| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jade Constantine
   |
Posted - 2008.08.04 17:03:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Jade Constantine on 04/08/2008 17:04:43
CSM Formal Meeting 9. Sunday 17rd August. 16:00 hours Eve Time
Agenda:
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
1. tba
2. tba
CSM Raised ISSUEs (to be submitted in templated form to CSM mailing list by 18:00 hours Friday 15th August.)
1. The "nano-nerf" implications as per dev blog - Popular Issue - Putting this on the agenda again because by the time of this meeting we will have had a further two weeks of testing the SISI changes and plenty of feedback to give a CSM statement on the speed issue and impact on gameplay and pvp balance in Eve Online.
2. Changing Carriers Combat Roles - Bane (rearranged issue from august3)
3. Prime fiction for the 3rd bloodline (more needed) - Jade (rearranged issue from august3)
4. MOTD for Fleet/Gang window - Jade (rearranged issue from august3)
5. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=755364 Local Chat Replacement + here + here (removing local as an intel tool) - Jade/Tusko
6. Gang/Fleet bonuses for single race fleets -Jade
7. tba
8. tba
9. tba
10. tba
11. tba
12. tba
13. tba
14. tba
15. tba
POPULAR Issue (Biggest unaddressed Assembly Hall Issue û will be added after CSM raised ISSUEs.)
1. I'm guessing its going to be speed and given we've undertaken to find out some more about the issue in the two weeks prior to this meeting I think its appropriate to put it back to the agenda.
AOB (Any other business) (additions can be submitted prior 18:00 hours Friday 15th August)
1. tba
2. tba
***
All CSM delegates and Alternates are invited to attend.
Serenity Steele is on holiday and we'll need at least one alternate for voting, lets try to have as many people as possible present.
++ This is the last date for Issues to be voted onto the second formal CSM/CCP meeting. All documents need to be fully completed in advance of the meeting and we'll be sending a bundled list of Issues to Iceland for the CCP council to review the following monday.
Star Fraction | Dare to Dream!
|
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.08.04 17:03:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Jade Constantine on 04/08/2008 17:04:43
CSM Formal Meeting 9. Sunday 17rd August. 16:00 hours Eve Time
Agenda:
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
1. tba
2. tba
CSM Raised ISSUEs (to be submitted in templated form to CSM mailing list by 18:00 hours Friday 15th August.)
1. The "nano-nerf" implications as per dev blog - Popular Issue - Putting this on the agenda again because by the time of this meeting we will have had a further two weeks of testing the SISI changes and plenty of feedback to give a CSM statement on the speed issue and impact on gameplay and pvp balance in Eve Online.
2. Changing Carriers Combat Roles - Bane (rearranged issue from august3)
3. Prime fiction for the 3rd bloodline (more needed) - Jade (rearranged issue from august3)
4. MOTD for Fleet/Gang window - Jade (rearranged issue from august3)
5. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=755364 Local Chat Replacement + here + here (removing local as an intel tool) - Jade/Tusko
6. Gang/Fleet bonuses for single race fleets -Jade
7. tba
8. tba
9. tba
10. tba
11. tba
12. tba
13. tba
14. tba
15. tba
POPULAR Issue (Biggest unaddressed Assembly Hall Issue û will be added after CSM raised ISSUEs.)
1. I'm guessing its going to be speed and given we've undertaken to find out some more about the issue in the two weeks prior to this meeting I think its appropriate to put it back to the agenda.
AOB (Any other business) (additions can be submitted prior 18:00 hours Friday 15th August)
1. tba
2. tba
***
All CSM delegates and Alternates are invited to attend.
Serenity Steele is on holiday and we'll need at least one alternate for voting, lets try to have as many people as possible present.
++ This is the last date for Issues to be voted onto the second formal CSM/CCP meeting. All documents need to be fully completed in advance of the meeting and we'll be sending a bundled list of Issues to Iceland for the CCP council to review the following monday.
Star Fraction | Dare to Dream!
|
Red Raider
Caldari
Airbourne Demons
|
Posted - 2008.08.04 17:53:00 -
[3]
I believe its supposed to be the 17th not the 17rd as in 3rd, 23rd, 33rd..etc.
Outside of that I am looking forward to it!
A happy gamer isnt on the forums, they are playing the game unless they have an idea that they honestly think is helping out. |
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.08.04 18:07:00 -
[4]
 Originally by: Red Raider
I believe its supposed to be the 17th not the 17rd as in 3rd, 23rd, 33rd..etc.
Outside of that I am looking forward to it!
thank you
Star Fraction | Dare to Dream!
|
Marya Sklodowska
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 12:02:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
7. Specific Alternative to speed changes MWD disables weapons -Jade
<3
-----------------------------------
Raivi's Research Alt
-Explosion Matrix-
Support Sarmaul's MWD MKII |
Toman Jerich
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 14:06:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Toman Jerich on 07/08/2008 14:10:12
So do you just intent to keep stacking the agenda with every 0.0/sov suggestion that gets posted?
It seems like every 0.0 or sov idea that comes up in the assembly hall, you will support inside of the first ten posts and agree to bring before the CSM. You do this before any significant discussion takes place on the issue (that is, before any well-thought-out objections can be made). You do it before you're able to see if the idea gets any popular traction. I know that the idea has to be discussed in the assembly hall for a minimum period of time before the CSM can vote on it, but you essentially bring the idea to the CSM for a discussion and vote regardless of how the suggestion thread pans out.
For example, the two 0.0/sov ideas on the agenda right now: The first one has all of 20 replies. The second one has 11, but you're right there in the second post supporting and you've got it on the agenda. It's absurd. If an idea is actually good, don't you think that it probably will get more than 6 supports?
The point of the CSM is to represent the player base. Right now you've got two items on the agenda that together have the support of a whopping 20 people from the player base. And the CSM is going to spend time discussion those ideas. Can you not at least wait until another idea with some popular support shows up? Barring that, maybe you could wait until a number of other CSM reps support an idea (hint: I mean Darius) before you bring an idea to the CSM, so that maybe it will have a chance of passing? Rather than voting on ideas that capture genuine player concerns, you've decided to vote on suggestions that fit your own preconceived agenda. I mean my god seven out of ten issues on the agenda right now are yours, and for the most part they're all issues with a mere two pages of player discussion behind them.
|
Kelsin
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 14:39:00 -
[7]
If the CSM was sitting on their thumbs and not addressing any issues posted in the Assembly Hall unless they have 500 supports, we'd be pretty ****ed at them for their laziness. I think it makes sense to present a variety of ideas to CCP, otherwise the process stagnates.
In short, are you really blaming the CSM for being hard-working?
|
Tzujeih
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 15:25:00 -
[8]
Jade to use up 10 of the 15 slots?
How about you move all that stupid bullshit to the end of the line.
|
Toman Jerich
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 15:46:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Toman Jerich on 07/08/2008 15:48:07
Originally by: Kelsin
If the CSM was sitting on their thumbs and not addressing any issues posted in the Assembly Hall unless they have 500 supports, we'd be pretty ****ed at them for their laziness. I think it makes sense to present a variety of ideas to CCP, otherwise the process stagnates.
In short, are you really blaming the CSM for being hard-working?
So you define hard-working as:
1) See thread with "0.0" or "Sov" in the title.
2) Open thread.
3) Hit reply.
4) Type "Please fill this out with a more detailed proposal."
5) Check Support.
6) Hit Submit.
7) Edit topic into CSM agenda.
Well, it is a whole seven steps, and I didn't even include all the steps needed to edit the agenda. So I guess you might have a point.
Seriously though, "hard-working" in this context would involve an active effort to build a consensus around an idea by soliciting buy-in from the relevant base of players. And not just 50 random peons (I'm looking at you Ankhsh2lfoslv.asdlf), people who matter in the game. Guess what, BoB don't waste much time on this CSM crap, and most of them don't read the assembly hall or eve-o in general. Many Russians or TCF might not even be able to read English. A hard-working CSM member would be making an effort to get in touch with the important individuals who actually live in 0.0 and get some feedback from them before tossing the idea off to the rest of the do-nothing know-nothing congress for a vote. Just because a group of people can't stand these forums doesn't mean that their opinion is irrelvant. It's highly relevant.
|
Kelsin
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 15:53:00 -
[10]
If anyone on the CSM attempts to do what you describe, I'd be very happy. Right now though I'm seeing a lot of work being done by Jade to keep getting topics in front of the CSM. If some people don't wish to be involved in this, that is their call. But arranging and attending every meeting and scouring the assembly hall forum to find topics to put on the agenda is indeed a lot of work, and if Jade weren't doing it the CSM would hardly be addressing anything - I think he deserves more credit than you're giving him.
|
Toman Jerich
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 16:06:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Kelsin
If anyone on the CSM attempts to do what you describe, I'd be very happy. Right now though I'm seeing a lot of work being done by Jade to keep getting topics in front of the CSM. If some people don't wish to be involved in this, that is their call. But arranging and attending every meeting and scouring the assembly hall forum to find topics to put on the agenda is indeed a lot of work, and if Jade weren't doing it the CSM would hardly be addressing anything - I think he deserves more credit than you're giving him.
He's certainly putting more effort into the CSM than I would put into a video game without compensation. But he knew what he was getting into when he signed up, and his effort is nevertheless insufficient for this task. If something is worth doing, then it's worth doing right.
|
Kelsin
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 16:27:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Toman Jerich
He's certainly putting more effort into the CSM than I would put into a video game without compensation. But he knew what he was getting into when he signed up, and his effort is nevertheless insufficient for this task. If something is worth doing, then it's worth doing right.
It's being done right. We would be very lucky to have more folks putting as much good work in as Jade is, given the thanklessness of the task.
As for the idea of appointing a development group of 0.0 'important individuals' - I don't see how handing the keys over to one particular subgroup of players will do anything for balance other than ensure that only development changes beneficial to that subgroup are passed.
|
Toman Jerich
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 16:38:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Toman Jerich on 07/08/2008 16:46:39
Originally by: Kelsin
I don't see how handing the keys over to one particular subgroup of players will do anything for balance other than ensure that only development changes beneficial to that subgroup are passed.
Good point. For that matter, I wonder why CCP didn't ask a bunch of WoW players, or even non-eve-playing citizens of iceland, to form the CSM? Those people would be free of any bias regarding changes to the game. And, if CCP implements changes requested by those who don't play Eve, maybe they would start to play it! What a bonus!
Oh, of course. It's because you want the people who understand the game and are invested in it to guide the changes. It's because when you change a game, you don't change it in favor of the people who do not play that game. You change it in favor of the people who do play that game so as to increase their enjoyment of it and maintain them as loyal subscribers. And if they like your improvements, they may invite their non-playing buddies to join in on the fun.
Living in 0.0 is a game. It is a very different game from the one played in highsec or lowsec. If the 0.0 game is changed, it should be changed by the people who actually play it and invest in it for their increased enjoyment. 0.0 should not be changed for the benefit and enjoyment of those who have chosen not to play the 0.0 game.
"Let's change 0.0 and the sov system" is a task that is fundamentally different in scope and in impact than "Let's change the powergrid on the nighthawk". Fitting a ship does not really constitute a game. The sovereignty system and the mechanics of 0.0 do constitute a game in the same way that the faction warfare system constitutes a game (I guess you would say a "mini-game", a sub-game within Eve). The people who choose to play the sov game should guide its changes in the same way that the people who play eve online should guide changes that apply generally to all of eve online.
|
Hertford
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 18:00:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Kelsin
As for the idea of appointing a development group of 0.0 'important individuals' - I don't see how handing the keys over to one particular subgroup of players will do anything for balance other than ensure that only development changes beneficial to that subgroup are passed.
The CSM is a 'particular subgroup of players'.
The Star Fraction has sovereignty in zero solar systems. |
Kelsin
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 18:16:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Toman Jerich
Living in 0.0 is a game. It is a very different game from the one played in highsec or lowsec. If the 0.0 game is changed, it should be changed by the people who actually play it and invest in it for their increased enjoyment. 0.0 should not be changed for the benefit and enjoyment of those who have chosen not to play the 0.0 game.
In the end, any aspect of the game should be balanced by developers with an eye towards how all subsystems within the game interact. To that point, it's just a really terrible idea to put veto power over the entire playerbase in the hands of players appointed solely because they have a narrow focus in their gameplay on 0.0 Sov warfare.
One might as well argue that a council of only nano-ship pilots should be selected to address the nano-nerf. It takes all sides to sort something as big as this out.
|
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 18:18:00 -
[16]
CCP ask CSM to help them come up with proposals to reform sovereignty warfare in 0.0
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
CCP has been discussing 0.0 and sovereignty internally for the past year and discussed many issues already. They found that Player Owned Station (POS) warfare is a very limited mechanic, and that it revolves around the amount of dreadnoughts and other capital ships in the fleet, while small ships only serve as support instead of being able to accomplish small objectives on their own. The long-term plan for 0.0 warfare is to have multiple layers of goals and objectives instead of all fighting occurring over stations. This would allow small groups to have an impact on the game, instead of needing hundreds of ships to have influence in 0.0.
Nathan (CCP) said that he does not believe that current large-scale fleet combat is interesting for the participants, mainly due to focus fire.
Andrew (CSM Jade Constantine) commented that current 0.0 PVP is siege warfare, people stick to established fortresses and do not venture beyond the gates. His suggestion was to include mechanics that encouraged sovereignty holders to patrol their space, and have ways for roaming gangs to peck at undefended systems and steal resources there.
The issue of logistics was also discussed. Alex stated that current POS logistics required an alliance to have powergamers that managed them around the clock. He proposed to make 0.0 appeal to a wider audience by removing these repetitive activities that required powergaming. Shayne urged CCP to consider mechanics that would provide more synergy between the industrial and combat aspects of 0.0.
CCP said that they would have to balance short term achievements to the long term empire building. If people could easily destroy in a day what took months to build up, this would be unfair. But on the other hand, it should not be too hard to smoke out established entities. They agreed however, that the current time sinks in POS warfare are too long.
This issue has been put on the rolling agenda, and CCP asked the CSM and the players to come up with concrete suggestions how to improve 0.0 warfare and sovereignty.
Enough said really.
Star Fraction | Dare to Dream!
|
Hertford
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 18:21:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Hertford on 07/08/2008 18:21:49
Originally by: Hertford
The Star Fraction has sovereignty in zero solar systems.
That makes The Star Fraction one of the last group of individuals qualified to comment on and suggest changes to 0.0 Sovereignty.
Jade, stick to Empire (High Sec) Issues. |
Toman Jerich
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 18:26:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Toman Jerich on 07/08/2008 18:28:34
Originally by: Jade Constantine
CCP ask CSM to help them come up with proposals to reform sovereignty warfare in 0.0
Ya, you keep waving that flag as if my point is that the CSM should give up on 0.0 and sov warfare.
But what I'm actually saying is that the CSM should try and address sov warfare in an effective way. Not by rubber-stamping ideas supported by some miniscule number of people for CCP to read. By actually putting in the time and the work to build a significant consensus around an idea.
If all the CCP devs are asking for is a bunch of ideas cast up by Joe Messageboardposter, then they can get that just by reading the assembly hall. They don't need you to vote for them to read it.
What CCP wants the CSM to do is the freaking legwork -- go out into the field, talk to people, and figure out what the solution really should be. Be solution builders, and not just a dumb pipeline or filter through which solutions might flow.
Stop lazily expecting the solutions to very hard, complicated problems to be dropped on your doorstep by enterprising constituents. Go out and find the solutions that will work yourselves.
|
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 18:28:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Hertford
Jade, stick to Empire (High Sec) Issues.
Negative. And on 0.0 issues, if you are interested in a balanced approach to 0.0 balancing you don't ask a group composed entirely of people too close to the issue. You guys are too invested in current 0.0 defensive advantages to discuss these things objectivity. Sure you have a right to an opinion, but you have absolutely no right to a veto. Asking people holding 0.0 space from the current stacked deck of broken sov mechanics about the future 0.0 warfare is like asking a focus group of turkeys if they are in favor of thanksgiving - nobody should be surprised at the answers that interest group gives.
Star Fraction | Dare to Dream!
|
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 18:33:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Jade Constantine on 07/08/2008 18:37:37
Originally by: Toman Jerich
Stop lazily expecting the solutions to very hard, complicated problems to be dropped on your doorstep by enterprising constituents. Go out and find the solutions that will work yourselves.
The thing you keep forgetting though is that we already have the opinions of the current status quo and those = lets do nothing. CCP also care about the opinions of the people who would like change and would like to make 0.0 warfare more interesting, more dynamic and generally more of a game. Those minutes are very revealing. The impression I get from reading you posts is that feel that people interested in raiding and opposing settlements in 0.0 have no right to opinion in the direction the game should develop and I strongly disagree with you. Eve is a game for all the players and I don't believe the current space holders in 0.0 have the right to veto any change that might make their job of holding territory more challenging.
You yourself concluded in Kelsin's thread that you didn't foresee ANY solutions that could be implemented within the lifespan of Eve online. You'll forgive me for dismissing that level of cynicism and remaining hopeful that those people who do see a future for non blob warfare laggy logjams in 0.0 might eventually win this argument and drive positive change.
Originally by: Toman Jerich
Issues this big are nothing more than opportunities for fun theorycrafting and to build castles in the air. By the time any 'visionary' proposal issued by the CSM can become reality, there will be a better game out there to play anyway.
Simple defeatism. I don't buy it.
Star Fraction | Dare to Dream!
|
Hertford
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 18:37:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
And on 0.0 issues, if you are interested in a balanced approach to 0.0 balancing you don't ask a group composed entirely of people too close to the issue.
Yes you do, because that's the group that has experience of the issue, and what they feel is 'wrong' with it. You don't ask an accountant to fix your car.
Quote:
You guys are too invested in current 0.0 defensive advantages to discuss these things objectivity. Sure you have a right to an opinion, but you have absolutely no right to a veto.
A semi-valid point. Yes, objectivity may well be difficult to achieve, but I'd rather have a car mechanic tell me what's wrong with my car than an accountant. Yes, the mechanic may not be perfectly objective, because he'd like to get some money out of you. But if the final result is that the car works, then the mechanic has succeeded. And who said anything about 'veto'? As a 0.0 player, I'd rather see proposals from those in or involved with 0.0.
Quote:
Asking people holding 0.0 space from the current stacked deck of broken sov mechanics about the future 0.0 warfare is like asking a focus group of turkeys if they are in favor of thanksgiving - nobody should be surprised at the answers that interest group gives.
Strawman and fallacious analogy. Those who have taken sovereignty, defended sovereignty, assaulted sovereignty, clashed over sovereignty and lost sovereignty are the perfect group to ask about sovereignty.
|
Toman Jerich
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 18:40:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Toman Jerich on 07/08/2008 18:42:52
Edited by: Toman Jerich on 07/08/2008 18:41:34
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Originally by: Toman Jerich
Stop lazily expecting the solutions to very hard, complicated problems to be dropped on your doorstep by enterprising constituents. Go out and find the solutions that will work yourselves.
The thing you keep forgetting though is that we already have the opinions of the current status quo and those = lets do nothing.
Oh really? You're certain that the general opinion of, say RA or Stain Empire or Solar Fleet is that the status quo is good? What are you basing that opinion on? Did nync post that somewhere on eve-o? Did you ask him? And what about BoB? Do you have a lot of contacts there who are feeding you information about what they generally think?
Jade, you don't know shit about what people in 0.0 think and you haven't tried to find out. You know what you think, and you know what you think people who play in 0.0 think. That's it.
Those people who are close to the issue have an important role to play. Maybe you don't let them decide every facet of your idea, but if it doesn't have any input or feedback from them and ignores their concerns, then your idea is useless. And the fact is that people with the best insights to give aren't just going to come to you. For one thing, many of them aren't going to post feedback here because they don't understand English. Or imagine a 0.0 powerhouse Russian alliance who might have their bread-and-butter game changed out from under them according to suggestions approved by a council that they couldn't provide feed back to because they don't even know it exists. It's absurd.
You need to put forth the effort to solicit the opinions that, while they won't show up on an eve-o forum, are still extremely relevant to the issue. You cannot dismiss those opinions by waving your hands and muttering about bias.
|
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 18:42:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Hertford
Strawman and fallacious analogy...
Ah well, we'll agree to disagree. Life goes on.
Star Fraction | Dare to Dream!
|
Hertford
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 18:45:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Originally by: Hertford
Strawman and fallacious analogy...
Ah well, we'll agree to disagree. Life goes on.
Your analogy would be perfect if you were comparing the turkeys involved in Thanksgiving to the Control Towers involved in 0.0 sovereignty warfare.
I don't see you requesting the opinions of the Control Towers, but then Control Towers don't have opinions, hence why your analogy is completely fallacious. |
Toman Jerich
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 19:00:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Toman Jerich on 07/08/2008 19:00:29
Imagine you're in Iceland, discussing your ideas for 0.0 and sov with the devs. The devs hear you out, and then look at Darius and Bane and ask "So, what did you guys think of the idea? You spend all your time doing this stuff". Then they say "We don't think this idea is the way to go. Certainly something needs to be changed, but I think this will anger a lot of veteran players". Then the devs look at you ask, "So did anyone who plays in 0.0 already get on board with this idea? What did they think?" And you say "Well not many of them contributed to the discussion about the idea. I guess they don't care strongly about it." I don't think the devs are going to buy that.
It's in your best interest in doing what I suggest. I'm not sure why you would resist it unless you're simply too lazy to do it. Even being able to tell the devs something like "I talked to some of the head guys in BoB and in some Russian alliances and all they want is the status quo. I think they'll be angry no matter what you do" Sounds better than "They didn't offer any opinions and I didn't go out of my way to ask."
|
Aprudena Gist
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 20:46:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Originally by: Hertford
Strawman and fallacious analogy...
Ah well, we'll agree to disagree. Life goes on.
You really dont get it do you? All you have ever done is try to get them to change 0.0 so your stupid worthless alliance can participate in it. Well you can't so stop trying to change the game for your own agenda. 0.0 is supposed to be where all the big players of the game emerge and duke it out if you aren't cutting it in the current system what makes you think that you will cut it with another system? Alliance level warfare isn't something someone like you or anyone else with no experience to take a look at and make decisions based off of crap like that.
Take for Example Ank and all her stupid crap she's putting forward.
|
sexyminer
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 06:50:00 -
[27]
Edited by: sexyminer on 08/08/2008 06:50:40
[quote/]In short, are you really blaming the CSM for being hard-working?
So you define hard-working as:
1) See thread with "0.0" or "Sov" in the title.
2) Open thread.
3) Hit reply.
4) Type "Please fill this out with a more detailed proposal."
5) Check Support.
6) Hit Submit.
7) Edit topic into CSM agenda.
Well, it is a whole seven steps, and I didn't even include all the steps needed to edit the agenda. So I guess you might have a point.
Seriously though, "hard-working" in this context would involve an active effort to build a consensus around an idea by soliciting buy-in from the relevant base of players. And not just 50 random peons (I'm looking at you Ankhsh2lfoslv.asdlf), people who matter in the game. Guess what, BoB don't waste much time on this CSM crap, and most of them don't read the assembly hall or eve-o in general. Many Russians or TCF might not even be able to read English. A hard-working CSM member would be making an effort to get in touch with the important individuals who actually live in 0.0 and get some feedback from them before tossing the idea off to the rest of the do-nothing know-nothing congress for a vote. Just because a group of people can't stand these forums doesn't mean that their opinion is irrelvant. It's highly relevant.
e: Here is one step-by-step for success:
1) Recognize that 0.0 is the land of elitist *******s who don't necessarily bother or have the ability to read eve-o. Remember that CCP doesn't really get involved in big 0.0 powerblocks after the t20 scandal and that certain players really do know more than the devs do about some aspects of their game. Get ready to play along with people's egos to accomplish something.
2) Get a shortlist of people who would be useful to ask about 0.0 and sov warfare. Hint: One of them sits on the council already! The others are major players in the large 0.0 powerblocks. They are people who have played the 0.0 game for a long time and have big-picture views, as well as a large personal investments in the game, and a lot of subordinates to take care of.
3) Present to them whatever idea you have.
4) Incorporate their feedback to improve the idea. Or if they collectively suggest that the idea is trash, then shitcan it.
5) Eventually bring to the CSM a plan that has a large chance of being successful if implemented because the people who understand the complicated inter-woven big-picture issues have at least not struck it down outright.
i agree all we need a CSM to do is to actually go into the topic count how many supports they have and then ask for a more detailed description and look at EVERY topic and some1 that can actually hold there ground towards CCP on the arguments as well (not that this may be a problem with holding ur ground) i wish i was older (17 atm -_-) to go to iceland then id go and put my self in a vote to be CSM ^^
|
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 11:55:00 -
[28]
Why is Jade filling half the slots with his stuff and where the hell are the rest of the council members? Shouldn't there be like 9 or something?
--------
Ideas for: Mining
|
Mazzarins Demise
Profit Development and Research Association
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 12:21:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Mazzarins Demise on 08/08/2008 12:27:13
Jade Constantine in regards to number 8 about donating ISK to real world charities. Might I suggest to look up a name called CrazyJoe for the game Ultima Online. If you get into contact with him that'll be even better.
Some years ago we did the same thing and donated millions upon millions of gold. We raised $10,000 for what I believe was for the Tsunami Relief Fund and the Red Cross. It made headlines on various news outlets so finding it shouldn't be too difficult. I'll see what I can pull up for you as well.
His main website is GamersCharity
Regards, MD.
-edits
Article on MSNBC
News Article
News Article when we reached 1 billion gold donated
|
LaVista Vista
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 14:29:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Abrazzar
Why is Jade filling half the slots with his stuff and where the hell are the rest of the council members? Shouldn't there be like 9 or something?
We are working on "larger" issues, in terms of actual size and reach(Though I'm working on smaller issues too, a number of them even). Also the submission date is not for another week, so there is still plenty of time.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |