K Suri
Red Gooey Bananas
8
   |
Posted - 2011.11.07 23:34:00 -
[1] - Quote
John Caesse wrote:Since the events of this summer, it seems whenever an issue arises the same calls for player-vs-ccp rebellion, canceled subscriptions, and prophecies that the game will end sound again.
This cannot continue; doing so dilutes the power which we, as players, can potentially wield. Like the boy who cried wolf, if we continue to throw tantrums, rage, and make demands about every little change and gripe when a real issue comes along we will not be heard.
So lets all take a step back, allow CCP to continue on their new path of giving us fixes and new content and save our ire for when its really needed.
Has it occurred to you that some players are deliberately and repeatedly creating and driving "the sky is falling" topics to reduce the effectiveness of future campaigns as we saw with "Nexgate"?
There is a minority of rebel-rousers (I use the term loosely) - and this includes some 0.0 leadership and some high-sec stirrers - that stir trouble for their own ends, not for the benefit of the game. Add a huge number of newer, less politically savvy players prepared to jump on pony posts just so they feel they "fit" into Eve, the manipluation of these very players is easily achieved. I think someone once called them "the cool guys". Fairly apt I think too.
To counter, those rebellious efforts are being deliberately hidden behind lots of posting smoke to reduce their effectiveness. The people doing this are genuinely concerned about CCP's reaction to short-term riotous behaviour (and subsequent changes based on this short term popularity) rather than CCP keeping their focus on the long-term game.
An RL example of this is Climate Change. Enough people are "anti-climate change" for a variety of reasons and/or agendas and by repeatedly reducing the seriousness of the potential cause and effects, there is enough doubt and uncertainty created forcing the effect of the protest to be watered down. We all know politicians follow the short-term votes, not the long-term future and they won't mandate change if they feel they have not got majority support.
Turning any debate into an "either believe" or "you don't" is great for reducing polarisation and the greatest benefit is that the indifferent voter usually sides with the "you don't" side because he doesn't like being bullied or forced into a position.
TLDR. You counter "sky is falling" spin by creating more "sky is falling" spin. It is an effective method of reducing the effectiveness of any protests by generating tedium in the subject. It's used frequently by spinners in RL.
That's my view anyway. |