EVE Search - CSM 3 Meeting 8 - Sunday september 27th 16:00

All Channels

Jita Park Speakers Corner

CSM 3 Meeting 8 - Sunday september 27th 16:00

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
mazzilliu	Posted - 2009.09.25 13:49:00 - [31] Wikis are up: Semi-permanently show pilot's name in space Larger HUD bracket for caps and supercaps Add Character transfer and portrait change tokens just like PLEX CSM term limits Fix plex keys Add login history in your account managment the "critique of the alliance tournament" issue is going to take a little longer to write up. i'm basically going to go through each post and tally up every concern that is listed, then rank them from most common to least common, then list some concrete ideas that are good in the thread. so if i dont get it done by today i'm just going to put it off till next meeting. MAZZILLIU 2009. CHANGE I CAN IMPOSE ON YOU.
Vrikshaka Yawn Corp	Posted - 2009.09.25 14:28:00 - [32] Originally by: mazzilliu hey go **** in some other thread. CCP said no on the scanner issue, and that they are overhauling the whole system instead. CCP will not add new code for a system that is due for an overhaul. no means no. there's nothing we can do about it. wait for the new system. Wait...what overhaul? When did they tell you this?
BallistaII BOUNTY. HUNTER. MINING. EXSPLORATION. CORPORATION. HYDRA RELOADED	Posted - 2009.09.25 15:27:00 - [33] Originally by: Vrikshaka Originally by: mazzilliu hey go **** in some other thread. CCP said no on the scanner issue, and that they are overhauling the whole system instead. CCP will not add new code for a system that is due for an overhaul. no means no. there's nothing we can do about it. wait for the new system. Wait...what overhaul? When did they tell you this? 3 years ago? Nexus Kinnon for CCP President!!!! Larkonis Trassler for CSM!!!!
Zastrow J	Posted - 2009.09.25 16:44:00 - [34] Originally by: Vrikshaka Originally by: mazzilliu hey go **** in some other thread. CCP said no on the scanner issue, and that they are overhauling the whole system instead. CCP will not add new code for a system that is due for an overhaul. no means no. there's nothing we can do about it. wait for the new system. Wait...what overhaul? When did they tell you this? hello, as I posted in the thread in question, the csm has already brought this issue to the attention of ccp. They aren't going to reverse the timer.
mazzilliu	Posted - 2009.09.25 16:53:00 - [35] ok ive had enough fun watching you all boohooing over the scanner change. i suspect "micia" even got a forum ban over the temper tantrum he threw in another thread. or else he stopped posting of his own accord. Scanner change has created an imbalance now get out of our thread MAZZILLIU 2009. CHANGE I CAN IMPOSE ON YOU.
Foolish Bob Caldari FireTech In Tea We Trust	Posted - 2009.09.25 17:01:00 - [36] Originally by: mazzilliu hey go ** in some other thread. No. You're our representatives and you're utterly failing to respond in a meaningful matter to our concerns, so we basically get to shout at you whereever we see you till you address them. Welcome to democracy. You're lucky you're not in a british democracy, or you wouldn't be able to move for eggs flying at you right now. Originally by:** mazzilliu CCP said no on the scanner issue, and that they are overhauling the whole system instead. CCP will not add new code for a system that is due for an overhaul. no means no. there's nothing we can do about it. wait for the new system. 1) I can be blind, so if this overhaul has been announced pls link it. If it's not and they've broken a key mechanic without telling us that there's something else coming along then there's an epic failure of communication that needs addressing too. 2) most of the compromises don't need new code. The 2 second thing needed new code - what we're talking about is changing the number 2000 in that new code to the number 1000 (or lower). In any case there's lots that can be raised with them. How did they come up with 2000? Did they do the request modelling? Can we see their simulation results that justify their gargantuan number? If they didn't simulate - a) why not it's not that hard to Monte Carlo a peak usage profile and b) what assumptions did they make when making up their number? And that's just the questions that pop into my head right away. I'm sure if you canvassed there'd be more and better questions others can come up with. In every way just saying "they said no to a rewrite" is woefully insufficient as a response and shows that you're not really paying any attention to the issue or the discussion at all, which further vindicates our shouting here to get your attention. ----------- I am me. I am not the corp I've joined nor the alliance I fly in. I'm also not a unique and special snowflake. Everything I say should be taken in that context.
mazzilliu	Posted - 2009.09.25 17:08:00 - [37] Originally by: Foolish Bob Originally by: mazzilliu hey go ** in some other thread. No. You're our representatives and you're utterly failing to respond in a meaningful matter to our concerns, so we basically get to shout at you whereever we see you till you address them. Welcome to democracy. You're lucky you're not in a british democracy, or you wouldn't be able to move for eggs flying at you right now. Originally by:** mazzilliu CCP said no on the scanner issue, and that they are overhauling the whole system instead. CCP will not add new code for a system that is due for an overhaul. no means no. there's nothing we can do about it. wait for the new system. 1) I can be blind, so if this overhaul has been announced pls link it. If it's not and they've broken a key mechanic without telling us that there's something else coming along then there's an epic failure of communication that needs addressing too. 2) most of the compromises don't need new code. The 2 second thing needed new code - what we're talking about is changing the number 2000 in that new code to the number 1000 (or lower). In any case there's lots that can be raised with them. How did they come up with 2000? Did they do the request modelling? Can we see their simulation results that justify their gargantuan number? If they didn't simulate - a) why not it's not that hard to Monte Carlo a peak usage profile and b) what assumptions did they make when making up their number? And that's just the questions that pop into my head right away. I'm sure if you canvassed there'd be more and better questions others can come up with. In every way just saying "they said no to a rewrite" is woefully insufficient as a response and shows that you're not really paying any attention to the issue or the discussion at all, which further vindicates our shouting here to get your attention. cry more MAZZILLIU 2009. CHANGE I CAN IMPOSE ON YOU.
Foolish Bob Caldari FireTech In Tea We Trust	Posted - 2009.09.25 17:33:00 - [38] Originally by: mazzilliu http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj3iNxZ8Dww well that's a conclusive counterargument ----------- I am me. I am not the corp I've joined nor the alliance I fly in. I'm also not a unique and special snowflake. Everything I say should be taken in that context.
Johnny Gurkha Digital Fury Corporation	Posted - 2009.09.25 19:13:00 - [39] Originally by: mazzilliu now get out of our thread "Jita Park Speakers Corner A less formal venue to discuss or debate whatever you wish regarding the Council of Stellar Management" If you want a private forum section then bring that up at a meeting of your great minds, otherwise quit being a ****ing emo
captain dirka Caldari Blackwater Syndicate Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.09.25 19:30:00 - [40] Originally by: mazzilliu Originally by: Foolish Bob Originally by: mazzilliu hey go ** in some other thread. No. You're our representatives and you're utterly failing to respond in a meaningful matter to our concerns, so we basically get to shout at you whereever we see you till you address them. Welcome to democracy. You're lucky you're not in a british democracy, or you wouldn't be able to move for eggs flying at you right now. Originally by:** mazzilliu CCP said no on the scanner issue, and that they are overhauling the whole system instead. CCP will not add new code for a system that is due for an overhaul. no means no. there's nothing we can do about it. wait for the new system. 1) I can be blind, so if this overhaul has been announced pls link it. If it's not and they've broken a key mechanic without telling us that there's something else coming along then there's an epic failure of communication that needs addressing too. 2) most of the compromises don't need new code. The 2 second thing needed new code - what we're talking about is changing the number 2000 in that new code to the number 1000 (or lower). In any case there's lots that can be raised with them. How did they come up with 2000? Did they do the request modelling? Can we see their simulation results that justify their gargantuan number? If they didn't simulate - a) why not it's not that hard to Monte Carlo a peak usage profile and b) what assumptions did they make when making up their number? And that's just the questions that pop into my head right away. I'm sure if you canvassed there'd be more and better questions others can come up with. In every way just saying "they said no to a rewrite" is woefully insufficient as a response and shows that you're not really paying any attention to the issue or the discussion at all, which further vindicates our shouting here to get your attention. cry more vote for the removal of a clearly emo raging csm that is incapable of anything at all. clear cut and simple. this is not how a csm should act respond or speak especially when responding to the player base.

CCP Zymurgist Gallente	Posted - 2009.09.25 19:59:00 - [41] Thread cleaned of off topic conversations. There are other more appropriate threads for other conversations. Zymurgist Community Representative CCP Hf, EVE Online Contact us

Foolish Bob Caldari FireTech In Tea We Trust	Posted - 2009.09.25 20:37:00 - [42] Edited by: Foolish Bob on 25/09/2009 20:37:27 \o/ power to the people! I'll skirt the edge of topic to suggest this: One thing missing from options to discuss would be investigating the possiblity of shortening the timer in lieu of removing it. If there really exists a happy region in the 500-1100ms range (for example) that is workable for the scouts and doesn't greatly impact lag, then it's by far and away the easiest option to implement. Then you've covered all the bases I think. ----------- I am me. I am not the corp I've joined nor the alliance I fly in. I'm also not a unique and special snowflake. Everything I say should be taken in that context.
Johnny Gurkha Digital Fury Corporation	Posted - 2009.09.25 20:52:00 - [43] I say again... "Jita Park Speakers Corner A less formal venue to discuss or debate whatever you wish regarding the Council of Stellar Management" I would like to discuss the CSM emotional stability, I sensed alot of rage in the "unclean" version of this thread
Kalius Prime Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.09.25 20:57:00 - [44] Originally by: mazzilliu Originally by: Vrikshaka Please don't ignore the 1200+ supports for fixing the directional scanner! V ccp is not going to revert the scanner back to the old one. Hello, Respectfully, I would like to make a comment. Certainly, they will not revert to the old delay-less scanner mechanic. However, that thread with 1200+ supporting posters, is not calling for a mere reversal of the change which was made. We can all appreciate the impact which the delay-less directional scanner had on server performance, and many have acknowledged the need for a control to prevent lag caused by scanner spam. Several great ideas have been put forth in that thread, which would improve the situation without reversing the initial decision to impose a delay on directional scanning. Some proposed changes have involved things such as: ~ Adding a visual indication of the directional scanner's remaining delay time (a meter which displays when scan is ready again) ~ Lowering the delay to half a second or one second ~ Removing delay on narrow scans of 90 degrees or less (preventing 360 degree spam, but allowing for smoother scouting) ~ Adding an automatic scan feature which automatically pings every two seconds ~ Adding a visual indicator of whether the items shown in the scan are from the most recent scan, or have not yet been updated due to scan delay (presently, combat notifications occlude the "directional scanner delay message", making it hard to determine whether a scan has been performed or not) Many of us would be grateful if you would consider presenting some of these suggestions, for modification of the present game mechanic, during this weekend's CSM meeting.
Avalloc	Posted - 2009.09.26 01:14:00 - [45] Improvement to change clone location UI. Tracking for Fighters lost in combat History of who added/kick character from Corporation Prevent cloaked ships in same gang/fleet from decloaking each other
Thorvik Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.09.26 04:56:00 - [46] Apparently I was censored as I was guilty of a Point of Order Infraction. Since these rules are being enforced by the Master at Arms I would like to request of the speaker for a Point of Information. May it please the Master at Arms; What does CSM intend to do with regards to the issue of the scan bug issue? This is an important issue and we (your constituency) would like for the CSM to ammend the current Agenda to reflect the needs and wants of the community. WE would further like for the CSM to consider to "Lay on the Table" the issue of Adjusting the Camera Angle in lieu of the Main Issue which I have tabled. Thank you
Dan Grommel Minmatar Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.09.26 13:02:00 - [47] Make ccp fix scanner and don't ignore the most pressing issue there is in this game. /me awaits to be censored out again.
S1r Minealot Shade. Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2009.09.26 15:47:00 - [48] +1200 support for scanner changes.. meh, please do something about it
Maxsim Goratiev Gallente Imperial Tau Syndicate	Posted - 2009.09.26 17:35:00 - [49] Please have a look at some UI changes, they might be worth your attention: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1186184 Fix Destroyers
Dibsi Dei Salamyhkaisten kilta HYDRA RELOADED	Posted - 2009.09.26 19:17:00 - [50] Originally by: Kalius Prime ~ Removing delay on narrow scans of 90 degrees or less (preventing 360 degree spam, but allowing for smoother scouting) This is a good idea.
Kazzzi Amarr Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.09.27 09:34:00 - [51] Term limits and helping to keep idiots from decloaking each other is more important to the CSM than the issue that over 1200 people have signed? Very well, on the order of term limits I vote that the current CSM term ends immediately.
Avalloc	Posted - 2009.09.27 15:46:00 - [52] Originally by: Kazzzi Term limits and helping to keep idiots from decloaking each other is more important to the CSM than the issue that over 1200 people have signed? Very well, on the order of term limits I vote that the current CSM term ends immediately. No, it is more like: "We discussed the scanner issues with CCP when we saw them face-to-face a few weeks ago and they're aware of player unhappiness and are looking at revising the current restrictions." People were spamming the scanner and it was producing quite a load on the servers. Inserting the delay reduced this drastically.
Vrikshaka Yawn Corp	Posted - 2009.09.27 19:32:00 - [53] Originally by: Zastrow J yo the CSM asked ccp about this for you guys and they replied that the directional scanner puts a huge load on the server and spamclicking it was creating lag. You'll have to start using long range probes instead of an inty Originally by: mazzilliu ccp is not going to revert the scanner back to the old one. Originally by: Avalloc No, it is more like: "We discussed the scanner issues with CCP when we saw them face-to-face a few weeks ago and they're aware of player unhappiness and are looking at revising the current restrictions." People were spamming the scanner and it was producing quite a load on the servers. Inserting the delay reduced this drastically. You guys wanna get your stories straight?
Erik Finnegan	Posted - 2009.09.27 22:02:00 - [54] @Vrikshaka : I do not see any substantial inconsistency in what my colleagues responded to that issue. The minutes of tonight's meeting are published on the evelopedia, and a raw log is available, too, as usual.
Treelox Amarr Evolution IT Alliance	Posted - 2009.09.28 04:31:00 - [55] Originally by: mazzilliu CSM term limits Ok I realise I missed making this objection before the meeting, RL and all. ...but why oh why was this even an issue that made it to a formal council meeting? It was proposed by a member of CSM, which seems a little bit like a conflict of intrest and self serving. The discussion thread only garnered 3 thumbs up, which does not really seem to indicate much support from the player base. If you actually go through and read the comments most of them seem opposed to Mazzilliu's proposal either in part or in whole. For myself the only thing I can really get behind is Issler is getting treated with this very short partial term she just inherited counting against her 2 term limit. Even though I dont really care for her views in most of the work she did with CSM in her last regular term, I have to say that getting "promoted" to a full council member from an alternate status this late in the term, especially after the CCP visit, and having it count as a FULL Term of service is just unfair to her and those who had hoped to elect her to a Full Council Position in the future. p.s. I wish CCP/ISD would hurry up and approve the minutes of this meeting, so my rabble rabble could either be justified or nullified, by what you guys actually discussed. Signature picture is inappropriate. Please change. ~Weatherman
Jettax Gallente The Professional's Club Fatal Ascension	Posted - 2009.09.28 11:31:00 - [56] This might be really easy to implement... Adjustable text font sizes for the overview.. Getting a bit hard to read at 1920x1200 :(
Wulfnor Caldari Roving Guns Inc. RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2009.09.28 16:59:00 - [57] Edited by: Wulfnor on 28/09/2009 17:01:01 wow here is an issue,term limits, that got more votes in the CSM than in the thread that started it. This a bad decision. No one in favor of it has explained how putting CCP in the position of deciding who does and who does not get to be on CSM does not open them to a charge of favoritism. And more importantly why CSM would think that is a good thing? Being a CSM rep is something that the players get to decide by design. CCP stepped back quite deliberately from interfering in that choice. The present CSM feels it is ok for CCP to be involved in choosing our Reps. Let us hope CCP is wise enough again to decline.
RedSplat	Posted - 2009.09.28 17:07:00 - [58] Originally by: Wulfnor wow here is an issue,term limits, that got more votes in the CSM than in the thread that started it. Yep, its embarrasing. Originally by: Jettax This might be really easy to implement... Adjustable text font sizes for the overview.. Getting a bit hard to read at 1920x1200 :( Use firefox with the dev tool addon and resize text. Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
Jason Edwards Internet Tough Guy	Posted - 2009.09.30 02:33:00 - [59] Review destroyers I dunno. I figure they arent what they ought to be... but fear being overpowered epically is so likely. Afterall have any of you seen an agony empire dessie gang? Wow. Tracking for Fighters lost in combat Alot of corps/alliances actually build and use public caps. That way at the end of the day. The pilot has no reimbursing to do. Dont see why this needs a change. Quote: Prevent cloaked ships in same gang/fleet from decloaking each other How was this passed tbh? Is vuk lau really the only one seeing how overpowered this is? Bombers are crazy op already... Avalloc should know because goons just downed like 70 bs recently using them. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded.
Andrest Disch Amarr Debitum Naturae	Posted - 2009.09.30 07:45:00 - [60] Originally by: Erik Finnegan @Vrikshaka : I do not see any substantial inconsistency in what my colleagues responded to that issue. The minutes of tonight's meeting are published on the evelopedia, and a raw log is available, too, as usual. Are there any minutes for the directional scanner discussion?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.