I like Soup.

Just a link, no summary, what a poor thread.

Expect this to be ISD'd.. In other words...closed...

Great posts guys, keep it up. You are all smart and interesting people. Especially the guy who wants me to read it for him.

How can you tell, there are so many to choose from?

Very very informative and relevant. Kudos to you sir. I'm glad you posted in this thread and added so much to the discussion.

All of these posts not related to the article posted are bad and you should all feel bad. INB4 inevitable lock.

Very very informative and relevant. Kudos to you sir. I'm glad you posted in this thread and added so much to the discussion.

All of these posts not related to the article posted are bad and you should all feel bad. INB4 inevitable lock.

I believe that you had good intentions at heart,
but people simply do not work that way.

Saw this on Reddit. Posting here:

Saw this on Reddit. Posting here:

http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/only-you-can-save-universe-ccp-seagull_26.html

EDIT: Since no one can be bothered to read the article posted, it goes over how non-representative CPM members can be and how the majority of non-Goon players can look at the long line of Goon representation as something bad for the games overall health.

Is that good enough for all the lazy people out there?

EDIT: Read the damn article if you want to comment.

There is only 1 Goonswarm member on the CFC.

Saw this on Reddit. Posting here:

http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/only-you-can-save-universe-ccp-seagull_26.html

EDIT: Since no one can be bothered to read the article posted, it goes over how non-representative CPM members can be and how the majority of non-Goon players can look at the long line of Goon representation as something bad for the games overall health.

Is that good enough for all the lazy people out there?

EDIT: Read the damn article if you want to comment.

The link does work. It is a long read but an interesting one.

I'm in the 'wait and see' contingent as well although I do agree that various events have been extremely worrying:

1) Unifex & CmdrWang leaving with no comment from CCP. Very unappreciative in my humble opinion.
2) P.C. in DUST 514. What a mess with virtual total ownership by DNS.
3) The CSM has become a bit of a joke with one 'official' goon candidate and numerous 'unofficial' goon candidates plus a number of other nullsec candidates. Failure of democracy or death by apathy? Take your pick.
4) Poor decision making at CCP: Financial writeoffs, dropping WoD, 'butter spread too thinly over too little bread'.

I'm painting a very black picture there in a 'Dinsdale' way and I do still think we have to wait and see what happens. The remaining industry dev blogs will be released at or during Fanfest and the changes so far proposed aren't that bad. It's going to be.........interesting.

That article can be summarised as "Oh god things are going to change and I'm going to have to put some effort into adapting, also lots of people will quit if they can't keep their gigantic overwhelming local advantage and for some reason I think they deserve the tiniest particle of respect. Even though only half of the industry devblogs have been released THIS WILL DOOM US ALL!!!!ONEONE"

I didnt read the article and I commented

SOMEBODY STHAP ME

Failure of democracy

FYP

I read the article, and decided that it wasn't worth commenting on, tinfoil for the tinfoil gods.

Eve is dying post # 758,642,312

Saw this on Reddit. Posting here:

http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/only-you-can-save-universe-ccp-seagull_26.html

EDIT: Since no one can be bothered to read the article posted, it goes over how non-representative CPM members can be and how the majority of non-Goon players can look at the long line of Goon representation as something bad for the games overall health.

Is that good enough for all the lazy people out there?

EDIT: Read the damn article if you want to comment.

Saw this on Reddit. Posting here:

http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/only-you-can-save-universe-ccp-seagull_26.html

EDIT: Since no one can be bothered to read the article posted, it goes over how non-representative CPM members can be and how the majority of non-Goon players can look at the long line of Goon representation as something bad for the games overall health.

Is that good enough for all the lazy people out there?

EDIT: Read the damn article if you want to comment.

There is only 1 Goonswarm member on the CFC.

In short, S&I is going to become a lot more PvP.

This typo is kinda hilarious. I also didn't expect the awe-inspiring Goon representative to come and grace us with his presence.

There is only 1 Goonswarm member on the CFC.

I liked this part:
"-áBut having a Goon finance guy design your risk/reward system is like having Goldman Sachs design your banking regulatory system."

---

Turtlesoup?

We also should use lots of sarcasm online and be as butthurt as you are, all the time.

Yes, I said I liked that part.

Deal with it.

"-áBut having a Goon finance guy design your risk/reward system is like having Goldman Sachs design your banking regulatory system."

Easier to judge a person based on his affiliations than top judge him on how and what he says and does.

m

I would say it's fair to assume that person shares the values and goals of the organiztion he/she belongs.

So you are literally denying that they possess either objectivity or individuality?

Way to try and dehumanize someone.

C'mon. We (or at least I am) are talking about game here, not real life. I don't know, nor do I care, actual people behind characters. And most definitely I won't assume that the way they act or play reflects their real personality.

Salvos, your quotations make that plainly obvious. But you quoted it because it resonates with you. Therefore, arguing with that misguided blurb is not so different from arguing with you.

Regardless, the quotation is worth responding to... sort of... as the reality it comes from is so distorted and non-real. Thank you Mike Azariah for the reality check.

Actually, if you're talking about the CSM, you are talking about real life. Their real identities are out there, they the person is representing the playerbase to CCP.

Mynna, the real person, has the game knowledge and expertise that I want behind a redesign of the industrial system in this game.

I couldn't give two flying ****s about what his corp ticker says, if he can get the job done.

If this came across as an attack on a specific author (or worse a person quoting another author) then I apologize for being guilty of shooting the messenger. It was never my intent to do that.

Please note I ignored the vast population of 'Who cares, as long as I can buy ammo and ships'.

Saw this on Reddit. Posting here:

http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/only-you-can-save-universe-ccp-seagull_26.html

EDIT: Since no one can be bothered to read the article posted, it goes over how non-representative CPM members can be and how the majority of non-Goon players can look at the long line of Goon representation as something bad for the games overall health.

Is that good enough for all the lazy people out there?

EDIT: Read the damn article if you want to comment.

cheese... cheese is better than soup.

You know CCP, when more and more of the player base starts posting in threads like this, and do my job of sounding the alarm bell, you might want to consider stop listening to the Malcanis', Mike's, and mynnna's of the gaming community, and start listening to, I dunno, accountants?

I think that's the first time ever I have seen a player unironically suggest that a game should be run by accountants.

do you want microtransactions?
because that's how you get microtransactions.

'What is in it for me' (and mine) is one way and what is often attributed (incorrectly) to be the thought process of the Goon, Mynnna (note, please, three n's)

Would you rather have someone with no education in banking ins and outs design the system? That will go over well.

Mynnna's Cap Stable interview fairly clearly paints him as representing nullsec only. His responses touch on changes that can be divided into two kinds:

1. those that affect nullsec only (interdictors, nullified interceptors, ESSes)
2. those that buff nullsec (refining changes, industry changes)

I'm of the opinion that a CSM who represents players from other areas (highsec, lowsec, WH) would make a point of pointing that out. That Mynnna didn't do so means (to me) that he doesn't represent those players at all.

And honestly, this is a surprise to me. I would think that CCP and CSM would want to strive to have the CSM represent all players, regardless of who elected them.

MDD

. That Mynnna didn't do so means (to me) that he doesn't represent those players at all.

And honestly, this is a surprise to me.

Hi, I'm a highsec ganker. I have very little knowledge of nullsec, how it works, what it needs/doesn't need. Do you want me representing nullsec players, recommending changes that I think are good for null? Remember, I have no experience in that area, and at best, my recommendations are going to be heavily theorycrafted.

I'd much rather have CSM members who focus on the areas in EVE that they have the most expertise in.

But that necessarily means that players who do not have CSM representatives are completely left out of the CSM/CCP discussion.

you might want to consider stop listening to the Malcanis', Mike's, and mynnna's of the gaming community, and start listening to, I dunno, accountants?

Yes, it does

They should mobilise

Solidarity, brother

Power to the people

Infinite Rice Pudding

Etc

Actually, if you're talking about the CSM, you are talking about real life. Their real identities are out there, they the person is representing the playerbase to CCP.

Mynna, the real person, has the game knowledge and expertise that I want behind a redesign of the industrial system in this game.

I couldn't give two flying ****s about what his corp ticker says, if he can get the job done.

Given that there are a small number of CSM positions and a large number of play styles, your position means there are *always* players left out of the CSM/CCP discussion.

MDD

There is only 1 Goonswarm member on the CFC.
...
yada yada

Cant you run for CSM on multiple platforms just like real life political parties?

Does a CSM member even have to just be one person?

I think you mean "multiple planks" (which together forms their platform), and I'd say yes they do. But no they cannot sensibly have more than one platform.

AFAIK a CSM member can only be one person you can't have a seat shared by two or more people).

MDD

Well, yes you can, but thats not the point of what we are debating here.

Does anyone know where it says a CSM is a single Player (or account, or Character)?

Thanks

REPRESENTATIVE CANDIDATE ELIGIBILITY
Anyone who has held an EVE Online account for more than sixty (60) days is eligible to campaign for a
representative seat on the CSM

The goal of CCP is to provide EVEGÇÖs individuals with societal governance rights. In similar fashion to a
real-world democracy models, candidates will be selected by fellow peers to be the voice of their interests to
the legislator. Once elected, the responsibility of these representatives will be to uphold the societyGÇÖs views as
best they can via direct contact and dialogue with CCP.

Can you list the "unofficial" goon CSM members along with a brief explaination of why they are?

We have just seen changes being made to stop the tournament being rigged from the outset. I think the same should be done for the CSM.

Hold on, perhaps I missed something here.

How, precisely, is/was the AT rigged?

I think that's the first time ever I have seen a player unironically suggest that a game should be run by accountants.

Dinsdale, EVE will never, ever make as much money as WoW has. Why aren't you playing that game if profitability is what determines enjoyment?

See, here is the thing.
CCP is a business, that's product happens to be a computer game.
Pretty much every business on the planet has some kind of accountant deeply involved in business.

Accountants might actually sound the warning, "hey, the changes you are planning are kind of bad for business since they will lower our cash flow, and we like cash flow".

And while I never said I would want accountants designing the game, they sure as hell would not set up changes that would disenfranchise a big segment of the player base, and I am not talking about just these changes to industrial characters.

Accountants might actually sound the warning, "hey, the changes you are planning are kind of bad for business since they will lower our cash flow, and we like cash flow".

And while I never said I would want accountants designing the game, they sure as hell would not set up changes that would disenfranchise a big segment of the player base, and I am not talking about just these changes to industrial characters.

I have no objection to these industial changes.

What I worry about is that the reason "it is good for the game as a whole" is selectively applied in the process of improving the game. When an idea is good as a whole and benefits most players including those power blocks with vested interests. The idea is promoted, supported with figures, discussed with reasons and finally get implemented.

When an idea is good as a whole but rejected by the power blocks because it hurts them. Dev are lobbied. The idea is suppressed. Good reasons are ignored. Average players do not give their opinions as usual. So dev compromised and twisted the mechanic in favor of vested parties.

Eventually, the overall game mechanic will be shifted bit by bit, not overnight, towards the favor of power blocks. Players who don't have the time or don't want to be part of the power blocks will be discouraged to continue the game because they are in a position of too big disadvantages. This is not the path I want to see the game is developed.

I have no objection to these industial changes.

What I worry about is that the reason "it is good for the game as a whole" is selectively applied in the process of improving the game. When an idea is good as a whole and benefits most players including those power blocks with vested interests. The idea is promoted, supported with figures, discussed with reasons and finally get implemented.

When an idea is good as a whole but rejected by the power blocks because it hurts them. Dev are lobbied. The idea is suppressed. Good reasons are ignored. Average players do not give their opinions as usual. So dev compromised and twisted the mechanic in favor of vested parties.

Eventually, the overall game mechanic will be shifted bit by bit, not overnight, towards the favor of power blocks. Players who don't have the time or don't want to be part of the power blocks will be discouraged to continue the game because they are in a position of too big disadvantages. This is not the path I want to see the game is developed.

And so it continues.
It appears from the posts I have read that I will have to start sharing my tinfoil, based on the cartel propagandists' comments in this thread.

You know CCP, when more and more of the player base starts posting in threads like this, and do my job of sounding the alarm bell, you might want to consider stop listening to the Malcanis', Mike's, and mynnna's of the gaming community, and start listening to, I dunno, accountants?

Or are you too far gone, and so wrapped up in the cult of "null sec is the panacea of everything" to recognize what is happening?

Of course, I am just some complete nutbar, with zero credibility , even though I have played all aspects of this game, save two.
I have not played FW , nor I have I played RMT lord.

But what do I know about Eve, and apparently a legion of like-minded people?

You could really be a good asset to the commmuntiy if yo would stop being delusional. You've been sounding alarms for YEARS with not one shred of evidence that you've been right about anything. In fact, you've been wrong over and over again. The one thing that ever actually hurt ccp and EVE's subs (incarna and the nex store debacle) you never even saw coming. You are litterally the Harold Camping of EVE Online.

And honestly, this is a surprise to me. I would think that CCP and CSM would want to strive to have the CSM represent all players, regardless of who elected them.

MDD

That's how it generally goes in any given MMO. Just replace words "power blocks" with vocal forum posters. CSM is certainly improvement in the feedback process, but only if majority of subscribers vote.

Regarding the 'unofficial' as opposed to 'official' GSF candidates (Or GSF aligned candidates.) remark I made one of the GSF CSM candidates states in her own candidacy statement that she is the "official" candidate. It may mean that she is the official GSF or it may be a amusing or sarcastic comment on her part. Nevertheless I was quoting her term for her position and her reference to there probably being too many representatives of GSF on the CSM.

Personally I would like to see CCP make a rule that there can only be one candidate running from each alliance or from the corporations within an alliance.

Example: XX Alliance comprises of corporation A, B, & C. The alliance decides that member 'A1' of 'A' corporation should run as a candidate for the XX alliance to represent their views on the CSM. This would then mean that no other members of corporations A, B, or C could also run as candidates for the CSM in that year.

Given the biased state of CSM for as long as I can remember this rule would make it more likely that minority viewpoints could be represented rather than large block votes and their minions. We have just seen changes being made to stop the tournament being rigged from the outset. I think the same should be done for the CSM.

When I mark tests I have a policy of NOT looking at who wrote them so as to avoid tainting the mark with bias. I do the same reading the forums. I only glance at the faces to the side AFTER reading the post. It is possible for someone you dislike or think little of to have a good idea.

Accountants run the company? No. But man I loved going to the summit to meet their economist. Dr. Eyjo was a fantastic speaker and we managed to get to see him for two sessions (This is where the knowledgeable of you are getting jealous). In a game laughingly referred to as spreadsheets in space, do you honestly think that the people running it do not know how to track trends and cause/effect?

Next year I'm running for CSM. I know nothing about anything, I'm perfect.

So which are the "numerous" unofficial CFC members?

When an idea is good as a whole but rejected by the power blocks because it hurts them, dev are lobbied. The idea is suppressed. Good reasons are ignored. Average players do not give their opinions as usual. So dev compromised and twisted the mechanic in favor of vested parties.

It is a harsh truth that the 'apathy' is NOT the biggest issue but, instead, education.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=310880&find=unread Weirdest forum 'like' i ever gave

And you gave it to one of the best ideas I have ever seen on these forums. Perhaps the best even.

i disagree.

i was very apathetic this year compared to last. last year i voted for 14 candidates on 3 accounts. this year i voted for like 7 on 1 account.

the CSM never seem to be doing that much other than "we had a chat to them, but here's a forum thread for your feedback anyway" which undermines the CSM when ccp just ask us directly anyway.
in addition, i don't want to read every candidates generic and boring pitches to figure out which ones i don't want to vote for, because you have to pick so many of them. i just want to vote for 1 person, like i do when i actually vote in elections. find 1 guy and go "he represents me best" not "this guy and these other 6 picked at random because i have slots to fill, but i'm not that interested in it"

not to mention, ccp made less effort to educate people this year than last year. last year i remember getting eve mails on my accounts, this year; nothing. if ccp can't be arsed to promote the csm, and tell us what they're doing. why should people care?

the lack of apathy is linked to education. people don't give a **** because nobody tells them why they should give a ****.

I would add that If the CSM was really that relevant and important, meeting minutes would require DAYS and not MONTHS to release. It's been pretty clear to anyone paying attention for very long where priorities lie with CCP in regard to the CSM and player communication. Since the CSM is a just a marketing focus group promoted as "player representation" that has no real oversight or influence whatsoever, it should come as no surprise there's apathy.

Hi, I'm a highsec ganker. I have very little knowledge of nullsec, how it works, what it needs/doesn't need. Do you want me representing nullsec players, recommending changes that I think are good for null? Remember, I have no experience in that area, and at best, my recommendations are going to be heavily theorycrafted.

I'd much rather have CSM members who focus on the areas in EVE that they have the most expertise in.

i disagree.

i was very apathetic this year compared to last. last year i voted for 14 candidates on 3 accounts. this year i voted for like 7 on 1 account.

the CSM never seem to be doing that much other than "we had a chat to them, but here's a forum thread for your feedback anyway" which undermines the CSM when ccp just ask us directly anyway.
in addition, i don't want to read every candidates generic and boring pitches to figure out which ones i don't want to vote for, because you have to pick so many of them. i just want to vote for 1 person, like i do when i actually vote in elections. find 1 guy and go "he represents me best" not "this guy and these other 6 picked at random because i have slots to fill, but i'm not that interested in it"

not to mention, ccp made less effort to educate people this year than last year. last year i remember getting eve mails on my accounts, this year; nothing. if ccp can't be arsed to promote the csm, and tell us what they're doing. why should people care?

the lack of apathy is linked to education. people don't give a **** because nobody tells them why they should give a ****.

It wasn't until a few patches ago that the CSM had any say in anything. I forget the feature now. but a few expansions back the CSM partnered with a scrum team and gave step by step feed back and caused a feature to change quite a bit. I think the feature was well received but i dunno if CCP followed up and let the CSM have access like that again