EVE Search - [Issue] The whole CSM thing should be quietly dropped

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[Issue] The whole CSM thing should be quietly dropped

» 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)
Berious Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.05.22 19:21:00 - [1] It wasn't necessarily a terrible idea but we're only one day after the elections and already the chair and another council member are bickering over the minutiae of rules and generally throwing their weight around in a very unconstructive manner. It's CAOD mk2 - and we all know how much intellegent debate comes out of that forum. I don't think individuals are going to be able to put their differences aside and represent concerns of the player base in such a bitter atmosphere. Entertaining to watch perhaps, but if CCP are planning to take the CSM seriously then that could mean trouble. In it's place I suggest an ideas box of sorts, we could even use this forum. Then just put the most popular ideas/concerns to subscribers en mass with the voting system we just used for the elections. Either that or just collect feedback as CCP always has which seems to have worked out more or less OK so far.
Jack Gilligan Dragon's Rage Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2008.05.22 19:22:00 - [2] I vote no, for now, because I want to give it a chance at least. The outcome of all these petitions and votes is, well, obvious. If CCP makes good, then the CSM will be a good thing. If they don't, then it's a joke. My opinions are my own and do not reflect those of my corporation or alliance.
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.05.22 19:32:00 - [3] Who is Jade bickering with now? Link? Also, you're way too quick to declare defeat. I'm going to at least wait to see what they bring forward to CCP - we've needed some way of streamlining the forum whine system for ages, and this seems like the best going. ------------------ Fix the forums!
Tolis Irithel Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.22 19:35:00 - [4] No support for this one. CSM should definitely not be ruled out so early; I'm fairly sure that a degree of the fractiousness comes from uncertainty. The first CSM should give a good guide as to whether the system can function, and in order for it to benefit the community, it should have our support.
Ishina Fel Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2008.05.22 19:37:00 - [5] Only identified mains should be able to make proposal threads. Works relatively well on CAOD, at least... unidintified alts post, but get moderated out. Oh, and: No. Go away.
Haakelen United Forces	Posted - 2008.05.22 19:41:00 - [6] Edited by: Haakelen on 22/05/2008 19:42:07 Originally by: Ishina Fel Oh, and: No. Go away. We don't need people trying to sink it from the beginning, without anything being done yet.
Berious Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.05.22 19:42:00 - [7] I'm not an alt ok just barely post so forgot to turn my "Real opinion inc" buttons on. Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto Who is Jade bickering with now? Link? Last few pages of his campaign thread and in a couple of other places.
Bad Harlequin Chiroptera Factor	Posted - 2008.05.22 20:23:00 - [8] Originally by: Berious already the chair and another council member are bickering over the minutiae of rules AKA politics, AKA 'hashing out ideas...' I have to ask you first: did you vote? Don't care whom for, but did you at all? Zleip > very, and this is more or less a post of humor that seriousness =)
Berious Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.05.22 20:41:00 - [9] Edited by: Berious on 22/05/2008 20:41:54 Originally by: Bad Harlequin Originally by: Berious already the chair and another council member are bickering over the minutiae of rules AKA politics, AKA 'hashing out ideas...' I have to ask you first: did you vote? Don't care whom for, but did you at all? I did as it happens. Didn't expect it to turn into a facsimile of Prime Minsters Question's before they even started discussing any substantive issues however. If the CSMs can't even play nice with nothing at stake then Huston we have a problem! Either CCP will pay a bit of lip service to the whole project and we're wasting our time here, or, more worryingly, they'll really see it as some sort of filter for interaction with the subscribers and we're up the proverbial creek as our representatives argue bitterly over what biscuits to serve at council meetings.
Bad Harlequin Chiroptera Factor	Posted - 2008.05.22 20:46:00 - [10] Ok, then: i don't mean to be harsh but stay with me - you think it should be dropped because you don't think the ideas currently being discussed are important? If you think about it a sec, that's a dangerous precedent: what happens when something you care about, or think is important to clear the air on, is discussed, and a hundred players post saying "screw this, it's pointless, drop the whole thing?" Zleip > very, and this is more or less a post of humor that seriousness =)
Berious Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.05.22 21:08:00 - [11] Originally by: Bad Harlequin Ok, then: i don't mean to be harsh but stay with me - you think it should be dropped because you don't think the ideas currently being discussed are important? If you think about it a sec, that's a dangerous precedent: what happens when something you care about, or think is important to clear the air on, is discussed, and a hundred players post saying "screw this, it's pointless, drop the whole thing?" I get where you're coming from, but my point was there isn't any substantive stuff on the table yet and it's already coming to blows. If they can't amicably arrange who gets the comfy leather chair and what are we getting for take-out then what chance do issues that could conceivably effect us in-game have? If the kids can't play nice, get 'em out of the sandbox!
Darius JOHNSON GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.05.22 21:11:00 - [12] Originally by: Berious Originally by: Bad Harlequin Ok, then: i don't mean to be harsh but stay with me - you think it should be dropped because you don't think the ideas currently being discussed are important? If you think about it a sec, that's a dangerous precedent: what happens when something you care about, or think is important to clear the air on, is discussed, and a hundred players post saying "screw this, it's pointless, drop the whole thing?" I get where you're coming from, but my point was there isn't any substantive stuff on the table yet and it's already coming to blows. If they can't amicably arrange who gets the comfy leather chair and what are we getting for take-out then what chance do issues that could conceivably effect us in-game have? If the kids can't play nice, get 'em out of the sandbox! There are issues and up/down votes. You don't have to like someone to do that. The rules are established and aren't open for negotiation, so that's not really an issue. We're going to have differing opinions on things. That's the point of having a diverse council.
Professor Leech Southern Light Entertainment Black Scope Project	Posted - 2008.05.23 01:43:00 - [13] CSM is not CAOD mark 2. If you look at the topics in this section of the forum they are real issues being address and everyone gets a vote. I do not support this as I think CSM should be given a chance to see if it helps the game. Originally by: Crawe DeRaven this thread is obviously going places
Athre The HIgher Standard	Posted - 2008.05.23 03:49:00 - [14] I do not support this. I would like to see the CSM be given a chance to iron things out. If need be the vice chair can tell anyone (chair or not) to knock it off.
Why'dyou HitMe Privateers Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.23 06:15:00 - [15] I do not support this.
Lord XSiV Digital Research - Omega Protocol	Posted - 2008.05.23 08:48:00 - [16] Scrap it. Waste of money that can be better used elsewhere.
Sariyah HUN Corp. HUN Reloaded	Posted - 2008.05.23 08:55:00 - [17] Crap thread. We'll see what CSM will bring, I think it's quite a unique idea and credit goes to CCP for it. If only for its marketing value, it's already a good thing. Still waiting to see this on news
Inanna Zuni The Causality Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.05.24 14:22:00 - [18] Originally by: Berious Didn't expect it to turn into a facsimile of Prime Minsters Question's before they even started discussing any substantive issues however. If the CSMs can't even play nice with nothing at stake then Huston we have a problem! Well speaking personally I <3 PMQs, but I don't agree with you here. The way CCP has set up and defined the CSM is not all that details. There are a few specifics (how the Chair gets chosen, for example) but not a lot else. This incarnation of the CSM will, therefore, take upon itself to find a mechanism to MAKE THE CSM WORK and that requires discussion! If everyone agreed 100% on something then, sfaiac, that is likely to lead to a bad decision as, clearly, something wouldn't have been considered properly. There will be to-ing and fro-ing while we discuss how we believe the best way to go about things should be. And we'll ask others for their opinions in reaching those decisions too. You can't fly a half-built ship, so don't complain about a CSM still finding its way in the universe yet either. IZ My principles
Great Emrys Pator Tech School	Posted - 2008.05.24 14:32:00 - [19] No support for this one, as I think they deserve a chance to get it right, even if they screw it up one or even two times...
Krypt Angel Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.05.24 17:35:00 - [20] While I will admit I'm still a little skeptical as to how well the whole CSM idea will play out it is FAR too early to be declared an all out failure. Bickering is to be expected I mean the members are after all...only human. Every elected group is gonna have its growing pains in the beginning. That said I see no reason to euthanize the beast before it has been given a chance to prove it can serve its purpose.....2-3 days is not nearly enough time for such a judgment call
Shanur Republic Military School	Posted - 2008.05.26 14:17:00 - [21] At least give it 18 months. Right now not even the elected CSM members have a full grasp yet of what the CSM is supposed to do. If after 3 visits to Iceland it still doesn't benefit all of us, you'll have my vote .
Midas Man Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.05.26 14:46:00 - [22] No support for this. Its healthy for a council to bicker and argue, its difficult to see both sides of an arguement and make constructive movements forward if everyone is nodding in agreement. If there is no argueing in a council then it is either the council of a perfect world or the council of a dictator and the perfect world scenario doesn't exist.
Kingwood Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations Star Buccaneers	Posted - 2008.05.27 18:28:00 - [23] /signed
Abriana Overlord Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.05.27 19:11:00 - [24] It is early days and will take a litle while to work things out, give it a bit of time to see how things work out, they are bound to be a little bit rocky in the beginning
Dionisius The Circle STYX.	Posted - 2008.05.27 20:59:00 - [25] Edited by: Dionisius on 27/05/2008 20:59:55 Lets see, most people are saying " Well lets give it a chance", now really what will change with CSP ? Nothing. Why nothing? Simple, most of the votes were based on, " I like this guy because he is cool" , or " I like this guy because i know him from a spaceships game ". These are not reasons to vote on anyone and lets face it, most of the people voting don't even have a clue on whats involved. The suposed council has the objective to make EvE better, or better, kinda filter the requests from the comunity and take them towards the Devs of EVE and CCP. Now, what will these people represent? The players? The will to solve problems? Surely not, if CCP is already implementing new stuff and is currently in testing stage , aka. Empyrean Age, what will these persons do? What power do they have to actually bring some changes for the better? The answer is No, No, Nothing and No. No they won't ask anything that wasn't already reasonable and asked before. No the power of actually doing stuff does not reside in 9 people that are part of the gaming comunity but in the Devs and other managers of the CCP team. The best example for that for instance was, the NOS nerf, were CCP observed the threads and chose the most balance solution for all, it came naturally and from the requests of the players. Other example, the speed nerf, the dampener balancing. Or we can observe the Carrier case were the comunity voice was heard loud and clear, and even between the " this suckzors" , "CCP suckzorz" posts, there were actuall people replying with good options. There is even a new features forum part and ideias discussion, all that CCP has to keep doing is looking at those forum sections and take notes. There is no need for 9 muppets to travel to Iceland and come back to the land of the living to tell us mortals that " HAI gaizzz, i was in CCPLAND and it was all peachy, they work wonders and are the best, we discussed blablabla with tea and cookies, and they promised they will do yadda-yadda-yadda." Kinda like, wakey wakey people, CCP isn't perfect, but then again, there is no such thing as perfection, only room for improvement. In my opinion this council isn't an improvement, its giving way to unfairness and lack of equallity between players. And just reinforcing that is the coment that Jade left in another thread and i quote, Originally by: Jade Constantine the last thread on this subject got -1 support. Perhaps you should go and register your support there rather than messing up the forum with duplicate posts? (reporting this as spam) Have a nice day." Who are you Jade to classify someone else's opinion has spam and posting that kind of giberish? Isn't the council supposed to be here to HELP players? Yeh council of stellar management... _____________________________________ I am the destroyer of worlds and the also the cokie thief.
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.05.27 22:29:00 - [26] Originally by: Dionisius Simple, most of the votes were based on, " I like this guy because he is cool" , or " I like this guy because i know him from a spaceships game ". These are not reasons to vote on anyone and lets face it, most of the people voting don't even have a clue on whats involved. So is that supposed to be better or worse than voting for Obama because you like his voice, Clinton because you like her ovaries, or McCain because you like his ability to take a bayonet to the groin? None of those are relevant in any way, and yet millions of people will vote based on them this year. Originally by: Dionisius The suposed council has the objective to make EvE better, or better, kinda filter the requests from the comunity and take them towards the Devs of EVE and CCP. Now, what will these people represent? The players? The will to solve problems? Surely not, if CCP is already implementing new stuff and is currently in testing stage , aka. Empyrean Age, what will these persons do? What power do they have to actually bring some changes for the better? The answer is No, No, Nothing and No. No they won't ask anything that wasn't already reasonable and asked before. No the power of actually doing stuff does not reside in 9 people that are part of the gaming comunity but in the Devs and other managers of the CCP team. The best example for that for instance was, the NOS nerf, were CCP observed the threads and chose the most balance solution for all, it came naturally and from the requests of the players. Other example, the speed nerf, the dampener balancing. Or we can observe the Carrier case were the comunity voice was heard loud and clear, and even between the " this suckzors" , "CCP suckzorz" posts, there were actuall people replying with good options. There is even a new features forum part and ideias discussion, all that CCP has to keep doing is looking at those forum sections and take notes. You know the funny thing about whine threads? They're made by the whiny. CCP wanted a better way of gaging the actual positions of the players, instead of just the positions of the vocal 1%. It may not get new people into the forums, but the people who voted will presumably have voted for people whose platforms they liked, and as such can be trusted to speak, however roughly, for those non-forum-using voters. Originally by: Dionisius There is no need for 9 muppets to travel to Iceland and come back to the land of the living to tell us mortals that " HAI gaizzz, i was in CCPLAND and it was all peachy, they work wonders and are the best, we discussed blablabla with tea and cookies, and they promised they will do yadda-yadda-yadda." Kinda like, wakey wakey people, CCP isn't perfect, but then again, there is no such thing as perfection, only room for improvement. In my opinion this council isn't an improvement, its giving way to unfairness and lack of equallity between players. Looking at the 9 of them, I doubt they'll be impressed by a plane ticket and some geothermal power. If they come back sounding like brainwashed automatons(or, worse yet, with Jade and Darius agreeing), I'll take your point, but until then I think you're overblowing this dramatically. ------------------ Fix the forums!
Esmenet	Posted - 2008.05.28 00:17:00 - [27] Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto They're made by the whiny. CCP wanted a better way of gaging the actual positions of the players, instead of just the positions of the vocal 1%. It may not get new people into the forums, but the people who voted will presumably have voted for people whose platforms they liked, and as such can be trusted to speak, however roughly, for those non-forum-using voters. A group of people voted in by about 10%(?) of the userbase can hardly be said to speak for "the silent majority".
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.05.28 00:36:00 - [28] Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto They're made by the whiny. CCP wanted a better way of gaging the actual positions of the players, instead of just the positions of the vocal 1%. It may not get new people into the forums, but the people who voted will presumably have voted for people whose platforms they liked, and as such can be trusted to speak, however roughly, for those non-forum-using voters. A group of people voted in by about 10%(?) of the userbase can hardly be said to speak for "the silent majority". About 11% of the user base, which is probably more like 15% of eligible voters. It's still far better than the >1% that talk about this stuff on the forums. And frankly, I'm a bit of a believer that if you don't vote in a democratic process, you clearly don't much care about the results, and can thus be safely ignored. The ones who wanted a say have had it, and by a means far less opaque than forum whining. ------------------ Fix the forums!
Dionisius The Circle STYX.	Posted - 2008.05.28 09:30:00 - [29] Edited by: Dionisius on 28/05/2008 09:33:56 Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto Originally by: Dionisius (...) So is that supposed to be better or worse than voting for Obama because you like his voice, Clinton because you like her ovaries, or McCain because you like his ability to take a bayonet to the groin? None of those are relevant in any way, and yet millions of people will vote based on them this year. It is relevant in the way people need to know what they are voting for and what powers they are granting to 9 people. In most cases people are voting just because its " a cool guy " or "their alliance leader ". Now in a council that is supposed to help develop and introduce new ideias and features to a game that sound a tad counter productive as people can , and will be, easely manipulated. Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto Originally by: Dionisius You know the funny thing about whine threads? They're made by the whiny. CCP wanted a better way of gaging the actual positions of the players, instead of just the positions of the vocal 1%. It may not get new people into the forums, but the people who voted will presumably have voted for people whose platforms they liked, and as such can be trusted to speak, however roughly, for those non-forum-using voters. The vocal 1%, dude are you serious? The vocal 1% turned into more than half the carrier pilots of the game getting "vocal" when CCP sugested the dismemberment of that ship. There was no need for someone to speak for the players either when the NOS and Dampener balance was introduced also and yet sensible reasoning came out of that said 1% as the ideia for it came from the players. That is reason enough not to empower people that have biased views on what issues they will pick up, how they will handle them, or not, and to resume to those sections of these forum that have actuall content by people that are giving new ideias everyday. CCP staff doesn't seem ileterate or dumb to follow the whines because so far they have been able to filter trough peoples ideias with relative success. CCP always brags that they are taking notes so this is more of a " ditch the notepad and shut those guys up " action above all things. Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto Originally by: Dionisius (...) Looking at the 9 of them, I doubt they'll be impressed by a plane ticket and some geothermal power. If they come back sounding like brainwashed automatons(or, worse yet, with Jade and Darius agreeing), I'll take your point, but until then I think you're overblowing this dramatically. Lol you really believe that these 9 people are in it to help and voice the concerns of the players? Have you not looked around in the game? lol. The only way for CCP to improve in these matters is to employ and train better GMs and dissociate partly them and the Dev team from the playerbase. I don't even need to dig that much up to go back and bring some screweups that this way of conducting the game brought out. _____________________________________ I am the destroyer of worlds and the also the cokie thief.
Inertial The Python Cartel	Posted - 2008.05.28 10:11:00 - [30] I agree! Drop the CSM. I think CCP is capable of running EVE to the ground all on their own. we are recruiting!
Gyro DuAquin1 Tri Optimum Ev0ke	Posted - 2008.05.28 11:59:00 - [31] I also agree ive been reading this forum for a while now. And most Threads are already in the Ideas Section. There is no new topic. Also when you check what ppl suggest its mostly that something is in the way how hey wanna play the game without paying attention about the bigger picture. In a nuthshell its the same BS over and over again, "nerf this" "buff that" bla. Most topics have been discussed aboout a million times. Also I must say that so few ppl actually voted and I guess quiet a few are alts of the ppl that actually voted that this council is nowhere near the mark of being elected by the mayoreti of the players. Also iam a bit suprised that ppl values CSM higher then the actual Player. Just because 2k ppl voted for someone doenst make what he is saying right nor correct. Most of the votes are based on some wrong Hype of ppl and/or that ppl wanted their CEO/Leader/member in that council.
Christy Walton Bloodveil	Posted - 2008.05.28 12:50:00 - [32] Originally by: Gyro DuAquin1 I also agree ive been reading this forum for a while now. And most Threads are already in the Ideas Section. There is no new topic. Also when you check what ppl suggest its mostly that something is in the way how hey wanna play the game without paying attention about the bigger picture. In a nuthshell its the same BS over and over again, "nerf this" "buff that" bla. Most topics have been discussed aboout a million times. Also I must say that so few ppl actually voted and I guess quiet a few are alts of the ppl that actually voted that this council is nowhere near the mark of being elected by the mayoreti of the players. Also iam a bit suprised that ppl values CSM higher then the actual Player. Just because 2k ppl voted for someone doenst make what he is saying right nor correct. Most of the votes are based on some wrong Hype of ppl and/or that ppl wanted their CEO/Leader/member in that council. this.
Jokus Balim Rising Sun Inc.	Posted - 2008.05.28 17:09:00 - [33] Give the CSM a chance. If it's crap, it's gone in six months. If it works, there is no reason for bickering. But I just have to vote yes, cause I find it funny to have "Self Destruction" as an agenda item for the CSM sessions.
Dionisius The Circle STYX.	Posted - 2008.05.28 18:31:00 - [34] Edited by: Dionisius on 28/05/2008 18:33:53 Taken from DEV BLOG Originally by: CCP Eligibility for voting is simple, if your account is 30 days or older, you can vote. There is one vote per account û meaning that those with multiple accounts have multiple votes. Unfair and completely wrong, this is the kind of action that leads to rigging elections. Originally by: CCP All players can propose a topic to be handled by the Council. A topic can consist of anything, and deal with any EVE related matter. Fair enough but.. we can do that already in the Ideas and Features Forums, Ships and Modules, General... kinda repeating don't you think? Originally by: CCP Players have to convince one, or more, of the Council members to bring the topic up at a Council meeting. A 'support' system is in place to allow players to declare support for a topic in a CSM forum channel which will be opened after the election. This 'support' system will make it easy for the Council members to get an overview of which topics players are concerned about. If 5% of the voters support a topic, the Council is required to bring it up. This is done to accommodate the voters, not the Council. So in other words, if i want to use random alts in order to exploit this system i can do it and suit my own whims, again this falls under the same unbalance that the voting system has. Originally by: CCP All Council meeting minutes will be documented by the Council members and published for all players. And? Originally by: CCP Topics, reaching the Council, have to receive a majority vote from the Council members before the Council can escalate the topic to the CCP council. The minimum time a topic has to stay open on the public forum is 7 days before it can be brought up by the Council û this applies to topics put forth by the Council members, or the voters. A topic is brought up in the Council if a Council member decides to bring it up there, yet never before the 7 day discussion period is up. Errrm excuse me but... what about the 5% support rule? Isn't this kinda oposite to what was stated in that rule? You get 5% support then what the thread is forgotten and its ditched? Originally by: CCP Each Council is elected for a mandate period of 6 months; no representative can be elected more than two mandate periods. In other words... if you exploit the system properly you can run this council with your eve friends and play tag. Originally by: CCP The Council will meet with the CCP Council in Iceland once per mandate period. They will also be able to send in topics, via mail, twice during that time. The topics sent in will be replied to by CCP and the answers will be made public. CCP could just give awards for people to visit the instalations, or you could actually use your comunity manager to answer the "comon" players posts. Originally by: CCP CCP commits to give honest and transparent answers to as many of the topics brought up by the Council of Stellar Management as possible. lol what?! Originally by: CCP While the Council does not have any formal powers within CCP, it is a very important communication conduit between CCP and the players which is why we encourage you to see what the candidates have to say. Our players are why we make this game after all. If they don't have any formal powers why are they speaking for 1% of the EvE playerbase? Why can't CCP just make pools and regular threads in the proper places and actually see and reply to ALL the players and not just 9 members of the comunity? The most important means of comunication is the goodwill of the Dev team and comunity manager and players, plus the hability to discern between good sensible ideias and otherwise. I dare the CSM members and CCP to try and convince US ALL that this councill is honest and usefull.
Ulstan	Posted - 2008.05.28 19:13:00 - [35] Not supported. I am interested to see how the CSM will play out. Dropping it before it has started is rather premature.
Dionisius The Circle STYX.	Posted - 2008.05.28 20:11:00 - [36] Originally by: Ulstan Not supported. I am interested to see how the CSM will play out. Dropping it before it has started is rather premature. Well fair enough but the most important question here is, what about your main? What seems to be the bother for some people to be posting with their main characters? _____________________________________ I am the destroyer of worlds and the also the cokie thief.
Squirrrel Squirrrel Industries	Posted - 2008.05.28 21:29:00 - [37] Not supported. Give it a chance. If it turns out to be a rotten egg, throw it out then and only then.
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.28 23:29:00 - [38] Originally by: Dionisius Originally by: Ulstan Not supported. I am interested to see how the CSM will play out. Dropping it before it has started is rather premature. Well fair enough but the most important question here is, what about your main? What seems to be the bother for some people to be posting with their main characters? Ulstan is a old and respected character who was associated with one of eve's first and greatest pirate corps the space invaders. Its a bit silly to accuse him of being an alt. Best learn a bit of eve history old chap. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Kingwood Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations Star Buccaneers	Posted - 2008.05.29 11:15:00 - [39] Originally by: Jade Constantine Ulstan is a old and respected character who was associated with one of eve's first and greatest pirate corps the space invaders. Its a bit silly to accuse him of being an alt. Best learn a bit of eve history old chap. Your post is totally irrelevant to this thread. Reported as spam. Have a nice day.
Dionisius The Circle STYX.	Posted - 2008.05.29 12:09:00 - [40] Edited by: Dionisius on 29/05/2008 12:13:29 Originally by: Jade Constantine Originally by: Dionisius Originally by: Ulstan Not supported. I am interested to see how the CSM will play out. Dropping it before it has started is rather premature. Well fair enough but the most important question here is, what about your main? What seems to be the bother for some people to be posting with their main characters? Ulstan is a old and respected character who was associated with one of eve's first and greatest pirate corps the space invaders. Its a bit silly to accuse him of being an alt. Best learn a bit of eve history old chap. I don't know every player in EvE and i certainly don't have any method of distinguishing old and "real" players from alts other than most alts don't show corp tickers or mainly are associated with starter corps/strange named ones. So anyways, you being the chairman of CSM, what can you tell me and the other readers that are sceptic to this new concept that can makes us look and hope this is not what we have been discussing here? Edit: Off course this invitation is also extended to Wrangler and any other dev / mod / csm member that wishes to give its ideia on the matter.
Gyro DuAquin1 Tri Optimum Ev0ke	Posted - 2008.05.30 11:48:00 - [41] Ok after checking first page, its still the same ideas. When ccp is going to fix it cause some ppl that have been elected by their posse or jerk crew iam as a normal cuistomer that tried to bring things forward and brought some ideas ask myself am i less worth then anyone with a forum hype, is going to be pretty disapointed about ccp handles things. In general this forum is Ideas MK2, same ppl, same ideas same discussions. There is tons of good ideas in the ideas section why not simply hire someone in iceland who gets 10Ç per hour to read forums. I guess tons of ppl would apply to such a job.
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.30 12:36:00 - [42] Edited by: Jade Constantine on 30/05/2008 12:43:07 Edited by: Jade Constantine on 30/05/2008 12:40:39 Originally by: Dionisius So anyways, you being the chairman of CSM, what can you tell me and the other readers that are sceptic to this new concept that can makes us look and hope this is not what we have been discussing here? Happy to. At the moment we have a council with some very enthusiastic and committed eve players who really want to make the CSM everything it can be. From a pretty much do-it-yourself start in a little over a week we've now got an internal email list, templates for issues in production, an updated independent CSM site, scheduling and formal in game comms. We've opted for transparency in the meetings, and a clear process in pre-publishing agendas and highlighting which issues are up for discussion and voting. We've been criticized for a slightly chaotic first meeting sure, but really, that was a matter of days after the election and we managed to do everything we were expected to do, we selected the council officers and agreed certain administrative policies that will set us in good stead for the time ahead. Yes some of the CSM officers were very new to the business of committee procedure - hopefully they will learn quickly from those reps that are experienced in these areas. But lets face it - this weekend is going to see us discuss the first player submitted items for the Iceland agenda and anyone can see the agenda for this on the Jita Park forum, I'd say this is pretty speedy process. Remember please that what we're essentially doing here is making sure that issues important to the player base get debated, voted on a formal agenda for direct discussion with CCP so we get clear answers to give you guys back. This is a clear mission goal and our success or failure will be judged on whether we're effective in getting the right proposals/issues/problems in front of the right people for substantive comment/replay and potential commitment. In six months time I'll personally consider the job well done if we have a CSM that has gotten substantive feedback and debate on a range of important issues. I want to see us refine and confirm the process of the CSM itself, I want us to tweak the constitution and procedures in a positive direction that strengthens the ability of the CSM to deliver results, I want us to involve the player base correctly, and I want to see us encouraging more people to vote in the next session as they see genuine positive outcomes stemming from the whole idea. Threads like this one strike me as being negative and pointless nay-saying on minimal evidence and sour grapes. There are players out there who would like the CSM to fail because they've simply down on CCP, down on a candidate, down on the fact they didn't get elected. Whatever the reason the reality is that we've only been in office for 9 days at the moment and we've achieved a heck of a lot really. We've got council officers appointed, process agreed, and first significant issue votes happening tomorrow. So please forgive me if I'm a bit scathing on the subject of the "lets quit the csm immediately - blah" lobby. I think perceptive readers of the Eve forums can see that in the main the people arguing for this have an agenda of their own, and its not an agenda that has anything to do with the interest and future enrichment of the eve experience for their fellow players. Give us a chance. Judge us on results. Nothing asked that I wouldn't be happy to pledge to anyone else. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.30 12:49:00 - [43] ---Continued. 1. Removal of 30/90 day time cards. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=777866&page=1 2. Jump Bridges and Cyno-jammers fix. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=777554 3. Log Server exploitation/BACON. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=777980 4. Skill Queue Functionality? http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=779102 5. 5% rule is too strict. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=777807 6. Kill Rights should be transferable. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=778012 7. Alliances in Faction Warfare. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=778272 8. Funky POS alterations. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=778222 9. Improve Black Ops. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=777663 10.Make suicide ganking more difficult http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=777704 These are the issues up for voting on Saturday. If you are interested in these issues then contact your CSM reps. Let them know which way you want the vote to go. You asked what you get from the process - well the short answer is you are going to get answers to the questions and proposals and issues that we vote onto the formal Iceland agenda. Don't see an issue thats important to you on this list? (or anywhere else on the Assembly hall forum? Get posting. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Le Skunk Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2008.05.30 18:14:00 - [44] Edited by: Le Skunk on 30/05/2008 18:17:12 Agreed. Youve already got the Vice chairman, an Eve Uni member who was voted in through Eve University block voting - trying to bugger around with the war dec system WHICH COINCIDENTALY is currenlty causing his own university a lot of grief. <--- my thumb here The early warning system went off some time ago, and now the bombers of player corruption are spotted on the horizon. Flee for the bunker if you will, but I shall be manning the guns! ALONE IF NEED BE!! SKUNK
Dionisius The Circle STYX.	Posted - 2008.05.31 03:45:00 - [45] Read and understood. Now first things first, thank you very much Jade for taking the time and writting a very good post to clarify things. ( i meen it thank you ) Secondly i do not have hidden motives or agendas, i like to play EvE and despite what sometimes may look like i do want this comunity and game to prosper. The reason i used this thread was simly well, not to spam the forus with another thread stating more or less the same, i think i wouldn't have gone with the "CSM should go down quietly" but instead with more in the line of "Clarify us , prove us, discuss CSM results ... " or something of the kind. So my thoughts on the matter, yes i agree we should give an oportunity to this new concept, if it was created to help and improve the comunity well fine by me lets give it a try and work on the parts that need to be improved in order to make the Council better for all. Again Jade my thanks for your time. _____________________________________ I am the destroyer of worlds and the also the cokie thief.
NoNameNewbie Raynor Heavy Industries	Posted - 2008.05.31 09:11:00 - [46] Originally by: Gyro DuAquin1 Ok after checking first page, its still the same ideas. When ccp is going to fix it cause some ppl that have been elected by their posse or jerk crew iam as a normal cuistomer that tried to bring things forward and brought some ideas ask myself am i less worth then anyone with a forum hype, is going to be pretty disapointed about ccp handles things. In general this forum is Ideas MK2, same ppl, same ideas same discussions. There is tons of good ideas in the ideas section why not simply hire someone in iceland who gets 10Ç per hour to read forums. I guess tons of ppl would apply to such a job. this ! Every Issue i've seen in here is like hey i copied the ideas selection to here just because we have a voting option. Mining sucks lets post on CSM, pvp sucks lets post on CSM, ...
Ma Eies	Posted - 2008.06.01 03:01:00 - [47] Edited by: Ma Eies on 01/06/2008 03:06:20 I agree, if they put the voting/support aspect in an ideas/issues forum that would be awesome, but the CSM serves no unique purpose just a few redundant ones Edit: I find it funny that if this thread gets the 5% support it needs the CSM will bring it up and then not escalate it to CCP, the system works
Deviana Sevidon Panta-Rhei Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.06.01 10:44:00 - [48] I do not agree to this proposal. The CSM had barely time to get started and because we do not see immidiate results the first call for stopping the CSM. I think it will take at the very least 6 month before we can really assess what good or bad the CSM did. Besides this first CSM has a harder time then any other who will follow in their steps. Becaue they have to create the rules and procedures from scratch. A lot of people have never learned to argue, or to respond to a rational argument. Perhaps the fault is not in the CSM but in the persons who call everyone who disagree a whiner and react angrily if they cannot get their way.
Melllo champers	Posted - 2008.06.01 11:21:00 - [49] Edited by: Melllo champers on 01/06/2008 11:21:35 Hardly anybody is interested in the CSM. Just look at how many thumbs up the most popular topics get. Topics get nowhere near enough votes to warrant things being an issue as per CCP rules. CSM was supposed to be voice of the players. It isn't.
Gone'Postal Scoopex The Volition Cult	Posted - 2008.06.01 11:25:00 - [50] Agreed. Questions, Comments, Problems, Please address them to the CSM.. Now CCP Never have to visit the forum. -V8I-
Christy Walton Bloodveil	Posted - 2008.06.02 14:40:00 - [51] Originally by: Melllo champers Edited by: Melllo champers on 01/06/2008 11:21:35 Hardly anybody is interested in the CSM. Just look at how many thumbs up the most popular topics get. Topics get nowhere near enough votes to warrant things being an issue as per CCP rules. CSM was supposed to be voice of the players. It isn't. This. Originally by: Jade Constantine Give us a chance. Judge us on results. Nothing asked that I wouldn't be happy to pledge to anyone else. I think he meant: let us travel for free,use CSM to our personal agendas and after we have done it all judge us on results.
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.02 22:23:00 - [52] Originally by: Christy Walton I think he meant: let us travel for free,use CSM to our personal agendas and after we have done it all judge us on results. Well Christy, nobody can claim I didn't make my personal agenda pretty damn explicit in my campaign platform. Its still there on public record and you had the option to support or vote against. If you voted against then fair enough but you are going to need to appreciate the fact that your opinion is in the minority within the CSM process. I'd only advise you at this point to consider standing yourself in six months time and tell the electorate how you could do better? Fair enough? CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Ma Eies	Posted - 2008.06.04 11:50:00 - [53] Edited by: Ma Eies on 04/06/2008 11:50:51 Edited by: Ma Eies on 04/06/2008 11:50:35 LOL it's not being said that the CSM reps (and their own agenda) are the problem, the whole concept of the CSM is being suggested as the problem. Jade you claim that Christy's opinion is in the minority of the CSM process, but the CSM was voted in by a minority of the EVE population. It's not the voice of the player base it's the voice of a minority that thinks the CSM might be able to do something, to be fair it might, but how much could it possibly do that couldn't be done by the player base on the forums. Seems CCP has made a smart move, the CSM is now set to take the brunt of player dissatisfaction (whining) in CCPs place
Toramii Le Moulin Rouge	Posted - 2008.06.04 12:08:00 - [54] Nay ... give the CSM a chance.
Tonto Auri Vhero' Multipurpose Corp	Posted - 2008.06.04 22:43:00 - [55] Originally by: Inertial CCP is capable of running EVE to the ground all on their own. This. -- Thanks CCP for cu
Elsebeth Rhiannon Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.06.06 11:45:00 - [56] First solution to the problem by the original poster should not be to drop CSM, it should be next time do not vote the guys you think are only bickerers. So no support - let it run a couple of terms at least before deciding. -- Help us defend the Republic; join Gradient today.
Aiden Bismuth Die Boeremag	Posted - 2008.06.06 14:23:00 - [57] I joined EVE just before the end of the voting process, and was still finding my feet, so I didn't vote or have a chance to view the candidate's options. However, I still stay we give the CSM a chance, and see what it's like after six months. Not supported AB

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.