Posted - 2010.07.08 07:28:00 - [272]

 

TBH that was unexpected. I would say that a member that has been on the CSM for a couple of times should know what or what not to say that falls under the NDA.

Anyways, I want to see details as everybody else, but I suppose this is one of the ongoing investigations of CCP (just like 6NJ) that goes on for 6 months & we get some jack **** post that isn't really informative at all.

Still, an unexpected turn of events, and I really want to see how this plays out.

For the hordes out there trying to satisfy their needs for drama, this will help you while you wait for official news:

Push this button

Posted - 2010.07.08 07:58:00 - [274]

 

Originally by: Malcanis

---

CCP, CSM members and Ankh herself have all confirmed that this is connected with something that happened in a previous CSM, and is nothing to do with CSM5 (at least not directly)

---

Links or it didn't happen.

All Ankh has said is that it wasn't the blog and that she doesn't agree with them. All CCP has said can be summed up as "She broke NDA. We don't want to tell you why." As for CSM members, I only count Sok as speaking for the legitimacy of the claim. The others have only commented on Ankh, or confirmed that the blog wasn't involved.

Personally, I'd like to see Mynxee comment on the matter. She's seemed to take a middle road on the ankh controversy in the past (both acknowledges that Ankh has issues, yet fairminded enough to recognize and respect the anti-ankh campaign).

Certainly, Ankh leaving the CSM is not that a huge loss.

BUT, the very fact that CSM was created in response to internal corporate dishonesty and favoritism from CCP employees DOES affect this matter. ESPECIALLY because CCP has, so far, given CSM the same treatment you give a group of touring kindergardners (Oh that's a great idea sweety! Now run along and play while the grown ups do real work. Here's a crown to make you feel special- smile for the cameras!).

While it is their official policy, and legal right, to stay quiet, it definitely does not do well for them PR wise.

All it takes is a simple "While serving under the term as CSM member, Ank divulged sensitive information to a third party." NDA agreements are quite purposefully left extremely broad, so it is very possible (especially considering CCP's track record) that they found a technicality to use to kick her out simply because they did not like her. If the "reason" is something she did x months/years ago, then that is just an asinine excuse to can her out of favoritism.

Keep the details - it's confidential, I totally understand the need to protect proprietary information. DO, however, point to a specific form of breach.

After all, this whole thing started when a certain unnamed spy uncovered questionable activity, and was banned for bringing it up to CCP in a petition as that was "breaking the EULA."

Posted - 2010.07.08 08:09:00 - [276]

 

Oh.........

My.........

God........

Can space politics get any better?

And to all those who are saying this is bad PR for the CSM and CCP, think again. There is no such thing as bad PR. PR is PR. More people are talking about space politics now than ever before. The issues that are being discussed may not be the best thing for game development but I bet this is sending shock waves throughout the MMORPG industry and players of all games will eventually hear of this in some form or another. They may think negatively or positively towards the actions of CCP but they are thinking about CCP and EVE.

I would like at some point a statement from CCP detailing the actual breach of the NDA, however this would remove a lot of the drama and rumours that are spreading through New Eden and elsewhere out of game.

Posted - 2010.07.08 08:18:00 - [278]

 

Originally by: Clovermite

---

Originally by: Malcanis

---

CCP, CSM members and Ankh herself have all confirmed that this is connected with something that happened in a previous CSM, and is nothing to do with CSM5 (at least not directly)

---

Links or it didn't happen.

All Ankh has said is that it wasn't the blog and that she doesn't agree with them. All CCP has said can be summed up as "She broke NDA. We don't want to tell you why." As for CSM members, I only count Sok as speaking for the legitimacy of the claim. The others have only commented on Ankh, or confirmed that the blog wasn't involved.

Personally, I'd like to see Mynxee comment on the matter. She's seemed to take a middle road on the ankh controversy in the past (both acknowledges that Ankh has issues, yet fairminded enough to recognize and respect the anti-ankh campaign).

Certainly, Ankh leaving the CSM is not that a huge loss.

BUT, the very fact that CSM was created in response to internal corporate dishonesty and favoritism from CCP employees DOES affect this matter. ESPECIALLY because CCP has, so far, given CSM the same treatment you give a group of touring kindergardners (Oh that's a great idea sweety! Now run along and play while the grown ups do real work. Here's a crown to make you feel special- smile for the cameras!).

While it is their official policy, and legal right, to stay quiet, it definitely does not do well for them PR wise.

All it takes is a simple "While serving under the term as CSM member, Ank divulged sensitive information to a third party." NDA agreements are quite purposefully left extremely broad, so it is very possible (especially considering CCP's track record) that they found a technicality to use to kick her out simply because they did not like her. If the "reason" is something she did x months/years ago, then that is just an asinine excuse to can her out of favoritism.

Keep the details - it's confidential, I totally understand the need to protect proprietary information. DO, however, point to a specific form of breach.

After all, this whole thing started when a certain unnamed spy uncovered questionable activity, and was banned for bringing it up to CCP in a petition as that was "breaking the EULA."

---

Oh yes I quite agree that CCP could give us more information about the kind of thing that (they think) she did. I'm just saying that there's no evidence at all that this is anything to do with her criticizing them in that blog of hers.

You might want to consider the legal implications though. If - as people are speculating - they did kick her because they suspect her of leaking NDA info to a competitior, well then that's their right, and they're probably right to have a "better safe than sorry" policy. I'd do the same (although I'd probably use spoongate as a pretext or something, but hey, we all know CCP understands PR like a randy boar in a sow shed understands romance)

But if they said that in public, without very hard evidence, then they'd be opening themselves up to a huge legal liability. Ankh would have very good grounds for suing them for significant damages.

tl;dr: CCP were probably right to do what they did, although as usual they handled it in :CCP: fashion. Now that someone with a clue has pointed this out to them they're doing their usual clamshell routine, and they're right to do that too.

Posted - 2010.07.08 08:47:00 - [280]

 

What exactly gives CCP the right to remove her from the CSM? The members are chosen by us, not by CCP. I see that they have the right to not listen to anyone and not provide any information or services, but is it for them to tell who are our voices?

I'd need more information before I could honestly remove support for her. As it stands now, she's still my voice towards CCP, and CCP is willfully ignoring my indirect voice without giving me a substantiated reason.

Posted - 2010.07.08 08:57:00 - [282]

 

Originally by: Flios Bror

---

What exactly gives CCP the right to remove her from the CSM?

---

Wow. Just wow. Ignoring everything else (like breaching a contract) are you seriously asking what gives a private company the right to remove a volunteer from one of it's programs?

Posted - 2010.07.08 09:19:00 - [284]

 

Originally by: Flios Bror

---

What exactly gives CCP the right to remove her from the CSM?

---

You have been paying too much attention to the politicians. The CSM has no power except that which CCP temporarily gives it. It was created for PR purposes, and all the huffing about accountability is because CCP screwed up the expectations management and allowed players to think that CSM would be allowed to do anything other than present player feedback in person.

This removal has made it abundantly clear that CCP has the power to unilaterally remove delegates, and I see no visible objections from the same people who were huffing about accountability and transparency last week.

Posted - 2010.07.08 09:33:00 - [286]

 

You know what's silly? People demanding that CCP discloses the information that was leaked to justify their actions even though that information is sensitive enough to require a NDA to assure confidentiality.

Posted - 2010.07.08 09:40:00 - [288]

 

Originally by: Alghu Karaolum

---

The ball is in CCP's side now, why was the second most voted CSM booted?

---

Because she breached the NDA?

(/flex thread title reading skills).

Posted - 2010.07.08 09:46:00 - [290]

 

Originally by: Yuki Kulotsuki

---

Larkonisgate:
Detractors: you ****ing pirate! OMG how dare you! ban his ass! forum ban should be game ban!
Supporters: way to get caught noob. you should've known better.

Alphabetsoup sacked:
Detractors: give us the goods. she probably deserved it.
Supporters: OMG leave her alone! just leave her alone!

One side seems to have been much more drama llama about this than the other; consistently through both sackings but on different sides of the candidate. Then again, the other side knows how to troll the first from here to iceland and back.

I for one welcome our [censored hacker name] supported, free-trip to iceland (too late!), vote for me I'm a chick, new CSM member.

---

This.

Then again, I've consistently been able to prove that Harcore carebears are "psychotic virigins" as ankh likes to call the pirates more than any other player.

Afterall, I get actual death threats during hulkageddon.

Inappropriate content removed.Applebabe

Posted - 2010.07.08 09:59:00 - [292]

 

Originally by: Cailais

---

The loss of Ankh may prove in the longer term to be a positive for the CSM.

I would hope it will encourage players to be more circumspect in their selection of a candidate and the 'drama bomb' bring the CSM to the attention of more players (even bad news is good PR).

My greatest concern for the CSM is, and has always been, its focus as a personality contest. Either players have been selected for the CSM because they're minor EVE Celebs or they apply to the CSM to become a minor EVE Celeb.

What the CSM hasn't done (as far as I can tell) is actually worked as a collective - its still a disparate group of individuals all clamouring for their place in the spot light.

My preference (before the first CSM) was that players ran and promoted themselves as players - not on the basis of their in game persona's. In the same vein rather than have player X or Y post the outcomes of the CSM perhaps there should be a CSM Avatar - an anonymous 'alt' who posts on behalf of the CSM as a whole.

The minutes and so forth rather reflect this "Ank said, Sok said" etc etc. We dont really need to know who in the CSM said what - what matters is the end result, not the unsightly process that goes on in the background.

C.

---

While it is true that "well known" characters have an easier time getting elected, it is also by virtue of them having a deeper, or more thorough, understanding of the game, or at least one particular aspect thereof. Also they tend to have a large follower base in cases of alliance leadership. However I disagree with the rest of your argument.

Most of the people elected to the CSM are already well known, and those who weren't haven't become more famous in the process. I can assure you that the CSM did and does work as a collective most of the time, that is clearly visible during the Iceland meetings if nowhere else. There is however no denying that people have differing opinions, experiences and obectives, but this doesn't prevent things being accomplished, on the contrary. It is through the exchange of ideas that the CSM works best.

As far as the elections go, people frequently tout their qualities as a person before their in-game persona, the latter being used as credential to attest of their knowledge (while also serving as a role of vote grabbing through name recognition).

An anonymous CSM Avatar could work for some things, not so for others.

The minutes reflect each member's opinions and ideas, as they are held and presented during the debates that happen. You seem to think that people having different opinions and arguing about proposals is a bad thing, I believe it is its greatest strength for without a contrary opinion, nobody would try and assert the validity of the claims. The process is as important as the end result, and while the end result should (and do) come from "the CSM", the process of arriving at that conclusion is a vital part and comes from the members. As a voter, you would want to know where the elected members stand, how they argue for/against things...

Posted - 2010.07.08 10:18:00 - [294]

 

Originally by: Yuki Kulotsuki

---

Originally by: Flios Bror

---

What exactly gives CCP the right to remove her from the CSM?

---

Wow. Just wow. Ignoring everything else (like breaching a contract) are you seriously asking what gives a private company the right to remove a volunteer from one of it's programs?

---

And therein lies the fundamental problem with the CSM.

Only the CSM should remove members from the CSM.
CCP should not be able to mess with the CSM.

While the CSM remains as it is, it will forever remain irrelevant to all. It's a pointless branch of CCP that was born of extremely dubious origins which not only is it unable to have any influence on, all it's siginificantly managed to do is introduce a new level of corruption to the game.

CCP have managed to create the illusion of choice and power, and yesterday managed to demonstrate to all that all those votes count for nothing when CCP decide they count for nothing. I feel it remains only a matter of time until the proof of electoral fixing comes along, there is simply no reason for CCP to hold a fair election for an irrelevant body which they can simply choose to ignore or disassemble at their convenience.

Since there is no electoral monitoring, CCP can save themselves a lot of uncertainty and campaign fixing by simply counting only the votes they have predecided to count.

CCP's marketing jerk will be counting the column inches this affair is generating and putting in for a pay rise, this has got to be worth a new Volvo at the very least.

Posted - 2010.07.08 10:20:00 - [296]

 

Originally by: Bellum Eternus

---

If some rumors that I've heard (from multiple sources) are true, and I have good reason to believe that they are, Ankh will be very lucky if she isn't charged in a criminal court for what she has allegedly done. If the real truth comes out about what she's (allegedly) done, breaking an NDA or mouthing off on some blog will seem like a drop in the bucket in comparison.

Of course, this post only means something if the truth comes out and we're not whitewashed by CCP and the other involved parties. At any rate, you heard it here first.

---

If some of the rumors that I've heard (from multiple sources) are true and I have good reason to believe that they are, Ankh is a little pink and yellow-striped alien from a planet Omicron Persei 8. If the real truth comes out about what she (allegedly) is, breaking an NDA or mouthing off on some blog will seem like a drop in comparison.

Can anyone be even more vague about anything then your post is? Hollow accusations without any proof or backing are just part of an irresponsible witch-hunt.

And no, I do not white-knight for her either, because some of the things she said and did were outright silly, if not to say idiotic. But some people here really need to take a step back and think about their own behaviour.

Posted - 2010.07.08 10:21:00 - [298]

 

so I asume that now that Ank is gone there will be no: Arrest pirates for days in stations when they did crime!

Good riddance...

Posted - 2010.07.08 10:44:00 - [300]

 

Originally by: Miyamoto Isoruku

---

Look, no one, not even Finn, opposed Ankh's candidacy more than I did. That said I simply do not trust CCP here, especially not after T20. For CCP to sack a CSM member not long after she made a very vocal blog post excoriating them simply does not seem kosher.

---

Agreed.

Even if they don't tell us the specifics of what she is alleged to have done, they really need to give more information in order to reassure the player base that there isn't any foul play going on here.