| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ankhesentapemkah
Gallente
   |
Posted - 2010.01.24 20:49:00 -
[1]
In my opinion, the CSM is not taken serious by CCP.
While some issues which have been raised through the CSM have been resolved and of course CCP can't fix everything within a week, I still think too much issues are not being looked at.
Especially the issues sent after the meeting in Iceland are not taken very serious, often only getting a line or two as reply, such as "its being added to the backlog" and "we're aware of this issue", after which we never hear from it again for another year.
CSM2 has proposed a Q&A session where the CSM could submit questions on behalf of the players. CCP hasn't been answering these either. Minutes take forever to approve and be published. Communication is one way, and I feel CCP isn't keeping up their end of the bargain and do not make use of all the work the CSM does for them.
Profilation and interest in the CSM is at a low since the last elections, and CCP still hasn't come up with any plan to improve on the CSM system. By the time they finally have something working, a lot of good people aren't egible to run again, which is a shame. The current CSM needs to discuss this with CCP and look for solutions, both for their own sake and that of the players.
---
Click banner for info! |
Drake Draconis
Minmatar
Shadow Cadre
Looney Toons.
|
Posted - 2010.01.24 21:20:00 -
[2]
How do you expect CCP To treat you seriously when the CSM constantly reminds us of what a joke it is?
=========================
CEO of Shadow Cadre
http://www.shadowcadre.com
========================= |
Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2010.01.26 04:09:00 -
[3]
So what's your proposal? Pictures of drill sergeants and 150-point red font?
|
Erik Finnegan
Gallente
Polytechnique Gallenteenne
|
Posted - 2010.01.30 12:31:00 -
[4]
It is not like there were no ideas on the table : quit that focus on issue submissions, which never get implemented. Do not stop the Assembly Hall and associated procedure; but stop doing only that. The CSM should be used as a player think tank, where CCP inputs topic that they are actually working on. This is what CSM3 had prominently discussed with CCP, and Zastrow wrote an emotional pledge in the CSM3's dev blog.
Having the CSM discuss issues, which are on CCP's agenda will increase the impact, which the CSM can do on actual development. Instead of bombarding CCP with player submitted issues, that are totally off limits and out of focus of current development.
CCP does not neglect the players, nor the CSM. It is simply that the topics brought up by the CSM are - more often than not - too far away from CCP's legitimate autonomy in the game's development. Having CCP input open questions into the CSM will bring the CSM closer to actual development; in turn, the CSM's anwers will have a higher chance of making a difference.
I admit, such a scheme may entail keeping more topics under NDA, and the regular CSM meeting minutes may have to undergo review by CCP before publishing.
Let's see this diagramme; CCP's current development focus and CSM's player submitted issues - in average - have a certain distance :
CCP's current development
(ccp) <---------------------> (csm)
CSM's new ideas
This distance needs to be briged in order to make a difference on CCP's development. Else, CSM's input will simply go to the backlog. And priority changes in the backlog are hard to display to the general public. XHagen affirms over and over again that such changes do happen. But rediscussing present issues does require a lot of patience by the player public and there is simply no process yet to "rediscuss" items, once submitted by the CSM, when they go into development.
Now, the sum of all the CSM's procedures does result in a certain influencial force on CCP. These procedures are :
- the item submissions (and re-submissions and re-re-submissions) on the Assembly Hall, which are submitted to CCP via meetings
- the faith of CCP into the CSM, which is constantly growing
- live discussion with CCP in online meetings and on Iceland (Iceland has the biggest impact)
The strength of CSM's influence, as a sum of the above, can be visualized like this :
(f) ----->
CCP has a will to change it's mind and include ideas and aspects (I call them ideas and aspects rather than new issues), brought up by the CSM. It can be visualized like this :
(w) --->
If you now overlap the distance between CCP's and the CSM's focus with the force of CSM's push and CCP's will to change, you get this :
(ccp) <---------------------> (csm)
(w) ---> <----- (f)
You clearly see the gap, which remains. Whining will not close that gap !
Instead of only relying on CSM's new ideas, brought up by players on the Assembly Hall, we will now look at the current development plan of CCP and pick items from that queue, which are under scrutiny. We will call them (sbi), as in "sprint backlog item". Those of you, who have followed CCP's demonstration of their development method, which is Scrum, have heard of that sub-process defined by the method.
Sprint backlog items are still not implemented, and may fail, but they are considerably closer to reality, because they are features chosen from the huge product backlog that shall be implemented :
(ccp) <-------> (sbi)
Go ahead and overlay CSM's strength with that distance and you see :
(ccp) <-------> (sbi)
(w) --->
<----- (f)
They meet !
As a clear result : CCP must give the CSM items from their current Sprint backlogs for discussion. |
Erik Finnegan
Polytechnique Gallenteenne
|
Posted - 2010.01.30 12:40:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Erik Finnegan on 30/01/2010 12:40:43
edited for grammar
If you go further on that will-and-force idea, you will have to consider two modfications to the last diagramme for the following reasons :
- CSM's force will be smaller when discussing Sprint backlog items, because some of them may not be allowed for public discussion on the Assembly Hall, nor a public display at all (via minutes). That reduces the range of the force (f).
- CCP's will, on the other hand, to listen to the CSM may be bigger for items, which they are working on already. They want the development to be ... awesome. Hence, player feedback - moreover : feedback from the most dedicated players the game has ever seen - will let this will (w) grow.
A reduced force :
(f) --->
and an increased will :
(w) ---->
overlayed with the distance of sprint backlog items from reality :
(ccp) <-------> (sbi)
(w) ---->
<--- (f)
Still meet ! |
Van Haulen
|
Posted - 2010.01.30 13:35:00 -
[6]
 Quote:
As a clear result : CCP must give the CSM items from their current Sprint backlogs for discussion.
You want to give people who are part of the player base access to the Sprint backlogs? Absolutely not! Do you really want a few select people to know how production requirements on certain items will change in the future (say)?
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Special Projects Executive
The Obsidian Legion
|
Posted - 2010.01.30 14:56:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Van Haulen
Quote:
As a clear result : CCP must give the CSM items from their current Sprint backlogs for discussion.
You want to give people who are part of the player base access to the Sprint backlogs? Absolutely not! Do you really want a few select people to know how production requirements on certain items will change in the future (say)?
No kidding. Wasn't one Larkonisgate enough for you?
Until there are actual penalties for the misuse of this information and the violation of the NDA (and I'm thinking actual civil penalties here, not the crap temp bans that were handed down the first time), the CSM should be kept as far away from upcoming change implementation as possible.
You mention above the communication is only one way - shocker that, right? Since the CSM has demonstrated it's inability to use the information they do get in a responsible manner, why the hell should CCP give them more?
--Vel
Forum Mom: Spanking the snot out of little brats. |
Drake Draconis
Minmatar
Shadow Cadre
Looney Toons.
|
Posted - 2010.01.30 15:30:00 -
[8]
Your assuming that I'm throwing a fit over the communications pipeline between CCP And CSM.
I'm not.
I have a problem with a-holes who get off scott free breaking NDA's... and CSM people who push there own private agendas by totally ignoring the people.
You assumption that CSM people automatically "give a ####" about us is false.
Of course Not all CSM are like that... but I'm getting tired of a total and complete lack of accountability for there purpose here.
There needs to be a change that proves to use that the CSM Are unbiased... willing to work for the community... who gives a fly crap what "THERE" alliances want or what the CSM cannidate in question wants... they SERVE US..... like it or not... thats there job.
This isn't a instant fanfest contest trip to iceland... that's just for grins...
Yet some CSM members have been quoted saying such things repeatedly.
These little things are what turns people off about the CSM... and cause the ever rising population of people who either don't care... or would rather see it shut down.
Damn straight I'm bitter... I love this game... enough to growl a bit louder.
=========================
CEO of Shadow Cadre
http://www.shadowcadre.com
========================= |
TeaDaze
|
Posted - 2010.01.30 16:52:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Drake Draconis
I have a problem with a-holes who get off scott free breaking NDA's... and CSM people who push there own private agendas by totally ignoring the people.
It seems the penalty for breaking NDA isn't in line with the seriousness but that is up to CCP to fix. There is also a lack of accountability for not turning up to meetings which again CCP need to look at.
On the subject of "Private agendas", part of the problem there is the laughably high level of support required for a proposal to be put in front of the CSM "without" a CSM rep picking it up in the first place. CSM reps will naturally pick up topics they agree with or have experience of because there are limited spots for each meeting.
Originally by: Drake Draconis
You assumption that CSM people automatically "give a ####" about us is false.
Of course Not all CSM are like that... but I'm getting tired of a total and complete lack of accountability for there purpose here.
I can't comment for other reps, but I actually attempt to interact with the rest of the playerbase, doesn't seem to be working out so well for me so far 
I'm not quite sure what measure of accountability you want.
* CSM reps not turning up to meetings without good reasons - that needs CCP to get tougher with.
* CSM reps breaking NDA - that is also up to CCP to deal with because the NDA contract is between them and the rep.
* CSM reps disagreeing with proposals or which never reach the required level of support - what exactly do you suggest here?
Part of the issue is the CSM can't do much to an individual rep and it is down to CCP to deal with them.
Originally by: Drake Draconis
There needs to be a change that proves to use that the CSM Are unbiased... willing to work for the community... who gives a fly crap what "THERE" alliances want or what the CSM cannidate in question wants... they SERVE US..... like it or not... thats there job.
There is a fundamental flaw in your argument here.
1) You assume that anyone from an alliance is only voting for their alliance interests which are not for the common good.
2) You assume that anyone not in an alliance will only vote for the common good.
3) You assume that anyone in eve can be unbiased towards their in game playstyle or experiences.
How do you propose to stop bias? The current system seems to create a council of representatives from a number of different playstyles but that comes down to the public vote and can't currently be controlled by CCP.
Lets assume you have two people in noob corps. One person supports suicide ganking, the other doesn't. A proposal is raised to outlaw it, one supports the other doesn't. Is that bias bad?
Are CSM supposed to pass any proposal raised without discussion of the possible outcomes? At that point all that happens is a counter proposal is raised and that is passed as well. Now you have two proposals, one to outlaw suicide ganking and one to support it. CCP then ignore the whole subject and nobody gains anything. It becomes a huge waste of time.
The point of the CSM is to filter the player requests and pass the most important to CCP (who are then free to ignore them if they so choose). There is an element of personal opinion on the decisions but that is fine because the council represent multiple playstyles.
Originally by: Drake Draconis
This isn't a instant fanfest contest trip to iceland... that's just for grins...
Yet some CSM members have been quoted saying such things repeatedly.
These little things are what turns people off about the CSM... and cause the ever rising population of people who either don't care... or would rather see it shut down.
I keep forgetting about fanfest 
AFAIK no current CSM reps have said they only ran for a free trip to Iceland but I agree that there was some epic level trolling in the past which has put some players off the whole CSM concept.
I am attempting to show there are still people who do take the responsibility more seriously.
|
Drake Draconis
Minmatar
Shadow Cadre
Looney Toons.
|
Posted - 2010.01.30 17:24:00 -
[10]
I'm going to assume for the sake of this discussion/argument that your completely unaware of the history behind my statements... if that is the case... then I'm a little disapointed in your supposed proclaimed experinced in the many areas of EVE Online.
One of the things I tend to "assume" (yes that might be a mistake) is you are aware of what the CSM is historically... and its actions to be sure.
1: The NDA - Your correct... but it's not seems... IT IS. That is something you need to bring up. There is an overwhelming opinion that Lark should have been permanently banned. The fact he wasn't... sets a precedent that implies that the CSM tend to think they are above the law so to speak... and can get away unscathed minus whatever punishment CCP employs (point and case... Lark)
Now I have nothing against lark other than the fact he's just the type of personality I don't get along with... I respect his skills... I respect his driving force being that he is a pirate and EVE requires a balance of all aspects to be great as it is. What I don't respect is the bravado he reflects and the fanboi club that continue to downplay it like it was nothing major and he was just keeping in line with piracy. Real life is not EVE Online... to mix them and use it as an excuse is poor. Yes he fessed up... yes he apologized... but that's not enough... never will be... and personally I get the sneaking suspicion he will be back in the CSM... in some form or fashion... and that REALLY ****es me off. Otherwise I wouldn't think much of it and let it go aside from making damn sure history records correctly.
But am I CCP? No... but I take NDA's/Contract's seriously in my line of work... you don't #### around with that... and he should have been taught that a little more harhsly IMHO. We have to live with it... why the hell can't he?
Overall this makes the CSM look horrid.... and as such invokes a lack of confidence due to the lack of action in taking steps to prevent such repeats. Such as encouraging CCP to be a little more harsh in its punishment. If anything it makes the CSM look like its responding appropriate. Instead of just standing around and saying things.
2: Your assuming I'm in line with the crowd on this area... I'm not.
IF you knew your history you'd see that there have been occasions where the CSM CHOSE/IGNORED valid proposals and or decisions... that or completely dropped the ball on communication with the people.
such examples are frequent and legitimate requests for meeting minutes... excused by silence or "Oh we can't talk about that". I realize some things can be mentioned but telling me if my proposed skill queue alternation passed would harldy be considered an earth shattering feat that would break the game as we know it due to its hush hush secrecy. I'm sure I speak for everyone who have had proposals passed up that didn't get feedback until months later if at all.
Proposals brought by CSM... PASSED by CSM... VOTED DOWN BY THE PEOPLE. This is outrageous and disgusting. That was one of the most insulting actions of the CSM to-date. Your Job is to listen... to weigh-in and to bring forth proposals that are legitimately supported. Ignoring proposals that are passed up with VERY MINIMAL support is stupid and begging to get your heads blown off in a political fashion. It only takes 1 singular incident to do that... and it happened. Now we have zero confidence in what the CSM really is... and just how legitimate your motives are.
Yes... your not the representative responsible... I get that... but you have a voice... and you can say/do something about it.
The representatives at the time said nothing and didn't bother to point it out.. they just voted it up and that was the final nail in the coffin. (And that was published in the minutes to boot)
<More to come>
=========================
CEO of Shadow Cadre
http://www.shadowcadre.com
========================= |
Drake Draconis
Minmatar
Shadow Cadre
Looney Toons.
|
Posted - 2010.01.30 17:44:00 -
[11]
<continued>
There are proposals that are foolish and ridiculous mob mentalities... and while I'm happy to see they are ignored... this is also an inherently dangerous problem. You can't be a democractic platform and ignore your people.
No matter how foolish or stupid they are (I can protest all I want but I am one voice).
IF they support en-masse then you are bound to pass it up and vote on it.... vote it down... it's legit and honestly people need to see that to get it through there thick skulls its not going to happen... such as ghost training.
Saying "It was proposed and passed up" is stupid. You should link history instead.
Showing a record with minutes to make the point clear CCP said no.
People are not going to search for the proof in the pudding if you don't bother to give them a damn bowel to put it in.
3: The flaw in my argument over bias is not mine... the flaw lies in human nature. It's a veiled statement.
I mean lets be serious... the USA's government has politicians who claim to be for the people but everyone knows they have there own bias and agenda. You can never achieve true bias.
But you can sure as hell make it hard on them to do anything outright. The bulk of the population in CSM are elected by alliances of a large population... that or those who have large swaths of gangs who happen to agree on one point (Take Care Party! *YUCK!*).
I realize this is a game... but the CSM should treat this seriously... and with a driving force to be determined to make it better one way or another.
So when I ask for a CSM that is unbiased and that gives a damn... I'm talking about people who actaully participate FREQUENTLY.... who post FREQUENTLY.... here... people who are willing to talk... people who keep balance and a nuetural position instead of taking sides when its a little to obvious they have there own firm opinion.
Example you used: One supports Suicide Ganking... the other doesn't.
When someone proposes to remove insurance for getting CONCORD'd... there is a major difference in coming up with some ****amania excuse (such as economics and no CSM hasn't said that... yet) and someone who takes the time to explain the mechanics and weighs things out statisticly.
Worse yet... saying "Deal with it... high sec is supposed to be safe... not safer" is a poor response.
THATS OUR JOB... even mine even... to troll... and be stupid.
YOUR job is to be a mediator and to weigh things out.
Your debate with the supercaps... you don't fly one... people know that... yet you passionately argue.
Why? Your no expert... you only know what you hear... see... understand. You stand to lose more respect than I would by arguing your out of your bloody mind.
But we both know its just an opinion... but your more public than I am.. people will shoot you first before they shoot me as I'm just a noob.
Your "CSM".
If you took the time to talk to the Super Cap Pilots and ask them how they felt about this... you would likely change your opinion a little bit... if not have an understanding and respect the fact they suffer.
Instead your focusing on CCP's supposed stance or your fear of proliferation of super caps sprouting up like rabbits.
Or maybe your side of the coin is entirely different... fact is... most CSM doesn't go that far.
At least your civil enough to discuss to a point... that I'll give you...
4: As to the fanfest... funny how you said "current". Of course there wouldn't be... that's the next CSM (not to mention previous)... I suggest you take the time to think about that before responding.
Bottom line is this... you have a serious problem here... and it's not what you initially thought it was.
Solution? Starts with you... and it's not an easy one due to the holes dug in due to previous actions.
No its not likely your fault... but its a mess you have to clean up.
=========================
CEO of Shadow Cadre
http://www.shadowcadre.com
========================= |
Z0D
|
Posted - 2010.02.06 21:22:00 -
[12]
Will bring to this weekend's meeting
z0d
Click below for my manifesto.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |