EVE Search - How to Represent the Player Base Without Killing the CSM

All Channels

Jita Park Speakers Corner

How to Represent the Player Base Without Killing the CSM

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Jehan Markow Militant Mermen LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM 0	Posted - 2011.10.25 13:01:00 - [1] - Quote I know a lot of people just want to see the CSM die, and with good reason. But I think there is a far easier plan that CCP can implement in order to know what is on the players' minds. Remember a few months back when CCP had its crowdsourcing poll? Several of my friends and I were upset that the voting lasted only a few days. Many felt it would have been a great opportunity to weigh in with CCP to counter the pet issues of certain CSM members. So I thought, why not just have an ongoing crowdsourcing poll? Just set up a part of the forum (or another part of the EVE website) where players log in and prioritise issues by assigning them ranks. Whenever we feel a problem has been addressed, we can go back into our crowdsourcing and change our opinions. The one flaw with ongoing crowdsourcing is what to do about players who put in their opinion and then never show up again. It should be relatively easy to formulate an algorithm where the strength of a player's opinion diminishes for each month he does not sign onto the ongoing crowdsourcing page, or where the weight of his rankings drops to 1% of full value when the account goes inactive. CSM members would have the right to propose new additions to the ongoing poll. I imagine that we would see the number of priorities balloon to 500 or more, and CCP might need to dedicate one part-time employee to keeping the system functional. However, having ongoing crowdsourcing would eventually cut down on the number of petitions and would give CCP a valuable tool for information on the player base that will always be available at any given moment. And when a member of the CSM tells you guys at CCP that they have an issue that players are concerned about, all you need to do is look at the ongoing crowdsourcing poll to call bullshit on them. Please consider the idea. The CSM as it stands today is an irrelevant dinosaur with little connection to the majority of players. It's enough to inspire apathy in a new player. Ongoing crowdsourcing would motivate many of us to participate in sharing our opinions on improving the game. -JM
Andski GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 435	Posted - 2011.10.25 13:17:00 - [2] - Quote Jehan Markow wrote: Please consider the idea. The CSM as it stands today is an irrelevant dinosaur with little connection to the majority of players. you clearly haven't been paying attention
Ya Huei Imperial Collective 18	Posted - 2011.10.25 13:35:00 - [3] - Quote I'm sorry but isn't it Trebor doing the crowdsourcing ?? as far as I know CCP has nothing to do with that ?
Weaselior GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1271	Posted - 2011.10.25 14:08:00 - [4] - Quote the player base is full of loud idiots and it is the job of the csm to filter those idiots out, not enable them
Jenshae Chiroptera 49	Posted - 2011.10.25 14:10:00 - [5] - Quote Weaselior wrote: the player base is full of loud idiots and it is the job of the csm to filter those idiots out, not enable them There just isn't any filter big enough for you though. CSM do you think? No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you.
Weaselior GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1271	Posted - 2011.10.25 14:43:00 - [6] - Quote Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Weaselior wrote: the player base is full of loud idiots and it is the job of the csm to filter those idiots out, not enable them There just isn't any filter big enough for you though. an i am rubber you are glue response, this is brilliant support for the argument your voice should be heard
Jenshae Chiroptera 50	Posted - 2011.10.25 16:20:00 - [7] - Quote Goons like to destroy things for attention like misbehaving five year old children. Does calls for removing the CSM completely make Mittens happy? CSM do you think? No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you.
Jehan Markow Militant Mermen LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM 0	Posted - 2011.10.25 16:42:00 - [8] - Quote Andski wrote: Jehan Markow wrote: Please consider the idea. The CSM as it stands today is an irrelevant dinosaur with little connection to the majority of players. you clearly haven't been paying attention Actually, I have, and clearly you are trolling me. According to CCP's own figures, voter participation in the last CSM election was around 14%, up from 12% in the previous election. You can check that information on CCP's sites, TenTonHammer, and Massively, among others. Those figures mean that 86% percent of players are currently not connected to the CSM. I think my point stands. Ya Huei wrote: I'm sorry but isn't it Trebor doing the crowdsourcing ?? as far as I know CCP has nothing to do with that ? I'm not so sure. I remember it was advertised by CCP and I figured CCP took the information into account. I know Trebor has been active in the matter, but his level of participation has not been clarified by CCP, as far as I can tell. Here is the wiki on crowdsourcing: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/July_2011_Prioritization_Crowdsourcing Weaselior wrote: the player base is full of loud idiots and it is the job of the csm to filter those idiots out, not enable them The very nature of democracy is that idiots often vote for the worst candidates, which is why people like George W. Bush and Barack Obama can win elections while the most adept administrators with the clearest vision get ignored by the masses. Once in power, the forces of incompetence serve to further undermine those who only have the community's best interests in mind, and further elections are all about beauty competitions instead of finding the best person to carry out the stated duty. Over 2000 years ago, Aristotle pointed this out as the flaw of democracy, and the CSM's pursuit of pet projects have undermined the fabric of EVE's reality in the last 3 years, nerfing the game so smart players have even less of an edge over stupid ones. Furthermore, the CSM only exists because CCP could not envision a better way to channel honest player grievances. What I am proposing is a better way to channel those grievances that puts a serious check on CSM power using actual facts and statistics, not just "Well, I am the Mitanni and all my friends in the game tell me we need to focus on free strudel for cap pilots every Wednesday." (No offence to the Mitanni intended, it's just a silly example of the main flaw of representative democracy.) -JM
Skunk Gracklaw GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 439	Posted - 2011.10.25 16:53:00 - [9] - Quote Jehan Markow wrote: So I thought, why not just have an ongoing crowdsourcing poll? Because "docking games" are clearly the most important thing the players are worried about...
Rer Eirikr Clearly Compensating The Dark Triad 19	Posted - 2011.10.25 17:19:00 - [10] - Quote Jehan Markow wrote: Andski wrote: Jehan Markow wrote: Please consider the idea. The CSM as it stands today is an irrelevant dinosaur with little connection to the majority of players. you clearly haven't been paying attention Actually, I have, and clearly you are trolling me. According to CCP's own figures, voter participation in the last CSM election was around 14%, up from 12% in the previous election. You can check that information on CCP's sites, TenTonHammer, and Massively, among others. Those figures mean that 86% percent of players are currently not connected to the CSM. I think my point stands. "HighSec pilots don't vote, therefore the CSM doesn't matter and must be totally irrelevant despite just having pushed forward some of the greatest referendums for ship balancing, lag, and actually getting **** done in Flying in Space instead of Incarna." Yep, clearly they're totally worthless.
The Mittani GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1623	Posted - 2011.10.25 17:25:00 - [11] - Quote I think this will just have to be my stock reply for the now-daily idiotic threads from miners who mistakenly blame the CSM for their dead Mackinaws: Quote: As I relaxed in the aftermath of a time-dilated fight where supercaps didn't rule the day and lag didn't determine the outcome, I browsed a rack of podkills with implants, spun my recently rebalanced hybrid-gunned ship, and typed off a poorly-thought-out ragepost about how the CSM was irrelevant, because I'm literally a big babby who has no idea what he's talking about. I then went off to enjoy a bunch of new spaceship-related content that CCP produced after they finally acknowledged that focusing on FiS instead of WiS was the right thing to do!
Skunk Gracklaw GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 439	Posted - 2011.10.25 17:38:00 - [12] - Quote Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Does calls for removing the CSM completely make Mittens happy? Any time the unwashed pubbie masses are crying Dear Leader is happy. Thanks for doing your part.
Jehan Markow Militant Mermen LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM 2	Posted - 2011.10.25 22:48:00 - [13] - Quote The Mittani wrote: I think this will just have to be my stock reply for the now-daily idiotic threads from miners who mistakenly blame the CSM for their dead Mackinaws: If you don't mind, I'd like your input on the actual point of this thread, which has nothing to do with petty in-game power squabbles and more to do with the disconnection between CSM members and the community of players as a whole. In sad fact, your reply only reinforces that point. While time dilation might be a good temporary solution, implants will be showing up on podkills, and there's a hybrid rebalance coming, the crowdsourcing poll from July shows that there were far more pressing issues on the minds of the players than these three niche issues which are primarily the worries of 0.0 PVPers. None of the three examples to which you point even made the top ten on the master list. Of your three examples, the highest priority among them ranked 19th on the master list. Then again, most of us didn't have enough time to vote and voice our opinion. Furthermore, the CSM hasn't really been pushing for those top 10 issues to be addressed, though I'm sure some at CCP have been a bit wiser and at least looked at how to implement them, if not actually started the work. While some of your pet issues may have been worked on, the vast majority of players are not being heard by CCP. My proposal for ongoing crowdsourcing would enable them to be heard with minimal effort on CCPs part. Basically, it would streamline CCPs system of petitions and moderators. Whether you like it or not, things are headed in that direction, whether from Hilmar's intentions or the alienation felt by the majority of players or the general popular uprisings around planet Earth in recent months. So are you for it or will you stand in its way? -JM
The Mittani GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1631	Posted - 2011.10.25 22:49:00 - [14] - Quote Why did you sign your post? Your name is right there, to the left of it. -JM
Endovior Brothers At Arms Intrepid Crossing 12	Posted - 2011.10.25 23:38:00 - [15] - Quote It is my belief that the reason why so few people voted for the last CSM was that previous CSMs have been relatively ineffective. The fact of the matter, however, is that the current CSM has been extremely effective. The fact that it's been extremely effective under the leadership of The Mittani, who is also the driving force behind all sorts of griefplay, conflates two entirely separate issues. Even so, the rage of hisec players destroyed by goons generates a feeling of disconnection from the various nullsec-sponsored CSM members. The CSM has clearly demonstrated itself as an effective force. So long as CCP doesn't do anything stupid, like disband or ignore it, I believe that it will remain so, and that future CSM elections will have a much higher turnout, as people realize that the voting process is actually an important one, which will shape the future course of their game. Not even much of a prophecy, really... provided the CSM is not outright disbanded, with all the attention it's been getting, anyone can clearly tell that the next CSM election will be much more highly publicized and far more strongly contested. Indeed, I would not be at all surprised if the next election had double the proportion of voters as did the last. Say what you will about his politics or the way he chooses to play the game, but you cannot deny that The Mittani has been the man behind the CSM's effectiveness. He is, almost certainly, the reason why we're getting an awesome expansion this winter instead of more frivolous work towards some badly implemented and boring establishment, with extra monocles on the side.
Skunk Gracklaw GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 469	Posted - 2011.10.26 01:28:00 - [16] - Quote Jehan Markow wrote: the crowdsourcing poll from July shows that there were far more pressing issues on the minds of the players than these three niche issues which are primarily the worries of 0.0 PVPers lol...the "crowdsourcing" poll got input from a tiny, tiny percentage of the playerbase and it was gamed by Eve University so that docking games was the number one issue. Do you really believe that docking games is the biggest problem in Eve Online? Also, crowdsourcing is a made-up word.
Jehan Markow Militant Mermen LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM 2	Posted - 2011.10.26 03:44:00 - [17] - Quote Endovior wrote: The CSM has clearly demonstrated itself as an effective force. How? I've already pointed to the clear demonstrations to the contrary. Not my own opinions, mind you, but the data that backs up my premise. So where is the data that backs up your premise? Quote: Say what you will about his politics or the way he chooses to play the game, but you cannot deny that The Mittani has been the man behind the CSM's effectiveness. He is, almost certainly, the reason why we're getting an awesome expansion this winter instead of more frivolous work towards some badly implemented and boring establishment, with extra monocles on the side. This thread was not made to argue about the Mitanni and his politics. I was proposing a far more effective method of gauging player input on problems in the game. As much as I would like to take the Mittani seriously, he - and every Goon posting here - have yet to weigh in on its viability. Skunk Gracklaw wrote: lol...the "crowdsourcing" poll got input from a tiny, tiny percentage of the playerbase and it was gamed by Eve University so that docking games was the number one issue. Do you really believe that docking games is the biggest problem in Eve Online? Nope, not at all. That is why I proposed ongoing crowdsourcing. If more of us players had the opportunity to respond, there would have been stronger data indicating players' thoughts on how to improve the game. Even a crowdsourcing poll lasting 2 weeks instead of 2 days would be better than nothing. You have no idea how many in-game buddies said "Really? That's what it was about? Gosh, I wish I'd known because I would have liked to weigh in." I'm not so narrow-minded as to think that only my in-game circles of friends cared about weighing in. As for EVE-U "gaming the system" - which is just mob democracy in action, no different from how CSM members are elected - you will notice in the link I posted above (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/July_2011_Prioritization_Crowdsourcing) there is an entire section where the EVE-U results are taken out so people like you and me in debates like this can see what EVE players thought without the interference from the EVE-U voting bloc. On that list, the Mitanni's three concerns above come in no greater than rank 14. Apparently my point about the CSM being disconnected from players still stands. Here's the TL/DR: ongoing crowdsourcing = more data on what players want to see. As for "crowdsourcing" being "a made-up word", so is "playerbase", "online", and "university". If you have a better word than "crowdsourcing" that you'd like to use, stop wasting our time and suggest it. I'd be happy to consider it. Do you want to whine about Webster or can we stick to the actual point of the thread? The Mittani wrote: Why did you sign your post? Your name is right there, to the left of it. -JM Fair's fair. I would be happy to answer once you give me an answer to this: Jehan Markow wrote: If you don't mind, I'd like your input on the actual point of this thread....
Skunk Gracklaw GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 476	Posted - 2011.10.26 04:07:00 - [18] - Quote Jehan Markow wrote: As for EVE-U "gaming the system" - which is just mob democracy in action, no different from how CSM members are elected - you will notice in the link I posted above (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/July_2011_Prioritization_Crowdsourcing) there is an entire section where the EVE-U results are taken out so people like you and me in debates like this can see what EVE players thought without the interference from the EVE-U voting bloc. On that list, the Mitanni's three concerns above come in no greater than rank 14. Apparently my point about the CSM being disconnected from players still stands. The. Results. Were. Meaningless. So few people voted that you can't point to the list and say "Durr Mittens only made it to number 14 on da list" and be taken seriously.
Jehan Markow Militant Mermen LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM 2	Posted - 2011.10.26 04:27:00 - [19] - Quote Skunk Gracklaw wrote: The. Results. Were. Meaningless. So few people voted that you can't point to the list and say "Durr Mittens only made it to number 14 on da list" and be taken seriously. With only 10% as much turnout of the CSM elections, the results were pretty much meaningless. Great, we agree. Now that's out of the way, my point is that the results would be more meaningful if it could be expanded to include more players. How to do this? Simple. Let the poll be initiated again with no deadline for voting and so that players can change their votes at any time. Given time, we would see more and more players voice their opinion, thus rendering... wait for it... MEANINGFUL RESULTS. What part of meaningful results is so scary to the Goons that you're wasting your time hijacking the thread? On a side note, if the CSM elections were announced one day and ended 3 days later, turnout would probably have been just as low as it was for crowdsourcing. -JM
Skunk Gracklaw GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 476	Posted - 2011.10.26 04:29:00 - [20] - Quote Jehan Markow wrote: Skunk Gracklaw wrote: The. Results. Were. Meaningless. So few people voted that you can't point to the list and say "Durr Mittens only made it to number 14 on da list" and be taken seriously. With only 10% as much turnout of the CSM elections, the results were pretty much meaningless. Then why are people complaining so much about the CSM?
Jehan Markow Militant Mermen LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM 2	Posted - 2011.10.26 04:54:00 - [21] - Quote Skunk Gracklaw wrote: Then why are people complaining so much about the CSM? Read what's already been posted. Once you've done that, you will see there are two answers: 1) CSM only got 14% turnout, a dismal failure. Even Myanmar gets better turnout in its elections. 2) Complaining about the CSM and whining that the CSM should go away is not the point of this thread, in case you didn't see the part of its title where it says "...Without Killing the CSM". Point is, my proposal is something the CSMs could all work on that would provide real-time answers for CCP's questions that created the CSM in the first place. It's a simplistic idea, builds on the positives of a past idea, solves most of other peoples' complaints with the CSM, and moves us toward direct democracy while moving us away from its older bastard half-brother, representative democracy. -JM
Endovior Brothers At Arms Intrepid Crossing 15	Posted - 2011.10.26 04:57:00 - [22] - Quote Personally, I think it's rather foolish to conflate 'effectiveness of the CSM as a whole' with 'success in implementing items X, Y, and Z off a list of the things I want'. The CSM does not have absolute control over what actually goes into Eve, all they can do is offer advice. Yes, you had a poll up. Yes, a few people voted on that poll. No, the things that got most voted for aren't actually up yet, even though it's been three months or so. Uh... you surprised? Have you paid any attention to what was happening during that time? To all the things that actually were happening, which were kind of important? Those things on which the CSM justifiably focused their attention? It's by that standard that I deem the CSM effective. Sure, it'd be nice if some of the minor but irksome issues of Eve were resolved. There's still time, and given the new focus of the Dev team in general, it's likely that some of them will be addressed. Given that much of the reason why the Dev team cares about FiS in the first place can be traced to the CSM's efforts, if any of those issues actually do get addressed, credit goes to the CSM anyway. If it weren't for them, none of those issues would be addressed, and the winter release would be all about establishments and paying for more clothing options.
The Mittani GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1636	Posted - 2011.10.26 05:22:00 - [23] - Quote Skunk Gracklaw wrote: Jehan Markow wrote: Skunk Gracklaw wrote: The. Results. Were. Meaningless. So few people voted that you can't point to the list and say "Durr Mittens only made it to number 14 on da list" and be taken seriously. With only 10% as much turnout of the CSM elections, the results were pretty much meaningless. Then why are people complaining so much about the CSM? The CSM is powerless! Wait, the CSM has too much power! Wait, someone on the CSM blew up my mining barge - quick, to Jita Park! Anyway, crowdsourcing is dumb. It's a buzzword attached to a simple poll, and CCP has nicely illustrated the danger of believing in buzzwords. It's nice that Trebor puts so much stock in crowdsourcing; if you like crowdsourcing and want to hear about it a lot, vote for Trebor for CSM7; he's a great rep and a hiseccer. And he loves his crowdsourcing. Crowdsourcing! Like 'Excellence', perhaps if you say it enough times magic fairies will happen.
Parsec Seti 1st Contact Fade 2 Black 20	Posted - 2011.10.26 06:40:00 - [24] - Quote The Mittani wrote: [ The CSM is powerless! Wait, the CSM has too much power! Wait, someone on the CSM blew up my mining barge - quick, to Jita Park! Anyway, crowdsourcing is dumb. It's a buzzword attached to a simple poll, and CCP has nicely illustrated the danger of believing in buzzwords. It's nice that Trebor puts so much stock in crowdsourcing; if you like crowdsourcing and want to hear about it a lot, vote for Trebor for CSM7; he's a great rep and a hiseccer. And he loves his crowdsourcing. Crowdsourcing! Like 'Excellence', perhaps if you say it enough times magic fairies will happen. From the sounds of it, a crowdsourcing initiative would weaken you and your desire to make the players of Eve play the game the way you want it to be played. I can see why you don't like it.
Skunk Gracklaw GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 481	Posted - 2011.10.26 07:08:00 - [25] - Quote Parsec Seti wrote: From the sounds of it, a crowdsourcing initiative would weaken you How so? A poll of players concerns could be a valuable tool but the way it was done made it into a joke.
Parsec Seti 1st Contact Fade 2 Black 20	Posted - 2011.10.26 13:55:00 - [26] - Quote Skunk Gracklaw wrote: Parsec Seti wrote: From the sounds of it, a crowdsourcing initiative would weaken you How so? A poll of players concerns could be a valuable tool but the way it was done made it into a joke. If you only want the game played your way, and want to force others to play it the way you want, then being the chair of a group that filters out players concerns and presents the "most important" ones to CPP would help you push your agenda. A more open system of polling, or crowdsourcing in this case, would make it harder for one group to push their own agenda as the most important one.
Elise DarkStar DarkCorp Capital Group DarkCorp Imperium 100	Posted - 2011.10.26 14:07:00 - [27] - Quote I don't see how polling is going to be harmful, unless you automatically assume that it will be used improperly. It's a tool like anything else.
The Mittani GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1648	Posted - 2011.10.26 14:21:00 - [28] - Quote Parsec Seti wrote: The Mittani wrote: The CSM is powerless! Wait, the CSM has too much power! Wait, someone on the CSM blew up my mining barge - quick, to Jita Park! Anyway, crowdsourcing is dumb. It's a buzzword attached to a simple poll, and CCP has nicely illustrated the danger of believing in buzzwords. It's nice that Trebor puts so much stock in crowdsourcing; if you like crowdsourcing and want to hear about it a lot, vote for Trebor for CSM7; he's a great rep and a hiseccer. And he loves his crowdsourcing. Crowdsourcing! Like 'Excellence', perhaps if you say it enough times magic fairies will happen. From the sounds of it, a crowdsourcing initiative would weaken you and your desire to make the players of Eve play the game the way you want it to be played. I can see why you don't like it. Lengthy, obtuse polls that appeal to the spreadsheet demographic don't have anything to do with my ability to convince folks over a beer or two about my point of view. But don't let that stop you constructing a conspiracy theory.
Parsec Seti 1st Contact Fade 2 Black 20	Posted - 2011.10.26 15:43:00 - [29] - Quote The Mittani wrote: [ Lengthy, obtuse polls that appeal to the spreadsheet demographic don't have anything to do with my ability to convince folks over a beer or two about my point of view. But don't let that stop you constructing a conspiracy theory. No conspiracy theory needed when you admit to what people are complaining about. The vast majority of Eve players don't get a trip to CCP to have a beer or two with them to convince CCP to push the game toward their play style. Polls need not be lengthy or obtuse. It sounds like you are afraid of objective measures, and would rather continue with the politics and the meta-game of the CSM. Players don't want part of their monthly fee going towards you and the CSM if it's simply a chance for you to convince folks of your agenda over a beer or two.
Jehan Markow Militant Mermen LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM 2	Posted - 2011.10.26 17:20:00 - [30] - Quote Endovior wrote: Have you paid any attention to what was happening during that time? To all the things that actually were happening, which were kind of important? Those things on which the CSM justifiably focused their attention? It's by that standard that I deem the CSM effective. Sure, it'd be nice if some of the minor but irksome issues of Eve were resolved. Please read my initial post. If you did, I doubt you understand it based on what you just said. The CSM may have gotten a few things moved on, but by and large this post is about how to best represent the entire player base, not just the handful of 0.0 organisations that it currently represents. Mind you, I am a 0.0 player who finds the CSM do push issues relevant to me. What I also see is a ton of hi-sec players (lame though I may find them) who have no voice in the game. If they get disgruntled and subscriptions go down, the reality of EVE will suck more for all of us, not just hi-sec players. So I'm proposing that we have an ongoing poll rather than relying exclusively on the CSM. That's all this post is about. Please go back and read what I wrote the first time. This is not intended to be a CSM-bashing thread, nor am I whining about my pet issues not being taken care of by the CSM. The Mittani wrote: The CSM is powerless! Wait, the CSM has too much power! Wait, someone on the CSM blew up my mining barge - quick, to Jita Park! Anyway, crowdsourcing is dumb. It's a buzzword attached to a simple poll, and CCP has nicely illustrated the danger of believing in buzzwords. It's nice that Trebor puts so much stock in crowdsourcing; if you like crowdsourcing and want to hear about it a lot, vote for Trebor for CSM7; he's a great rep and a hiseccer. And he loves his crowdsourcing. Crowdsourcing! Like 'Excellence', perhaps if you say it enough times magic fairies will happen. Yeah, that crowdsourcing option "Commitment to Excellence" was 100% a joke, but I'm pretty sure if ongoing crowdsourcing was well implemented, enough players would request dismissal of that option due to ineffability. In any event, you're now taking up a theoretical linguistic position on the word "crowdsourcing" which perhaps belongs in the realm of English professors but has little to do with the problems of EVE or the proposal I made. In substance, you are talking about what has happened in the past (summer crowdsourcing) and it sounds like you're just wrapped up in the usual Jita Park politicking. How about weighing in on whether my proposal would work? Have you actually read my first post from front to back? Sorry if it's not perfectly clear. I'm not a career politician. Skunk Gracklaw wrote: Parsec Seti wrote: From the sounds of it, a crowdsourcing initiative would weaken you How so? A poll of players concerns could be a valuable tool but the way it was done made it into a joke. Again, you agree with me 100% but you refuse to admit that you agree with me. This must be what it feels like to teach kindergarten. [quote=The MittaniLengthy, obtuse polls that appeal to the spreadsheet demographic don't have anything to do with my ability to convince folks over a beer or two about my point of view. But don't let that stop you constructing a conspiracy theory.[/quote] When powerful politicians are opposed to polling, it's difficult to not connect the dots between their agitated opposition and the power they hold. Call it a "theory" if you like, but it's "conspiracy fact" over 90% of the time. But since the only opinion you are willing to give is on something that happened three months ago and not on what I'm proposing now, perhaps your situation belongs in that <10%. Still, I am not trying to appeal to "the spreadsheet demographic". I would think that getting to vote on your concerns appeals to each and every individual except those in power. I am suggesting that we use direct democracy in EVE instead of representative democracy, and we have yet to hear your clear thoughts on the matter. -JM

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.