| Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Gunship
Amarr
FATAL REVELATIONS
FATAL Alliance
   |
Posted - 2007.06.07 11:45:00 -
[121]
I think this is a very good idea. Would proberly have been better if the news had come on the eve-online web-site first, then in the NYT, but no big deal, Ductoris did a fine job of linking it.
I guess details of how many, lenght of service etc. will be forthcomming soon(tm).
So you want to join us? |
Aleric Vikyz
Shadow Of The Light
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 11:45:00 -
[122]
 Originally by: Sanakan Soryu
i wonder how many BoB will get a free trip to iceland 
It's probably more likely that the council will be made up of Goons than BoB. Which is a terrible thing for the community.
|
ry ry
StateCorp
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 11:46:00 -
[123]
Originally by: Sanakan Soryu
i wonder how many BoD will get a free trip to iceland
if they are developers, they'll already be there.
|
Hermia
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 11:47:00 -
[124]
I hope some of the more influential players consider this step and re-join eve over this.
CCP are pulling all the stops on this one.
|
Benilopax
Gallente
Pulsar Combat Supplies
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 11:47:00 -
[125]
Simple, no alliances on the committee. Send empire dwellers, who have no interest in politics.
I'll throw my hat in when it comes around.
------------------------------
Benilopax touched by an Avon!
|
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Sparta Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 11:47:00 -
[126]
Edited by: Patch86 on 07/06/2007 11:46:49
If it's done right, this is definitely a decent move. I'm no tin-foiler, but I must say that I find myself less and less surprised every time theres a new "scandal" allegation- the benefit-of-the-doubt trust I was giving them in the T20 incident simply isn't there any more. If this fixes it, more the better.
On the other hand, if they don't do it right, it'll just be a waste of time. So a bunch of people get a tour of the office block- does that really solve anything in the area of "do they cheat, don't they cheat"? If you'd shown me around the ENRON offices, I wouldn't have been able to tell you that corruption was afoot- I'd just see some swanky offices. And in any case, if these Ombudsmen are drawn from the regular player base, they'll all have allegiances (if they're drawn from the forums, as an election would suggest, then they'll be well known, too). And that'll mean that some people will just disregard what they say anyway.
Still, I wait eagerly to see how it turns out.
--------
|
Jonas O'Fall
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 11:54:00 -
[127]
It all depends how the elections go.
If the results contain a broad spectrum of the playerbase, then we're likely to accept it.
But if there's 3 or more BoB/pets on the committee, things are going to get ugly very quickly.
|
Aphotic Raven
Gallente
E X O D U S
Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 11:55:00 -
[128]
This is very good publicity for eve and very good news for the future of the game.
I think a lot of people would simply like to know how many employees of CCP have characters in the top few alliances...
Pick them by territory... outposts... whatever and reveal how many characters are currently in them (or have passed through them)
Personally, I think that would put a lot of the community's worrys to rest.
So how about it?
Originally by: Dr Cupid
Let me tell you all that I'm really enjoying eve-beta, and can't wait for the real game to come out!
|
BLAIYNE
Shadow Play
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 11:55:00 -
[129]
Originally by: Mr Adequate
What to do to keep restless citizens quiet? A committee!
That is so true! 
Great idea though CCP.
Once again it emphasises CCP's commitment to player involvement in Eve, and makes it seem as though the game exists for the players, and not the other way around (as could be said of various other MMOs).
OK, maybe things haven't been handled as well as they could have been in the past, but at least with this bit of original thinking we (the players) stand a chance of seeing for ourselves what's going on.
|
DarkMatter
Amarr
Mineral Aquisition Group
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 11:57:00 -
[130]
Originally by: Jonas O'Fall
It all depends how the elections go.
If the results contain a broad spectrum of the playerbase, then we're likely to accept it.
But if there's 3 or more BoB/pets on the committee, things are going to get ugly very quickly.
There should only be one rep per alliance allowed...
Corps and alliances should have primary elections, then whoever wins those get to campaign for the 9...
If one Bob rep and 8 Bob pet reps get elected, then that's the way it is... It's a free election...
Building the homestead
|
|
|
MasterDecoy
Gallente
Raddick Explorations
Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 11:59:00 -
[131]
good move
P.S. i can see that the tin-foil brigade is already at work.
go forth gentlemen!
Originally by: Lavinrac Krad
Quit comparing Eve to the John Holmes of MMORPGs
|
Virtuozzo
IVC Consortium
INVICTUS.
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:05:00 -
[132]
Originally by: Sabahl
IMO Nobody from the top twenty alliances should be allowed to be on the commity. This is supposed to be about transparency. How much would everyone trust the results if they knew that people with obvious allegiances to the power-blocs who either make or defend against most of the complaints about in-game bias were part of that auditing group?
EVE's schizofrenia will get in the way I'm afraid. Define the top 20, by what criteria, and is a support alliance an independant one, who will judge who is alt and who is a main entity.
I agree this is about transparency, but trust is a two way road and equally important it is a matter of being familiar with the troubles and hickups, as well as having familiarity with audit processes.
I agree that some organisations in game will raise more eyebrows then others on such a board. Then again, that goes for being on the giving and the receiving end of the perceived ****stick.
This is tricky, in all honestly. You can't write off all parties involved in allegations or exposed to or at the source of drama, if you did that you'd leave open the folks who only have a very superficial perception and no exposure to the drama or the historic issues.
Catch22. I guess the point is, that CCP is taking a big step here (if you own a business, imagine you have to open up everything to your customers, you know, those rude nosy bastards who complain about prices and god knows what :P), the fundamental issue is one of trust, it is up to us to look each other and CCP into the eye and be the better person. It's got to come from all ways, or it is a process doomed. And given that CCP are taking this step, it is up to us to rise up and be professionals and keep our eyes and minds open and reach out to that hand. Whatever comes of it, no matter how difficult the process may be, it is one that can't be ignored or treated with extremistic perceptions. No matter what the outcomes, the fact that the process is there should be a big sign.
And hey, if you don't trust whoever you end up electing, or are unhappy with him or her, you can always pod the bastard to express your feelings.
Virtuozzo
Last words of a Caldari general: "Pull the Ravens back! Full retreat! they've got frigates!"
*snip* Inappropriate. -Elmo Pug |
CaptianBlack
Minmatar
EFFI Reanchoring
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:06:00 -
[133]
so to these brave souls, who get to sort out all the little problems in eve... what do you think would happen once your ingame names get out in the open.. !!! (i'll leave this one open to your imagination)
if they use your real names, what happen then.. !! some screaming loon knocking on ya front door @ 3am, wanting to knock ya block off...
as much as it's a good idea to have independant group looking into aligations ect, it may cause more problems and arguments,then solve..
CCP, think again.. it may take 10-20 people to look into something.. but only one person should make the final decision.. they call this person a judge.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.internationalhero.co.uk/c/capblak.htm |
News
Minmatar
Slacker Industries
Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:07:00 -
[134]
This won't be an election. This will be a popularity contest. A silly one at that.
|
Perl Regex
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:10:00 -
[135]
Originally by: Sha Dar
Actually, I think has real potential..
I have experience with "real" so-called "professional" auditing companies from my previous job, on several occasions and can tell you that they are anything but.
Having people do this that not only really care about the game and it's future, but actually have an inkling as to what questions need asking, will be much more productive imho than the run-of-the-mill bean counters.
As to the actual questions that need asking, no doubt numerous threads will be debated here when the time approaches, and candidates chosen, so good ideas will no doubt be taken from them.
On this move, kudos CCP.
I actually work for one of the "Big 4" accounting firms. I am not an accountant or auditor, I'm an engineer working on some internal software systems. As much as we like to poke fun at the bean counters I have to say that I have seen our group do some excellent work in the fields of company reviews in the areas of process controls and IT governance.
Personally I think the concept is excellent but without some controls over who can be on this committee and what their skill set is then it may well end up being a farce.
One solution to this that I believe would work is to have the committee as planned but employ some professional (and independent) "facilitators" to assist the committee with planning and execution.
This is exactly the type of thing I have seen our group do (and no, I don't intend to tell you who it is). The combination of professional facilitators directing the efforts of employees with vested interests in the companies we have dealt with to do process reviews and come up with new ideas and plans works amazingly well (as much as it pains me to say it as I hate being involved in that sort of stuff myself).
And to those thinking about running for the committee. Make sure you are prepared for the effort involved and please treat it seriously and keep in mind that the outcome will potentially affect a large number of people's livelihoods. If done right this will not be a holiday but ******* hard work.
Now, pardon me while I go wash my mouth out with soap. I can't believe I just used some of those words.
Cheers
|
Ska La
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:17:00 -
[136]
Originally by: Aleric Vikyz
Originally by: Sanakan Soryu
i wonder how many BoB will get a free trip to iceland
It's probably more likely that the council will be made up of Goons than BoB. Which is a terrible thing for the community.
Of course, since Goonswarm has done more to expose corruption, collusion and cheating than any other player group in the EVE universe. It would be terrible to allow them additional opportunities to help reform and improve a game we all love, wouldn't it?
Your statement makes no sense, unless one is to suppose that the "community" you speak of is one of shady characters and others who have something to conceal.
|
Qual
Gallente
Cornexant Research
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:18:00 -
[137]
Originally by: Hermia
I hope some of the more influential players consider this step and re-join eve over this.
CCP are pulling all the stops on this one.
Like who? I can say I know of too many who quit. Most are still here, just much less i public view.
"The short version: Qual is right." -Papa Smurf |
DarkMatter
Amarr
Mineral Aquisition Group
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:20:00 -
[138]
Quote:
Of course, since Goonswarm has done more to expose corruption, collusion and cheating than any other player group in the EVE universe. It would be terrible to allow them additional opportunities to help reform and improve a game we all love, wouldn't it?
Not really, your last temper tantrum was chock full of false accusations... You guys just whine the most, and then want credit for it. 
Building the homestead
|
Qual
Gallente
Cornexant Research
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:22:00 -
[139]
Edited by: Qual on 07/06/2007 12:21:16
Originally by: DarkMatter
There should only be one rep per alliance allowed...
Free elections should be exactly that. Free!
If Goons or BoB or RA or MC or whoever can get votes for 5+ spots, well, then thats democracy for you. It aint pretty, but we lack a better alternative.
"The short version: Qual is right." -Papa Smurf |
Aleric Vikyz
Shadow Of The Light
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:25:00 -
[140]
Originally by: Ska La
Of course, since Goonswarm has done more to expose corruption, collusion and cheating than any other player group in the EVE universe. It would be terrible to allow them additional opportunities to help reform and improve a game we all love, wouldn't it?
To quote the 'Great Goon', from the 'State of the Goonion', "we need to go back at what we're good, which is to take the highest number of pilot, go to the smallest area possible and overload it with****gotry!"
Yeah, sounds just like the kind of people I want with a hand in this game's future. 
|
|
|
Qual
Gallente
Cornexant Research
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:27:00 -
[141]
Originally by: Ska La
Of course, since Goonswarm has done more to expose corruption, collusion and cheating than any other player group in the EVE universe. It would be terrible to allow them additional opportunities to help reform and improve a game we all love, wouldn't it?
Look at it like this: Once the election happen, the community will have its say. If they trust you guys to be doing the right thing, you will get your fair share of seats, if not, you wont.
What individuals on the forums think about you wont matter much then.
"The short version: Qual is right." -Papa Smurf |
Windryder
Caldari
New Fnord Industries
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:27:00 -
[142]
Perhaps this shouldn't be done by a vote - perhaps it would be better done as a lottery with a bias towards a diverse subset of players; i.e. not representative of the players but representative of the *range* of players in the game.
I hope it isn't a case of the biggest alliances -> most votes -> most committee members.
"Never underestimate the power of a n00b to blunder through a dangerous situation unharmed and obliviously unaware." |
Ska La
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:28:00 -
[143]
Edited by: Ska La on 07/06/2007 12:28:17
Originally by: DarkMatter
Quote:
Of course, since Goonswarm has done more to expose corruption, collusion and cheating than any other player group in the EVE universe. It would be terrible to allow them additional opportunities to help reform and improve a game we all love, wouldn't it?
Not really, your last temper tantrum was chock full of false accusations... You guys just whine the most, and then want credit for it.
Yes, our efforts to insure fair play have been far outshined and eclipsed by the beacon of justice that is the Mineral Aquisition Group. Thanks for everything you've done, including the mispelling of your own Corp Name. (Acquisition is spelled with a 'C')
What is Goon? I want to know what Goon is...I want Goon to show me. |
Maya Rkell
Third Grade Ergonomics
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:31:00 -
[144]
Originally by: Sabahl
IMO Nobody from the top twenty alliances should be allowed to be on the commity.
Then it's not representative of the community and is inherently biased. Hence it's pointless. No, arbitrary bans on people being on it will not work.
//Maya |
Gaven Blands
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:42:00 -
[145]
Deleted expletive,
I'm pretty hardline against CCP, but having read that, I'm pretty convinced.
It might actually be enough for me to stick around...
It's a big, huge, step in the right direction.
Not to mention, the first body that does this, will set a precedent, and the overseeing council could well develop into an international body for the regulation of all online entertainment gaming. That would be amazing to see.
May I suggest that once you have this up and running, you completely overhaul the GM system into something a lot more transparent, effective and respectable. Eve's GMs are little more than a running joke. In any other competitive arena, the judges are granted an inherent respect by the competing. The GM system of Eve, and the clear low level of wits demonstrated by the incumbents deny and respect at all, and that is something undesirable.
Powerful, respectable stewardship is what the vast majority of people want to see.
Current chances of CCP seeing another penny out of me: Above Average. |
Lasati
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:44:00 -
[146]
Originally by: Windryder
Perhaps this shouldn't be done by a vote - perhaps it would be better done as a lottery with a bias...
Didn't CCP already try that with t2 bpos?
|
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Sparta Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:49:00 -
[147]
Originally by: DarkMatter
Originally by: Jonas O'Fall
It all depends how the elections go.
If the results contain a broad spectrum of the playerbase, then we're likely to accept it.
But if there's 3 or more BoB/pets on the committee, things are going to get ugly very quickly.
There should only be one rep per alliance allowed...
Corps and alliances should have primary elections, then whoever wins those get to campaign for the 9...
If one Bob rep and 8 Bob pet reps get elected, then that's the way it is... It's a free election...
True, but it wouldn't achieve much (except giving 9 BoB affiliates a free holiday to Iceland). Democracy can suck, sometimes.
And it's not entirely unlikely, either. EVE's 0.0 population is split in two large groups, the Coalition and the BoB Alliance. While the Alliance is relatively straightforward, with a top down "head" with alliances underneath, and a relatively united view of things, they'll be able to bring a lot of voting power to bear come election time. The Coalition has no such unity, and each alliance is likely to vote for one of their own.
Maybe.
--------
|
Maya Rkell
Third Grade Ergonomics
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:52:00 -
[148]
Patch, thee are a lot of Empire carebears. Lots. They don't usually say much either. But they'll vote for people who can champion their views.
I don't think you'll see as many PvPers on it as you think.
//Maya |
DarkMatter
Amarr
Mineral Aquisition Group
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:52:00 -
[149]
Edited by: DarkMatter on 07/06/2007 13:02:19
Originally by: Ska La
Edited by: Ska La on 07/06/2007 12:28:17
Originally by: DarkMatter
Quote:
Of course, since Goonswarm has done more to expose corruption, collusion and cheating than any other player group in the EVE universe. It would be terrible to allow them additional opportunities to help reform and improve a game we all love, wouldn't it?
Not really, your last temper tantrum was chock full of false accusations... You guys just whine the most, and then want credit for it.
Yes, our efforts to insure fair play have been far outshined and eclipsed by the beacon of justice that is the Mineral Aquisition Group. Thanks for everything you've done, including the mispelling of your own Corp Name. (Acquisition is spelled with a 'C')
A goonie talking fair play? Are you actually serious?
None of what you do is for fair play, it's out of hatred...
Wow, my corp has been around for nearly 3 years, you're the first one to notice, props for that. Although it's mainly due to most ppl not caring... And there are corporations irl that use that spelling...
Building the homestead
|
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Sparta Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:55:00 -
[150]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Patch, thee are a lot of Empire carebears. Lots. They don't usually say much either. But they'll vote for people who can champion their views.
I don't think you'll see as many PvPers on it as you think.
Yah, but the same applies to them as does the Coalition- little voting unity. If 20,000 people all vote the same way, and 180,000 (I know, I know, just an example) vote for 200 different people, the results are going to be pretty skewed.
--------
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |