Your hood scares me.

Im not going to vote

Its up to CCP/CSM

I suppose this passes for "fashionably unimpressed."

Thread #3 where The Apostle cries about the CSM. Can CCP please revoke thread creation priviledges for The Apostle?

I am the narcissistic hero that highsec needs.

About what? You would need to back up your argument with proof that we're supposedly worried. Now I posted here because I noticed you're probably the biggest crybaby on the forum right now. WIth your 3 unproductive threads and full of bad ideas which CCP has not acknowledged any of yours are good, I actually found a major bug and reported here to be noticed by CCP. Guess which threads got CCP responses. Here's a hint. It ain't you.

Apostle, even if your intentions are real, placing too much emphasis on negative re-inforcement without reasoning is just going to make it a troll thread.

( It actually makes me question wether you are simply trying to help the Goons, tbh )

The goons do this all the time with repetition, one liners of disrepute, other stupidity, mostly its obvious, half are just clowning around of course.

What does seem apparent however, is there is a lull in posting atm, which makes me think that the last couple of weeks have exhausted the topic material and people are waining when looking at it.

It might get an injection of course, it's only my observation of events since Thursday. That and CSM voting isn't for two months. Also CCP haven't chimed in on a few points which are dragging their heels.

Don't let it stop you posting of course, your entitled as anyone, but as a "suggestion" can I just recommend you make it pro-active, just a thought?

You see. Unlike you without a brain that don't bother to think or even get past your biases, you just jump right into trying to be a troll. You're a bad one and end up making crap threads.

The bug I brought to the attention was a critical one that broke one of the most important parts of the game which are roles. Of course you don't have any QA skills which isn't something you don't do or have any skills for. Sitting in your parent's basement coming up with genius ideas like trying and convince yourself (because CCP won't listen to you) that it's better to dilute the voting population's value of a vote based on region players lives in. CCP listens to one thing only. Money. That's why they assign 1 vote for every paying account. You are more than entitled to vote however you want but you are a dumb child thinking you can influence how CCP will organize the CSM's. The Mittani's done a pretty good job and your high-sec representative, Trebor, does like to admit that the CSM6 team is quite an effective one.

There's another thing that you fail to notice because it's obvious you've never held a job where you were required to abide by an NDA tied to the economic life of a company. The CSM6 Team like all teams before them cannot release information at their own prerogative without CCP's permissions due to the NDA all those participants signed. It's no different from when I was working for NitroSecurity and they got bought out by Intel Corporation through their subsidiary, McAfee. I couldn't say **** for weeks because it's insider trading. The CSM team also does not formulate or push ideas to CCP, they only give their feedback on ideas that CCP pitches to them. But of course, you the child, don't know that.

bla and...... Hey, you did acknowledged my point which they do listen to money so that's why they will never back away from 1 vote for every paying account. Voter participation will always be optional in this game like most elections IRL.

Chillax.

My view is allowing others to use self-initiated behavior rather than fear based dominace always works much better as its a "choice" the individual makes for themselves given the evidence. But you stick to your unsubstantiated hate rants if you like and see how stupid it makes you look.

Yes, I'm a goon. I do have all those characteristics. Thank you. However I cannot say the same about you.

Your proposal based off of regions of space and that is diluting the vote. When 100% of the null-sec / wh-space / CSM chair (Really they're all the same anyways) votes for the CSM candidates they want which numbers at 24000-30000 votes which are restricted to only 5 null-sec / wh-space / CSM chair candidates vs 3300 (Trebor's vote numbers) votes split across 2 high-sec candidate and let's hypothetically assume 1500 for the low-sec guys. The value of a high-sec / low-sec vote is 3 times better than the null-sec / wh-space / CSM chair votes. You obviously do not understand dilution. Hence why CCP will keep the way the system is because it's 1 vote 1 account without any consideration for how many secondary restrictions there may be.

I know and I've already done the math in regards to your proposal based off the numbers from the CSM6 votes. That's why I'm pointing out the flaw of your concepts because of the fact of voter participating is pretty dismal in high-sec. It's not the null-sec / wh-space player's fault that high-sec pubbies are dumb and like to play with themselves. It's your preoperative to become a community organizer and get them to vote. It works for President Obama, so why can't it work for you?

My individual sensibilities? Well it's nice to know that you think I'm supposedly offended by this when you're having an aneurysm every post.

I'm naive? I'm not the one proposing dilution. Now that's a naive concept. Now go wail in the corner because I took your candy cane.

One thing I have learned from living in the US is that there is no such thing as a 'democracy' but you always have to keep voting one step towards your ideal because you will never get what you want in one election cycle but through a progression of multiple voting cycles.

Your signature however isn't true which goes to show what kind of person you are. Afterall, you're probably the kind of guy that laughs maniacally at oxymorons when it isn't really that funny. You see. The last election around, I wanted to vote for Mittani and Solo Drakban created an awesome tool that allowed us to vote for the candidates we wanted to choose directly when we went to visit our forum. But hey, I won't let that deter you, child.

Your dilution idea will always come up over and over again by you because it's you. An uncreative person with a lack of good ideas. You have to remember. The CSM has to consider your ideas in order to pitch it to CCP because it's extremely doubtful they'll listen to you directly here. "Dumb idea, dumb kid, next!"

Erm... explain to me please the differnce bettween say the Goons voting for thier Alliance candidates and Hi sec voting for it's candidates? Two differnt player bases only interested in thier aspect of the game. Both by your logic doomed to perish in their self-interest.

What does CONCORD security status have to do with players and the CSM?

Let's be honest.

Security Status defines the speed of CONCORD response to aggression. It does not define how safe you are. You may be safter in 0.0 than in some areas of 0.9.

The activities in-game, such as mining, hauling, industrial production, scouting, combat fleets, planetary interaction and so forth are spread across all of New Eden.

The CSM selection process should focus on game areas; not on how fast CONCORD will respond.

...You are the one trying to mandate voting along CONCORD response times...

Well, you want a set of High-Security candidates, a set of Low-Security candidates and a set of Null-Security candidates. What is that other than mandating voting along CONCORD response times?

You do realise people mine in high-sec, low-sec and null-sec? And that a candidate running for, for example, mining improvements will be able to impact on all of them? The same with Incursions, Production, well ... just about all aspects of EVE. Very few activities in EVE are restricted to a single security status.

So what would a "high-sec" candidate DO? Work on faster CONCORD response times?

Wow, just spent the whole thread liking every post by the Apostle... without bothering to read them.