telling a guy who has clearly expressed racist views on your forums "no, you can't run for a position that puts you in a position to make our employees highly uncomfortable in their workplace, which puts our business at risk" is the same as limiting that position to white male landowners

i didn't know this, thanks frying doom

CCP already stops people who are under 21 from running, naturally these monsters are violating their human rights

If CCP ban him for being a member of a political association that is against his Human rights.

That's the third time in as many posts you're misrepresented my position. Care to go for a fourth?

e: Let's clarify it for you here.

Running for and serving on the CSM is (much like playing this game) a privilege.

it's not, sorry

So according to you can they ban people on their sex, age, race or sexual disposition?

So according to you can they ban people on their sex, age, race or sexual disposition?

*munches popcorn* Dude you wouldn't know what a Human Right was if it hit you in the head! *burps*

Immutable characteristics do not include political affiliation.

So clarify your position.

You say it is not a human right but you ***** if other human rights are involved.

So what exactly is your position?

Ok I will make this a bit easier for you

would you have a problem if CCP said that no past or current members of Goonswarm and no people residing in the United States of America can sit on the CSM?

If a business says "We and a significant number of our customers disagree with your political views and as such do not want you representing us", then all they've done is defined the relationship. No one's rights are infringed as a result.

Ok I will make this a bit easier for you

would you have a problem if CCP said that no past or current members of Goonswarm and no people residing in the United States of America can sit on the CSM?

So would you care to enlighten me as to which parts of the UN Human rights are human rights and which are not?

Not really, because CCP choosing to exclude a significant portion of the playerbase from CSM eligibility would damage the credibility of the CSM amongst the playerbase to the point that "apathy" would be a severe understatement

But nobody is saying he shouldn't be allowed to run on the basis of his RL political beliefs, but for his apparent inability to not tell other members of the playerbase about his views on race in discussions like "blaster balancing." You following?

I feel like a broken record: Articles 1 through 29 are Human Rights, article 30 is the checks-and-balance to protect those rights from infringements. Since hate-speech and racism infringe on the rights of others they are not a Human Right. You seem to think that anything coming out of your mouth is a Human Right, when it is not. When you're negatively effecting other people (their Human Rights) its a line you don't cross.

You don't seem to understand a check-and-balance and it makes me sad, which makes me eat more popcorn

If a business says "We and a significant number of our customers disagree with your political views and as such do not want you representing us", then all they've done is defined the relationship. No one's rights are infringed as a result.


As both an American and a member of Goonswarm I would certainly have a problem with it, but they would not be infringing my rights by making this decision.

And how is that different from saying we don't want any for example Catholics on the CSM? And as it is really not where does that line stop as freedom of political or religious association is just as bad as sexual or racial discrimination.

Well if that is your belief that is fair enough. So you have no problem with removing this privilege for geographical location and association, but you do for age, sex and financial considerations, How about citizenship status, for examples only people who are citizens in the countries they reside?

Actually it doesn't state that as I mentioned above.

But anyway we are not talking about his speech, we are talking about him being removed because he is the member of political movement.

As I have said many times if his speech breaches the EULA or TOS fair enough, but removing someone due to a political affiliation is just wrong.

Otherwise we can argue our selves back to white land owning males, very easily.

CCP could chose to deny anyone a seat on the CSM for any reason they please. Some, such as the ones you describe, would be widely regarded as "highly irregular" and probably get them a lot of negative press, bad attention, and lost subscriptions (including mine, in all likelihood.) But running for and sitting on the CSM is not a right, and denying one the ability to do so - regardless of reason - does not somehow inhibit ones ability to practice their rights.

So how do you see the differences between a voluntary employee and an employee as far as these corporate rights are concerned?

I see the difference as irrelevant; CSM members are not employees of CCP. They are representatives of the playerbase to CCP and, due to the high profile nature of the position, de facto representatives of CCP to the community at large. You'll recall that community representative aspect being one of CCP's justifications for the requirement that candidates divulge their real names. That ultimately makes rejecting a potential CSM member for whatever reason CCP chooses little different from another business ending a sponsorship agreement if the figure they're sponsoring takes remarks or actions the company finds disagreeable, and neither case is a violation of a person's rights.

For example, the numerous companies that ended their advertising deals on Rush Limbaugh's radio show in the wake of his remarks regarding Sandra Fluke (remarks which anyone would agree were heavily steeped in the political views he professes) were not violating Rush's right to freedom of speech, nor his right to political affiliation, by doing so.

First: CSM reps are not employees of CCP thus CCP is not legally required to be antidiscriminatory in regards to political beliefs.

Second: The issue is not Fon's political beliefs, it is his apparent inability to separate his political beliefs from anything else in his life. If he were able to keep a politically neutral stance in regards to EVE, then it would not be an issue and this discussion would be moot.

Third: You are a blithering idiot, please shut up.

Fourth: :munch:

Are we able to make cash donations to help support a CSM's candidacy run?

Is there a limit we can donate at one time or overall?

Sorry I have no idea who Rush Limbaugh is.

The attack ads would have been fun, shame they dropped that and pretty much every other idea the community had for this csm election