Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 30 .. 36 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
serras bang
Lucien Coven
14
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 13:25:00 -
[481] - Quote
William Walker wrote:For highsec how about having a few people from each FW race step forward and then they choose amongst those people a select few that will represent them. Otherwise I see no possibility for unison within highsec.
factional warfare is done in low sec not high sec. |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
723
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 13:27:00 -
[482] - Quote
There are people who do not currently vote or do not understand the function of the CSM At the moment we have the minority, to stive to get the majority is a good goal to strive for. as to the 1% this reminds me of a comedy show I saw years ago that said "9 out of 10 doctors believe that is you don't use this product, you will be hit by a bus. Yo just need to find the right 9 doctors"
Even if we have unparallelled engagement (Oh you still didn't say if these other games had player elected councils) involving more of the community into the process is always a good thing, as having the decision on who to elect governed by the minority only favours the minority, not the playerbase. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9332
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 13:29:00 -
[483] - Quote
serras bang wrote:as it stands now within hi sec we cannot defend ourselves without being attacked first or we will get concorded witch posses a problem for a multi billion isk ship. GǪfunnily enough, that's one of the larger problems with lowsec right now if you want to try to carve out a little niche for yourself. You can certainly do it and nothing is stopping you, but the cost quickly becomes so prohibitively high in terms of retaining your options and flexibility that it's a better long-term choice not to be in lowsec at all in spite of the (very slightly) better benefits. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Lord Zim
1247
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 13:32:00 -
[484] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:There are people who do not currently vote Because they don't give a ****.
Frying Doom wrote:or do not understand the function of the CSM Because they've worked pretty damn hard to avoid learning what the CSM is and does.
Frying Doom wrote:Even if we have unparallelled engagement (Oh you still didn't say if these other games had player elected councils) involving more of the community into the process is always a good thing, as having the decision on who to elect governed by the minority only favours the minority, not the playerbase. They will only involve themselves if they actually give a ****. Given how many different avenues CCP have tried to educate the people, the only thing we can draw from the voting attendance is that the rest of the people don't give a ****.
Adding a "abstain/vote" popup upon login won't change their minds, nor will it educate them. |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
723
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 13:34:00 -
[485] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Frying Doom wrote:There are people who do not currently vote Because they don't give a ****. Frying Doom wrote:or do not understand the function of the CSM Because they've worked pretty damn hard to avoid learning what the CSM is and does. Frying Doom wrote:Even if we have unparallelled engagement (Oh you still didn't say if these other games had player elected councils) involving more of the community into the process is always a good thing, as having the decision on who to elect governed by the minority only favours the minority, not the playerbase. They will only involve themselves if they actually give a ****. Given how many different avenues CCP have tried to educate the people, the only thing we can draw from the voting attendance is that the rest of the people don't give a ****. Adding a "abstain/vote" popup upon login won't change their minds, nor will it educate them. Nor is the current level of voting any reason to not try harder to get an even higher level of involvement. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Lord Zim
1247
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 13:36:00 -
[486] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Nor is the current level of voting any reason to not try harder to get an even higher level of involvement. Yelling at a mountain to get the **** out of the way won't make it actually get out of the way. Nor will the non-voters start to vote just because you put an abstain/vote dialog box upon login. |
serras bang
Lucien Coven
14
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 13:38:00 -
[487] - Quote
Tippia wrote:serras bang wrote:as it stands now within hi sec we cannot defend ourselves without being attacked first or we will get concorded witch posses a problem for a multi billion isk ship. GǪfunnily enough, that's one of the larger problems with lowsec right now if you want to try to carve out a little niche for yourself. You can certainly do it and nothing is stopping you, but the cost quickly becomes so prohibitively high in terms of retaining your options and flexibility that it's a better long-term choice not to be in lowsec at all in spite of the (very slightly) better benefits.
dont take multi bilion isk ships into lowsec ?
but honestly you can build and run with a few friends or fw in low sec and not spend anywere near what you would on mission fit to get an effective ship. i mean you wouldnt unless your good run around in null with billion isk ship. but no in my opinion low sec should be fw and outlaw space no recourse for pvp except possible loss of ships. |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
723
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 13:39:00 -
[488] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Nor is the current level of voting any reason to not try harder to get an even higher level of involvement. Yelling at a mountain to get the **** out of the way won't make it actually get out of the way. Nor will the non-voters start to vote just because you put an abstain/vote dialog box upon login. The big point is that some just might and any level of increase participation is a good thing.
Just because we currently have a minority is no reason we should not keep trying. If it was the oher way around and we got an 80% turn out then yeah the minority would be less of a concern but the way it is at the moment is only minorities of players and special interest groups are voting. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9332
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 13:40:00 -
[489] - Quote
serras bang wrote:dont take multi bilion isk ships into lowsec ? It's not a matter of ISK but of something far more valuable: options and flexibility. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
serras bang
Lucien Coven
14
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 13:44:00 -
[490] - Quote
Tippia wrote:serras bang wrote:dont take multi bilion isk ships into lowsec ? It's not a matter of ISK but of something far more valuable: options and flexibility.
then all i could suggest if its flexability as it stands do not go into low sec untill you have some training behind yah that makes you flexible enough with ships and setup.
wrong answer i know but hey like i said im pritty sure im gonna run for the next csm so if you have a thought on this one then vote for me and bring it to me. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9332
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 13:53:00 -
[491] - Quote
serras bang wrote:then all i could suggest if its flexability as it stands do not go into low sec untill you have some training behind yah that makes you flexible enough with ships and setup. Ok, you're not getting what I'm saying.
The problem with trying to establish yourself in lowsec is that you have a choice: live under pretty much the same rule as in highsec GÇö you can't actively target people who are gunning for you GÇö and thus always be on the defensive, or give up all thoughts about ever returning to highsec, which means the (tiny) added benefits you gain for being there are lost because you can't spend them on anything. Lowsec locks you in in a way that neither highsec nor nullsec does: the supposed benefit of being able to protect yourself only hurts you and does so in such a way as to render any benefits from being lowsec rather meaningless.
Yes, the odd -10 passing by will be a legit target, but those are surprisingly few and far between GÇö GÇ£nuisance attackersGÇ¥ (what would in highsec be labelled suicide gankers) are plenty common and they make sure that going after them is a costly business because you have to waste precious time and effort to clean up after yourself GÇö time and effort that was meant to go towards reaping those (tiny) added rewards the space had to offer.
Yes, as usual, alts are a way around this but as always, any design that means you have to rely on alts to lead a normal life is fundamentally broken. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
725
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 13:56:00 -
[492] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Frying Doom wrote:The big point is that some just might and any level of increase participation is a good thing. No, the big point is that yelling will not make them change their mind and that you need to stop looking at GàÖ as being bad engagement or lack of representation. If people are interested and want to vote, they will; if they aren't and don't, they won't. The current methods are working exceedingly well and you might want to consider the possibility that the results are entirely true to what people actually thinkGǪ 1/6 is a bad level of engagement, if EvE has a a better percentage of players than other games, that does not make it a beacon, it just means the levels of players involved sucks less than the other games.
It is always a mistake to believe you know what other people are thinking from what the minorities tell you.
As I have said I think the current methods are good but more needs to be done to include the majority into what has so far been a minority play ground. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Lord Zim
1249
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 13:59:00 -
[493] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:1/6 is a bad level of engagement Says who? |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
725
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:00:00 -
[494] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Frying Doom wrote:1/6 is a bad level of engagement Says who? mathematics. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
betoli
Ketogenic Killzone
41
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:00:00 -
[495] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:betoli wrote:I would think you should be able to stand for whatever aspect you want - it would be up to the electorate to make their minds up whether you were the best person to represent :insert gameplay choice:. If I were voting, I would assume a jack of all trades was less desirable than someone who has all their eggs in the same metaphoric basket - but thats purely personal opinion. A jack of all trades tends to have a better understanding of the bigger picture than someone who's focusing on one single aspect of whatever, and if he's active in more than just one area of the game then he has an even bigger chance of being a better asset to "the CSM" than if he were someone who did nothing but make spreadsheets about his BPOs, setup vast production spreadsheets detailing input material requirements, cost, profitability, maintain multiple alts in multiple trading hubs, and min/max that as much as possible. In EVE, while someone might be called "an industrialist", and as such would love nothing better than if CCP were to buff all the things he uses, be that BPO copying, invention, manufacturing, hauling, etc, to make his part of the game better, that really doesn't mean he should be elected to be "the industrialist representative". Why? Because people who call themselves industrialists are most commonly hisec only. As such, I would expect a lot of them to have a penchant for bringing up minute UI details which could make their day to day living easier, while being blindingly oblivious to a much larger sucking chest wound which is the fact that nullsec industry is more or less limited to 2 things. 1) Import everything from hisec, 2) build supercaps. The rest is easier, cheaper, quicker and by far the least effort to do in hisec (and lowsec for normal caps), and means that nullsec is depopulated most of the time outside of actual fleet fights. This, in turn, means that roaming gangs have a very, very hard time actually catching someone, because they'll be less than 5 pr system (iirc most of the systems I've flown through lately outside of fleet ops have had 1-2 in them, total). The same goes for things such as L4s, which set the reward bar so high that a lot of people don't find the effort of receiving the rewards which nullsec anoms can yield worth it, and as such also help depopulate nullsec even further. I don't expect anyone representing "mission runners" to do anything other than choke on his coffee if anyone even contemplates uttering the words "nerf" and "L4" in the same sentence (except if it's prefixed with "don't"), even though it very well could've been a benefit for the game as a whole. betoli wrote:But OK. Your earlier question: We are striving for improved representation of demographics: I believe that creating specific role posts would encourage voters to think about whether a candidate really represented that position. I think that because I believe the majority of players don't meta-game. There would be nothing to stop a null sec player standing for office as a high sec rep, however if they did, and won it, it would highlight (both to the player base and to CCP) that the CSM system was flawed in the way that's been discussed ad-nausium in this thread. Therefore if the representational model is flawed, then under this model, it would become transparently, embarrassingly, and indefensibly, obvious beyond debate. That would be so undesirable that I suspect no one would try it on, and there would be a lot of pressure from everyone (CCP, other CSMers, and players alike) to maintain the credibility of the institution.
Assuming that were the case, then representational balance is acheived by CCP specifying the number of posts in a proffesion domain according to their understanding of the player distribution - that doesn't need to be (and couldn't be) perfect it just needs to improve on the current **** poor distribution of representation:demographic. You keep harping on and on about "representational balance", and thus I ask you this: what's broken in hisec which needs fixing, apart from wardecs/crimewatch? What's broken in lowsec which needs fixing, apart from FW farmville? What's broken in nullsec which needs fixing, apart from the SOV system? What's broken wrt missions which require fixing? What's broken wrt industry which needs fixing? How much representation does the things which are broken in these areas of the game actually need? How much are they getting today? How much time should CCP dedicate to each of these broken things, and in what order?
|
serras bang
Lucien Coven
14
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:00:00 -
[496] - Quote
so if understand tippa that your biggest gripe for low sec is the fact you always on the defensive and have no way of actively defending yourself on a shot first bassis without the outlaw tag and being actively persudes by bounty hunters in hi if you decide to go back up ?
if im wrong sorry may have to put it in a lil bit more laymans terms if im correct i have a possible answer for you that may or may not put this to rest |
betoli
Ketogenic Killzone
41
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:01:00 -
[497] - Quote
snipping lots, only because there was, in fact lots....
Lord Zim wrote: A jack of all trades tends to have a better understanding of the
See "personal opnion", you could vote how you like.
Lord Zim wrote: Because people who call themselves industrialists are most commonly hisec only. As such, I would expect a lot of them to have a penchant for bringing up minute UI details which could make their day to day living easier, while being blindingly oblivious to a much larger sucking chest wound which is the fact that nullsec industry is more or less limited to 2 things. 1) Import everything from hisec, 2) build supercaps.
Thats a campaigning issue. If a candidate only stood for reduced clicks, that would make them a **** poor candidate. But the same argument can be made against the current system - there is nothing stopping the current CSM focussing on their own personal irrelevance. What the suggestion would mean is that there would be some explicit lobby for indy (whether or not its useful is an issue for voters)
Quote: The same goes for things such as L4s, which set the reward bar so high that a lot of people don't find the effort of receiving the rewards which nullsec anoms can yield worth it, and as such also help depopulate nullsec even further. I don't expect anyone representing "mission runners" to do anything other than choke on his coffee if anyone even contemplates uttering the words "nerf" and "L4" in the same sentence
No I doubt that. Well unless a complete idiot was elected - which i guess is possible. One of the problems on the forums is that nullers et al make the assumption that highseccers just want more reward and less risk. In fact most recognise IMHO that balance is really important. There is confusion on the boards as to what HS is for - we see 'the noob area' and 'a valid gameplay choice' in equal measure. A decent PVE rep should be attacking the barriers to LS and NS PVE not seeking buffs for the already well subscribed HS activity. If CCP simply proposed 'nerf HS bounties', then of course a rep should be saying 'hold on, where's the balance? What are you giving us to do to to make ISK instead?'
TBH what I think your doing here is portraying a potential 'mission runner' rep as the worst of the forums carebear whiners - its a sort of generalised ad-hominem attack. Whilst forgetting that a lot of people run mission-alts to fund PVP and other game activity.
Quote: You keep harping on and on about "representational balance", and thus I ask you this: what's broken in hisec which needs fixing, apart from wardecs/crimewatch? What's broken in lowsec which needs fixing, apart from FW farmville? What's broken in nullsec which needs fixing, apart from the SOV system? What's broken wrt missions which require fixing? What's broken wrt industry which needs fixing?
Are you serious? Missions... should require PVP fits not dedicated PVE fits so that people actually learn how to play. Mission AI? ? Boringness? Its only if your perspective is that missions are an intentional painful grind to make isk, that missions don't need love.
Quote: How much representation does the things which are broken in these areas of the game actually need? How much are they getting today? How much time should CCP dedicate to each of these broken things, and in what order?
All decisions are up to CCP. All we are talking about is representation to that dictatorship. But CCP does worry and count how much time is spent doing what - thats their food supply. And it should be a guide - I am not saying that 60% of the CSM should be HS orientated, because that would be foolish - but it could be improved from what we have now - short answer - its up to CCP.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9332
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:01:00 -
[498] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:1/6 is a bad level of engagement You have ridiculously unrealistic expectations. GàÖ is spectacularly high for a game and, as mentioned, better that some real-world and actually important elections get.
Quote:It is always a mistake to believe you know what other people are thinking from what the minorities tell you. Absolute statements are absolutely false. No, it's not always a mistake. In particular, if the supposed majority has every opportunity and ability to speak up and chooses not to do so, then it's a very real possibility that the minority is already doing good enough a job representing them.
Quote:As I have said I think the current methods are good but more needs to be done to include the majority into what has so far been a minority play ground. The majority is already included. They just choose not to bother.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Lord Zim
1249
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:02:00 -
[499] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Lord Zim wrote:Frying Doom wrote:1/6 is a bad level of engagement Says who? mathematics. Wrong. Try again. |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
725
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:05:00 -
[500] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Lord Zim wrote:Frying Doom wrote:1/6 is a bad level of engagement Says who? mathematics. Wrong. Try again. 1/6 is below 3/6 which is half.
And any minority deciding things for a majority is not democratic. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9332
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:09:00 -
[501] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:1/6 is below 3/6 which is half. GǪand that still doesn't make it bad engagement. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
725
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:12:00 -
[502] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Frying Doom wrote:1/6 is below 3/6 which is half. GǪand that still doesn't make it bad engagement. even if it were, which it isn't, there is still a lot of room for improvement. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Brooks Puuntai
Nomadic Asylum Still Censored
703
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:13:00 -
[503] - Quote
Some US midterm/presidential elections only get alittle bit above 1/3 of the total vote most elections hit about 1/2 of the total eligible voting population. So hitting 1/6 on a internet space ship game isn't bad really. |
Hypercake Mix
Magical Rainbow Bakery
21
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:13:00 -
[504] - Quote
Changes to high-sec affect other secs rather strongly with the way things are now. I would not risk putting someone in a CSM seat if they didn't have strong experience in all space. It's just unfortunate that the many that do have experience in all space are biased. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9332
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:14:00 -
[505] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:even if it were, which it isn't,-áeven though it is there is still a lot of room for improvement.
GǪand annoying people is not the right way of doing it, nor should you really expect the numbers to be that much higher GÇö hell, you shouldn't even expect them to be as high as GàÖ to begin with.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
725
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:23:00 -
[506] - Quote
Tippia wrote:GǪand annoying people is not the right way of doing it, nor should you really expect the numbers to be that much higher GÇö hell, you shouldn't even expect them to be as high as GàÖ to begin with.
As I have said before 1 minute a year is not very annoying.
For a player representative body with seats going to people with as little as 1/3 of 1% and the higest number of votes going to someone with 3% that is not a player representative council, it is a minority council.
The fact that there is 1/6 of the players involved in the process is a start but that's about it. It's a start. More can and should be done to promote the CSM to the players. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Inquisitor Kitchner
Galaxy Punks Executive Outcomes
42
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:24:00 -
[507] - Quote
I still love the fact this is going on, and the argument seems to be:
1) There are 3 times as many high sec players as null sec players 2) There isn't enough high sec representation on the democratically elected CSM
??????
Go vote? I took a degree in politics, I've studying UK, European and American politics for about 5 years. I can argue with you till 2 in the morning about how you're basically complaining about something which is perfectly natural.
The minorities that are represented were elected because their players (voters) engage with the game. High Sec players by and large don't, because they tend to want the game to be their game and no-one else's. There are plenty of Null/Low Sec players who do that too, and I disagree with them, but they actually care enough to vote. |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
725
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:25:00 -
[508] - Quote
Brooks Puuntai wrote:Some US midterm/presidential elections only get alittle bit above 1/3 of the total vote, and most elections hit about 1/2 of the total eligible voting population. So hitting 1/6 on a internet space ship game isn't bad really. No it isn't really bad its a good start and much like US elections there should be more information given to the voters to encourage them to vote. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Karl Hobb
Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium
518
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:28:00 -
[509] - Quote
What exactly is missing in the current crop of CSM candidates? You've got a representative who ran on a mining platform, for Christ's sake. IIRC there was also someone running on a ******* "API" platform.
I'm guessing what you really want is more carebear representatives. Nothing Found |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
725
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:28:00 -
[510] - Quote
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:
I still love the fact this is going on, and the argument seems to be:
1) There are 3 times as many high sec players as null sec players 2) There isn't enough high sec representation on the democratically elected CSM
??????
Go vote? I took a degree in politics, I've studying UK, European and American politics for about 5 years. I can argue with you till 2 in the morning about how you're basically complaining about something which is perfectly natural.
The minorities that are represented were elected because their players (voters) engage with the game. High Sec players by and large don't, because they tend to want the game to be their game and no-one else's. There are plenty of Null/Low Sec players who do that too, and I disagree with them, but they actually care enough to vote.
And with your studies in politics did governments, individual parties or candidate try to get more people to vote via advertising, scare campaigns or just meet and greets? Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 30 .. 36 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |