Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lorelei Ierendi
Lorelei for CSM
111
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 21:02:16 -
[91] - Quote
Hi Ashterothi!
Thank you for taking the time away from your own campaign thread in order to visit mine!
Ashterothi wrote:Although the exact reason was never explicitly stated, anyone who was paying attention could easily infer as to why it occurred, and it wasn't for suicide ganking or in game griefing. Are you advocating an escalation of banning for such behavior by CCP, especially in the wake of their announcement allowing the tactic of "Hyperdunking"
No, I am not advocating an escalation of banning. Suicide ganking is not griefing. I am not advocating a policy change here... just maybe some more clarity/transparency for the bans that take place. If you have the energy, I think I talked about this on my capstable interview!
Hello, world!
Lorelei for CSM!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=386664
|
Ashterothi
The Order of Thelemic Ascension
217
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 22:38:29 -
[92] - Quote
Lorelei Ierendi wrote:Hi Ashterothi! Thank you for taking the time away from your own campaign thread in order to visit mine! Ashterothi wrote:Although the exact reason was never explicitly stated, anyone who was paying attention could easily infer as to why it occurred, and it wasn't for suicide ganking or in game griefing. Are you advocating an escalation of banning for such behavior by CCP, especially in the wake of their announcement allowing the tactic of "Hyperdunking"
No, I am not advocating an escalation of banning. Suicide ganking is not griefing. I am not advocating a policy change here... just maybe some more clarity/transparency for the bans that take place. If you have the energy, I think I talked about this on my capstable interview!
Thanks for clarifying that! And best of luck to you!
Ashterothi for CSM 10!
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2305
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 05:51:03 -
[93] - Quote
Lorelei Ierendi wrote:I would like there to be a "High Sec" platform, for a candidate for the CSM. If no one else wants to step up to the plate, then I will. If someone else wants to run for CSM for the benefit of High Sec gameplay, then I am happy to step down and support them... if they can do a better job. It looks as though there is a considerable turnout, and I am trying to round all of you up to get the high-sec force to work on fixing up this long-stagnated region. I am really excited to see that not only are there so many of you, but you've got great ideas and completely unique viewpoints! You in particular would appear to be the first carebear candidate this round, to which I must say I am a tad surprised.
You've got an interesting perspective from the standpoint of one who likes to run package delivery. We throughout EVE rely a lot on you folks for our logistics teams but we don't always consider your feelings. As you are a casual gamer, I think you'll find a lot of agreement with Mike Azariah's style. He has already been in the CSM twice in a row and is highly likely to win a third seat. I assume you knew by now that he is indeed running again.
Well I'd like to see you bounce ideas off the other highsec candidates. I want your unique input. You've said you're fighting for the right to play your way and for the chance to survive, well one of the big topics that Jenshae Chiroptera and I have been discussing recently is providing tools for the defender to allow them to step up their game with skill and save their shipments or whatever it is they're defending. So if you've got the time, please stop by my highsec reform thread. I'm hoping to get at least a bit of input from all of you, and I want you all to come with an open mind. I believe that all highsec candidates can work together through differing opinions and goals, united toward one grander goal: that highsec definitely needs work!
CSM X: Sabriz Adoudel, Mike Azariah, Sugar Kyle, Corbexx, Jenshae Chiroptera
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2430
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 10:43:16 -
[94] - Quote
BTW I am following this thread and if you have questions about what it is like being the 'highsec' csm guy. Ask away.
You are taking up a hard task because while a large percentage of the game live in highsec they do not organize nor do they really care about the metagame (elections included). Hopefully Leeloo and the rest of the CCP community team can generate some more noise this year and we can get a decent turnout.
Some will tell you that this is Nulls year . . . with expected sov changes.
Yes and no. the changes are coming but the game is a whole, not isolated instances. Any change in one area has an affect across the whole of the game. Even when they are talking about a part of space you know less about you have the right and the responsibility to represent your part of the game and ask how it wide the effects will be.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Lorelei Ierendi
Lorelei for CSM
113
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 14:43:40 -
[95] - Quote
Hi Mike! Thanks for stopping by!
Mike Azariah wrote:BTW I am following this thread and if you have questions about what it is like being the 'highsec' csm guy. Ask away.
You are taking up a hard task because while a large percentage of the game live in highsec they do not organize nor do they really care about the metagame (elections included). Hopefully Leeloo and the rest of the CCP community team can generate some more noise this year and we can get a decent turnout.
I think something like a popup on logging in for the week of the elections would be a good thing. Like I have said, we get several popups in the run-up to downtime every day... one week of pop-ups on logging in with the elections coming would not be too much more of an inconvenience. Then we could at least be sure that no one missed out on voting because they didn't know!!!
Mike Azariah wrote:Some will tell you that this is Nulls year . . . with expected sov changes.
I hope that the changes in null will bring us high sec carebears also fresh wind! Aside from the game mechanics, I hope that the changes in null will make it more exciting than it previously seemed to be, and more accessible (for someone sitting outside and watching).
Hello, world!
Lorelei for CSM!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=386664
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2315
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 19:23:16 -
[96] - Quote
Lorelei Ierendi wrote:Aside from the game mechanics, I hope that the changes in null will make it more exciting than it previously seemed to be, and more accessible (for someone sitting outside and watching). I feel the same way. I've been in nullsec and liked it, but trying to maintain myself out there is stressful. I just don't play the game enough anymore, and as a result if I want to join in on a fleet starting out there, I have to gather my things and ship out a day before in preparation, because that's actually easier than staying out there sometimes.
CSM X: Sabriz Adoudel, Mike Azariah, Xander Phoena, Sugar Kyle, Corbexx, Jenshae Chiroptera, Marlona Sky
Highsec reform thread
|
Lorelei Ierendi
Lorelei for CSM
118
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 18:06:56 -
[97] - Quote
Lorelei Ierendi wrote:http://capstable.net/2015/01/26/lorelei-ierendi/
Interview is up.
And the discussion of the interview is up:
http://capstable.net/2015/02/04/csm-x-show-3/
I get air time between about minute 39 and 46. I found the comments... interesting and valuable.
Does anyone else have any comments?
Hello, world!
Lorelei for CSM!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=386664
|
Dersen Lowery
Drinking in Station
1447
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 18:26:01 -
[98] - Quote
Lorelei Ierendi wrote:more clarity/transparency for the bans that take place. If you have the energy, I think I talked about this on my capstable interview!
If they're not providing any rationale for a ban, it's because CCP security is concerned that giving the person a reason would give them information they could use to work around the ban. It's for people that violate the EULA so baldly that there's no possibility that they were acting in good faith.
If you make CSM, you will eventually learn how seriously Team Security takes this kind of operational security, but then you won't be able to tell anyone.
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2469
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 18:50:14 -
[99] - Quote
There is also the fact that CSM is NOT a two things that people seem to think that we are.
We are not the internal affairs of ccp so we do not double check all the bans to make sure they are right. We see the stats of bans and the effects, we may advise on the wording of rules and such but ccp security are trained professionals whose job it is to keep the game 'clean'.
We are not the Human Resources department. We have no effect on hires or fires nor should we. This came up at the beginning of last term and the smart thing to do is stay clear and send condolences to those who were laid off and to those left behind. Congrats to people who move on to new jobs and new futures. These are people and their livelihoods. Act accordingly
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
879
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 01:05:15 -
[100] - Quote
Lorelei, you have my support. Maybe the OP title could be a statement rather than a question?Mike Azariah wrote:Some will tell you that this is Nulls year . . . with expected sov changes. m I would like this to be EVE's year.
I have a dream This galaxy will rise up, and live out the true meaning of its existance: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all pilots are created equal."
I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Minmatar, the friends of former carebears and the newbies of former SOV owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.
I have a dream that one day even the waste land of low sec, a space sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of barrenness, will be transformed into an oasis of thriving systems and conflict.
I have a dream that our four types of space will one day live in a galaxy where they will not be judged by the alliance they are in (except Goons ) but by the content of their character.
I have a dream today!
CSM Ten movement for change.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
|
Lorelei Ierendi
Lorelei for CSM
119
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 18:30:04 -
[101] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:There is also the fact that CSM is NOT a two things that people seem to think that we are.
We are not the internal affairs of ccp so we do not double check all the bans to make sure they are right. We see the stats of bans and the effects, we may advise on the wording of rules and such but ccp security are trained professionals whose job it is to keep the game 'clean'.
And I am NOT advocating or assuming that the CSM gets to approve bans or control bans. I would, however, like to know if the person applying to join my corp has a shady history etc. That is the rationale behind my "Wall of Shame".
Mike Azariah wrote:We are not the Human Resources department. We have no effect on hires or fires nor should we. This came up at the beginning of last term and the smart thing to do is stay clear and send condolences to those who were laid off and to those left behind. Congrats to people who move on to new jobs and new futures. These are people and their livelihoods. Act accordingly
Oh heaven forbid that any game company, anywhere, lets players have anything to do with hiring or firing!
I have, of course, been reading the blog posts, twitter et cetera of CSM9 and have decided not to say anything more about it at the moment!
Hello, world!
Lorelei for CSM!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=386664
|
Aditu Ibuki
Metaphysics Industries Holed Up
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 20:59:41 -
[102] - Quote
Can I make a suggestion that a less controversial platform for those of us who do not play EVE for PvP is the additional of new content which is not centered around PvP or in areas where PvP is likely in seconds once you decloak.
EvE has improved it fleet combat in the last 7 years or so, but it has always had an amazing potential in its economy implementation. Would CCP countenance adding new content for non PvP or PvE activites, the last time this seemed to happen was with PI and some small additions to exploration. This is not about dumbing down the game or making it risk free it is about giving so love to the areas of the game that at lot of us are attracted to in Eve other than exploiting other players. Why has CCP never widened trade possibilities much or fleshed out more NPC companies opportunities for player content? |
Lorelei Ierendi
Lorelei for CSM
119
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 09:57:15 -
[103] - Quote
Thank you for stopping by my thread!
Aditu Ibuki wrote: Why has CCP never widened trade possibilities much or fleshed out more NPC companies opportunities for player content?
You raise some interesting points... and I am going to have to think about that.
But my initial, not really thought about, emotional response would be something along the lines of:
isn't the thing about Eve that it is a Sandbox, with player generated content... and shouldn't CCP stay as much out of it as possible, and enjoy what we do with each other?
As a really non-PVPer I can appreciate the feeling of "lack of content" (especially on weekends when there are really no suitable freighter contracts for me, where I want to go). If you are not PVPing sometimes it feels like you have to struggle to find something to do. But if it is too much, I don't think that for EVE the right answer is "more content" but rather "try another game as well".
Hello, world!
Lorelei for CSM!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=386664
|
Bellak Hark
New Eden Media Organization
37
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 10:26:25 -
[104] - Quote
Your campaign ad |
Lorelei Ierendi
Lorelei for CSM
122
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 18:07:13 -
[105] - Quote
Thank you! It is very nice!
Hello, world!
Lorelei for CSM!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=386664
|
Arthur Aihaken
X A X
4067
|
Posted - 2015.02.21 02:54:03 -
[106] - Quote
Lorelei Ierendi wrote:4) Wardecs. The war dec mechanic is broken. There have already been talks/suggestions about enabling player groups that are not eligible for "war deccing" but also not eligible to put up POS or POCOS.... This is a central theme to New Player Retention, and not to be ignored. You have my vote; any possibility you could expand on this in a bit more detail? I'd be interested in your thoughts. Thanks.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
124
|
Posted - 2015.02.21 03:03:24 -
[107] - Quote
I wasn't gonna vote but the overwhelming response has convinced me to vote for this candidate.
ty all for helping me make the decision. |
Lorelei Ierendi
Lorelei for CSM
129
|
Posted - 2015.02.22 17:58:29 -
[108] - Quote
It has indeed been a busy week!
The official candidate list is out - I am there.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ortXpjkEXGPaFkTpuRRnm7MFpz6-lBNmSH7vUw5yvBs/edit?pli=1#gid=901990959
Just for clarity, I wanted to point out (as I said in at least one other place) that I am living in Germany, but I am not german... just in case that ends up being important for anybody.
Whilst I have been taking a couple of days (more or less) away from the internet, there came an interesting DEVblog on the New Player Experience. https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/opportunities-abound-the-new-player-experience/ Looks like interesting times are ahead!
Hello, world!
Lorelei for CSM!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=386664
|
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1806
|
Posted - 2015.02.22 19:03:15 -
[109] - Quote
So gonna go ahead and ask this because i cant read through 6 pages on a mobile that can barely show 4 lines of text at a time, and I sure as hell wotn rememebr to come back later.
what defines a 50:50 win chance in ganks? is it 1 miner versus 1 ganker, is it based on 1 miner versus a 5-man ganking squad?
how do you scale mechanics that no matter how many gankers there are the miner has a 50:50 chance of being safe, and how does that eman balanced? or another approach, how do you determine what a "fair" number of gankers is to start the 50:50 chance at? should 1 ganker have no chance to kill a miner? should it take 10 for a 50:50 chance? what ship/base are you basing the gankers flying with this (catalyst atron nado, etc)? do gankers now have to travel in groups of 25+ tornadoes just to kill a freighter?
in short, how complicated must you make ganking without changing anything needed by the miner/trader before its "balanced"?
*edit* if the psot if too long that already answers what im asking, just tell me the page its on, make my poor life easier with this terrible terrible excuse for a smartphone |
Lorelei Ierendi
Lorelei for CSM
129
|
Posted - 2015.02.22 21:52:43 -
[110] - Quote
Nariya Kentaya wrote:So gonna go ahead and ask this because i cant read through 6 pages on a mobile that can barely show 4 lines of text at a time, and I sure as hell wotn rememebr to come back later.
Still, thank you for stopping by, anyway.
Nariya Kentaya wrote:in short, how complicated must you make ganking without changing anything needed by the miner/trader before its "balanced"?
*edit* if the psot if too long that already answers what im asking, just tell me the page its on, make my poor life easier with this terrible terrible excuse for a smartphone
Ok.
Some of the things / ideas I have said on this subject in various forum/interview and stuff:
- Teach the new players about DSCAN, as part of the NPE. - Introduce some randomness in CONCORD response times (both longer and shorter than currently...) - An active self-destuct module that would allow a non-afk miner/freighter to take most of his stuff with him... if he chooses.
I can understand that with so many candidates you don't feel that you have time to read all the threads and listen to the interviews et cetera... but if you really want to know... you really should read the thread and listen to the interviews...
Hello, world!
Lorelei for CSM!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=386664
|
|
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1806
|
Posted - 2015.02.22 22:18:57 -
[111] - Quote
Lorelei Ierendi wrote:Nariya Kentaya wrote:So gonna go ahead and ask this because i cant read through 6 pages on a mobile that can barely show 4 lines of text at a time, and I sure as hell wotn rememebr to come back later. Still, thank you for stopping by, anyway. Nariya Kentaya wrote:in short, how complicated must you make ganking without changing anything needed by the miner/trader before its "balanced"?
*edit* if the psot if too long that already answers what im asking, just tell me the page its on, make my poor life easier with this terrible terrible excuse for a smartphone Ok. Some of the things / ideas I have said on this subject in various forum/interview and stuff: - Teach the new players about DSCAN, as part of the NPE. - Introduce some randomness in CONCORD response times (both longer and shorter than currently...) - An active self-destuct module that would allow a non-afk miner/freighter to take most of his stuff with him... if he chooses. I can understand that with so many candidates you don't feel that you have time to read all the threads and listen to the interviews et cetera... but if you really want to know... you really should read the thread and listen to the interviews... thanks for the response
and i DO try and read most fo the threads and interviews, its just there are alot so I have to prioritize, and not to be offensiv here but, I try and restrict that to the candidates with the highest likelihood of re-election (so i can judge my opinion on whether to support them or look for someone else), because franly its difficult for an "independent" to compete with a main party (WH/nullsec community backed candidates) or an entrenched member (because lets face it, if someone was re-elected once, their chances of being re-elected again are decently boosted) |
Ampoliros Ni-Dunes
Ouroboros Infinitum
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.23 09:31:57 -
[112] - Quote
I will vote for you, Lorelei Lerendi. I don't know if The Caldari Navy Intelligence Self Destruct Device is your idea, but I'd love that to be advocated.
Additionally, as for the bounty mechanics, if it hadn't been suggested before, I would like to see a "Bounty Hunter" skill set, raising the payout significantly higher than it is currently.
As for wardeccs, and player corporations generally, what is your view in raising wardecc cost / CONCORD bribe 10 to 100 fold, aswell as corporation creation cost. Both also could be raised in difficulty with skills.
Nachbar Gr+++ƒe! |
Lorelei Ierendi
Lorelei for CSM
134
|
Posted - 2015.02.23 18:38:09 -
[113] - Quote
Thanks for stopping by my thread to ask questions! :)
Ampoliros Ni-Dunes wrote:I will vote for you, Lorelei Lerendi. I don't know if The Caldari Navy Intelligence Self Destruct Device is your idea, but I'd love that to be advocated.
The idea is so good that I am sure that something similar must have been suggested before, but I did not read it anywhere. I actually got the idea whilst listening to CODE. players talking about how undesirable it is to be AFK... I thought how best to reward a player for not being AFK... and how a non-AFK player (in a single account) can best defend himself from different forms of ganking. That is what I came up with.
Oh, and I am sure that the Caldari Navy Intelligence have something like that... just do not want to give it out. Where are the elite spies when you need them!
Ampoliros Ni-Dunes wrote:Additionally, as for the bounty mechanics, if it hadn't been suggested before, I would like to see a "Bounty Hunter" skill set, raising the payout significantly higher than it is currently.
Something has to be done about the bounties.
Ampoliros Ni-Dunes wrote:As for wardeccs, and player corporations generally, what is your view in raising wardecc cost / CONCORD bribe 10 to 100 fold, aswell as corporation creation cost. Both also could be raised in difficulty with skills.
Well I have advocated more the "non-deccable, no POS "corporation"" as a means for players being able to group together and avoid wardecs. I think once a wardec is running, then it is unfair to the deccer to have it so easily defeated (dissolve corp and reform).
So we need a mechanic that:
1) allows groups of players to avoid being wardecced, in exchange for having (as a group) no real tangible influence on in-game structures, taxes et cetera. 2) allows wardecs to be meaningful declarations of war that persist until resolved (either diplomatically, or when no longer paid for). 3) allows it to be possible to bring in as many allies as wanted - on both sides of a fight. The increasing costs per ally make involving other players less likely because: People want to hold out to see if good PVPers / Mercs want to help.
I talked more about this here: http://justforcrits.com/csmx-lorelei-ierendi/
Hello, world!
Lorelei for CSM!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=386664
|
Ampoliros Ni-Dunes
Mobit Constellation Bureau
1
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 12:16:36 -
[114] - Quote
Thank you for your reply. Lorelei Ierendi.
In the interview in the link you provided you said something that caught my attention: Highsec is underrepresented in the CSM. That's terrible! Users and players can create as much content in low and null sec as much as they want and is possible, but highsec is something CCP has a responsibility for. I don't yet have much insight in the NPE, but I think new players should be able to get an understanding of the difference between order and anarchy (which is just another word for sandbox imo) and learn to decide how much they want to or can take before being confronted by piracy et al the first day on. And I don't think a few repetetive missions count.
As much CCPlease I (and many others) would like to do, I want to refrain from details, pleads and rants for now. This is my first CSM election, and we'll see what, if anything, will change. I have a strong RPG and SciFi background, and being a carebear is for me the only way to play the game. And btw, I only very recently discovered its exact meaning, and I think it's a dumb word, It should be a completely legit playstyle just like pirates or anyone living in wormholes. But I agree in being AFK is not legit, and I agree with your 50:50 approach.One can't be without the other.
Ok, just one rant. Creating a corporation is too easy and too cheap. There should be a minimum bar of what one corporation may expect from wardeccing another in terms of resilience and defense. The stronger mostly become stronger on cost of the weak, not other strong ones. That may be anti-darwinian, but it's a game after all. And as for wardec mechanics, the cost could be dependant on system security. You pay so much, and may attack the enemy corp members up to this or that system security. After all a wardec payment is a CONCORD bribe, and I would like to see a 1.0 sec CONCORD integrity withstand but the highest bribe (or even additionally Connection skill), and a 0.5 sec CONCORD crimewatch officer look the other way for cheap. That may result in a corp fleeing into higher sec rather than immediately disbanding the corp altogether. This as much as for CCP having to take responsibility for its highsec.
Good luck on your election!! And sorry for the "neighborly" greetings earlier, in the official candidate list your country of origin is listed as Germany. |
Lorelei Ierendi
Lorelei for CSM
134
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 18:29:34 -
[115] - Quote
Ampoliros Ni-Dunes wrote:Thank you for your reply. Lorelei Ierendi.
My pleasure.
Ampoliros Ni-Dunes wrote: Users and players can create as much content in low and null sec as much as they want and is possible, but highsec is something CCP has a responsibility for.
I am not sure that I agree with that. CCP have a responsibility for defining the game mechanics et cetera... and the rest of it is just up to us players! I think that CCP needs to take a look at the game mechanics that are currently at work in High Sec, compare them to the other Secs, and see if there is enough difference there to make things worthwhile.
Ampoliros Ni-Dunes wrote:I don't yet have much insight in the NPE, but I think new players should be able to get an understanding of the difference between order and anarchy (which is just another word for sandbox imo) and learn to decide how much they want to or can take before being confronted by piracy et al the first day on. And I don't think a few repetetive missions count.
This is Eve. When we fly out of a designated "rookie" system we are at risk and exposed to the big bad world. I think that it would be bad for players in EVE to simply be able to totally "opt out" of the Sandbox. The Sandbox also includes High Sec. When you really look at it, the differences in Sec are more or less just differences in the way players (can) shoot each other.
Ampoliros Ni-Dunes wrote:Ok, just one rant. Creating a corporation is too easy and too cheap. There should be a minimum bar of what one corporation may expect from wardeccing another in terms of resilience and defense.
As a proud member of a one man corporation, I disagree. Like I said, what I would like is to see my Corporation able to bring in as many allies and mercs as I want to help fight my war. But I don't need to post what I think, again!
Ampoliros Ni-Dunes wrote:Good luck on your election!! And sorry for the "neighborly" greetings earlier, in the official candidate list your country of origin is listed as Germany.
The form for registering for the CSM did not allow me to enter a nationality that was different from my address.
Hello, world!
Lorelei for CSM!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=386664
|
Lorelei Ierendi
Lorelei for CSM
134
|
Posted - 2015.02.25 18:31:38 -
[116] - Quote
Nariya Kentaya wrote:thanks for the response
my pleasure.
Nariya Kentaya wrote:and i DO try and read most fo the threads and interviews, its just there are alot so I have to prioritize, and not to be offensiv here but, I try and restrict that to the candidates with the highest likelihood of re-election (so i can judge my opinion on whether to support them or look for someone else), because franly its difficult for an "independent" to compete with a main party (WH/nullsec community backed candidates) or an entrenched member (because lets face it, if someone was re-elected once, their chances of being re-elected again are decently boosted)
Just because it is difficult, however, does not mean that it is not worth trying!
Hello, world!
Lorelei for CSM!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=386664
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
979
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 04:11:58 -
[117] - Quote
You have my mining laser! Erm ... I mean vote.
CSM Ten movement for change.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
Lorelei Ierendi
Lorelei for CSM
134
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 18:32:09 -
[118] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:You have my mining laser! Erm ... I mean vote.
Thank you! I will take what I can get! :)
Hello, world!
Lorelei for CSM!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=386664
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
23507
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 02:54:29 -
[119] - Quote
Lorelei Ierendi wrote:However... if a miner pre-pulls CONCORD in an asteroid belt, but having an alt in a rookie ship fire one shot at their mining vessel... then this is potentially a bannable offense. CCP should level the playing field here.... and either allow (or disallow) CONCORD manipulation on all sides.
CSM campaign writeups should be carefully vetted against (grossly) incorrect statements about current game mechanics.
Your understanding is not correct here. You should be better aware of the rules that affect you.
Rush to danger, wind up nowhere
Sabriz for CSM go go go
|
Lorelei Ierendi
Lorelei for CSM
139
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 10:05:02 -
[120] - Quote
Sibyyl wrote:Lorelei Ierendi wrote:However... if a miner pre-pulls CONCORD in an asteroid belt, but having an alt in a rookie ship fire one shot at their mining vessel... then this is potentially a bannable offense. CCP should level the playing field here.... and either allow (or disallow) CONCORD manipulation on all sides. CSM campaign writeups should be carefully vetted against (grossly) incorrect statements about current game mechanics. Your understanding is not correct here. You should be better aware of the rules that affect you.
And of course, this was already handled about two posts after the one you are quoting. But thank you for reading, anyway!
Hello, world!
Lorelei for CSM!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=386664
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |