EVE Search - CSM Campaign who are you voting for?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

CSM Campaign who are you voting for?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 .. 11 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ramona McCandless The McCandless Clan Turing Tested 2351	Posted - 2014.03.17 19:03:00 - [241] - Quote Vote MTU for CSM He is the only clear choice * Makes sure garbage is collected on time * Doesn't make promises he can't keep * Arrives on time * Keeps his mouth shut on unimportant issues * Adored by Gankers and Carebears alike * Fit body, shame about the face * You can find him all over the place * Code Compliant Sales figures alone, if turned into votes, would place MTU as Chairman of Western Europe, President of EvE, King of all Skyrim, Pony Empress and Top of the Pepsi Chart simultaneously! You know MTU is the clear choice. A vote for MTU is a vote for yourself! * Vote MTU For CSM * "They feel the need to cover their ears and eyes in horror at your very presence." - Pontianak Sythaeryn Omnis nomiom nom nom nomi
Toshiro Ozuwara Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 358	Posted - 2014.03.17 19:10:00 - [242] - Quote Tippia wrote: Angeleh wrote: What is enough people? I am not really sure I think 10% of the playing accounts is enough. That's 40GÇô50,000 accounts. You can get a good representative sample from as few as 2,000. So 10% is more than enough. Democracy. The 10% who still care. ---
Angeleh Silverflames 19	Posted - 2014.03.22 20:50:00 - [243] - Quote Malcanis wrote: What do you think we should be doing that you definitely know that we aren't? Represent at least 50% of the players.
Proclus Diadochu Obstergo Red Coat Conspiracy 1313	Posted - 2014.03.23 09:16:00 - [244] - Quote Angeleh wrote: Malcanis wrote: What do you think we should be doing that you definitely know that we aren't? Represent at least 50% of the players. EDIT I do not expect the CSM candidates to inform the players about the fact that CSM exists and what it stands for. I think that is CCPs responsibility, and that they are failing. Clearly shown by less than 10% of the players even participating in the CSM vote. So, what is the best way to represent the various members, playstyles, and groups within the playerbase? To step up and run for CSM; urge friends to run; support voting and vote; getting involved in debate, discussion, and the process; There are so many options to support the process beyond simply saying that the process or organization is broken. Hell, if you don't like it, get involved and make a change. I'm a wormhole resident. I founded one of the largest FW corps in the history of Eve, I owned space in Delve, I've researched, copied, manufactured and sold billions in Capital weapons and ammo, I fought in the Northern War against the Drone Russians, ran level four missions, mined, FC'd everything from small gangs to Supers, taught new players how to Eve, been a lowsec pirate, highsec ganker, and I'd imagine I'm forgetting some things... Point isn't to toot mah horn, the point is that if I'm a member of a CSM, I can influence and represent across a ton of the playstyles and many of the playerbase. Sure, some of the people elected overtly represent a particular playstyle or community, but that doesn't dismiss their (our) experience or our ability to help represent and support other areas. So, as long as you vote people with diverse experience and a willingness to utilize their experience for the overall betterment of the greater Eve community, then you can achieve a larger representation; and who's to say that you aren't the person for the job? Discuss, Debate, Run, Vote, and simply be involved if you want to make the CSM better. CSM9 Candidate \| Twitter: @autoritare \| Gmail: [email protected] Campaign Thread: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=325889 My Blog: http://casualcapsuleer.wordpress.com \| No-Local News Writer/Editor
Prince Kobol 1452	Posted - 2014.03.23 09:32:00 - [245] - Quote Malcanis wrote: We blog, we post, we hold public town hall meetings on EVE radio, we even publish summit meeting minutes, given enough time; I really don't know else you can reasonably expect from us. Frankly it feels like you want me to individually contact each player and have a personal coversation with them once a month or so. What do you think we should be doing that you definitely know that we aren't? I want to see the entire CSM run naked through the streets of Iceland with a random vegetable stuck up your bums all chanting Satanic Verses.
Angeleh Silverflames 20	Posted - 2014.03.23 11:28:00 - [246] - Quote Proclus Diadochu wrote: Hell, if you don't like it, get involved and make a change. So, to you the solution is to become a part of the problem? As long as CCP does not take measure to make sure the entire player base is informed about CSM and get them involved in the vote, the problem with CSM only representing a subset of the player base will persist.
Ramona McCandless The McCandless Clan Turing Tested 2377	Posted - 2014.03.23 11:48:00 - [247] - Quote Angeleh wrote: So, to you the solution is to become a part of the problem? "It is far easier to kill an entity from within than without" * Vote MTU For CSM * "They feel the need to cover their ears and eyes in horror at your very presence." - Pontianak Sythaeryn Omnis nomiom nom nom nomi
Aivo Dresden Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 305	Posted - 2014.03.23 13:54:00 - [248] - Quote Mangala Solaris. He's a great guy in the corp, tirelessly organizing content not only for RvB but for the general EVE public. Events such as Ganked roams for example. The time and effort he puts in to making this better should be recognized. I'm happy with him representing my interests as a player.
Infinity Ziona Cloakers 1906	Posted - 2014.03.23 14:41:00 - [249] - Quote I'm tossing up between, goon alt one and goon alt 2, although I feel goon alt 3 might be just as useless... I'll probably go for goon alt 50. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467
Alphea Abbra Common Sense Ltd Nulli Secunda 675	Posted - 2014.03.23 15:25:00 - [250] - Quote Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote: I am not trying to convince people not to vote, I am simply saying the CSM is a sham of faux democracy given every single CSM is stacked with nullsec-centric representation. Until there are seats reserved by region, the CSM is a nullsec dominated farce in practice. No. Quote: Who's interests am I serving? I was trying to serve the under-represented hisec person, the same way functional democracies like Canada today have got regional seat allocation based on population working. Its not impossible, you just need the will to do it. And yes, wormholers make up a 'distinct society' just like Quebec, and should have a reserved seat also... No person in hi-sec is underrepresented. They are represented exactly to the degree they voted. CSM is a sounding board, a PR machine, entirely obsolete, good for getting ideas and feedback to the developers, or any combination thereof that you'd like. It's not a modern parliament. Hi-sec won't be better served with adding 9 morons to 1 energetic, well reasoned and creative person. You can't outvote the "null-bloc" on the CSM, and your "regional voting" is just not applying to the CSM. You might need to look up some advisory boards. Often, green advisory councils have a few politically appointed members, some elected or appointed by interest groups, a few corporate members and a lawyer, or economist or both. Very few have people because of their academic background, but then again many of the others have such a background. Such a group wouldn't vote - because they can't decide stuff. They can't change policy because a majority thinks one way or the other. But charismatic, hardworking and resourceful members on such a board can have a good chance of getting listened to. That's the CSM, but it's not your idiotic idea of some kind of space-parliament. Quote: Forgive me if I don't think nullsec candidates claims of being able to "also speak for hisec" would ever be as robust, as from someone who actually lives their EvE career there. I am saying 'no taxation without representation', you are saying 'the colonies should continue to kiss king George's ring..." Yeah, George Washington...thats who I am. George..Fricken..Washington... No.
Infinity Ziona Cloakers 1906	Posted - 2014.03.23 15:42:00 - [251] - Quote Alphea Abbra wrote: but it's not your idiotic idea of some kind of space-parliament. You're right, its obviously your idiotic idea of a nulltocracy. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467
Alphea Abbra Common Sense Ltd Nulli Secunda 675	Posted - 2014.03.23 16:13:00 - [252] - Quote Infinity Ziona wrote: Alphea Abbra wrote: but it's not your idiotic idea of some kind of space-parliament. You're right, its obviously your idiotic idea of a nulltocracy. Yes, obviously. All the votes for null-sec members magically appearing, nobody knows from where. No, it's not a "nulltocracy". It's a council of those willing to run and able to get support. Most of the time, they're also realistic about being able to get a platform to say things to developers, but not under the delusion that they get to vote on each new feature as items on an agenda. Null-sec is generally more organised than any other area of space, but you still see the wormholers organise and get people in, you see lowsec or FW candidates give it a good showing, so they either get together and find a good candidate that they can agree on, or are ambitious enough to run their own candidate in a soloshow. Is the support part easier when you have 2 000 characters you can mail for probable votes easier? Yes, of course it is. But FW didn't have that force, and neither did the WH candidates. Still, they got 2 or 3 candidates in (Two Step, Hans Jagerblitzen, a third guy IIRC), in one election. They organised, ran a limited number of excellent candidates, got those viewpoints into the room. Can any hi-sec candidate do exactly that? Yes, naturally. There is no inherent security-status bias in the CSM. This election, as any election, comes pre-rigged for the intelligent, the prepared, the charismatic and the witty. "Prepared" today often means being in a party that can organise, has a voter base already, can get you on TV etc. In EVE, "prepared" means one with a voter base, name recognition, a platform for publicity or a good amount of people who can speak positively for you. Even when you have that, a victory is not given. Take a look at riverini last year and his EN24 party. I'm risking the prediction that something similar will happen this year. I don't think he has it to win, just like most hi-sec candidates he is missing those few bits that makes a winning candidate. I'm not sure I am going to have Steve Ronuken on my list come election day. It's a possibility because I think he (At least on the surface) is intelligent, well-reasoned and could be an asset to council CCP on a number of issues. That's the same reason I voted for Hans Jagerblitzen before, even though I do not like FW and I think low-sec is pointless. I'd like the best reasoned, the most intelligible, the most knowing and the most creative candidates on the CSM. I want those regardless of what security-status they call home, or what corp or alliance ticker they have, because I don't view the CSM as a penislengthcomparison, but the players electing a sounding&feedback board to council CCP. Feyd Rautha Harkonnen does not want that. Evidently, he thinks of this as a comparison between the penislengths of hi-sec, low-sec, null-sec and WH. He's free to do that, but at least if he reads my (and others') rebuttal, he'll know why he is barking up the wrong tree.
Kiryen O'Bannon Thrall Nation Brave Collective 99	Posted - 2014.03.23 16:30:00 - [253] - Quote Matias Otero and Sugar Kyle.
Ramona McCandless The McCandless Clan Turing Tested 2381	Posted - 2014.03.23 16:34:00 - [254] - Quote **MTU for CSM * Vote MTU For CSM *** "They feel the need to cover their ears and eyes in horror at your very presence." - Pontianak Sythaeryn Omnis nomiom nom nom nomi
Proclus Diadochu Obstergo Red Coat Conspiracy 1313	Posted - 2014.03.23 18:54:00 - [255] - Quote Angeleh wrote: Proclus Diadochu wrote: Hell, if you don't like it, get involved and make a change. So, to you the solution is to become a part of the problem? As long as CCP does not take measure to make sure the entire player base is informed about CSM and get them involved in the vote, the problem with CSM only representing a subset of the player base will persist. So, to you the solution is to not be involved and just complain about it? You say that the CSM process is broken, but you aren't interested in applying effort to get involved and trying to fix it. You can't force players to vote, and what ideas do you have that CCP could impliment to better communicate out to everyone? A Dev blog, forums, a mail? Also, you clearly missed the point of my previous post and continue to dismiss the experience of people that are taking the time and effort to run for CSM. CSM9 Candidate \| Twitter: @autoritare \| Gmail: [email protected] Campaign Thread: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=325889 My Blog: http://casualcapsuleer.wordpress.com \| No-Local News Writer/Editor
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative. 14246	Posted - 2014.03.23 18:56:00 - [256] - Quote Angeleh wrote: Malcanis wrote: What do you think we should be doing that you definitely know that we aren't? Represent at least 50% of the players. EDIT I do not expect the CSM candidates to inform the players about the fact that CSM exists and what it stands for. I think that is CCPs responsibility, and that they are failing. Clearly shown by less than 10% of the players even participating in the CSM vote. When you say "less than 10%", presumably you're unaware that last year it was 14%, and the year before, 17%. That's still far from enough, but it's half as much again as you're trying to pretend. In any case, thanks for grudgingly conceding that we the CSM are doing what could be expected to be done with respect to publicising the CSM. So my original statement stands. If "72%" of the players can't muster more than 2 candidates, is that a problem with the other 28% or with the 72%? What electoral system could represent people who refuse to vote or run? The functionally ******** idea of "allocated" seats would be ridiculously easy to game by organised groups. 1 Kings 12:11
Toshiro Ozuwara Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 380	Posted - 2014.03.23 19:40:00 - [257] - Quote Malcanis wrote: So my original statement stands. If "72%" of the players can't muster more than 2 candidates, is that a problem with the other 28% or with the 72%? What electoral system could represent people who refuse to vote or run? The functionally ******** idea of "allocated" seats would be ridiculously easy to game by organised groups. It seems you know the answer. Scrap the bad system which is rejected by the many (which democracy supposedly represents) and only really serves a small minority in the game. It is the height of bureaucratic and political arrogance to pursue democracy when the majority has rejected it. They thought they could get away.-áNot today, it's not the way that this kid plays.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative. 14246	Posted - 2014.03.23 20:49:00 - [258] - Quote If you people put a tenth of the effort into getting representation that you do Into complaining you're not then you'd have nothing to worry about. 1 Kings 12:11
Angeleh Silverflames 20	Posted - 2014.03.23 21:14:00 - [259] - Quote Malcanis wrote: When you say "less than 10%", presumably you're unaware that last year it was 14%, and the year before, 17%. Where do you get these numbers? My numbers are: February 28, 2013 : CCP announces EVE Online crossed 500.000 subscribers. April 27, 2013 : CCP announces CSM8 results including "During the election 49702 votes were cast ". 49702/500000 = 9.94%, less than 10%. This is ignoring players above 500,000, but including more players will only reduce the participation, making less than 10% still true. Also this is the number of votes in total, how many are actually represented in CSM8 is unknown to me, but it can maximum be all the votes, which would be less than 10%. Of course it is possible that about 150,000 players quit in the 2 months, and there were only 355,000 players in April, making it 14% who voted. More detailed numbers are welcome. I apologize if I came across as saying it is the people that run for / are elected for CSM who are responsible for the system to work. It is my opinion it is solely CCPs responsibility to keep the players informed of such initiatives - and to drop them when 90% don't think they are worth voting on.
Kaarous Aldurald ROC Deep Space The ROC 3348	Posted - 2014.03.23 21:17:00 - [260] - Quote Toshiro Ozuwara wrote: Malcanis wrote: So my original statement stands. If "72%" of the players can't muster more than 2 candidates, is that a problem with the other 28% or with the 72%? What electoral system could represent people who refuse to vote or run? The functionally ****** idea of "allocated" seats would be ridiculously easy to game by organised groups. It seems you know the answer. Scrap the bad system which is rejected by the many (which democracy supposedly represents) and only really serves a small minority in the game. It is the height of bureaucratic and political arrogance to pursue democracy when the majority has rejected it. "the majority" didn't reject anything. They didn't even bother to vote. So yeah, ** 'em. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á Psychotic Monk for CSM9.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative. 14247	Posted - 2014.03.23 21:21:00 - [261] - Quote Not every EVE player is eligible to vote. EG: accounts less than 30 (or was it 60?) days old. Some of those 500k were also Serenity players, and therefore also disqualified. 14% of the electorate voted. Additionally, the fact that you're essentially telling people to "Don't vote in the election because not enough people voted in the last election" is beyond satire. The problem with the CSM is literally you. 1 Kings 12:11
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative. 14247	Posted - 2014.03.23 21:22:00 - [262] - Quote Toshiro Ozuwara wrote: Malcanis wrote: So my original statement stands. If "72%" of the players can't muster more than 2 candidates, is that a problem with the other 28% or with the 72%? What electoral system could represent people who refuse to vote or run? The functionally ******** idea of "allocated" seats would be ridiculously easy to game by organised groups. It seems you know the answer. Scrap the bad system which is rejected by the many (which democracy supposedly represents) and only really serves a small minority in the game. It is the height of bureaucratic and political arrogance to pursue democracy when the majority has rejected it. Wait, I thought the problem was that we are so bad at letting people even know that the CSM exists. How are these people "rejecting" something they don't even know about? 1 Kings 12:11
Little Dragon Khamez Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition 1184	Posted - 2014.03.23 23:46:00 - [263] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Toshiro Ozuwara wrote: Malcanis wrote: So my original statement stands. If "72%" of the players can't muster more than 2 candidates, is that a problem with the other 28% or with the 72%? What electoral system could represent people who refuse to vote or run? The functionally ****** idea of "allocated" seats would be ridiculously easy to game by organised groups. It seems you know the answer. Scrap the bad system which is rejected by the many (which democracy supposedly represents) and only really serves a small minority in the game. It is the height of bureaucratic and political arrogance to pursue democracy when the majority has rejected it. "the majority" didn't reject anything. They didn't even bother to vote. So yeah, ** 'em. It's not the player base that's unengaged with democracy, it's the csm candidates that have failed to appeal to the majority of the player base. That's why they are not attracting votes, because their appeal isn't broad enough. It's the candidates that should be engaging with democracy and representing broader interests within the player base ss opposed to their own special interests. People might be inclined to vote for them then. Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...
Nicolai Serkanner Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 84	Posted - 2014.03.23 23:56:00 - [264] - Quote Who are the CSM? I distinctly remember the Somer Blink affair. The CSM told us they would get into the bottom of it. I guess they are still trying.
TigerXtrm Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance 495	Posted - 2014.03.24 00:02:00 - [265] - Quote Nicolai Serkanner wrote: Who are the CSM? I distinctly remember the Somer Blink affair. The CSM told us they would get into the bottom of it. I guess they are still trying. They did get to the bottom of it. The bottom being that CCP had no problem with the system Somer had come up with because it benefited everyone. Only when they found out the playerbase was firmly opposed to it did they implement a change to prevent incentive to buying GTC's through affiliate links. The matter is pretty much resolved at this point. If you want to see people fired, banned, hanged or otherwise shamed, this is a game, not a government. My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!
Toshiro Ozuwara Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 382	Posted - 2014.03.24 00:05:00 - [266] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: "the majority" didn't reject anything. They didn't even bother to vote. So yeah, **** 'em. Withholding a vote (conscious non participation) in a democracy, that is deliberately choosing to not participate in said democracy, is a no vote for the process. It is the height of mental retardation that a process that is supposed to reflect the will of the people, rejects the will of the people. The closest parallel I can think of is the EU, where any no votes are ignored and voted upon again until the electorate gets the answer "right". The CSM is a group chosen by a narrow group of interested parties that can directly benefit from insider information and influence. The average capsuleer in hisec, who makes up a large number of the players in this game is unrepresented because he doesn't belong to one of these narrow special interest classes. Next, the CSM is widely perceived to be a mouthpiece for CCP, having no real power, and no members who actively and publicly hold CCP's feet to the fire. Everyone campaigns on, "I am going to fix X and I have ideas to improve Y" and then they get elected, say almost nothing for a year, and then disappear, or run again claiming "We accomplished X, Y and Z on the last CSM but our work is not done yet." as they get sucked deeper into the political machine and lose the naive idealism from when they ran their first campaign. So yeah, whatever. Vote. Or don't. Just don't try to pretend this process is in the interest of everyone, or that we just need more participation in politics to clean politics up or make it more effective. Because that has NEVER happened in human history. If CCP would invest in better systems for crowdsourcing ideas and feedback (as well as a more transparent process for internal affairs) then there would be no purpose to a CSM whatsoever. It's because they have surrounded their castle with ivory towers, which demand that some politically motivated capsuleers occupy, that we are stuck with this disgusting racket today. They thought they could get away.-áNot today, it's not the way that this kid plays.
Kaarous Aldurald ROC Deep Space The ROC 3350	Posted - 2014.03.24 00:14:00 - [267] - Quote So, you're complaining because you don't have representation in something you deliberately choose not to participate in... And that's anyone's fault but yours... why? ... Furthermore, what exactly are you even suggesting? Is this seriously just you posting "Grr, CSM!", or do you actually have an answer to any of this? Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á Psychotic Monk for CSM9.
Toshiro Ozuwara Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 384	Posted - 2014.03.24 00:34:00 - [268] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: So, you're complaining because you don't have representation in something you deliberately choose not to participate in...? Were did I complain about lack of representation? Democracies don't create representation. They create the perception of representation. Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Is this seriously just you posting "Grr, CSM!", or do you actually have an answer to any of this? Why Grrr CSM? I'm pointing out that the emperor has no clothes for no greater reason than anyone has ever done so. Because it's satisfying to call a lie a lie. They thought they could get away.-áNot today, it's not the way that this kid plays.
Kaarous Aldurald ROC Deep Space The ROC 3350	Posted - 2014.03.24 00:40:00 - [269] - Quote Toshiro Ozuwara wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: So, you're complaining because you don't have representation in something you deliberately choose not to participate in...? Were did I complain about lack of representation? Democracies don't create representation. They create the perception of representation. Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Is this seriously just you posting "Grr, CSM!", or do you actually have an answer to any of this? Why Grrr CSM? I'm pointing out that the emperor has no clothes for no greater reason than anyone has ever done so. Because it's satisfying to call a lie a lie. So... not offering a solution to the perceived problem? Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á Psychotic Monk for CSM9.
DeMichael Crimson Republic University Minmatar Republic 23825	Posted - 2014.03.24 00:42:00 - [270] - Quote Well, after reading all of this I gotta say I'm half tempted next year to canvas within the game as well as post threads here in the forums announcing my candidacy for the CSM. Of course it would be on a PvE platform representing the high sec demographic group. Obviously the only references I can use would be my participation as an active member in these forums for the past 6 years along with my Evelopedia contributions and editing work. Unfortunately after CCP supposedly fixed a bug affecting the Preferences page / user settings the Evelopedia contributor history was changed and as such I became a victim of Identity Theft. It seems that the majority of my Evelopedia work has been credited to an alt that I don't use and after submitting a bug report in September 2013 along with multiple 'Support Tickets', CCP has informed me that they are aware of the problem and hopefully will have it resolved "Soon". Yeah right. DMC Faction Standing Repair Plan \| California Eve Players \| (Proposal) Bring Back 'The Endless Battle' Missions

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 .. 11 :: 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.