EVE Search - CSM Council Members Kicking and Muting eachother like Children

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

CSM Council Members Kicking and Muting eachother like Children

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 15:42:00 - [1] Well the meeting was 75% fiasco, 25% useful. But ultimately good issues got onto the agenda including the council-voted CSM chair. I'll be pushing that one in Iceland and hopefully it gets added to the constitution. If it does I'll be stepping down from chair and seeing what the re-vote brings. The council will be able to vote for its own chair and I'll probably get to sit back and sip fine wine. But at least I'll have cat-herded some decent issues onto the agenda and made a progressive change to the constitution in the inaugural CSM. Anything else is pure froth at this point. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 16:25:00 - [2] Well, the only "power" I believe the chair should have in these meetings is the ability to moderate discussion. What that actually means is the issue that causes such friction. Last night we got into a ridiculous series of problems because NOBODY amongst the CSM committee (thats all nine members) had the wit (myself included) to quote the piece from the founding document that specified simple majority voting was the default rule. Instead we had had a 5/4 in the committee on the issue and I tried to get clarification with a vote - vote was resolved, some people felt they weren't bound by the vote. Eventually Husko pointed out the quote from the founding documentation and we had a re-vote that signified our (re)adoption of the simple majority voting system. Now I lost patience with a CSM member continually interrupting these votes with off-topic comments, critiques of spelling and grammar, and general disparagement on the real life knowledge of people debating with them. Question is - what do you do as Chair of a committee in a text-based chat when somebody WILL NOT, follow the procedures of discussion and voting and is continually interrupting? Face to face its easy, you look them in the eye and ask them to behave and restate the principle that you raise your hand to be recognized. In a text chat in a badly overrunning meeting where we have the time pressure of knowing that anything we don't consider will NOT be on the formal Iceland agenda and you have a recipe of bad-tempered exchanges and frustration for all concerned. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 16:38:00 - [3] Originally by: Darius JOHNSON Again you attempt to rewrite history when the logs clearly show otherwise. Nobody continuously interrupted votes... How delusional are you that you're making this statement not 7 posts after the actual conversation is quoted? The logs show otherwise. Read them. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 16:46:00 - [4] Originally by: Darius JOHNSON Quoting an "I know you are but what am I" post. Spoken like a true child. (I didn't expect you to reason your way out of it because you're wrong.) CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 17:16:00 - [5] Originally by: Verone Edited by: Verone on 09/06/2008 17:10:08 Originally by: Jade Constantine Well, the only "power" I believe the chair should have in these meetings is the ability to moderate discussion. Sorry, but that single sentence is one of the most stupid things I've ever seen posted on these fourms. What the hell is the point in a discussion if one person can ultimately decide what is discussed, and silence anyone with whom they don't agree? What is it with the damned hippy-flower-child-politically-correct mumbo jumbo being spoken on these forums today? We have an agenda, rep starts bringing up a topic not on the agenda = Chair (moderation) "thats not on the agenda, please disregard that topic." We have a topic, rep starts talking about a different topic = Chair (moderation) "thats not the topic please return to the topic." We have a vote, rep starts debating other people's voting choices = Chair (moderation) "please refrain from interfering with the process of the vote" Etc etc etc. Moderation of a meeting does not mean censorship. It means that you are doing what you can to ensure the agenda items get raised, introduced, everyone who has a desire to speak on it gets to speak and say their piece, and then a vote happens, results are recorded. Without some kind of moderation what is to stop the meeting simply arguing about the first agenda item for 2 hours and getting nowhere? Quote: It's unfortunate that the CSM has turned out like this, and that there's so much bad feeling in the air about it. Actually, it borders on being dissapointing to be honest. 99% of the bad feeling comes from people who for one reason or other have decided they want the CSM to fail. Don't be one of them Verone. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 17:33:00 - [6] Originally by: Anton Marvik Now you're just going to brush off the community's outrage by saying we "just want the CSM to fail". Lol, don't make me laugh. A few dozen goon forum trolls and assorted hangers on is not "the community." Seriously, get over yourselves guys. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 17:40:00 - [7] Originally by: Anton Marvik Are you familiar with the term "Irony"? In before Goon Conspiracy, ohwait. You were a bit too slow. Seriously though, I'm thinking of have a siggy made that says "I muted a CSM rep and 2000 goons flamed me" - now that'll be funny. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 17:41:00 - [8] Originally by: Kaylana Syi 1) 4) Jade, copy and paste is the true way to paraphrase, ie DON'T PARAPHRASE, when you have a bunch of people who vote on something. Yep, you're right. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 17:44:00 - [9] Originally by: Darius JOHNSON I think you're on meds. In a few days time you can see for yourself. Something tells me you'll be a lot more polite in person. Time will tell. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 18:10:00 - [10] Originally by: Verone Edited by: Verone on 09/06/2008 17:59:47 Originally by: Jade Constantine 99% of the bad feeling comes from people who for one reason or other have decided they want the CSM to fail. Don't be one of them Verone. In my eyes, given the amount of putrid adolescent slush that's poured out of the mouths of the very people who should be running the CSM, it's already failed. As for your other points, I'm not saying that a meeting shouldn't be chaired. I'm questioning what the hell the point is in a meeting when people who're taking part can't put their viewpoints across because they're silenced by an overzealous channel moderator. I stand by that moderation decision 100%. I don't care if 10,000 goons get up on their hind legs and cry primal soliloquies to the moon about this. If a disruptive CSM member is preventing us getting the business of the meeting done then I believe the Chair has the right to temp mute them to get the business of the vote underway. This wasn't about stopping discussion - the person in question had their say (many times) and their objections were noted - but the group wanted to move to the vote and get it done. Sorry if it chaffs your sense of political correctness Verone, but I believe getting through the agenda items and properly representing the player base that voted for us is more important than listening to pointless circular arguments that have already been stated in the course of the meeting. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!

Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 18:17:00 - [11] Originally by: Wu Jiun lol. and she just keeps going. like the duracell bunny but... less professional. what i like the most: writing it off as a goon campaing when clearly several members of the council have raised their concerns about her behaviour and so have a lot of other (non-goons) people. how can one be that delusional? None of the concerns brought up have convinced me that there was anything incorrect about the moderation decision. I stand by it 100%. If CCP think I was wrong they can sack me, if the CSM think I was wrong they can support my motion to make the Chair an elected position and then vote for somebody else. At this point thats all anybody can substantively say on issue. We can have another 1000 goon posts complaining about muting and pretending to care about the process of the CSM but it will make precisely no difference. I made a call, I stick by it. Move on or keep crying. Either way the agenda is going forward and we'll see what happens in Iceland. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 18:32:00 - [12] Originally by: Jacque Custeau I love the way people voted for Hardin's proposition that allows CSM members who are late to a meeting come in after the current agenda item is over. Quote: 1st issue is can the elected candidate return to a meeting and regain voting rights when the debate moves on to the next item on the agenda And then Jade's idea of paraphrasing Quote: alternates can be removed from CSM rep voting status at any time by a candidate arriving at the meeting Well Jacque ... this is the motion from the agenda: Quote: 1. Alternates and Voting (if an alternate is empowered to replace a full rep for the meetings does can a rep come back mid-way through and take the alternates place once again?) (Hardin) I wanted to be sure on precisely what we were agreeing too. As you will note from the chatlog - anytime people questioned my paraphrasing I invited them to restate themselves for the record. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 18:36:00 - [13] Originally by: Verone You were elected in by the majority vote because people had faith in you to act in a becoming manner of someone given the position of CSM Chairman. How do you intend on repairing the apparently massive damage that's been done to the working relationship between CSM members because of your hasty and overzealous silencing of people who aren't saying what you want to hear? No damage has been done. This is all forum froth and trolling. In reality we'll sit down next week and whenever and continue our job. You are welcome to your opinion that this was "hasty and overzealous" muting. I (and incidentally the V Chair) am of the opinion it was entirely correct muting of a person who had fallen into a pattern of disruptive behaviour in the meeting. I have no opinions about what people say in meetings. Its the when I'm concerned about. As long as they follow the proper order of debate, they respect other recognized speakers and they curtail their interruptions when asked there will be no further problems. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 20:24:00 - [14] Originally by: Christy Walton I feel sorry for Jade. Lost his time, his gf and now his virtual reputation (if he ever had one) Maybe he should resign and let CSM try to recover. Good heavens could you be more dramatic! Do you think my dog and goldfish are going to die next! Listen to yourself. I volunteered to an elected position on a bloody player council in a mmorpg. I muted somebody in a meeting to let a vote get counted. Now my "virtual reputation" (whatever that is) "lies in tatters" I've "lost my time" (sounds like a doctor who plot) and I've lost my gf? Though how you'd know anything about my personal life I've got no clue. Go outdoors! Smell the fresh air! Get a sense of perspective and have a beer! Go find a girlfriend and have some fun mate. shakes his head kids today honestly. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 20:38:00 - [15] Originally by: Farrqua If Jade would have just listened more to the group and less to hear himself talk, you would have had a very short and productive meeting. Somehow I doubt if my comments in that meeting would add up to a substantial proportion of the 4hour running time. But continue with the silly troll-war. Its all getting a bit desperate. Maybe my parrot dies next right? CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 22:10:00 - [16] Originally by: Thaylon Sen would u guys all shut up and shake hands. you've ben elected by the community to represent us... not **** about with ego issues on both sides. do the job u put ur self up for and were elected to do! Probably for the best. Nobody who stood doesn't have leather for skin anyway. I'm sure it'll be handshakes and smiles at the next meeting before we on the dramallama for the next set of fun rides. Don't worry about all this froth. As long as we keep pumping through the issues we are actually doing the job. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 22:33:00 - [17] Originally by: Arithron I still see you have yet to step down as Chairman, despite your election promise. Yawn. Why do you keep flogging this dead horse? I said I'd do my best to get a change to the constitution that made the CSM chair elected by the committee. I've written, publicly discussed, and commended the issue to the CSM, its been added to the Iceland agenda. If I manage to see this put into the constitution by vote and consultancy with CCP I'll step down and stand for re-election as chair under the new rules. If it doesn't get added to the constitution I won't. Its fairly simple to understand. I want to ensure that no future CSM session will be led by a person who wins the popular vote but isn't capable of chairing meetings. If I don't get this surety then there is no purpose to resigning and I'll stand as chair for the full session. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 22:38:00 - [18] Originally by: Oncely Magnanimous so will you admit that you acted out of line? (this question only needs a yes or no answer, but i don't see that coming.) I'm going to say I made three mistakes: 1. I didn't restate the rules of discussion and debate in the meeting at the beginning. 2. I should have simply copy and pasted the vote intro's. 3. I should have taken a direct judgment on the simple majority thing (and should have known in advance what the doc said) For that stuff I'm happy to apologize and say I'll do better next time. But on the issue of muting a member of the council after 3 warnings in order to protect the process of a vote - absolutely not. I stand by that decision 100% and would do it again. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 22:51:00 - [19] Originally by: Arithron This issue keeps coming up because it's something you said you'd do before being elected, and now haven't done. I've told you what I said. And thats precisely what I am doing. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 23:06:00 - [20] Originally by: Arithron Again, I ask you where the passages are that give you the right to change the CSM constitution? I see NO evidence of submission of CSM constitution stuff to CCP for rulings, just proposals and votes in the CSM meetings. Still managing to avoid this one, since its proving a little harder than you thought to find those passages? Lol, seriously, only way it can be done is for us to raise an issue on the topic (as I've done with the electable chair proposal) we'll present it to CCP and ask if we can do it. If they say yes "its done". If that happens I'll set down and we'll have an elected chair immediately. I really don't understand where you are going with this line of questioning. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!

Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 23:09:00 - [21] Originally by: Arithron You can ask Jade, since he isn't denying stating that he'd stand down as chairman Take care, Bruce Hansen As far as I know there is no recording or mp3 or whatnot. It was an open vent session when I said I felt the CSM should have an elected chair and if I got elected I'd lobby to get the constitution changed issue raise->ccp agreed. I got asked - what if you win and become chairman? I said I'd still push for the measure and step down for re-election when it was done. Others have tried to make an issue of this. But really there is no issue. I'm intending to do what I said I'd do and try my best to get this measure though. If I can't get it through then I have absolutely no intention of resigning and I will stand as chair for the session regardless. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 23:28:00 - [22] Edited by: Jade Constantine on 09/06/2008 23:28:51 Originally by: Arithron Actually, you are supposed to be presenting to CCP PLAYER issues, not CSM constitution ones. You seem to make decisions in meetings and through votes that WILL NOT be put to CCP. This, frankly, is an abuse of power by the CSM, and not its purpose. CSM mechanisms, if in doubt, should be clarified through CCP directly, not group decisions by the Chair and representatives. Before clarification, if it takes some time to come, you should be guided by the CSM documents...which give you no rights to change/decide/propose alterations of the CSM constitution. Besides, any issue that is discussed and voted upon MUST be put to the players via the threads for 7 days... Bruce Hansen It was CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.09 23:51:00 - [23] Edited by: Jade Constantine on 09/06/2008 23:53:02 Originally by: Arithron Edited by: Arithron on 09/06/2008 23:36:20 Actually, I was referring to other CSM issues apart from the chairman one...such as alternates/abstaining etc. I'm also asking for the written evidence that allows the CSM to vote on these matters at all. You have produced no evidence regarding CCP rulings on any matters regarding CSM constitution changes or CSM meetings etc. Bruce Hansen Thats because we're making it up as we go along Arithron. Sorry but there it is. I mean we could have met first time and said: "what shall we do?" "dunno" "Ummm what should we do?" "dunno" "How should we handle all this stuff?" "dunno" "We know! lets ask CCP!" "meeting adjourned" "drinks on me! Great meeting everyone!" (next meeting) "So what did they say?" "umm nothing really" "What?" "Yeah they said its all in the documentation" "Umm" "What?" "Lets ask for clarification!" "excellent meeting adjourned!" "Great meeting guys Drinks on me!" Instead we opted yes, to make it up as we went along and try and score the win condition of taking a bunch of issues to Iceland from a running start with 3 weeks and a bunch of forum trolling to put up with. End of the day we're going make that win condition and I for one am pretty happy to say to the electorate that they made the right choice to elect some can-do grifters in the role rather than a bunch of people who wouldn't dare take a move without everything signed and sealed in triplicate with the favorable entrails of a dove and the blessing of a local clergyman. Have we made mistakes? hell yes. Have we at least got something done hell yes. Lets have a big drink of glass half full here and look on the bright side you bunch of moody so-and-sos! CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.10 00:14:00 - [24] Originally by: Arithron Who are you calling a moody so-and-so? You actually. You've stalked these forums for the last three weeks like some kind of morbid vulture picking holes and singing songs of doom and gloom and anytime anybody actually tries to engage with you they get more carping criticism and nit-picking leaving the poor respondent wondering they bothered in the first place. I've tried to explain the situation to you but you still insist on trying to blame and whine and complain about whats been done over the course of three weeks of frenetic struggle to get this show on the road. At this stage Arithron though I'm deeply tempted to tell you where to get off I'm still going to advise my fellow CSM reps to try and reach middle ground with you on these multi-item issues, but I'm going ask you in turn to shelve the pettifoggery for long enough to see we are actually trying to work with you here and do the best we can do. But if you can't do that well, nobody can say I didn't try. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.10 00:19:00 - [25] Originally by: Anton Marvik Why is it always somebody else's fault, Jade? Why do you feel the need to troll every thread this evening? Its one of those perennial questions of the human condition isn't it? CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.10 00:44:00 - [26] Originally by: Anton Marvik I believe removing Jade from Chair is constructive. I believe it is to the benefit of CSM and many people agree with me. Furthermore, plenty of people are willing to give my words credence, Jade simply doesn't because my position is different from his, fortunately he is in no position to mute me. Well I believe that removing you from your ship and podding you repeatedly until your clone had so few skillpoints you couldn't reliably speak caldari without a phrasebook would be constructive too but we can't have everything we want. I guess we both need to get used to living with disappointment. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.10 22:48:00 - [27] Well I've said my piece to them already. As far as I'm concerned here's the line in the founding documents I'm supporting: Summary of Representative Responsibilities Chairman and Vice-Chairman: Organize meetings of the CSM Moderate meetings Delegate assignments where necessary Summon Alternates when primary Representatives are unavailable *** Its a cut and dried case really. Chair has the power to moderate meetings. Moderation can mean calling people to speak, warning people from speaking over each other, ensuring the correct order of the agenda is followed and yes, if neccessary its going to include channel mutes if people really are refusing to follow the guidance of the Chair. Where we've gone wrong in my opinion is allowing ourselves to believe we can handle rules changes to this admin and procedural stuff as a elected committee. But the reality is we're a factionalized CSM with some members who really don't like other members and too much voting on partizan lines for our prospective changes to the constitution to be considered safe or reasonable. I think the way forward is to pretty much veto all attempts to re-write the constitutional issues at this point and focus entirely on player subscribed gameplay issues. I've certainly got the power as Chair to say whether an item/motion can come under the heading of ISSUE or administration and from now on I'm going to be inclined to say all attempts to change or re-write the constitution must be submitted as ISSUEs, supported by a CSM rep, go through the 7 day public discussion, and come up for discussion in the meeting as a prospective item for future 1to1 discussions with CCP on and thence to a documented proposal. We'll basically take the position that only CCP can or should change the constitution/CSM texts. And all we can do is make advise on that. We never should have been changing these things on the fly and its clear in retrospect it was a big mistake. Simplifying matters in this way we'll remove a big slice of politics and in-fighting from the CSM because issues like moderation/no-confidence/role of alternates/voting weights and such will be out of our reach (and temptation) and we'll focus entirely on ISSUEs. I'm sure there will still be storms ahead but I think a majority of the CSM are behind this intention to remove factional infighting from the administrative/procedural section of CSM proceedings and fingers crossed we'll ensure that from this point forward we won't be having any more silly votes and wasting the public time.
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.11 00:07:00 - [28] Originally by: Darius JOHNSON I'd like to make note of the fact that this issue was not brought up until AFTER a motion had been presented to remove your ability to mute people during meetings as you're clearly not fit to handle this. I'd also like to note the fact that you have chosen to unilaterally state that the results of the vote which caused you to throw the tantrum in the first place are null due to this dictatum. All in all an exercise of convenience. Yeah it is true Darius. Your overt attempts to play politics with the council and vote away powers and positions you don't like is a big part of me realizing that any CSM involving this sort of personality mix cannot be allowed to change its own constitution in a significant way. Some of us are trying to make the process work - you're out there playing junta for the fun of trying to fix the system again. Well consider me convinced, I've learned that we are going to have to stick to player-submitted ISSUEs only since any sniff of changing the constitution is going to have your trying to vote yourself increased holidays and tin stars to differentiate you from the alternates. Ultimately whatever, you don't like me Darius, I don't like you. We represent opposite sides of this game from the ground up, we can cast votes on gameplay issues - we can't however be trusted to make collective decisions about the CSM process in and of itself. Still, at least we got some good issues on the table. Got to look on the bright side. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.11 00:18:00 - [29] Originally by: Darius JOHNSON The difference being one of us plays by the rules as established and one throws a temper tantrum and insinuates that they can change them by dictatorial fiat whenever they realize they'll lose. Game hasn't changed for me. It's now officially gone from a council to the Jade Constantine hour. Congrats! You haven't seen me lose my temper Darius old boy. Cheer up, at least we'll get some decent ISSUES through. You should actually drop Kelsin a line about that 0.0 sovereignty re-vamp, he might be able to help you with the write up. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.11 00:29:00 - [30] And my dog died and my time was stolen and my gf left and my house burned down (and 100 over terrible things the goons seem to think). Makes you think doesn't it, maybe Internet spaceships really are serious business CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!

Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.11 22:55:00 - [31] Edited by: Jade Constantine on 11/06/2008 22:56:38 Originally by: Cpt Branko *Jade did a world of discussing in the thread. "Oh, yeah, I support it" is NOT a discussion. Particularly and specifically not when it's posted by one of the CSM guys, and advancing a unpopular topic just because you like it (with a number of other topics far more popular not being discussed) means you're only pushing your personal agenda rather then being a medium for the players to communicate with CCP. I think you'll find I expressed an opinion on one of the threads on the topic. "Currently there is a problem with the docking timer being abused by well-tanked battleships (and capitals) being able to engage in combat and then de-aggress and redock to avoid significant counter-attack. This problem was caused by general increase in ship hit points over several incremental patches designed to specifically to lengthen combat while there has been a failure to lengthen re-dock/jump aggression timers by a similar degree. Outcome is that station dock range (stargate range) fighting is currently overpowered since in the environment of increased hit points for all ships it becomes too difficult to destroy targets in the limited aggression window. This encourages over-blobbing as the only way to inflict sufficient damage on the target before it docks and has the knock-on effect of discouraging any combat at all. Question will CCP development agree this is a problem? And will they commit to increasing dock/redock/gate aggression timers to be in line with general ship hit point buffs since CASTOR? Roughly this would involve lengthening timers to 2-3x their current value. Additional related question can we have a visual countdown of dock/redock/gate aggression timer on our User Interface please?" In raising the issue document for the Iceland agenda several discussions in several threads will be summarized and the decent ideas listed. Please don't jump to the conclusion that just because I've typed "yeah support" in one of several duplicate threads I haven't made substantive comment in one of them.
Jade Constantine	Posted - 2008.07.11 15:20:00 - [32] Please lock this thread. Its now really taking the mickey that discussion of meeting 3 is constantly bumped above discussion of recent meetings post Iceland when virtually everyone with an interest in the process knows that these early teething issues with the council have been resolved to mutual satisfaction. This thread (and others like it) now serve only the interests of trolling and shouldn't be open. Star Fraction \| Dare to Dream!

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.