| Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Semkhet
The Priory
   |
Posted - 2008.10.20 13:49:00 -
[1]
I always viewed this CSM thingy as a pure PR stunt. If CCP was genuinely interested in knowing their customer's opinions, it would simply require adding the pertinent front-end to a database-driven polling system and bang, they could have their cross-referenced stats, on as many subjects and how often it would be deemed opportune.
If CCP was also genuinely interested in EvE player's grey matter, an equivalent system could be put at disposal of the community to allow polls on player's issued proposals in the spirit to perfect or add new features to the game.
Instead they came up with the principle of a consultative representative body. Well, "representative" bodies are just that: an imperfect snapshot limited to the opinion of those (positively) interested (since you don't get the option to vote AGAINST the CSM), with no implicit guarantees that the peeps you vote for will act as you wish.
The "consultative" part is even more cute. Basically this means: we might listen to the CSM in areas we don't really care or view as critical.
That's why I consider all this crap a monument of futility & deception. But maybe I'm wrong. Hence I'm interested not in who will get elected, but in the participation rate. IMHO, I expect the number of voters vs the number of active accounts to be lower than the first time.
Only time will tell 
|
LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
|
Posted - 2008.10.20 14:22:00 -
[2]
I think you are right. I really hope that we see an increase in actual % voters of the userbase. However, at this point it seems like we have don't have very many candidates at all.
Maybe people realized it's not an easy task to be a CSM member. However, if there becomes less and less people who wants to run for CSM, we might have a problem.
I'm sure we will always have enough interest in the CSM to make it "relevant". I and several other members of the council have taken initiative to get onto things like EVE Radio, podcasts and even places like eve-mag.com, in order to increase awareness. I hope it pays off and we will see at least 15% turnout.
|
Ankhesentapemkah
Gallente
Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2008.10.21 06:35:00 -
[3]
I think most people think that CCP won't listen, or the CSM won't have any effect.
But then again most people don't think about the long-term effects. We've had almost a hundred issues so far, and only half a dozen were actually implemented in the game or known to be in the short-term release pipeline.
And of those issues a lot of people think "Meh, CCP already had that planned, what do we need the CSM for?"
I agree that things could have been better, especially the communication. Both between us and CCP and between us and the players. However this is a long-term process and this is just the beginning.
---
Thanks for all that supported me. Let me know if there's anything I can do for you.
|
Semkhet
The Priory
|
Posted - 2008.10.21 06:39:00 -
[4]
 Originally by: LaVista Vista
Maybe people realized it's not an easy task to be a CSM member. However, if there becomes less and less people who wants to run for CSM, we might have a problem.
Well, it's basic psychology: humans don't move unless there is a subjacent motivation which provides subjective benefits vs the overhead required by the task.
Some CSM candidates act under the conviction that the whole community can benefit from their interventions, other ones are there merely to push an hidden agenda. Nothing new, it's also like that in RL politics since humanity exists.
I can only have compassion for players being manipulated that way by CCP. My beef is that the job could have been performed efficiently and silently, without integrating aspects like representatives, egos, hidden interests and subjectivity ,which invariably mess things up unless all candidates are living examples of wisdom. And with all due respect, EvE is certainly one of the last places I would look for wisdom
|
Semkhet
The Priory
|
Posted - 2008.10.21 06:59:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
I think most people think that CCP won't listen, or the CSM won't have any effect.
But then again most people don't think about the long-term effects. We've had almost a hundred issues so far, and only half a dozen were actually implemented in the game or known to be in the short-term release pipeline.
And of those issues a lot of people think "Meh, CCP already had that planned, what do we need the CSM for?"
I agree that things could have been better, especially the communication. Both between us and CCP and between us and the players. However this is a long-term process and this is just the beginning.
The issue at hand here is not if the CSM is effective since it's effectiveness is solely function of CCP's obscure decision processes based on we don't know what set of criterias on a case-by-case basis, and therefore totally out of control.
Rather the question is, why did CCP come up which such an intricate concept, both in design as implementation, when things could have been done simply while providing a much higher degree of objectivity by avoiding the pitfalls implied by any kind of representative system ?
It's all the difference between form vs substance.
|
LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
|
Posted - 2008.10.21 07:20:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Semkhet
Rather the question is, why did CCP come up which such an intricate concept, both in design as implementation, when things could have been done simply while providing a much higher degree of objectivity by avoiding the pitfalls implied by any kind of representative system ?
It's all the difference between form vs substance.
I think there's several reasons to it:
1. It's a social experiment. CCP Xhagen, who created the CSM, studies philosophy. It might be a product of his mind to see how it would turn out?
2. A better community trough "standards" by the elected representatives. The current state of the EVE-O forum is extremely sad. One could imagine CCP had hoped that the CSM would set the standard. You could argue it did for this term. The CSM document is actually fairly explicit about this 
3. Better communication with the community. You could argue that the CSM allows for more communication with CCP by providing a 2-way communication with CSM as the moderator. However, it *has* had the effect that CCP seemingly communicates less with us on certain key issues. However, they should certainly not hear from anyone that they don't let us in on what they are working on. The recent spew of dev blogs and the like was certainly to be expected, despite the amount of whine which thought CCP was ignoring the community. However, their communication on things like the alliance tournament is *really* bad.
That's what I can come up with for now.
|
Semkhet
The Priory
|
Posted - 2008.10.21 08:02:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Semkhet on 21/10/2008 08:07:03
Originally by: LaVista Vista
1. It's a social experiment. CCP Xhagen, who created the CSM, studies philosophy. It might be a product of his mind to see how it would turn out?
Philosophy is a very interesting field, but except for juggling with abstract concepts, absolutely useless in EvE's framework unless you cross-reference it with real & documented data. Here, structural anthropology comes much more handy since it provides (philosophical) analysis of models which have been implemented here or there at some time in human history. Check Claude LTvi Strauss for example.
Originally by: LaVista Vista
2. A better community trough "standards" by the elected representatives. The current state of the EVE-O forum is extremely sad. One could imagine CCP had hoped that the CSM would set the standard. You could argue it did for this term. The CSM document is actually fairly explicit about this
I wouldn't state is as "sad". Like it or not it's just the mere reflection of a reality. Artificially hiding it will not induce any behavioral evolution. Genuine changes are often the result of providing constant and long-term behavioral examples instead of working through brute force.
Originally by: LaVista Vista
3. Better communication with the community. You could argue that the CSM allows for more communication with CCP by providing a 2-way communication with CSM as the moderator. However, it *has* had the effect that CCP seemingly communicates less with us on certain key issues. However, they should certainly not hear from anyone that they don't let us in on what they are working on. The recent spew of dev blogs and the like was certainly to be expected, despite the amount of whine which thought CCP was ignoring the community.
When a money-making venture is led by a directorate which isn't submitted to an accountability framework on fact finding missions, analysts, decision processes and subsequent implementations, the resulting behavior can sometimes be erratic. As long CCP isn't a traded company led by a board of directors whose position can be put in jeopardy at each shareholders meeting according to their performance, don't expect too much
Originally by: LaVista Vista
However, their communication on things like the alliance tournament is *really* bad.
Alliance tournaments ? I stopped to bother from 2006 on, the day CCP's referee wasn't even able to follow their own set of rules by popping my ship (which left a can at 80 Km from said referee who was located at the center of the battlefield) under the pretext that I had crossed the 100 Km radius of the arena 
|
Pixel SonursCreen
|
Posted - 2008.10.23 20:25:00 -
[8]
The best saylors stand on the lands
a knife can cut from both sides
what is wrong with ego and business if at the end its a survival of the fittest?
As long as the CSM candidates remain honest, loyal and trustworthy to their promises and do their best to contribute on developing a better game, i dont see the problem on selling the brand a little?
Ur idea on the polls systems is a nice one, i agree something like that would give more accurate statistics on certain topics.
Even if CCP created CSM for PR stuntings, what is wrong with that? it gives players an extra option to set a goal to work for or something like that, you know. its cool
CSM could form a strong in game platform competing with CCP to fill those laggy 0.0 gaps and all that if indeed participation will occur in the near future.
Its up to the candidates to figure out how to arrange their agenda for their membership and hopefully the third or 7th CSM will be able to overrule a "tanknerf" if the players want to by then because we are all playing battleship online from the upcoming "speed nerf" |
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.10.23 20:42:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Pixel SonursCreen
The best saylors stand on the lands
a knife can cut from both sides
what is wrong with ego and business if at the end its a survival of the fittest?
As long as the CSM candidates remain honest, loyal and trustworthy to their promises and do their best to contribute on developing a better game, i dont see the problem on selling the brand a little?
Ur idea on the polls systems is a nice one, i agree something like that would give more accurate statistics on certain topics.
Even if CCP created CSM for PR stuntings, what is wrong with that? it gives players an extra option to set a goal to work for or something like that, you know. its cool
CSM could form a strong in game platform competing with CCP to fill those laggy 0.0 gaps and all that if indeed participation will occur in the near future.
Its up to the candidates to figure out how to arrange their agenda for their membership and hopefully the third or 7th CSM will be able to overrule a "tanknerf" if the players want to by then because we are all playing battleship online from the upcoming "speed nerf"
Say what? |
Semkhet
The Priory
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 15:06:00 -
[10]
Cough cough... In the line of what I expected:
1st CSM turnout: 11,08%
2nd CSM turnout: 8,61%
- 22,29%
Conclusion: most players are either not interested or consider CSM irrelevant.
|
Darius JOHNSON
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 16:06:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Semkhet
Conclusion: most players are either not interested or consider CSM irrelevant.
You can actually posit quite a few "conclusions" from that... all of which would be reaching as you have no idea why people don't vote. By no means am I insinuating that people ARE indeed engaged really, but merely pointing out that the conclusion you've come to is not one you could have reasonably reached. It's stated as fact with no basis.
Originally by: Iroku Mata
Darius is time to STFU and make your GSM place free for someone who got the humildity to have the job you claim and failled!
|
Maximum KILLDEATHRATIO
Minmatar
24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 16:46:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Maximum KILLDEATHRATIO on 25/11/2008 16:53:25
Since everyone who voted in the election is using the internet and eve-online's forums, a straight up online forum poll system would be a better representation of the playerbase.
An in-game poll would be ideal. Or combination of forum poll, in-game poll, and newsletter poll. By account of course~
I am always sceptical of putting people into unnecessary positions of authority. Review of the first CSM's early sessions is a prime example of power abuse. Kicking people from a chat channel, resubmitting the same issues in a different wrapper, uneven time investment in issue discussion.
And consider all of the technical challenges that exist for managing issues, their status, and their importance. Its a full time job; Don't misunderstand, I'm not advocating CSM by saying its a full time job. CSM being a full time job is exactly why players shouldn't be performing the duty. This effects who is willing to participate in the CSM. And lets face it, the leftovers from the first CSM that made it into the second CSM are either attention-***** prima-donnas, view it as an internship for CCP, or combo.
And it sucks cause you only get to vote for candidates. I'd much rather they have "Screw the CSM, vote for player polling." option to vote for. Buuut instead I had to vote for a representative. And he didn't make it. So I have no representation but to post my opinion and hope that these asshats respect or care despite my not liking them. Cause I sure as hell won't be kissing any ass.
FAYKE EDIT: Internally handled polls are also better cause you can cross-reference the player's relevance to the question.
Say you have a question dealing with alliance management and you have 3,000 opinions to view... well it'd be useful to find the relevance of the opinion. Is this player currently affected by, or has ever previously been effected by alliance management? Does he have the skills to potentially be effected by alliance management? Oh? Only 10% of those voters have any experience with it, lets filter out the other 90% and see what the relevant votes and points are about.
And then you pay an unbiased analyst to read the forums and collect the coherent and well presented arguments, find interesting statistics in the poll voting, and present the findings CCP.
___________________
Yes I'm bitter. (the taste you can see!)
|
Semkhet
The Priory
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 16:56:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Darius JOHNSON
Originally by: Semkhet
Conclusion: most players are either not interested or consider CSM irrelevant.
You can actually posit quite a few "conclusions" from that... all of which would be reaching as you have no idea why people don't vote. By no means am I insinuating that people ARE indeed engaged really, but merely pointing out that the conclusion you've come to is not one you could have reasonably reached. It's stated as fact with no basis.
-22% is a fact which is a direct consequence of people not voting. And since this voting takes place by net over many days, you can't refer to attendancy issues either. Players don't vote either because they are not interested (for a wide range of reasons probably), or they simply don't believe that the CSM is useful enough for them to bother. These are the main lines which define polls in every case: either lack of interest, either lack of confidence. Capisci ?
|
Pax Ratlin
Gallente
Woodland Larch
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 18:46:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Semkhet
Originally by: Darius JOHNSON
Originally by: Semkhet
Conclusion: most players are either not interested or consider CSM irrelevant.
You can actually posit quite a few "conclusions" from that... all of which would be reaching as you have no idea why people don't vote. By no means am I insinuating that people ARE indeed engaged really, but merely pointing out that the conclusion you've come to is not one you could have reasonably reached. It's stated as fact with no basis.
-22% is a fact which is a direct consequence of people not voting. And since this voting takes place by net over many days, you can't refer to attendancy issues either. Players don't vote either because they are not interested (for a wide range of reasons probably), or they simply don't believe that the CSM is useful enough for them to bother. These are the main lines which define polls in every case: either lack of interest, either lack of confidence. Capisci ?
People don't vote for all kinds of reason, and yes most of those reasons we can ignore, but your still faulty in presenting only 2 conclusions as to why they didn't vote. You either unaware or deliberatly ignoring an obvious 3rd conclusion, they are simple confused about what they are voting for, in those circumstances the natural action is inaction. I think a very strong argument can be made that CCP and the CSM have not done enough to educate the majority of the player base who don't haunt the forum boards, who don't go to the EvE website and who 'simply log on and play a game'.
Then there is the 4th conclusion, and I think you'll find that most people don't vote b ecause of this. They don't see the need for the CSM or anything similar to it that could replace it. Many many people work on the adage 'If it ain't broke don't fix it' and i strongly suspect that for the silent majority of non-forum going memebers of the playerbase they are perfectly happy with the way is run and the direction it is going in.
That is not to say they are correct or incorrect, it's just their opinion as your is yours and mine is mine.
|
Darius JOHNSON
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 19:06:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Semkhet
-22% is a fact which is a direct consequence of people not voting. And since this voting takes place by net over many days, you can't refer to attendancy issues either. Players don't vote either because they are not interested (for a wide range of reasons probably), or they simply don't believe that the CSM is useful enough for them to bother. These are the main lines which define polls in every case: either lack of interest, either lack of confidence. Capisci ?
I "capisci"'d the first time you wrote the exact same thing. Nothing about the content of my post has been altered by your restatement of the same. The poster above me has quite clearly laid out 2 further possibilities and there are yet more beyond that. You are still reaching and are still not in a position to come to the conclusions you have. I can only assume you're making these attributions in cause for dramatic effect.
Originally by: Iroku Mata
Darius is time to STFU and make your GSM place free for someone who got the humildity to have the job you claim and failled!
|
Trinneth
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 20:34:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Trinneth on 25/11/2008 20:45:47
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
I think most people think that CCP won't listen, or the CSM won't have any effect.
I voted, but to be blunt I'm cynical about the effect the CSM is able to have, for one simple reason: Skill queueing.
Universally popular amongst players, supported by every member of the first CSM and not every member of the second, item one on the agenda of the first meeting in Iceland. There will never be another requested feature with so much community support.
Understand I'm not cynical because the feature wasn't implemented, I'm cynical because CCP were not moved to talk about the issue. There was no feedback, no discussion, no response for the entire term of the first CSM.
I don't expect CCP to implement or even want to implement every change requested by the CSM, but at a minimum I would hope that the CSM had the ability to throw a spotlight on an issue and have CCP take it seriously as a result. I don't believe that's been the case so far.
|
Maximum KILLDEATHRATIO
Minmatar
24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 20:56:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Trinneth
Edited by: Trinneth on 25/11/2008 20:45:47
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
I think most people think that CCP won't listen, or the CSM won't have any effect.
I voted, but to be blunt I'm cynical about the effect the CSM is able to have, for one simple reason: Skill queueing.
Universally popular amongst players, supported by every member of the first CSM and not every member of the second, item one on the agenda of the first meeting in Iceland. There will never be another requested feature with so much community support.
Understand I'm not cynical because the feature wasn't implemented, I'm cynical because CCP were not moved to talk about the issue. There was no feedback, no discussion, no response for the entire term of the first CSM.
I don't expect CCP to implement or even want to implement every change requested by the CSM, but at a minimum I would hope that the CSM had the ability to throw a spotlight on an issue and have CCP take it seriously as a result. I don't believe that's been the case so far.
As long as there are enough people giving them money CCP can do anything they want.
They openly taunt joke about their players complaining on the forums. And its easy enough to play the cool rockstar dev that doesn't care. As long as people are paying.
When eve gets competition, if eve gets competition, they'll have to step their game up and listen to their customers, cause income won't be guaranteed then.
___________________
Yes I'm bitter. (the taste you can see!)
|
Darius JOHNSON
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 21:57:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Trinneth
I voted, but to be blunt I'm cynical about the effect the CSM is able to have, for one simple reason: Skill queueing.
Universally popular amongst players, supported by every member of the first CSM and not every member of the second, item one on the agenda of the first meeting in Iceland. There will never be another requested feature with so much community support.
Understand I'm not cynical because the feature wasn't implemented, I'm cynical because CCP were not moved to talk about the issue. There was no feedback, no discussion, no response for the entire term of the first CSM.
I don't expect CCP to implement or even want to implement every change requested by the CSM, but at a minimum I would hope that the CSM had the ability to throw a spotlight on an issue and have CCP take it seriously as a result. I don't believe that's been the case so far.
I do not support skill queuing depending on how it gets implemented if it does. CCP DID have a discussion with the CSM regarding this, the results of which are off the record. They did listen however and a dialogue was had. Sorry to burst your bubble.
Originally by: Iroku Mata
Darius is time to STFU and make your GSM place free for someone who got the humildity to have the job you claim and failled!
|
Trinneth
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 22:47:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Darius JOHNSON
Sorry to burst your bubble.
What, the happy little world in which it seemed like CCP blew you off? If they took the issue seriously and talked about it that's a good thing, an off the record discussion's better than no discusison at all.
My cynicism is based on what's on the record, which is kind of all I have to go on - if you're discussing the major stuff behind closed doors then people like me are going to continue to get the impression that you're being ignored, since we don't get to hear about the stuff you don't talk about.
|
Darius JOHNSON
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 22:50:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Trinneth
What, the happy little world in which it seemed like CCP blew you off? If they took the issue seriously and talked about it that's a good thing, an off the record discussion's better than no discusison at all.
My cynicism is based on what's on the record, which is kind of all I have to go on - if you're discussing the major stuff behind closed doors then people like me are going to continue to get the impression that you're being ignored, since we don't get to hear about the stuff you don't talk about.
I understand implicitly dude and I apologize for coming across as snide. I have the memory of a goldfish and had assumed this information had been presented somewhere. Assume that any of the items that have been voted "Yes" by the council have been discussed with CCP. If you haven't gotten a result then there's a reason for it. Either it's still being hashed out off the record, or it's been pushed off to the second council.
Originally by: Iroku Mata
Darius is time to STFU and make your GSM place free for someone who got the humildity to have the job you claim and failled!
|
Maximum KILLDEATHRATIO
Minmatar
24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 23:43:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Darius JOHNSON
I do not support skill queuing depending on how it gets implemented if it does. CCP DID have a discussion with the CSM regarding this, the results of which are off the record. They did listen however and a dialogue was had. Sorry to burst your bubble.
So much for transparency.
___________________
Yes I'm bitter. (the taste you can see!)
|
Pax Ratlin
Gallente
Woodland Larch
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 23:54:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Maximum KILLDEATHRATIO
Originally by: Darius JOHNSON
I do not support skill queuing depending on how it gets implemented if it does. CCP DID have a discussion with the CSM regarding this, the results of which are off the record. They did listen however and a dialogue was had. Sorry to burst your bubble.
So much for transparency.
The lad has a point, i mean i think most of us can understand that some conversations with CCP may have to be 'off the record' for buisness reasons, but at least tell us when your having the discussion and a broad reason why it has to be 'off the record'.
|
Darius JOHNSON
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.26 00:56:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Pax Ratlin
The lad has a point, i mean i think most of us can understand that some conversations with CCP may have to be 'off the record' for buisness reasons, but at least tell us when your having the discussion and a broad reason why it has to be 'off the record'.
It was off the record because it wasn't officially on the agenda at that point in time. When it is officially on the agenda it will be "on the record" and you will have the complete details of the discussion.
Originally by: Iroku Mata
Darius is time to STFU and make your GSM place free for someone who got the humildity to have the job you claim and failled!
|
Pax Ratlin
Gallente
Woodland Larch
|
Posted - 2008.11.26 03:30:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Pax Ratlin on 26/11/2008 03:38:17
Originally by: Darius JOHNSON
It was off the record because it wasn't officially on the agenda at that point in time. When it is officially on the agenda it will be "on the record" and you will have the complete details of the discussion.
Look you have used an 'off the record' conversations, that we can't independantly verify, as proof of CCP's actions and then you tell us that we can't be told about 'off the record' conversations until/if they becomes 'on the record'.
Please do yourself and the rest of the CSM a favour and before posting, pause, think and triple check your facts because when one member of the CSM posts it reflects on the rest of the CSM. And the whole CSM structure is already under a sustained attack by nay-sayers and forum bullies.
Remember the old saying ... "Please don't feed the trolls"
EDIT: Okay before the wrong end of the stick gets grasped, as a CSM your post carry a presumed weight of authority with the playerbase, irregardless of any lack or substance of real authority. Sadly (and quite stupidly) we expect people who put themselves forward for election to be whiter than white and to never put a foot wrong. I doubt that i could personally live upto such high standards and i also doubt anyone will give you the benefit of the doubt when you prove to be human and screw up. Such is the life of an elected official .... even in an internet starship game.
|
Stalina
Gallente
Deep Space Exploration Squad
|
Posted - 2008.11.26 10:24:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
I think most people think that CCP won't listen, or the CSM won't have any effect.
*Cough*
________________
Originally by: Malcanis
Hey I've got an idea: why don't you and your nerf-crying ilk never, ever post again.
See what you've done. Look what you did.
Now shush.
|
Semkhet
The Priory
|
Posted - 2008.11.26 16:09:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Stalina
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
I think most people think that CCP won't listen, or the CSM won't have any effect.
*Cough*
Well, that among other things.
Fact of the matter is that if CCP was genuinely interested about player's opinions, all the PR stunt would be relegated to the second stage provided they give priority to substance over form and appearances...
I mean come on, I could ask one of my programmers to design a polling system based on a PostgreSQL db model and a rock-stable CodeCharge-generated web app in a half-day, and CCP can't come with a thingy like that in what ? 5 years ? And we are talking about an investment of less than 300 $ ?
But yeah, it's way more efficient to put a bunch of peeps in a chat room to talk for ages about who does what, when, where, how, trips to Iceland and all that sh.., while at the end accomplishing a poor record of representative objectivity since most of us simply can't be neutral even if we try...
Useless crappola IMHO.
|
Darius JOHNSON
|
Posted - 2008.11.26 17:56:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Pax Ratlin
Edited by: Pax Ratlin on 26/11/2008 03:38:17
Originally by: Darius JOHNSON
It was off the record because it wasn't officially on the agenda at that point in time. When it is officially on the agenda it will be "on the record" and you will have the complete details of the discussion.
Look you have used an 'off the record' conversations, that we can't independantly verify, as proof of CCP's actions and then you tell us that we can't be told about 'off the record' conversations until/if they becomes 'on the record'.
Please do yourself and the rest of the CSM a favour and before posting, pause, think and triple check your facts because when one member of the CSM posts it reflects on the rest of the CSM. And the whole CSM structure is already under a sustained attack by nay-sayers and forum bullies.
Remember the old saying ... "Please don't feed the trolls"
EDIT: Okay before the wrong end of the stick gets grasped, as a CSM your post carry a presumed weight of authority with the playerbase, irregardless of any lack or substance of real authority. Sadly (and quite stupidly) we expect people who put themselves forward for election to be whiter than white and to never put a foot wrong. I doubt that i could personally live upto such high standards and i also doubt anyone will give you the benefit of the doubt when you prove to be human and screw up. Such is the life of an elected official .... even in an internet starship game.
Actually I responded to a specific example that was given. A gentleman specifically said item X wasn't being discussed. I merely responded to say it had. Not every conversation that is had needs to be published. If you don't believe a conversation occurred then that's your bag. I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. Thanks for the advice though.
Originally by: Iroku Mata
Darius is time to STFU and make your GSM place free for someone who got the humildity to have the job you claim and failled!
|
Miss KillSome
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.11.26 21:12:00 -
[28]
Guys..get real:
this whole CSM farse was just another CCP's way of trying to limit whines on forums..They know that 30+ page topics with opposing oppinions to what CCP is doing arent a good showoff how they (don't) listen to playerbase.
They managed to get 25% of whines into other section under idea that things are getting done and that we will forget about them sooner or later..
CSM thingy is just another crowd manipulation tool from CCP to keep us more calm about stupid changes or stupid nerfs of strange bugs or whatever they are not capable of repairing or using more brains to come out with some better solutions (nano-nerf for instance "broke" more things that it fixed..).
I voted in first CSM mandate, then i kept eye closely which things and what stuff is going to change with "representative body" between us and CCP..WELL..NOTHING CHANGED!
So..this time i just didnt bother..and all those: "vote for your CSM today.." commercials were pretty annoying..
-----
TCODA corporation is recruiting!
TCODA is awesome! |
Semkhet
The Priory
|
Posted - 2008.11.26 22:03:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Miss KillSome
Guys..get real:
this whole CSM farse was just another CCP's way of trying to limit whines on forums..They know that 30+ page topics with opposing oppinions to what CCP is doing arent a good showoff how they (don't) listen to playerbase.
They managed to get 25% of whines into other section under idea that things are getting done and that we will forget about them sooner or later..
CSM thingy is just another crowd manipulation tool from CCP to keep us more calm about stupid changes or stupid nerfs of strange bugs or whatever they are not capable of repairing or using more brains to come out with some better solutions (nano-nerf for instance "broke" more things that it fixed..).
I voted in first CSM mandate, then i kept eye closely which things and what stuff is going to change with "representative body" between us and CCP..WELL..NOTHING CHANGED!
So..this time i just didnt bother..and all those: "vote for your CSM today.." commercials were pretty annoying..
Actually if CCP had balls, it wouldn't have been hard to add as poll option something in the line of "I vote against the CSM". Then maybe we would have achieved a much better turnout, but with probably the opposite results than those expected by CSM supporters...
|
Issler Dainze
|
Posted - 2008.11.26 23:25:00 -
[30]
A lot of validity to the comments and concerns voiced in this thread. All I can add is I really will try to make my participation in the CSM something positive for the pilots of Eve.
I can't say yet is that is possible but I will make my best effort.
Issler
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |