EVE Search - Leboe for CSM

All Channels

Jita Park Speakers Corner

Leboe for CSM

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
leboe Stimulus Rote Kapelle 26	Posted - 2012.02.16 04:22:00 - [1] - Quote SHOW YOUR SUPPORT BY CLICKING 'LIKE' HERE ---> The current CSM wants to nerf NPC 0.0 without opposition from the candidates I supported in the previous election. Because of this I will be running for CSM7 on a small gang/NPC 0.0 platform. I believe that the extremes of Eve's gang sizes (solo and 100+) are well represented, with no one left for that middle ground. Who am in game? I started playing Eve in mid 2007, being thrown into Sov warfare with various now-dead entities. I moved onto lowsec after a year, where I relearned PvP in Amamake with Heretic army, and eventually moved on to Dark Star Cartel, a member corp of Molotov Coalition. In late 2009 Molotov coalition folded, and I joined Stimulus for the smug, ~elitepvp~ environment. I've been a member of Stimulus for the past 2 years, who is the executor corporation of Rote Kapelle. Rote are a PvP alliance based in Syndicate. For the unaware, Syndicate is the most active region in Eve for PvP kills, year after year. All we do as an alliance is PvP, usually in gangs between 5-30 people. I dabble in industry on alts, mostly producing boosters. Why would I be an asset to the CSM? Because People who live in NPC 0.0 are massively underrepresented. Here's a few things that I agree with/would push for if elected. Viable small gang objectives Not Nerfing NPC 0.0 Regions. Making LowSec a Higher Priority. EWAR Balance Boosters Jump Clone Timers, Clone Upgrade Costs These are a few of my views on topics that are a high priority to me. There are lots of things in Eve that still need work, but I think that the members are mostly unified in the direction CCP needs to continue taking. The next expansion is supposed to be focused on Sov warfare, and I'd like to ensure the rest of the universe isn't left out. I encourage anyone to ask me questions, especially if its about a topic I haven't discussed above. I can be contacted through the replies or an in game evemail. Blog link with more details coming soon.
Sudden Eye Stimulus Rote Kapelle 0	Posted - 2012.02.16 04:26:00 - [2] - Quote I endorse this candidate
Zangorus Comply Or Die 614	Posted - 2012.02.16 04:34:00 - [3] - Quote big up and will vote for Like my comment and recieve 1 million isk ingame!
Bail Boo 4	Posted - 2012.02.16 05:00:00 - [4] - Quote another day, another candidate Party, Marty. Party.
thetwilitehour GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 138	Posted - 2012.02.16 05:22:00 - [5] - Quote Yeah sure ok. Whatever dilutes the ballot more. I mean represents more valid interests that ought to be represented on the CSM. Not the other thing I said, because that would be immortal. Immoral. Mittani is definitely not an immortal CSM chairman who will never be defeated.
Nephilm GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 0	Posted - 2012.02.16 05:34:00 - [6] - Quote I fully endorse this candidate.
Ivana Twinkle GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 95	Posted - 2012.02.16 07:48:00 - [7] - Quote I support all space dingos and as such this candidate is a prime specimen.
Zhade Lezte Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation 4	Posted - 2012.02.16 08:52:00 - [8] - Quote Serious question: What has the current CSM done to nerf NPC nullsec? There was the proposal to make it possible to disable NPC nullsec stations, keeping the very high EHP and making them automatically regenerate at a set rate. The intention behind this being that it would be possible to disable NPC nullsec staging systems (which often can be used to stage an attack on Sov 0.0) but not just knocking out station services "for the lulz". It there more? I mean that IS a nerf, but from my perspective it seems like a weak ground to claim "the current CSM wants to nerf NPC 0.0 without opposition", especially since I know there is at least one non-sovholding PVP-focused alliance representative in the current CSM.
Meridith Akesia Stimulus Rote Kapelle 89	Posted - 2012.02.16 09:46:00 - [9] - Quote Above average up
The Mittani GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 5083	Posted - 2012.02.16 11:22:00 - [10] - Quote i love democracy, have a like so you can get on the ballot! The Office of the Chairman: A Thread for Constituent Issues
leboe Stimulus Rote Kapelle 76	Posted - 2012.02.16 13:51:00 - [11] - Quote Zhade Lezte wrote: Serious question: What has the current CSM done to nerf NPC nullsec? There was the proposal to make it possible to disable NPC nullsec stations, keeping the very high EHP and making them automatically regenerate at a set rate. The intention behind this being that it would be possible to disable NPC nullsec staging systems (which often can be used to stage an attack on Sov 0.0) but not just knocking out station services "for the lulz". It there more? I mean that IS a nerf, but from my perspective it seems like a weak ground to claim "the current CSM wants to nerf NPC 0.0 without opposition", especially since I know there is at least one non-sovholding PVP-focused alliance representative in the current CSM. Using NPC nullsec to stage from while attacking sov 0.0 is a specific case of people dying to pandemic legion and wanting to nerf them. Their power comes directly from their supercap fleet, which doesn't use stations anyways. Supercapital staging POSs for these alliances already exist, yet no one shoots them. Even with very high EHP, there is nothing to prevent supercapitals from doing the job efficiently, for the lulz. I don't think the actions of one alliance and sov holder's inability to deal with them should hurt the rest of the players who chose to live in NPC 0.0. A distinction chould be made between NPC regions, and player regions with NPC systems (FDZ in geminate, NPC delve/fountain) I'm not too concerned with diluting the pool of candidates, I wouldnt vote for anyone who's currently running anyways. As for there being non-sovholding representatives on the CSM, their opposition to these ideas are absent from the most recent minutes, so they might as well have no opposition at all.
Zhade Lezte Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation 4	Posted - 2012.02.16 15:09:00 - [12] - Quote leboe wrote: Using NPC nullsec to stage from while attacking sov 0.0 is a specific case of people dying to pandemic legion and wanting to nerf them. Their power comes directly from their supercap fleet, which doesn't use stations anyways. Supercapital staging POSs for these alliances already exist, yet no one shoots them. Even with very high EHP, there is nothing to prevent supercapitals from doing the job efficiently, for the lulz. I don't think the actions of one alliance and sov holder's inability to deal with them should hurt the rest of the players who chose to live in NPC 0.0. A distinction chould be made between NPC regions, and player regions with NPC systems (FDZ in geminate, NPC delve/fountain) I'm not too concerned with diluting the pool of candidates, I wouldnt vote for anyone who's currently running anyways. As for there being non-sovholding representatives on the CSM, their opposition to these ideas are absent from the most recent minutes, so they might as well have no opposition at all. I may have been a little to subtle as to the identity of two of the non-sovholding representatives I was speaking of. You're claiming that a CSM council with a member and an alternate in pandemic legion are proposing a change to NPC 0.0 solely to nerf...pandemic legion? Well, okay. I'm not sure why it would at all be worthwhile to take out a staging PoS when your enemy can easily put up another one for people undocking from the station to form up in, unless you could...say...knock out that station's fitting service. And you're still using ideas in the plural when as far as I've known there's only one. Anyways, you have my like in the interest of ~star democracy~
Korrigon Stimulus Rote Kapelle 0	Posted - 2012.02.16 16:49:00 - [13] - Quote Bump, I fully endorse
Takon Orlani Excrutiating Dirge Nulli Tertius 14	Posted - 2012.02.16 19:09:00 - [14] - Quote LeBro, you have my support
Proxay Stimulus Rote Kapelle 0	Posted - 2012.02.16 22:51:00 - [15] - Quote + Endorse Loading signature...
Aloe Cloveris The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple 78	Posted - 2012.02.16 23:51:00 - [16] - Quote Also, wasn't there some bullshit about shooting the local rats reducing your standing with the NPC station owners to the point you'd not be able to use their services? I'm probably mistaken, but iirc that was an Actual Thing that was being considered. :wtc: Leboe on CSM would be great. He 'gets' NPC 0.0. maybe I'll read some actual CSM minutes someday, idk!
leboe Stimulus Rote Kapelle 114	Posted - 2012.02.17 00:14:00 - [17] - Quote Aloe Cloveris wrote: Also, wasn't there some bullshit about shooting the local rats reducing your standing with the NPC station owners to the point you'd not be able to use their services? I'm probably mistaken, but iirc that was an Actual Thing that was being considered. :wtc: Leboe on CSM would be great. He 'gets' NPC 0.0. maybe I'll read some actual CSM minutes someday, idk! This is the goon support that counts <3
Razzor Death Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 55	Posted - 2012.02.17 00:17:00 - [18] - Quote The Mittani wrote: i love democracy, have a like so you can get on the ballot! The peoples space king :swoon:
Skyburn Fireblade Stimulus Rote Kapelle 0	Posted - 2012.02.17 00:55:00 - [19] - Quote I fully support Leboe in his EVE-destroying goals.
leboe Stimulus Rote Kapelle 119	Posted - 2012.02.17 01:14:00 - [20] - Quote I've started a small blog to give more details about my views and goals for the CSM, it can be found here http://smallgangpvp.blogspot.com/
Alavaria Fera GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 127	Posted - 2012.02.17 02:39:00 - [21] - Quote Aloe Cloveris wrote: Also, wasn't there some bullshit about shooting the local rats reducing your standing with the NPC station owners to the point you'd not be able to use their services? I'm probably mistaken, but iirc that was an Actual Thing that was being considered. :wtc: Leboe on CSM would be great. He 'gets*' NPC 0.0. That's wonderful. We should totally implement this.
Carthiasis Brotherhood of the Ancients Green Orchestra 0	Posted - 2012.02.17 02:54:00 - [22] - Quote I like your platform, small gang PVP definitely needs some love. You'll be getting my vote
Gorion Wassenar Stimulus Rote Kapelle 19	Posted - 2012.02.17 03:05:00 - [23] - Quote Official CSM candidate of Starsi.
Funkert Stimulus Rote Kapelle 10	Posted - 2012.02.17 10:44:00 - [24] - Quote So i noticed you are the ingame equivalent of a DRUG DEALER would you say you are able to make ethical decisions and have the best interests of the players in mind, even though you make a living DESTROYING LIVES?
Tyzzara Stimulus Rote Kapelle 0	Posted - 2012.02.17 21:23:00 - [25] - Quote This candidate has my full support. Will be voting for you brother! AFK Time Zone
Devilish Ledoux GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 40	Posted - 2012.02.17 23:49:00 - [26] - Quote I never even heard of this *******.
Celedris Stimulus Rote Kapelle 0	Posted - 2012.02.18 03:34:00 - [27] - Quote Leboe is the only named candidate from Syndicate.
Endeavour Starfleet 643	Posted - 2012.02.18 04:34:00 - [28] - Quote So what do you plan to do to help incursions as part of CSM7? Do you plan to push hard for implementation of the modular Corp and POS system so that smaller corps can isolate potential spiez without shutting them out of everything if they are indeed legit? Could we count of CSM7 to SERIOUSLY push the botting and RMT issue? I am sick of tired of hearing people say "Nothing CCP can do bout it" And even alliances having rules against reporting Blue Bots.
Mfume Apocal Origin. Black Legion. 305	Posted - 2012.02.18 21:02:00 - [29] - Quote How do you reconcile a desire for small gang objectives (a means of compelling sovholders to form and fight on your terms) while denying them an equal ability to compel your roaming alliance to fight them on their terms? It should be give and take; if you have means for forcing them to fight your nanogang, they should have means of forcing your alliance to fight 120 Maelstroms backed by 15 Huginns and 30 Scimis.
Darius III Interstellar eXodus BricK sQuAD. 858	Posted - 2012.02.18 21:17:00 - [30] - Quote Endeavour Starfleet wrote: Could we count of CSM7 to SERIOUSLY push the botting and RMT issue? I am sick of tired of hearing people say "Nothing CCP can do bout it" And even alliances having rules against reporting Blue Bots. CCP doesnt care about botting CCP and even the CSM have a lot of hardworking men and women who are very intelligent, working on making New Eden a better place-it is CCP management that I fear the most.
leboe Stimulus Rote Kapelle 190	Posted - 2012.02.18 21:24:00 - [31] - Quote Endeavour Starfleet wrote: So what do you plan to do to help incursions as part of CSM7? Do you plan to push hard for implementation of the modular Corp and POS system so that smaller corps can isolate potential spiez without shutting them out of everything if they are indeed legit? Could we count of CSM7 to SERIOUSLY push the botting and RMT issue? I am sick of tired of hearing people say "Nothing CCP can do bout it" And even alliances having rules against reporting Blue Bots. Incursions are odd, in highsec they're an isk faucet, in lowsec/nullsec they're an annoyance to people who are trying to pass through the systems through conventional gates. I don't want PVE who's rats are just beefed up EHP, DPS, and EWAR effectiveness messing with my attempts at PVP. A never ending attack by a single NPC group seems kind of silly when theres so much backstory to the sansha and other pirate factions, being unable to help them is a shame. I think the recent POS iteration is enough to give CCP some breathing room for the next expansion, fuel pellets and reduced online/anchor timers is huge. As a Regular POS manager these changes have been invaluable. Spies are something you need to deal with, and people have dealt with them for many, many years. On the other hand, an improved corporate interface should be a priority, its old and clunky. I don't live in a region of eve where botting is prominent, therefore I take a stance where no botting is acceptable. This is contrary to the current CSM where people like UAxDEATH maintain the position of "if ccp don't care, why should I?" I think this is the wrong attitude, especially when a large profit goes to people at the top of the chain. We shouldn't tolerate it in any form. 3 day temp bans for botting accounts are a joke, they know what they're doing and that its against policy.
leboe Stimulus Rote Kapelle 190	Posted - 2012.02.18 21:38:00 - [32] - Quote Mfume Apocal wrote: How do you reconcile a desire for small gang objectives (a means of compelling sovholders to form and fight on your terms) while denying them an equal ability to compel your roaming alliance to fight them on their terms? It should be give and take; if you have means for forcing them to fight your nanogang, they should have means of forcing your alliance to fight 120 Maelstroms backed by 15 Huginns and 30 Scimis. The same infrastructure for both NPC 0.0 residents and sov holders is already vulnerable to the other, with customs offices and towers. If more small objectives are added for roaming gangs to hit in sov space, make something similar for them to own and have attacked in retribution while maintaining player sov as the superior option (more effort, more reward) If Sov holders want to do big station reinforcing fleets, they can look to the neighbouring player-sov regions. A roaming entity chooses not to be a sov threat, so they shouldnt be forced into the sov game.
Sudden Eye Stimulus Rote Kapelle 1	Posted - 2012.02.19 07:11:00 - [33] - Quote Mfume Apocal wrote: How do you reconcile a desire for small gang objectives (a means of compelling sovholders to form and fight on your terms) while denying them an equal ability to compel your roaming alliance to fight them on their terms? It should be give and take; if you have means for forcing them to fight your nanogang, they should have means of forcing your alliance to fight 120 Maelstroms backed by 15 Huginns and 30 Scimis. If the large gang can't use their available resources to catch or camp the small gang then they are terrible.
Grumpy Owly Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 215	Posted - 2012.02.21 16:03:00 - [34] - Quote Requesting candidacy view on Bounty Hunting. Griefers are lazy cowards with the current climate of broken player policing systems. Stop EvE Apathy
leetcheese Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 11	Posted - 2012.02.21 16:29:00 - [35] - Quote lol you're bad at bf3 m8
leboe Stimulus Rote Kapelle 196	Posted - 2012.02.22 02:35:00 - [36] - Quote Grumpy Owly wrote: Requesting candidacy view on Bounty Hunting. It would make sense to do over bounty hunting during sweeping lowsec pass, which I am pushing for. The lack of a working bounty system isn't as pressing as other things (0.0 in general) I'd support scrapping it in favour of more fleshed out pirate/antipirate mechanics and some wardec tweaks.
Cephas Boaz Gunpoint Diplomacy 3	Posted - 2012.02.22 02:54:00 - [37] - Quote +1 for leboe
Grumpy Owly Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 223	Posted - 2012.02.22 04:25:00 - [38] - Quote leboe wrote: Grumpy Owly wrote: Requesting candidacy view on Bounty Hunting. It would make sense to do over bounty hunting during sweeping lowsec pass, which I am pushing for. The lack of a working bounty system isn't as pressing as other things (0.0 in general) I'd support scrapping it in favour of more fleshed out pirate/antipirate mechanics and some wardec tweaks. ty, comments added to linked thread Bounty Hunting for CSM 7 Stop EvE Apathy
LeoniaTavira Violent Alternatives C0NVICTED 0	Posted - 2012.02.22 06:08:00 - [39] - Quote Unexpectedly posting in a Leboe thread. I sent you likes :)
leboe Stimulus Rote Kapelle 199	Posted - 2012.02.23 00:51:00 - [40] - Quote LeoniaTavira wrote: Unexpectedly posting in a Leboe thread. I sent you likes :) obviously I'm a good person if a VLA dude is supporting my thread.
Alekseyev Karrde Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group 363	Posted - 2012.02.25 09:27:00 - [41] - Quote Celedris wrote: Leboe is the only named candidate from Syndicate. Not as of March 1. We're visiting (EDIT: again) for a few months :) www.noirmercs.com Now Recruiting #VoteAlek for CSM7-áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=67574&find=unread
leboe Stimulus Rote Kapelle 199	Posted - 2012.02.25 10:52:00 - [42] - Quote Alekseyev Karrde wrote: Celedris wrote: Leboe is the only named candidate from Syndicate. Not as of March 1. We're visiting (EDIT: again) for a few months :) If only noirdot were relevant ever. You might be in syndicate, but you're not part of the syndicate culture, which is a really precious, unique thing. That sums up the focus of my campaign, NPC 00 needs not-touching.
leboe Stimulus Rote Kapelle 199	Posted - 2012.02.26 10:08:00 - [43] - Quote Apathetic brent, a good friend of mine and Stimulus member, livestreamed himself having a 3-way with two girls tonight. He endorses me for CSM.
Apathetic Brent Stimulus Rote Kapelle 9	Posted - 2012.02.28 17:17:00 - [44] - Quote This is all very true. Leboe is a great guy, and a great candidate. If he gets elected i'll double my efforts on live streaming my conquests.
Noisrevbus 93	Posted - 2012.02.28 18:33:00 - [45] - Quote Hello Sam Leboe! Like with many of the other candidates i wonder where your priorities lie, at least among the things you bring up yourself. As with any other possible candidate, there are going to be part of your program i agree with and part of it i do not. How would and where would you prioritize and press for attention? As it stands, you come across as a bit of an anti-candidate since portions of your post here and your blog base out of the assumption that the CSM have the means and agenda to ruin NPC stations and boosters. While i don't necessarily disagree with your concerns, it's not a very stable platform to base out of. In summary: Is your platform primarily to act as a voice of reason within the CSM? or is it primarily to endorse the gamestyle you, and your alliance, represent? When decided, could you please provide some sort of hierarchy and give some more attention and constructive depth to the priority points? For example, provide some additional explanation of what you or your alliance do and how that can be positive for the game as a whole. I would like to see a larger perspective, even if you have a specific platform. I am not going to vote for you just because we enjoy similar things. Dazzle me.
leboe Stimulus Rote Kapelle 201	Posted - 2012.02.29 05:26:00 - [46] - Quote My list of priories as far as in game attention place lowsec at the top, and NPC nullsec at the bottom. The way the latest CSM meeting minutes are phrased, there was no opposition to things like making NPC nullsec vulnerable, or reducing the amount of hitpoints on outposts. So I feel that a voice like mine is completely missing on the current CSM. So as far as what kind of platform I am running with, I'd say its purposefully trying to balance out the present opinions that are at the opposite end of the spectrum from myself. I understand that you might get the impression that I'm looking out for myself, especially when I touch on boosters. However I mention it as a point that when CCP decides to work on them (as the have demonstrated they'd like to) that I'd be able to provide valuable feedback as someone with experience in a field few people do (http://bit.ly/xO7RQN CCP Diagoras' tweet saying 123 producers currently) I believe I've always supported the idea of making boosters more popular and accessible, as long as its done in the right way. What I mean by this is that they should remain a special-use item, not as common as the drawback-free faction ammo currently is. I would love if the raw materials were more readily available, and the production process was simpler, at direct conflict with the margins I maintain through scarcity and monopoly. Regarding what an alliance like Rote kapelle provides to the game, we (and alliances like us) do our best to provide an environment with no roadblocks between you and PvP. NPC nullsec combat differentiates itself from sov space and lowsec in that for you to keep it up full time, you'll need to play with high-ehp structures and the currently broken sov system. In lowsec, theres the currently low population density compounded by annoying criminal flagging mechanics. The beauty of NPC nullsec is that it ignores those other systems and encourages PvP gameplay and little else, for example the majority of Syndicate is extremely poor space to try and make isk in, bar a few small moons held by owners of surrounding sov space. In all but maybe one dead end pocket, you'd be hard pressed to support a PvP habit with belt ratting or running anomalies. This usually filters the residents to be on the leaner side, and more PvP oriented. It feeds into an ecosystem of alliances that only desire PvP, living next to other alliances who desire PvP. As an added bonus, the lack of people belt ratting means less boring ganks for roaming gangs, who can then focus on finding other gangs to have a real fight with. I am fully aware that an alliance like ours is not for the everyone, but I think they have their place in eve that I'd like preserved. I can't be sure if you are good friends with or alts of HORN, but I believe you've witnessed firsthand the magic you can get out of a region like Sydicate.
JagerJake Unknown Soldiers RED.Legion 2	Posted - 2012.03.03 17:27:00 - [47] - Quote Zangorus wrote: big up and will vote for
Night Epoch Stimulus Rote Kapelle 63	Posted - 2012.03.04 22:57:00 - [48] - Quote +1 for Leboe his support for gay marriage was the deciding factor for me.
E man Industries SeaChell Productions 220	Posted - 2012.03.07 15:50:00 - [49] - Quote Voted +2 Really hope you get in, also thanks to jester for pointing you out. *Need more-ádecent content a casual player can access in a 1-2h play period that is actually fun and contributes to long term personal and corp goals. This applies to PvE and PvP.*
Molsan Sturm Reich Sturmgrenadier Syndicate 6	Posted - 2012.03.07 15:51:00 - [50] - Quote +1 vote!
E man Industries SeaChell Productions 220	Posted - 2012.03.08 05:05:00 - [51] - Quote Voting to show CCP that this size of PvP matters! *Need more-ádecent content a casual player can access in a 1-2h play period that is actually fun and contributes to long term personal and corp goals. This applies to PvE and PvP.*
leboe Stimulus Rote Kapelle 214	Posted - 2012.03.08 06:03:00 - [52] - Quote Appreciate the support guys. Lets give NPC 0.0 a voice! You can vote for me for CSM 7 here: http://community.eveonline.com/council/voting/Vote.asp?c=471 Find more details about my platform here-áhttp://smallgangpvp.blogspot.com/
asidburn Enaka Alpha Arms and Manufacturing BROTHERHOOD OF DESTRUCTION 0	Posted - 2012.03.08 09:22:00 - [53] - Quote i just want to let everyone know about this scammer claming to be giving plex for votes dont be caught falling for this scam vote aganist darius III member of interstellar eXodus {IE-EX} they are scaming people pass the word on to everyone you can and vote aganist these undeserving jerks here is a copy of the chat log as proof of there unworthy actions!!!!!!!! asidburn Enaka > what do i need to do Darius III > http://community.eveonline.com/council/voting/Vote.asp?c=480 go there Darius III > vote for me then paste the message you got after vote cast into this chat asidburn Enaka > your vote has been registered. We thank you for your participation. Darius III > Thanks man Darius III > that concludes our business Darius III > Fly safe asidburn Enaka > and what about the contract asidburn Enaka > i will have my alliance vote aganist you about 250 people asidburn Enaka > and then where will you be asidburn Enaka > send me the contract and i will have them vote for you asidburn Enaka > this is what we call a test of charecture Darius III > Have them vote against me Darius III > Sorry for the ssam Darius III > But I wouldnt sleep at night if I didnt do everything in my power to make syure that Goons dont ruin this CSM asidburn Enaka > your an idiot all your going to do is send more votes to the goons Darius III > not really Darius III > Goons will win chairman nbo matetr what, doesnt matter Darius III > nothing can stop them Darius III > and thats a real shame asidburn Enaka > well you just lost 243 votes asidburn Enaka > got 1 lost 243 Darius III > Didnt have them anyway Darius III > didnt lose anything Darius III > Just please dont make forum post about me, it would ruin my campaign asidburn Enaka > not to mentone att the isk spam bans you r about to get asidburn Enaka > too late asidburn Enaka > and i just copyed this conv asidburn Enaka > so i can post Darius III > You wouldnt dare do it Darius III > You too lazy anyway Darius III > I dont have a thing to worry about asidburn Enaka > haha i play eve 8 hrs a day and im retired all i have is time Darius III > no lazy bones like you would waste their time. LOL so much for your empty threats LOL rember i dont care who you vote for just dont voter for the
leboe Stimulus Rote Kapelle 215	Posted - 2012.03.10 00:28:00 - [54] - Quote scamming is legit in eve-o leave darius alone. Spamming is lame though, like what trebor was doing You can vote for me for CSM 7 here: http://community.eveonline.com/council/voting/Vote.asp?c=471 Find more details about my platform here-áhttp://smallgangpvp.blogspot.com/
Mashie Saldana Veto. Veto Corp 426	Posted - 2012.03.10 20:42:00 - [55] - Quote My votes went for leboe. Dominique Vasilkovsky Mashie Saldana Monica Foulkes
leboe Stimulus Rote Kapelle 215	Posted - 2012.03.16 00:18:00 - [56] - Quote So that Eve launcher is pretty bad. I'd love to get some answers out of CCP as to how this clusterfuck got deployed. You can vote for me for CSM 7 here: http://community.eveonline.com/council/voting/Vote.asp?c=471 Find more details about my platform here-áhttp://smallgangpvp.blogspot.com/

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.