Hey everyone. I'd like to announce that I'll be running for CSM9.

... being the direct cause of some of the changes CCP has made to aggression mechanics over the years.

... having created one of the two biggest content generating organizations in highsec right now and possibly even ever.

As the pirate king...

using the mechanics to outsmart new guys

Seems you know very little of highsec piracy.

It's actually VERY rare a "new guy" gets attacked.

Yes it is extremely rare that new corps or newb friendly corps full with newbies get wardecced in highsec, you are correct. I mean this probably never ever happens.

@psychotic


Looking forward to your answers, however reading stuff like "It is terminally boring. And I choose that word on purpose. It is a subscription killer." doesn't make me want to vote for you, not that I do not agree that mining is boring, but purely because there are enough miners out there who enjoy it, and to change their gameplay because you personally think it's boring is not the right angle to take in my opinion, I personally think highsec is extremely boring, terminally boring actually.

So you say it is a subscription killer, another big claim really, how did you find this out?

I am also interesting in hearing your thoughts on how you think mining should be more interesting and more engaging, and what effect you believe it will have on the community.

There are very few people who "enjoy" mining. There are plenty who tolerate it.

I can't find the article you're talking about just this second, but yes, I have written bits along those lines and still maintain that opinion.

It is my belief that badly run do-nothing corporations do more harm to this game than basically anything else. A bright-eyed young enthusiastic newbie joins one and is told that they can't do any of the cool things they joined the game to do until their six months or a year or two years old. They instead get chained to an asteroid belt or a mission agent and either become a mindless grinding robot or quit the game in frustration.

I think it's far better that corporations like these be destroyed, even if that means that some of the people who would otherwise have stayed to do mindless mud-stacking quit as a result. This game has one significant advantage over every other game on the market, and that's the competitive nature of it. I want those enthusiastic newbies to walk away from the ashes of crappy corps into vibrant and dynamic corps that are making a splash and doing interesting things.

I think the high level of competition, including things like spying, betrayal, and unconventional tactics is outstanding and I can't wait to see what the community comes up with next. I think it's the shining jewel in Eve's crown. I think it should be nurtured and encouraged as much as possible and I'd love to see that backed by CCP.

I believe that betrayal of trust and perceived friendship should be encouraged, yes. These things going on in game are no different than a poker player bluffing. That level of play can be rough, but Eve is a full contact sport for your mind, after all.

As for hooligans in soccer, no I do not encourage criminality or violence in the real world. I do support the odd bit of violence in hockey in that it adds strategic depth to the game, but stop supporting it as soon as it starts cause more than minor injuries. In these cases, there are real consequences and lives could be ruined. In Eve, zero lives are ruined.

The question of if voice comms etc. count as being within the game and the finer points of "it's space, he had it coming" are valid and interesting discussions, but given that this is my CSM thread I'll have to invite you to talk about it with me in C&P or privately.

Hm..

You create content. What about the people who have no interest in your "content creation" and are ussually on the receiving end of it and are thus robbed of their time in his game. Let's face it, most of us have families and jobs and our "online time" is ussually limited. What happens, when your "content creation" gets in the way of these hardworking people and they're worse off for it?

Do you consider it a worthy note, for them to be able to have a choice of participation in these "events" you create? Because if you're only creating events for yourself and those who think like you (however flawed that might be), don't you represent only a portion of the area you operate in and would thus, if chosen for a CSM, be giving further imbalance of the territory?

Sorry, you must have misunderstood me. I was talking about actual friendship. See, just because there are some kilometers between the people I communicate with, doesn't mean I don't value them and our relationship any less.
Maybe for you Eve is just a game, but for me - and many others - it's a community.


So, you and I are not real? The time I spend in Eve is not real time? The value I put on things in game is not real?
EVE is real. And that's not just a phrase. And if you want to work with CCP on the CSM you should be aware that they mean that, and you may want to watch Hilmars presentation...

And just to elaborate on where I stand.. I am part of Eve, I know the risks and if I trip somewhere, I'll take my lessons from that.
If I fall for a random scam, I wouldn't be mad at the scammer, at most I would be mad at me if it was too obvious and if not I would be curious what happened.
If someone ganks my ship, I'd either shrug it off cause it wasn't worth much or blame it on me for packing too shiny, or not paying attention.
If someone betrays my friendship, I wouldn't be mad or raging either, I'd simply be disappointed.

Eve isn't real. It's a game. This predisposition to conflate reality with fantasy is as bizarre as it is disturbing. One of the most attractive things about Monk's philosophy is his absolute rejection of the specious association between "the game" and "real life."

(This is more in reference to your strange inference that Monk supports RL life violence via hooliganism because he likes to engage in non consensual pvp in a video game)

Sephira, if letting the air out of the balls was a legal move in a game that strongly featured letting the air out of the balls, I would be all for it.

I am aware there is actual friendship here to. I have several very good friends I've made in Eve. They would never betray me in a video game because that would ruin our friendship and they are actually my friends.

And yes, I agree with you, Eve both is and contains communities, many of which are outstanding.

The time spent in Eve is real, yes. As is the time you spend playing Team Fortress 2 or chess. You may be invested in your pieces. You may dislike it when you lose. When you lose, however, no limbs are lost, no lives are ruined, and nobody stops being able to pay their mortgage. Just like in chess or TF2, you acknowledge the game you sat down to play and in playing accept the consequences.

The consequences to high stakes poker *do* ruin lives on occasion, but people still play it, consciously aware of what they're getting into and consenting to play a very high stakes game very competitively.

People, but playing Eve, consent to playing a very low stakes game competitively.

I have a rule, Monk.

Never trust anyone in EVE unless you are sleeping with them in real life.

Last year, I had you fairly far downballot. I'm considering that again this year. However, I have one important concern, especially considering some of the stuff I have seen on minerbumping.com:
What do you think of using EVE as a hunting ground for targets of psychological torture of the variety that Erotica 1 recently posted for all to see on soundcloud? here: https://soundcloud.com/kalorned/erotica1bonusroom_sohkar

Seriously given the number of lightly-veiled threats of RL violence being posted in Ero's CSM thread, I think any overstepping of the line by Ero is the smallest concern anyone decent would have.

Honestly, if I were Ero I'd withdraw from the CSM race for the safety of myself and family, and report those threats to both CCP and consider reporting them to police as well.

Then Ero should do that.

I'm not here making death threats. I'm just trying to ascertain Monk's opinion of Erotica 1's actions, because there's a difference between suicide ganking miners (which some of my buddies do) or scamming, on the one hand, and inciting mental breakdowns on the other hand. I'd be interested in a rep for the gankers. I'm not interested in a rep for people whose primary target is, apparently, not related to EVE Online.

Then Ero should do that.

I'm not here making death threats. I'm just trying to ascertain Monk's opinion of Erotica 1's actions, because there's a difference between suicide ganking miners (which some of my buddies do) or scamming, on the one hand, and inciting mental breakdowns on the other hand. I'd be interested in a rep for the gankers. I'm not interested in a rep for people whose primary target is, apparently, not related to EVE Online.

A closed GD thread indicated that P.M. was actually involved along side Ero in at least several if not a significant portion of the bonus rounds. If this is true it would appear that P.M. is actually on side with that being the direction they would like EVE to become.

Last year, I had you fairly far downballot. I'm considering that again this year. However, I have one important concern, especially considering some of the stuff I have seen on minerbumping.com:
What do you think of using EVE as a hunting ground for targets of psychological torture of the variety that Erotica 1 recently posted for all to see on soundcloud? here: https://soundcloud.com/kalorned/erotica1bonusroom_sohkar

...Here are some more .... ON THIS ONE "Happy Miner Payout" you can clearly hear Phsychotic Monks voice.

And how they sadistically humiliate a father of 3 kids in fromt of his wife ans children.

It appears that Monk was not asked about the Bonus room in this thread until five days ago, and identified as a participant only yesterday...but hasn't posted to this thread for ten days. I hope no real-life issues are interfering with his candidacy, and that we will hear more from him.

On what grounds are you basing this judgement and sentence? Something more than huff puff emotion I hope.

This recording is mild at best. The only thing the father had to do in front of his wife and 3 children was refuse to sing songs and read aloud a wiki article. Your version of being sadistically humiliated would give the average person a rosy cheeked blush.

Tsk. Put that pitchfork away.

I think you've gazed too long into the abyss. The abyss is gazing into you.

I am in fact still here, yes. I'm in the middle of moving and my internet access is severely limited until the 4th. My apologies.

I know that's unfortunate timing, but you know how real life gets sometimes.

So you have your answers he is not banned, and this thread is about Monk's run for CSM not others so lets get it back on topic.

A closed GD thread indicated that P.M. was actually involved along side Ero in at least several if not a significant portion of the bonus rounds. If this is true it would appear that P.M. is actually on side with that being the direction they would like EVE to become.

I'm not in a position to speculate about anyone's motives in this thread, nor is anyone else. I am interested to hear Monk's position on the E1 affair, though. If none is forthcoming, I won't be voting for him.

Do you really need some lame justification?

Hello Psychotic Monk,

I only have 1 short, pointed question, so this should be a pretty easy "yes" or "no" answer.
Everyone has their own reasoning / logic, so I don't want to know why, just a clear answer to whether or not you support a ban.

Do you support banning players, for actions, like Erotica 1 ?

I really don't get your and other players pretext for question like this, bans by CCP are never open for discussion, so why would CSM candidates mix into such affairs? The play style of E1 was fun for as long as it lasted and on a certain moment CCP decided she committed a bannable offense, its simple as that. This was simply based on EULA, ToS or other directives clearly set out by CCP on harrasement (see the mining bumping statement).

So, supporting such a thing is never up to a CSM member, but just a CCP internal matter.

Sephira, if letting the air out of the balls was a legal move in a game that strongly featured letting the air out of the balls, I would be all for it.

Zappity, having been on the defense and having been successfully defended against in these situations, I feel that defenders have a great number of advantages in these situations. I don't think they need more of them in a generalized non-specific way, but I do feel like they should know more about them. Honestly, each of the major types of content creating gameplay has several very strong counters, the shortcoming is only in the knowledge or will of those that would apply them.

Asking a dedicated PVP ship to defend a mining fleet can often lead to mind numbing boredom for the PVP pilot, so we're providing the option for players to make sacrifices in their mining ships to allow self-defense.

Yeah, the Procurer/Skiff buff matters a lot more in nullsec, where no way in hell do you have an Orca in the belt with you (helloooooooooo target) and one of the main threats is an AFK cloaky camper.

What was the most enjoyable part of your Bonus Round participation, Monk? What was least enjoyable? How did you happen to become involved?

I have removed a rule breaking post and those quoting them.

The Rules:
10. Discussion of warnings and bans is prohibited.

Such matters shall remain private between CCP and the involved user. Questions or comments concerning warnings and bans will be conveyed through email or private messaging. CCP respect the right of our players to privacy and as such you are not permitted to publicize private correspondence (including petition responses and emails) received from any of the aforementioned parties.

...and give -constructive- feedback on how to move forward.

Sadly I have to agree with Zappity. I actually put a vote in behind Monk last elections and would have done so again this time, as I feel that the Ganker/Criminal playstyle is an important part of EVE even if we don't like it that much when we receive it. However Monk hasn't answered the hard questions in this thread, only the nice soft questions as well as not giving feedback even though we are past the date he said he would be back by, which leaves me feeling his campaign is based on popularity issues rather than seriousness, & that he won't be as effective as other options.

What hard questions? The only ones I've seen in a while consist of "I hate you because you is pirate!" or "What do you think about Erotica1?"

There have been precious few people asking him "questions" that weren't pure bullshit. ISD Ezwal has basically been having to camp out in this thread because it's mostly personal attacks and "+1" statements. Not a lot to reply to.

Then you fail at comprehension. Let me put it in a simple manner that even you cannot obfuscate.

Monk, without reference to specific players, is the bonus room the sort of emergent gameplay that your platform embraces? If so, what message would you use your CSM term to convey to CCP? If not, how do you reconcile this with the fact that you have participated in bonus rooms?

See above, about E1. Again. In before Ezwal deletes this one too.

There is a distinction between the behaviour associated with the bonus room (fine to discuss) and Erotica 1. Notice that I specifically exclude reference to specific players.

I would feel more confident about a candidate who also gave some feedback in their own thread.

It's a loaded question, it's an attempt at guilt by association, it's bullshit, and if I were him I wouldn't bother answering it either. Stay on message, and all that.

It is fundamentally important that someone with significant hands on experience in these matters be on hand to help CCP determine what is or isn't going to be good for the health of emergent gameplay in highsec.

What hard questions? The only ones I've seen in a while consist of "I hate you because you is pirate!" or "What do you think about Erotica1?"

There have been precious few people asking him "questions" that weren't pure bullshit. ISD Ezwal has basically been having to camp out in this thread because it's mostly personal attacks and "+1" statements. Not a lot to reply to.

I am happy to endorse my favorite Psychotic for election to the 9th Council of Stellar Management! Good luck at the polls!

I would like to add one more question: to what extent did you share in the "take" of Bonus Rounds, Psychotic Monk?

One phrase i keep remembering is the one of your website "Be the chaos you want to see in the universe", and it reminds me that EVE really is an amazing game with limitless possibilities. And we need to keep the game this way. It's why we all love EVE.

Hey guys. I didn't want to make my **** extremely public, but you deserve an answer on why I'm not present in this thread. I've upended my life and moved and also am having trouble getting internet set up in the new place. Once this is sorted I expect to be present again, but it's taking longer than expected.

As for a question that's being asked repeatedly, I'd like to address this now that fewer people are openly howling for blood and hopefully we can talk about this more or less rationally.

So, without further ado, here's a list of things you aren't mad about:

Someone getting mad at their attacker.

A list of things that routinely cost people every last space-dime they have

Out of the box thinking costing someone a great deal.

A singing ransom, known in some circles as 'torture'. Last time you saw one of these you thought it was hilarious.

I think I covered all the points. Anything I missed that you're mad about?

...I think I covered all the points....

As for a question that's being asked repeatedly, I'd like to address this now that fewer people are openly howling for blood and hopefully we can talk about this more or less rationally.

So, without further ado, here's a list of things you aren't mad about:

Someone getting mad at their attacker.

A list of things that routinely cost people every last space-dime they have

Out of the box thinking costing someone a great deal.

A singing ransom, known in some circles as 'torture'. Last time you saw one of these you thought it was hilarious.

I think I covered all the points. Anything I missed that you're mad about?

Actually IGÇÖm not really sure if youGÇÖre just trolling (very bad in your own CSM thread, especially with serious questions like these) or if you really donGÇÖt have any clue what all the fuss was and still is about (even worse as the self-proclaimed "pirate king" who should be an expert on the matter).

The least that I would expect is a straight-up answer, especially from you as it should be a key-area of your expertise. And that is also what I primarily expect from any CSM-member:
First: to be able to express his opinion about matters in his area of expertise, even if it is unpopular; second and even more important: to be able to give a comprehensible explanation of how he came to that opinion.

If you donGÇÖt feel comfortable to comment on recent events because youGÇÖre somehow biased (e.g. personal involvement, personally knowing involved people, etc) everybody will understand that - but you have to say so. But answering very specific and relevant questions that need to be answered - first and foremost for your own camp - like the one by Eva Darke "Specifically, IGÇÖd like to know where you draw the line (if at all) on what is, and is not, acceptable player behavior" with a bunch of loosely related youtube videos, wiki-links and nothing else only conveys one message: IGÇÖm not fit to be a CSM-member, not by a long shot.

So, let me ask you again: Imagine you have a CSM-meeting with CCP and CCP asks the CSM the following question: "WeGÇÖd like to know where you draw the line (if at all) on what is, and is not, acceptable player behavior". What will be your answer?

answering very specific and relevant questions that need to be answered - first and foremost for your own camp - like the one by Eva Darke

These are NOT serious questions. They are trollbait (see: I'm here )

Psychotic Monk responded with the facts that were necessary, and it's really not that difficult to draw your own conclusions.

As of yesterday there are now 3 accounts from my side voting for Monk.

Really liked the Wardec Pod cast.

I've heard Monk talk about this sort of thing before in interviews and podcasts, so I didn't expect to be surprised by his answers. However, given this is his CSM campaign thread, and is being read by people who may not have listened to those, I was interested in reading Monk's direct response. By all accounts, he's certainly capable of articulating his position on these matters in a way that demands respect, even from those who don't agree with him.

Actually IGÇÖm not really sure if youGÇÖre just trolling (very bad in your own CSM thread, especially with serious questions like these) or if you really donGÇÖt have any clue what all the fuss was and still is about (even worse as the self-proclaimed "pirate king" who should be an expert on the matter).

The least that I would expect is a straight-up answer, especially from you as it should be a key-area of your expertise. And that is also what I primarily expect from any CSM-member:
First: to be able to express his opinion about matters in his area of expertise, even if it is unpopular; second and even more important: to be able to give a comprehensible explanation of how he came to that opinion.

If you donGÇÖt feel comfortable to comment on recent events because youGÇÖre somehow biased (e.g. personal involvement, personally knowing involved people, etc) everybody will understand that - but you have to say so. But answering very specific and relevant questions that need to be answered - first and foremost for your own camp - like the one by Eva Darke "Specifically, IGÇÖd like to know where you draw the line (if at all) on what is, and is not, acceptable player behavior" with a bunch of loosely related youtube videos, wiki-links and nothing else only conveys one message: IGÇÖm not fit to be a CSM-member, not by a long shot.

So, let me ask you again: Imagine you have a CSM-meeting with CCP and CCP asks the CSM the following question: "WeGÇÖd like to know where you draw the line (if at all) on what is, and is not, acceptable player behavior". What will be your answer?

Hey, my internet is finally fixed! I exist again!

There have been several proposals to help the issue which have varying amounts of good. Having a war follow an individual for an amount of time is one of the more popular ones and seems fairly reasonable on the surface.

Beyond that, I would also make closing the corp to avoid a war an exploit, just like it was for years before CCP decided to change that ruling.

The real crux of it, though, is that in highsec there's very little reason to be in a corp if you're not wardeccing or taking advantage of POS/POCO mechanics, so the answer isn't in legislating their use but in building motivation to stay and keep a corp open. If, for instance, a corp actually brought real tangible benefit to its players, possibly in the form of something like fleet-bonus-style bonuses or access to content that cost some investment to open up and was better in some way than other comparable content then players would be much more hesitant to recycle corps in the same way that pirates are often accused of recycling gank alts.

People are going to be people, and we can't blame them for using the best tools available to them. If we want to make a more interesting game we simply have to make the boring option no longer the best choice.

If, for instance, a corp actually brought real tangible benefit to its players, possibly in the form of something like fleet-bonus-style bonuses or access to content that cost some investment to open up and was better in some way than other comparable content then players would be much more hesitant to recycle corps in the same way that pirates are often accused of recycling gank alts.