If elected to the CSM, will you host a weekly podcast discussing EVE with people across all party lines? You could call it **** on CSM (you don't have to break NDA).

Why are you running for a CSM seat with an alt and not your main character?

Since you openly admit to being the man in charge of GIA, the goon intelligence agency, how do you think CCP can stop people from doxxing other players for the "Meta" game part of eve? As the leader of GIA, why do you support efforts of members of the GIA in their doxxing efforts? Also, what is your activity level? how often do you actually log in to play?

Also, what is your activity level? how often do you actually log in to play?

Why are you running for a CSM seat with an alt and not your main character?

I answered this already on this page about two posts ago but let me say again: I don't doxx people; none of my GIA people dox anyone; I have nothing to do with such activities.

As I said on reddit when you asked me the same thing, since nothing has changed:

"I don't want to do anything to anyone in Eve which I'd not be happy about them doing to me, and I would hate to get doxxed. Ergo I think doxxing people is ******, unpleasant, and if you want to look at it in totally detached lawl meta terms it is also stupidly counter-productive.

Edit: the nastiest thing I do is make rude jokes about people and God knows they do the same thing right back to me!"

So then, when the issue of one player collecting, posting, and sharing the personal information of other players was brought to light, and it seemingly has become a recurring theme with different examples cited each time, what do you feel is the appropriate response to curb that behavior?

Do you think it crosses the line into "real life harassment" that CCP have reinforced their policy on recently and should be condemned? Do you feel it's an internal cultural issue with that player's organization and the "us vs them at any cost" mentality that same player cites as his rationale? Do you feel that is a healthy aspect of the community that 50% of the sov holders have towards the game?

Clearly people are linking you to the actions of Digi and his usage of collecting other players personal out of game information. This is clearly due to the GIA, which you openly state you are the head of and thus are perceived to be the cause of these acts.

In the spirit of supporting the "meta-game" what do you think CCP can do both mechanically in-game and policy wise to limit the inherent danger Joe The Gamer can experience out of game by someone like that, without neutering the ability to prevent enemies in-game from committing acts such as the ones that destroyed Band of Brothers etc.? It is clearly the fear of being destroyed from the inside that caused those acts of doxxing to occur.

Please don't fall into the fallacy of thinking this is taking pot shots at you (as some people tend to resort to when these questions are raised to them), I'm genuinely curious how you see this issue and how you would go about fixing it.

I think that if someone has their private, personal details released without their permission then yes, that sounds like real life harassment and if CCP feel brave enough to enforce that then I would entirely welcome them doing so. Of course, someone could rules-lawyer that with specious "what if" hard cases, but I hope that I'm being pretty clear on the principle. I think that I've been extremely clear on my distaste for such practises.

Personally, I can only remember this happening once in the last couple of years, but that once was too often, and I hugely regret that it was by my alliance.

Personally, I can only remember this happening once in the last couple of years, but that once was too often, and I hugely regret that it was by my alliance.

In fact, Digi is not in the GIA, and his only interaction with our agents is when he bans them and I have to tell him to leave them alone and unban them

So you're influential enough within GSF/CFC to tell him to reverse his decision as an IT guy (let me tell you just how hard that is in my own experiences, sysops are the least receptive people to be told that they're wrong), but not influential enough to either get him to stop doing it altogether or to remove him from the alliance? Because as I said above, his actions are less public now but they still happen, and that's a problem.

You've clearly said that you don't condone what he does, so does that mean others in GSF who are above you do? IIRC there's only 2 more people above you, and that's Mittani and Sion.

like he's already been banned from SA, the GSF homeland, for admitting to collecting personal info on people. Isn't that enough of a smoking gun?

it has nothing to do with the CSM.

I think I agree with a lot of what you say in your blogs. Are you planning on doing any of the podcasts? I like to hear the csm candidates needing to answer questions as they come.

Mynnna is leaving some big shoes to fill but Endie's got the chops.

The best part of electing the head of the Goon Intelligence Agency is you never have to sit down and write him an EVE mail to tell him about something; he already knows! He's known since you talked about it in corp chat.

Now that's convenience.

Well hello there!

My name is Lanctharus Onzo and I an one of the co-host and writers of the Cap Stable Podcast.

In early 2014 our podcast interviewed a great majority of the candidates for CSM9 and we will be doing the same for CSM10.

Here is our announcement: http://capstable.net/2014/12/01/council-of-stellar-management-x-call-for-candidate-interviews/

As we stated in the announcement, you can contact us to schedule your one on one interview via any of the following methods:

Email: [email protected]
Twitter: @CapStable
Or via our contact form

We look forward to speaking to you about your particular skill set and expertise in EVE Online and we hope you success in your candidacy.

Sincerely,

Lanctharus Onzo
Co-host & Writer of the Cap Stable Podcast
Military Director, Alea Iacta Est Universal

My hope is to be able to influence CCP in the direction I have talked about on my blog: an Eve of smaller groups, more frequent and more numerous wars fought between more localised actors. I want to log into TMC or EN24 or Crossing Zebras and see reports from a dozen wars spread across Eve.

This may seem counter-intuitive for someone who has helped build Goonswarm into the dominant actor in one of the two largest blocs the game has ever seen, but I feel passionately that an Eve of smaller groups offers greater chances for more leaders, more new FCs and more content creators. That will be good for us, for the rest of Eve and for the game as a whole.

For this reason I would like to try and influence CCP towards denser populations; towards an Eve that can see smaller groups stand alone and does not drive them into vast webs of neo-feudal relationships.

I think that most players would love to be part of something more human-sized in an Eve where a bunch of plucky new players can decide to take the plunge and grab a piece of nullsec to call their own without renting, without having to get the permission of one bloc and without bowing the knee to the other bloc.

Most importantly, I want to see it be extremely hard to remove an alliance from space as long as they keep turning up and defending it (not just using it, mind!) If someone doesn't defend their space, however then it should not require multiple fleets and masses of supers to swiftly take it from them.

What would a more balkanised Eve mean for the CFC? Does not the existence of the CFC and the "other" big bloc prevent a more balkanised Eve? I guess what I mean is that any changes to the game to bring about a more balkanised Eve must mean breaking the power of coalitions.

How does this sit with you as a senior Goon, and what do you think can be done to balkanise nullsec?

He's already addressed these in his articles on sov.

TL;DR: The giant coalitions exist because it's too easy to take sov; sheer firepower at specific timers is the biggest determining factor in sov, so a few dozen people with supers/T3s could take sov from hundreds of players that don't have similar resources without breaking a sweat. Hence everyone has to band into coalitions with equal firepower just to survive. Remake sov so it's persistence, not firepower, that determines who controls sov, so that a group of 100-200 newbros can force NC to put time & dedication into taking a single system from them (rather than steamrolling them with a dozen supers whenever their reinforcement timers pop), and the gigantic coalitions will no longer be necessary to survive. Once giant coalitions are no longer necessary, they'll fracture because it's a pain in the ass to keep 12,000 people cooperating with each other.

For any who are interested, I wrote up my assessment of how each of the major blocs and alliances have reacted to Phoebe, with scorecards for each. Some of the results may surprise http://www.endie.net/wordpress/2014/12/alliance-phoebe-scorecards/