EVE Search - No confidence in no confidence threads.

All Channels

Assembly Hall

No confidence in no confidence threads.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Satis Tyr Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.10 23:07:00 - [1] I move that all threads suggesting the removal of any of the CSM reps be taken with a grain of salt. Theese people were elected to do a job. It is a job that you all want them to do. CCP has given them an enormous challange and they are sucseeding. The majority of the work of the CSM has run very smoothly and every problem that has occured has come in the form of commitee procedure. They have not been given time to work out procedure but they are doing it as well as they can and have come to some decisions. As for the Goons, it seems obvious that they, like any other group, are a group of individuals. While some goons may attempt to harass or troll or greif, that does not say anything about other Goons. An individual may not be judged by any other member of a group to whitch they belong. They must be judged by their own merrit. Well done CSM.
teji	Posted - 2008.06.10 23:19:00 - [2] CCP introduced roles for SEVEN people. If 7 people can't get along without one being called chairman they certainly can't get along with one being called chairman. What makes it worse that the person with that title takes it to mean they have more say and more power than the rest of the group which is not true. CCP screwed them from the beginning. I feel sorry for the CSM reps. Council of equals. Not a dictatorship where one rules over them all. Wish I could give this a thumbs down :(
lecrotta lecrotta Corp	Posted - 2008.06.10 23:32:00 - [3] Originally by: teji CCP introduced roles for SEVEN people. If 7 people can't get along without one being called chairman they certainly can't get along with one being called chairman. What makes it worse that the person with that title takes it to mean they have more say and more power than the rest of the group which is not true. CCP screwed them from the beginning. I feel sorry for the CSM reps. Council of equals. Not a dictatorship where one rules over them all. Wish I could give this a thumbs down :( Put a group together without a well defined structure and the individual with a more dominant/strong personality will always rise among them to take control, its the natural and normal progression of things no matter if you like it or not. Making a set of well defined rules will prevent things from getting out of hand in the future but complaining about it is a waste of breath.
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.10 23:36:00 - [4] Support. I've actually got no confidence in the people that make "no confidence" threads. I think they're rubbish. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Inanna Zuni The Causality Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.06.11 00:46:00 - [5] Originally by: teji CCP introduced roles for SEVEN people. Quoting Robert's Rules or something similar ... "Point of information!" Nine people ... ;-P IZ
Anthony Pants	Posted - 2008.06.11 01:37:00 - [6] With the power to vote people into office, there absolutely needs to be the power to remove them from office. If a goon were chairman, there would be absolutely no question about a vote of no confidence clause passing.
Tesseract d'Urberville Tadakastu-Obata Corporation The Honda Accord	Posted - 2008.06.11 01:53:00 - [7] Edited by: Tesseract d''Urberville on 11/06/2008 01:52:55 Amen. Fully support. Getting a group of people with opposing viewpoints, especially passionate people with opposing viewpoints and who don't necessarily like each other, to work together and is a lot harder than it looks (this I know from experience). Cut the CSM reps some slack. Oh: and there's no such thing as a motion or vote of "no confidence" in Robert's Rules. Some parliaments and other legislative bodies have adopted the concept, and it makes very nice fictional drama, but in practice it tends to be used frivolously and prevents anything from getting done. I'll now hypocritically suggest that we forget about these ridiculous threads and get back to the business of suggesting and discussing improvements to the game...
Satis Tyr Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.11 06:05:00 - [8] I disagree Anthony. From what I have seen I am fairly confidant that had a goon been voted in as chair the same problem would be present, and there would possibly be more of a cry for removal for the simple fact that goons have a reputation. there would be a committee arguing about procedure with no time to actually do so. Whoever the chair was, be it a goon or not, would be stepping in and doing what they feel was needed in order to keep the meeting on track, or in the case of the end of meeting 3 what was needed to end the meeting with everything clear. However in terms of actual game issues I don't think anything would be different.
Erotic Irony 0bsession	Posted - 2008.06.11 06:16:00 - [9] JF & RP partisans supporting their own thread instead of my more elegant and parsimonious proposal. Shameful. SHAMEFUL.
Anthony Pants	Posted - 2008.06.11 06:40:00 - [10] Originally by: Satis Tyr I disagree Anthony. From what I have seen I am fairly confidant that had a goon been voted in as chair the same problem would be present, and there would possibly be more of a cry for removal for the simple fact that goons have a reputation. there would be a committee arguing about procedure with no time to actually do so. Whoever the chair was, be it a goon or not, would be stepping in and doing what they feel was needed in order to keep the meeting on track, or in the case of the end of meeting 3 what was needed to end the meeting with everything clear. However in terms of actual game issues I don't think anything would be different. That's pretty much what I said. I support "no confidence" votes, and I think they're important in any democratically-elected body.
Josiah Conqueror	Posted - 2008.06.11 06:43:00 - [11] Originally by: Satis Tyr ... Oh hey, a Star Fraction post in support of Jade Constantine.
Ryoji Tanakama Daikoku Fleet Shipyards	Posted - 2008.06.11 11:58:00 - [12] Originally by: Anthony Pants With the power to vote people into office, there absolutely needs to be the power to remove them from office. If a goon were chairman, there would be absolutely no question about a vote of no confidence clause passing. There is already a mechanic for this. At the end of the term, if you dont like your CSMs or chairperson, you elect not to elect them again. ~Ryoji Tanakama Daikoku Fleet Shipyards
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.11 13:53:00 - [13] Originally by: Anthony Pants Originally by: Satis Tyr I disagree Anthony. From what I have seen I am fairly confidant that had a goon been voted in as chair the same problem would be present, and there would possibly be more of a cry for removal for the simple fact that goons have a reputation. there would be a committee arguing about procedure with no time to actually do so. Whoever the chair was, be it a goon or not, would be stepping in and doing what they feel was needed in order to keep the meeting on track, or in the case of the end of meeting 3 what was needed to end the meeting with everything clear. However in terms of actual game issues I don't think anything would be different. That's pretty much what I said. I support "no confidence" votes, and I think they're important in any democratically-elected body. There will never be a formal no-confidence mechanic on the CSM. The closest you will get to this will be an electable chair where you might be able to harangue a sitting Chair to stand again for re-election mid term. For good or ill we are stuck with the CSM reps elected this time around and the first opportunity the Eve electorate will have to remove those chosen will be the vote for the next session in the autumn. The sooner this sinks in the sooner we'll have this Assembly hall back for serious issues rather than spurious muck-hurling.
Pnuka GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.11 14:21:00 - [14] Originally by: Jade Constantine Originally by: Anthony Pants Originally by: Satis Tyr I disagree Anthony. From what I have seen I am fairly confidant that had a goon been voted in as chair the same problem would be present, and there would possibly be more of a cry for removal for the simple fact that goons have a reputation. there would be a committee arguing about procedure with no time to actually do so. Whoever the chair was, be it a goon or not, would be stepping in and doing what they feel was needed in order to keep the meeting on track, or in the case of the end of meeting 3 what was needed to end the meeting with everything clear. However in terms of actual game issues I don't think anything would be different. That's pretty much what I said. I support "no confidence" votes, and I think they're important in any democratically-elected body. There will never be a formal no-confidence mechanic on the CSM. The closest you will get to this will be an electable chair where you might be able to harangue a sitting Chair to stand again for re-election mid term. For good or ill we are stuck with the CSM reps elected this time around and the first opportunity the Eve electorate will have to remove those chosen will be the vote for the next session in the autumn. The sooner this sinks in the sooner we'll have this Assembly hall back for serious issues rather than spurious muck-hurling. Is there a list you could provide the public with other mechanics/votes that you will not allow, a lot of ideas being thrown around here and most of them are null and void and nobody realizes it.
Yorda Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.11 14:29:00 - [15] Well it's a good thing you elected us to be the voters so you can have no confidence in your choice. ohwai-
Innominate GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.11 14:31:00 - [16] Edited by: Innominate on 11/06/2008 14:32:21 Edited by: Innominate on 11/06/2008 14:31:55 Originally by: Jade Constantine There will never be a formal no-confidence mechanic on the CSM. When was this voted on? Did I miss reading one of the CSM meetings?
Maitsu GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.11 14:40:00 - [17] Edited by: Maitsu on 11/06/2008 14:40:58 Originally by: Jade Constantine Originally by: Anthony Pants Originally by: Satis Tyr I disagree Anthony. From what I have seen I am fairly confidant that had a goon been voted in as chair the same problem would be present, and there would possibly be more of a cry for removal for the simple fact that goons have a reputation. there would be a committee arguing about procedure with no time to actually do so. Whoever the chair was, be it a goon or not, would be stepping in and doing what they feel was needed in order to keep the meeting on track, or in the case of the end of meeting 3 what was needed to end the meeting with everything clear. However in terms of actual game issues I don't think anything would be different. That's pretty much what I said. I support "no confidence" votes, and I think they're important in any democratically-elected body. There will never be a formal no-confidence mechanic on the CSM. The closest you will get to this will be an electable chair where you might be able to harangue a sitting Chair to stand again for re-election mid term. For good or ill we are stuck with the CSM reps elected this time around and the first opportunity the Eve electorate will have to remove those chosen will be the vote for the next session in the autumn. The sooner this sinks in the sooner we'll have this Assembly hall back for serious issues rather than spurious muck-hurling. I think people would drop all of this if you would just admit to getting carried away and promise not to do so in the future. A sign of a trustworthy person is their willingness to admit their own mistakes. Stop being such a **** up. Also as someone who doesn't believe this council will actually effect the game in any way regardless, you are further ruining it's chances by playing king of a meaningless little castle.
Viktor Konstantine GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.11 14:59:00 - [18] The purpose of a chairman is to direct meetings in an orderly fashion, and act as an informal representative of the body as a whole. You instead have chosen to be an arbiter, taking your scant majority as a mandate to act as a decider, and to hold power over the other members of the council. Everybody wants to start talking about game issues, but your pathetic and power-hungry attempts to control the debate have paralyzed the body.
Boss Cracker	Posted - 2008.06.11 15:27:00 - [19] Originally by: Jade Constantine There will never be a formal no-confidence mechanic on the CSM. The closest you will get to this will be an electable chair where you might be able to harangue a sitting Chair to stand again for re-election mid term. For good or ill we are stuck with the CSM reps elected this time around and the first opportunity the Eve electorate will have to remove those chosen will be the vote for the next session in the autumn. The sooner this sinks in the sooner we'll have this Assembly hall back for serious issues rather than spurious muck-hurling. I am intrigued to know upon what you base your authority to declare what the elected representatives of the players may and may not discuss. I can't remember the bit in the CSM document where you were given the power to rule by fiat. While your soap-opera-meltdown and blatant malfeasance is pretty hilarious, you are an obstacle to getting sensible improvements in the game brought to the attention of the devs.
Satis Tyr Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.11 21:19:00 - [20] Edited by: Satis Tyr on 11/06/2008 21:21:36 Originally by: Josiah Conqueror Originally by: Satis Tyr ... Oh hey, a Star Fraction post in support of Jade Constantine. I would ask you to read my post again. I voiced no support of any council member in paticular. In fact a large portion of my post was intended to give people some perspective on the Goons. To shed some positive light on the Goons who are on the council. So I think you misenturpret my sentament. If I could restate your words accuratly I would state the folowting. "oh hey, a Star Fraction post in support of individuals in Goonswarm" has a slightly differen ring to it eh? As far as Jade Constantine is concerned, I do not feel that everything Jade has done in council chambers is in line with the way I would have run things. Jade made statements in meeting 3 that I see as emotionally driven and counterproductive to the process. This however is something that every one of the council members have done. This is something that anyone in their position, be it chair or member, would have done. Honestly I am amased that it hasnt happened more. this is a testament to the stregnth of our council and the dedication they are putting forward. Josiah. Do not let your pettyness and simplicity get in the way of rational thought. Jade is doing the things nessesary to keep this council on track. For the record, I take no issue with Jade's use of muting. oh and before you call this post a Star Fraction post in support of Jade Constantine, let me make this as clear as it can be. I am an individual. I support the entire council.
Ethaet Aliastra	Posted - 2008.06.11 21:28:00 - [21] hmm, posted by a star fraction member. Did Jade ask for backup? -------------------------------------------------------------- Seriously, we need some kind of separation between the post and signature. There you go. Now that wasn't so hard
Satis Tyr Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.11 21:35:00 - [22] /facepalm
Theramin Dogon GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.12 00:25:00 - [23] Originally by: Jade Constantine Originally by: Anthony Pants Originally by: Satis Tyr I disagree Anthony. From what I have seen I am fairly confidant that had a goon been voted in as chair the same problem would be present, and there would possibly be more of a cry for removal for the simple fact that goons have a reputation. there would be a committee arguing about procedure with no time to actually do so. Whoever the chair was, be it a goon or not, would be stepping in and doing what they feel was needed in order to keep the meeting on track, or in the case of the end of meeting 3 what was needed to end the meeting with everything clear. However in terms of actual game issues I don't think anything would be different. That's pretty much what I said. I support "no confidence" votes, and I think they're important in any democratically-elected body. There will never be a formal no-confidence mechanic on the CSM. The closest you will get to this will be an electable chair where you might be able to harangue a sitting Chair to stand again for re-election mid term. For good or ill we are stuck with the CSM reps elected this time around and the first opportunity the Eve electorate will have to remove those chosen will be the vote for the next session in the autumn. The sooner this sinks in the sooner we'll have this Assembly hall back for serious issues rather than spurious muck-hurling. You know, you never received the majority of the vote. Out of the nine CSMs, you only made about 19% of the vote. Bane and Darius together, for example, have more votes than you. If there are enough people in the playerbase or the council that feel strongly enough to rethink your position (which is what we're asking for), then anything else is less than democratic. Do your job, and let the people be heard.
Zorok LEGI0N F.E.A.R Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.12 02:13:00 - [24] This is a bit OT but where can I read these meetings at? I can't find any links to any of them.
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.06.12 02:16:00 - [25] Originally by: Zorok This is a bit OT but where can I read these meetings at? I can't find any links to any of them. www.eve-csm.com - there's also chatlog links in the Jita Park threads of the completed meetings.
Anton Marvik AnTi. Atrocitas	Posted - 2008.06.12 02:18:00 - [26] Edited by: Anton Marvik on 12/06/2008 02:20:51 Wow, look at all the SF members that support this. Jade, is this another "big thread" you're going to railroad through? Talk about ****ing up the assembly hall.
Zorok LEGI0N F.E.A.R Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.12 02:19:00 - [27] Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto Originally by: Zorok This is a bit OT but where can I read these meetings at? I can't find any links to any of them. www.eve-csm.com - there's also chatlog links in the Jita Park threads of the completed meetings. Cool thanks! I'm going to BM this website.

Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.