| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
50
   |
Posted - 2012.02.15 17:54:00 -
[1] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Boris Lachenkov wrote:... The people we get behind are usually the social ones with ... Again, I repeat that being social does not mean that you are most competent for the job. Mittens and most politicians say what ever appeals to the lowest common denominator. He is harping on about how CSM went to an emergency meeting. There would not have been a meeting without the riots and revoked subscriptions in the first place. They didn't have to say anything special, just repeat what was already all over the game and forums. High sec, low sec and worm hole space by their very nature tend to create a multitude of smaller groups. This fragmentation means that it is far less probable that there will be anyone taking up a position to protect their interests.
Actually, in a job like this, being social really, REALLY does mean a lot more than whatever your definition of competency is.
The entire job is social, be it talking regularly with the other CSM reps or directly with CCP. How on earth is someone without social skills supposed to be effective at all, let alone preferable?
|
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
77
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 16:54:00 -
[2] - Quote
Killer Gandry wrote:End result ot the debate is that there are players who wish for an active "none of the above" option as to let CCP see howmany would actually vote that and take that into their calculations.
CSM candidates feel threatened?
What makes you think CCP cares about that information?
Think about it - it's extremely easy to participate in this whole system. Voting is beyond simple, you have 14 days to do it on any number of accounts you have that qualify. Running is almost as easy, as the only two barriers of entry are "are you 21?" and "can you legally travel to Iceland?".
A vote of "none of the above" is really saying "I'm too lazy to run, too lazy to solicit any of the 28 certified candidates from just about every corner of the galaxy, but certainly not too lazy to whine about it". How valuable is any of that to CCP at the end of the day?
|
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
77
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 16:59:00 -
[3] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Snow Axe wrote:
A vote of "none of the above" is really saying "I'm too lazy to run, too lazy to solicit any of the 28 certified candidates from just about every corner of the galaxy, but certainly not too lazy to whine about it". How valuable is any of that to CCP at the end of the day?
No. I believe that all players in CSM capacity is bad for EVE, self included.
Good for you. CCP clearly doesn't, hence the CSM existing. So we're right back to the "why do you think they care about your opinion?" point. |
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
77
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 17:04:00 -
[4] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Snow Axe wrote:
Good for you. CCP clearly doesn't, hence the CSM existing. So we're right back to the "why do you think they care about your opinion?" point.
"Why do you think they care about anyone's opinion?"
They're paying yearly to fly some of them to Iceland for the 7th time. That's a good sign they at least somewhat care. Even if they didn't care and this is all PR, what skin is it off your back?
|
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
77
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 17:28:00 -
[5] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Then I would be happier. Time and again, I have seen games eroded by vocal short sighted players.
And far more often, I have seen short-sighted devs with no idea what players actually *do* in game ruin a game completely.
A good recent example - some devs spent 2 years focusing on this expansion that even at best would have added nothing but fluff, ignored the core game and very nearly lost the entire thing because of it. You might have heard of it, it was called Eve Online. |
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
77
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 17:45:00 -
[6] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:For all those years they had CSM and look what good that did them! 
Wait, I thought you would be happy to see the CSM worthless and ignored?
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Emergency meeting was a result of the riots and all they had to do was repeat what was very loud and clear all over the forums.
GMs, could have done that quicker with less cost.
GM's would have been able to report how angry people are, sure, and their usefulness would have ended there. Would they have known to push CCP to put some very immediate focus on the whole Flying in Space thing as that's what people were truly angry about?
Also as an aside, why the hell do you care about "less cost" to CCP? Do you really think they're so stupid that they'd be flying a group of players to a foreign country if consulting their GM's had the same effect? |
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
77
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 18:21:00 -
[7] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:The key is that GMs would be impartial and not try to direct the game into conscious or subconscious bias that would be detrimental to the over all game in the long term.
The only way a GM's opinion would be even somewhat useful to CCP would be if they were still actively playing the game, which means not only would they be subject to the same biases as the current CSM players, it'd be even harder to weed out as their biases would be obfuscated by their roles, as opposed to the system we have now, where factions are out in the open, making blatant attempts to one-up your adversaries easy to spot and shoot down. |
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
77
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 18:30:00 -
[8] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:By that token you can say that the null sec focused players must be automatically disregarded when ever an aspect to do with other parts of space is brought up; as they are not actively playing there.
It doesn't make their opinion irrelevant (as they may well have played that aspect of the game, or currently participate in it), but it does mean that people who actively DO participate in that part of the game should definitely be taken more seriously. Hence why it's a good idea to find a candidate that plays what you do and back them, OR run yourself. Abstaining like this is a good way to ensure that the CSM becomes totally unbalanced, which nobody wants.
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:It does not take more than an average understanding to see why an idea is logically sound.
This says more about your struggles on this topic than I'm sure you wanted to admit. |
| |
|