Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Xenuria
Marcabian 5th Invasion Fleet
817
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 01:52:00 -
[31] - Quote
Aram Kachaturian wrote:Damn, i feel a lot of hate in this thread.
Calm down, there are way more important things to do than hating.
Good luck Xenuria
I don't think it's hate.
I think it's Fear. CSM 9 Candidate Philanthropist Polymath Savant Hero |
Esha Amphal
Hedion University Amarr Empire
12
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 02:04:00 -
[32] - Quote
I'm genuinely curious. |
Cannibal Kane
Somali Coast Guard Authority
3568
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 02:17:00 -
[33] - Quote
I am not going to some random blog to see what a person is about. "I saw him fight by the monument in Jita. He flowed in his Machariel like a Shinto spirit, 800MM shells sprouting in his passing. His hair flowed in the corona of his target's warp core breach. It was truly majestic. And while everyone stared in awe I stole the loot and ran off. Because I am like that." - NEONOVUS |
Carmichael Tanni
Dolmansaxlil Shoe Corporation
6
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 10:31:00 -
[34] - Quote
Another lazy candidate, can't be bothered to answer simple straight forward questions, even when they're asked three times.
Troll candidate, Avoid. |
Mag's
the united SCUM.
17015
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 13:17:00 -
[35] - Quote
I really cannot take this seriously, therefore have to agree with others when they say you are simply trolling the process.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
KuroVolt
The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
1665
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 16:56:00 -
[36] - Quote
In all honesty Xenuria, I browsed this thread hoping to learn a bit more about your platform, but you have not answered alot of the questions people have presented to you.
I think that is because you believe the questions not to be genuine eventhough they are. So please concider answering them. BoBwins Law: As a discussion/war between two large nullsec entities grows longer, the probability of one comparing the other to BoB aproaches near certainty. |
Esha Amphal
Hedion University Amarr Empire
12
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 17:06:00 -
[37] - Quote
Okey doke, I suppose I'll have to read between the lines concerning my latest questions. That's fine. I drew those questions straight from your opening statements, because it was my belief that your platform would be the easiest structure for you to defend. Considering the atmosphere in the thread I can understand your unwillingness to grin and bear someone probing your platform for flaws. You've given me some brief answers and that's a lot more than I could hope to expect from certain other candidates.
There are others in the thread already giving up on you, but I've plenty of patience and respect for players willing to step up to the CSM plate. Few players would ever bother - it's a unique process for a niche game in a niche gaming genre, so when someone does volunteer I'm willing to listen to what they have to say.
I'm not fearful of you, I'm not fearful of your opinions and I'm not fearful of you being elected. Your intent is obviously to make change - you perhaps have some differing opinions and viewpoints than the other candidates running and those who have run before, and bringing those to the table in a serious fashion would only force the members that oppose your opinions to earn their stripes. You have some radical ideas that would add to the CSM workload, but that said your goal of logging communications for future use and reference isn't a bad idea - it simply needs further discussion.
I will drop my previous questions. Let me ask some new questions from an angle that you should have no objections to.
Hypothetical situation: You're aware of a player who utilizes what it is occasionally considered a 'grief' mechanic: wardecs. Wardecs are the core of their playstyle and where they find the most enjoyment in Eve. Not only do they declare wars on corporations which a vocal percentage of the playerbase finds distressing and intimidating, this particular player imposes considerable disadvantages on themselves by warring against corporations solo. This makes their chosen playstyle challenging because they're almost always outnumbered, rewarding because they don't need to split loot, and frustrating because any nerf made to the wardec 'offender' by CCP this player feels exponentially.
CCP comes to you and states that they're currently working on changes to wardecs that benefit wardec 'defenders', because they feel this is best for the majority. They believe wardecs currently favour offenders and this should change so that there is balance between both sides. They want defenders to have more teeth in the conflict, so that there is less desire to dissolve their corporation and start over with a new corporation, avoiding the wardec entirely.
What do you have to say to CCP in this situation? |
Xenuria
Marcabian 5th Invasion Fleet
817
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 21:19:00 -
[38] - Quote
Esha Amphal wrote:Okey doke, I suppose I'll have to read between the lines concerning my latest questions. That's fine. I drew those questions straight from your opening statements, because it was my belief that your platform would be the easiest structure for you to defend. Considering the atmosphere in the thread I can understand your unwillingness to grin and bear someone probing your platform for flaws. You've given me some brief answers and that's a lot more than I could hope to expect from certain other candidates.
There are others in the thread already giving up on you, but I've plenty of patience and respect for players willing to step up to the CSM plate. Few players would ever bother - it's a unique process for a niche game in a niche gaming genre, so when someone does volunteer I'm willing to listen to what they have to say.
I'm not fearful of you, I'm not fearful of your opinions and I'm not fearful of you being elected. Your intent is obviously to make change - you perhaps have some differing opinions and viewpoints than the other candidates running and those who have run before, and bringing those to the table in a serious fashion would only force the members that oppose your opinions to earn their stripes. You have some radical ideas that would add to the CSM workload, but that said your goal of logging communications for future use and reference isn't a bad idea - it simply needs further discussion.
I will drop my previous questions. Let me ask some new questions from an angle that you should have no objections to.
Hypothetical situation: You're aware of a player who utilizes what is occasionally considered a 'grief' mechanic: wardecs. Wardecs are the core of their playstyle and where they find the most enjoyment in Eve. Not only do they declare wars on corporations which a vocal percentage of the playerbase finds distressing and intimidating, this particular player imposes considerable disadvantages on themselves by warring against corporations solo. This makes their chosen playstyle challenging because they're almost always outnumbered, rewarding because they don't need to split loot, and frustrating because any nerf made to the wardec 'offender' by CCP this player feels exponentially.
CCP comes to you and states that they're currently working on changes to wardecs that benefit wardec 'defenders', because they feel this is best for the majority. They believe wardecs currently favour offenders and this should change so that there is balance between both sides. They want defenders to have more teeth in the conflict, so that there is less desire to dissolve their corporation and start over with a new corporation, avoiding the wardec entirely.
What do you have to say to CCP in this situation?
War mechanics are a tough one because there are so many extra and then meta variables that can be thrown into the mix. I think dropping a corp just to avoid a wardec is silly and goes against the intention of the original design. I think things need to be changed on both sides of the conflict. It should be easier for those defending to request allies but also less practical for them to drop corp or dissolve it entirely. How specifically to go about this is not something I have an idea on because there is alot of other information I don't have. I would however love to sit down with ccp and discuss alternatives.
CSM 9 Candidate Philanthropist Polymath Savant Hero |
Lanctharus Onzo
Alea Iacta Est Universal Brave Collective
42
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 04:27:00 -
[39] - Quote
Xenuria wrote: I think it's Fear.
"I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing....only I will remain"
And Xenuria
Lanctharus Onzo wrote: Do you consider the timing of this post appropriate and adequate, given that it went up just a few days before the election begins and given that there was no widespread public knowledge of you running prior to your name appearing appearing on the approve list of CSM candidates?
Then, additionally, do you feel it is appropriate for the community to hold CSM candidates up to public scrutiny? Would you agree or disagree that posting this late hinders the ability of either the community at large or media representatives to hold you to that public scrutiny?
You still haven't answered the questions.
What are you afraid of?
I remain... Writer, Co-host of the Cap Stable Podcast Twitter: @Lanctharus |
Orontes Ovasi
Nex Exercitus Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.12 17:27:00 -
[40] - Quote
Vote Xenuria to put him in a room with every CSM candidate you hate most! |
|
Lyris Nairn
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
12296
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 13:45:00 -
[41] - Quote
I am somewhat torn between your platform and Riverini. What would you say really differentiates you from that particular element of the competition? Sky Captain of Your Heart
Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn |
Andreus Ixiris
Duty.
4541
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 16:56:00 -
[42] - Quote
Given the general reaction of people in this thread, I'm tempted to vote for Xenuria for my own twisted amusement.
Not convinced, but tempted. Mane 614
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
1106
|
Posted - 2014.04.18 22:43:00 -
[43] - Quote
Xenuria, I like your stance, but your platform is dry. I don't like a biased representative on the CSM, but I do like someone with a mission or goal. You've said you think sovereignty and wormhole space need some love, and that's great, but could you expand on that? Also, I'd like to hear a response to Cannibal Kane's post on page 2.
Considering voting for you, but on the fence about it. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) And bring back the missile Inquisitor!! |
Ka Pl'aah
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.19 03:54:00 -
[44] - Quote
I voted Xenuria in my #1 slot! Go Xenuria! Pay no heed to the detractors! You'll be great for EvE! |
KuroVolt
The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
1715
|
Posted - 2014.04.19 13:29:00 -
[45] - Quote
Andreus Ixiris wrote:Given the general reaction of people in this thread, I'm tempted to vote for Xenuria for my own twisted amusement.
Not convinced, but tempted.
I actually put Xenuria on my ballot for this exact reason. BoBwins Law: As a discussion/war between two large nullsec entities grows longer, the probability of one comparing the other to BoB aproaches near certainty. |
Alphea Abbra
Common Sense Ltd Nulli Secunda
748
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 17:13:00 -
[46] - Quote
KuroVolt wrote:Andreus Ixiris wrote:Given the general reaction of people in this thread, I'm tempted to vote for Xenuria for my own twisted amusement.
Not convinced, but tempted. I actually put Xenuria on my ballot for this exact reason. And here we see the evil inherent in NRDS. When they can't shoot people, they vote for Xenuria instead.
Anyway, I don't think this particular joke person stands a chance. Like last time, it'll be a failure. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
1145
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 17:56:00 -
[47] - Quote
Alphea Abbra wrote:And here we see the evil inherent in NRDS. There's no need to generalize people based on alliance.
Go ahead, tell me I talk just like every other member of TEST. Just do me a favor and find examples of other members of TEST talking the way I do. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) And bring back the missile Inquisitor!! |
KuroVolt
The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
1776
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 19:34:00 -
[48] - Quote
Alphea Abbra wrote:KuroVolt wrote:Andreus Ixiris wrote:Given the general reaction of people in this thread, I'm tempted to vote for Xenuria for my own twisted amusement.
Not convinced, but tempted. I actually put Xenuria on my ballot for this exact reason. And here we see the evil inherent in NRDS. When they can't shoot people, they vote for Xenuria instead.
Thats actually cause I'm a troll and a forum regular who just wants to see the forums burn, all the while I still wont shoot neutrals though. BoBwins Law: As a discussion/war between two large nullsec entities grows longer, the probability of one comparing the other to BoB aproaches near certainty. |
Alphea Abbra
Common Sense Ltd Nulli Secunda
748
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 23:29:00 -
[49] - Quote
Although I was going for a "Violence inherent in the system", it works just as well this way. Assuming that all TEST or Provibloc members are actually Cthulhu cultists and inherently evil ... Yes can do!
Nah, not really. I don't think KuroVolt would vote for jokes like this one, and even if, I don't think it's anywhere near actual evil. It was a play at the NRDS of not punishing potential innocents for paranoias' and amusements' sake, which in this context would mean that KuroVolt has broken the NRDS policy towards the new CSM by voting for Xenuria. I'm sorry that the original joke was so bad it had to be explained.
And still, NRDS is inherently evil. Introducing newbs to 0.0? EVIL. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |