open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked [CSM6] Re-Elect Trebor Daehdoow
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 : last (11)

Author Topic

Siecen K'Solaran
Posted - 2011.03.13 13:50:00 - [211]
 

Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab
Originally by: Siecen K'Solaran
For those just joining us, the unsourced accusations in question are that mittens is involved in the supposed smear campaign against trebor, and that mittens "wants to try to use [the csm] as a vehicle to advance his own petty in-game interests, at the expense of the vast majority of the players of EVE."

Why should he not delete your post when you don't even get the timeline right?

Originally by: Leaked before both SHC and Jita Corner got spammed by goons
(7:52:06 PM) directorbot@goonfleet.com/directorbot: Gentlegoons, some news. As you may not know, we had a 'fleet battle', the rarest of events today in eurotime against Ev0ke and PL; in a similarly rare event, Mister Vee screwed up and welped our fleet (while us welping is not rare, Vee usually doesn't err) This is a good time to grab new Alphafleet ships and be prepared for more bloc-level goodfights in euro tz going forward.

In CSM Politics news, we have found the powerbase of the pubbies who elected mouthbreathing idiots to the last CSM; apparently they live on ****heap, that forum where our anicent enemies in BoB used to congregate to hide behind the skirts of their own moderators. The SHC population remains hostile and hates our guts, hates nullsec, and is writing reams of conspiracy-fueled words about how we're out to ruin the game or ruin the CSM and 'why can't every candidate be just like Trebor' - who Helen Highwater identified as one of the most dangerous idiots on CSM5. Feel free to swing by their ~discussion thread~ to have a look at what our self-declared political enemies post like: http://www.scrapheap-challenge.com/viewtopic.php?t=39368 Things heat up in idiocville around page 21 when Vile Rat and I arrive.

*** This was a broadcast from themittani to all, replies are not monitored ***



Because deleting comments you don't like is bad, that's why. I don't know anything about timelines.

On topic, I'll accept that as mittens mobilizing goons against trebor. Could be fake, but I doubt it. If trebor had had linked it when I asked for citations, I would have dropped it from my argument.

Got anything for the "he wants to try to use it as a vehicle to advance his own petty in-game interests, at the expense of the vast majority of the players of EVE" part?

Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.03.13 14:05:00 - [212]
 

Originally by: Siecen K'Solaran
For those just joining us, the unsourced accusations in question are that mittens is involved in the supposed smear campaign against trebor, and that mittens "wants to try to use [the csm] as a vehicle to advance his own petty in-game interests, at the expense of the vast majority of the players of EVE."

I deleted your post because I did in fact already address the questions you asked (which were not quite, by the way, the specific points you make above), but also because I knew you almost certainly couldn't resist the bait and would post about it in this thread, where I could address it in front of a wider audience. Thanks!

As for The Mittani's involvement in the smear campaign against me, according to a Goon Jabber leak, he ordered a "no-holds-barred posting op". He hasn't bothered to deny it, and a previous leak from the same source in which he identifies me as a target was confirmed by him in the very next post in the thread.

With respect to your second concern, The Mittani would be a fool to admit this in public, but given his history in-game (which, I hasten to repeat, I entirely admire -- in an in-game context), you would have to be a fool not to be concerned. I addressed this issue in a comment to the blog post; interested readers should check it out.

Another interesting post is a wonderful demolition of the Goon smear talking points by Andrea Griffin. It's a fascinating exposure of how out-of-context quote-mining works.

Finally, with regard to setting myself up as the "anti-goon" candidate, I did not do that; The Mittani did. And to be precise, I'm not anti-goon -- or anti-anyone for that matter. I'm pro-EVE.

I am not at all worried about the smear campaign -- on the contrary, I was praying The Mittani would be foolish enough to go after a candidate with strong qualifications, such as Seleene or myself, and thus increase non-powerbloc turnout. It's a classic case of "The Emperor has made a critical mistake..." and "His pattern indicates two-dimensional thinking".

My only concern, as I pointed out in my Guide to Mud, is that it will generate too many extra votes for me, and divert votes away from other qualified candidates.

Unlike The Mittani, I don't have any particular desire to be chairman. My primary concern is that CSM 6 contain delegates that will work their asses off to improve the game for all players.

Including, of course, the Goons.

Siecen K'Solaran
Posted - 2011.03.13 15:54:00 - [213]
 

Edited by: Siecen K''Solaran on 13/03/2011 15:57:03
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
I deleted your post because I did in fact already address the questions you asked (which were not quite, by the way, the specific points you make above), but also because I knew you almost certainly couldn't resist the bait and would post about it in this thread, where I could address it in front of a wider audience. Thanks!


Because that's so much easier than copy pasting, sweet damage control brah.

Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
With respect to your second concern, The Mittani would be a fool to admit this in public, but given his history in-game (which, I hasten to repeat, I entirely admire -- in an in-game context), you would have to be a fool not to be concerned. I addressed this issue in a comment to the blog post; interested readers should check it out.


"Given his in-game history"? Is that all you have? You say as a statement of fact and in bold that "he wants to try to use it as a vehicle to advance his own petty in-game interests, at the expense of the vast majority of the players of EVE" and when I ask for citations you present nothing but wordy variations on "he's a tricky sort of guy and I don't trust him"? Can you provide a single case of out-of-game malfeasance? A quote that says he would abuse power, or even push for a change which would benefit his alliance over others? Would you deny that he has been against overpowered supercarriers and against the technetium buff, which benefit his alliance?

Facts are awesome. Please provide one.

Kethas Protagonist
Protagonist Ventures
Posted - 2011.03.13 17:07:00 - [214]
 

You have my vote.

Thank you for your work on CSM5 and best of luck with your CSM6 campaign.

HighlanderUK
Interstellar Business Machines Corp.
Posted - 2011.03.13 21:10:00 - [215]
 

Thanks for your previous work, and i wish you the best of Scottish luck for CSM6, here's hoping the 'pothole' fixing continues, rather than sticking on new content every 6 months. You'll be getting my vote, and hopefully those of my corp members.

As an industrial player & a corp mainly doing missions and industrial work, i would like to see some effort put into bringing the indy part of EVE some much needed care an attention. The last few updates and new add-ons seem to have been mainly aimed at PVP/0.0/alliances. Its about time the smaller corps were also given some attention, and stop CCP always aiming to get players out of empire and into 0.0 to be able to play half of the game mechanics or any new ships they decide to introduce), or adding PI to totally feck things up for indy's.

I'd like for the small fixes and changes to continue, such as icon fixing, UI corrections, drone AI etc.....now fix things like the lab and factory use restrictions, and I will be even happier -- 11 is very poor for a game based on advanced science and space-age technology, that had been set way back many years ago (been playing 6 years), long before the player base grew over the quarter million mark, and the settings of any NPC station have NOT been upgraded/adapted to match the number of players wishing to build/research/invent. I like to play my own way, and I am paying to play after all. If we are to retain good players and good friends made over the years, we need to fix what's broken first, before adding more 'dough' to the mix!!

Trilliam Green
Posted - 2011.03.13 22:08:00 - [216]
 

Hey there Trebor, you are getting all of my votes because of the great work that you did with CSM5, good luck ;)

Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.03.14 01:08:00 - [217]
 

Originally by: Siecen K'Solaran
"Given his in-game history"? Is that all you have? You say as a statement of fact and in bold that "he wants to try to use it as a vehicle to advance his own petty in-game interests, at the expense of the vast majority of the players of EVE" and when I ask for citations you present nothing but wordy variations on "he's a tricky sort of guy and I don't trust him"? Can you provide a single case of out-of-game malfeasance? A quote that says he would abuse power, or even push for a change which would benefit his alliance over others? Would you deny that he has been against overpowered supercarriers and against the technetium buff, which benefit his alliance?

There was another one before that in reaction to the 'jump bridge nerf' summit report where GS had a call-to-arms for major 0.0 alliances to take over the CSM, iirc. We already know they got involved partly in order to maintain the status quo despite it being obvious to anyone living out there that force projection is one of the main causes of the stagnant nature of large parts of 0.0.

Galantria
Caldari
Pegasus Mining Korp
Integrity Respect Selflessness
Posted - 2011.03.14 02:55:00 - [218]
 

Edited by: Galantria on 14/03/2011 02:56:00
After reading the entire threads of many other canidates, and never befor voting (having 4 chairs over the years)you have my vote Trebor. Just remember us small fry when you get there.

Galantria
CEO Pegasus Mining Korp

Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.03.14 11:20:00 - [219]
 

I'll reply to some of the pending questions later today (I have to head down into the Anime Mines this morning), but I just wanted to post a quick headsup:

The CSM just published a devblog to help explain what the CSM is really all about, and what it has achieved. I think you'll find it interesting reading.

Bomberlocks
Minmatar
CTRL-Q
Posted - 2011.03.14 12:34:00 - [220]
 

Edited by: Bomberlocks on 14/03/2011 13:17:44
Bumping to say that we want the real life photo of Treb and Seleene.Very Happy

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.03.14 19:54:00 - [221]
 

Edited by: Trebor Daehdoow on 15/03/2011 01:00:23
Yesterday, I was a guest on a marathon 4hour CSM election program hosted by DJ DrizzCat of New Eden Radio. Many candidates showed up, and each was asked the same set of questions -- the recording of the entire show is now online.

The final question was interesting - "If you could change one thing about EVE or CCP, what would it be?"

My answer was pretty much what you'd expect from me: More resources devoted to improving and re-writing the EVE UI, since that's something that is of immediately benefit to everyone.

So far, pretty straightforward.

Last up was The Mittani, who dropped in at the last moment. When asked what one thing he'd want, The Mittani did not hesitate - a user-moddable UI!

Finally, something The Mittani and I can agree on!

For you see, back when I ran for CSM 5, the two things I said EVE needed were a renewed War on Lag, and a user-moddable UI. I said so in great detail my CSM 5 Manifesto.

So I guess The Mittani's position is that:

* I am an idiot, and all of my ideas are dangerous.

* Except for the one that The Mittani thinks is the best thing that could happen to EVE!

It gets better. In my CSM 5 Campaign Thread I caught a fair amount of flak for my UI proposal, and how impractical it was. However, I'd thought through some of the technical and meta-game issues, and was able to give good answers to some fairly hard questions.

So if The Mittani gets attacked for this "dangerous and idiotic" idea, he can save himself some time and get the answers from my thread of 10 months ago.

But wait, there's more. The other thing he'd like to change is CCP's dysfunctional internal communications, and he gave a wonderful example of a case where a CCP dev discovered a way to make his part of the code much more efficient, but didn't even think to let other people at the company know about it, so they could use it in their own code.

What he forgot to mention is that he got that example directly from Mynxee (CSM5 Chair) in an MSN conversation -- the same Mynxee who was labeled by the Goon CSM Alternate (Helen Highwater) as a "dribbling r*****d".

So there you have it: The Mittani gets his biggest ideas from dangerous idiots and dribbling r*****ds. Twisted Evil

Bomberlocks
Minmatar
CTRL-Q
Posted - 2011.03.14 20:14:00 - [222]
 

Excellent comeback there, Treb. I think you'll have to wait a while until Mittens can consult with his advisers on what course of action to take. Will it be to grab the bull by the horns and admit that his apparent claim is mostly just a front to block any change that might hurt him and his vacuous followers or that he doesn't care anyway because his ponies are shinier than your ponies? Or will he deny all with a chorus of Goons echoing "NO U"?

Enquiring minds want to know.

Killer Gandry
Caldari
Shadow of the Pain
Posted - 2011.03.14 20:16:00 - [223]
 

My personal thoughts on that are that he took some items from previous CSM's which might likely get more looked at with Incarna on the rise.

Then just hope that during CSM one of those points actually get's worked on by CCP and start chestbeating how HE made it possible.

Typical lawyer trick.


Sidus Sarmiang
GoonWaffe
Posted - 2011.03.14 20:25:00 - [224]
 

The UI thing was never the issue. CSM ideas like "Lets make titan doomsdays pingpong", "the Dominion sov changes sound like a great idea", and "remove jump bridges" are why we've become unhappy with the CSM. Both show that people who have no idea how life in nullsec works are trying to make decisions about how nullsec should be.


Now this idiocy about how we want to use the CSM to buff our alliance. The value of technetium and the power of supercaps are two severe imbalances in the game that favor our alliance while hurting the rest of nullsec. We want both of them fixed, which should tell you where our priorities lie. Can anyone present a reasonable counterarguement to this? Saying you don't trust us is one thing, but this is us flat out stating we want to give up two of our biggest advantages to bring more life and balance to nullsec.


Topics like fixing the UI and lag are things everyone can agree on, but when it comes to nullsec balance I don't think you have a sufficient understanding.

Mynxee
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.03.14 20:36:00 - [225]
 

Edited by: Mynxee on 14/03/2011 20:43:30
Originally by: Sidus Sarmiang
The UI thing was never the issue. CSM ideas like "Lets make titan doomsdays pingpong", "the Dominion sov changes sound like a great idea", and "remove jump bridges" are why we've become unhappy with the CSM. Both show that people who have no idea how life in nullsec works are trying to make decisions about how nullsec should be.


Consider the facts: nine of the remaining twelve CSM5 members (Vuk, Korvin, Mazz, Sokratesz, Teadaze, Trebor, Helen Highwater, Alpha12125, and ElvenLord) are null sec players, most if not all in sov-holding alliances.

Seven of those people--including Helen Highwater--attended the December Summit where the fabled "destroy null sec" discussion occurred. Even discounting the "dangerous idiot" (as Helen has so charmingly described Trebor), null sec was more than adequately represented by informed players in the December meetings.

Did all those people--including your own representative--REALLY fail to speak out against these bad ideas that you're so worried about? All this drama sounds like spin to me, especially having listened to the recordings from those sessions.


Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2011.03.14 20:47:00 - [226]
 


I met the player of Helen Highwater once or twice at the UK live roleplaying event "The Gathering" and suffice to say he really shouldn't be labelling anyone else "a dribbling idiot."

I mean, I love eccentric people as a rule and live-roleplayers are pretty amusing, but Helen was in the category of players I don't much appreciate (exploiting the volunteer program to gain extra spells for his "npc" colour mage) that I always considered ruined large scale fest events with its essential tendency towards corruption and cronyism.

No doubt if Helen had been running for CSM back before the huge bpo scandals he'd have expected some extra skillpoints for his main as a reward for time served and fair reward.

I'm glad that CCP closed those loopholes and drew a line under earlier scandals but I do think its a little rich for a player like Helen with a history of corrupt behavior in massively offline live-roleplay fest systems to run for election without fully disclosing his previous experiences of being a "played npc" for the Lorien Trust.



Sidus Sarmiang
GoonWaffe
Posted - 2011.03.14 21:11:00 - [227]
 

Originally by: Mynxee


Did all those people--including your own representative--REALLY fail to speak out against these bad ideas that you're so worried about? All this drama sounds like spin to me, especially having listened to the recordings from those sessions.





My understanding is that my representative did speak out against it. I can't see Vuk Lau having supported it either. The devblog had a narrative that they wanted to remove jump bridges and so of course they quoted the candidates that spoke out for it. As for the rest of the nullsec players; if any of them did agree with the idea that jump bridges need to be removed, then I'm against them regardless of what part of space they're from. I was in nullsec before jump bridges were introduced and logistics were a nightmare in those days. Also bear in mind that back then much higher levels of compression were possible and people had more incentives to mine in 0.0 (even if it was still boring as all hell). Logistics are bad enough as is, we don't need to make a critical but unfun part of the game even worse.

The idea that it will reduce empire size and force projection is just as silly. If you look at the pre-jump bridge maps, you'll see many multiple region alliances covering the map, many of whom were in coalitions. If any nullsec players support the removal of jump bridges as a way of fixing these problems with the game, then they don't understand the game.





Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.03.14 21:32:00 - [228]
 

Just a quick note that I've updated the third post in this thread so it contains an index to Trebor's Top 13 Posts in the Thread.

As this thread is getting really huge, I thought it might be helpful.

More replies tonight, as time permits...

Mynxee
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.03.14 22:01:00 - [229]
 

Edited by: Mynxee on 14/03/2011 22:09:24
Originally by: Sidus Sarmiang
My understanding is that my representative did speak out against it. I can't see Vuk Lau having supported it either. The devblog had a narrative that they wanted to remove jump bridges and so of course they quoted the candidates that spoke out for it. As for the rest of the nullsec players; if any of them did agree with the idea that jump bridges need to be removed, then I'm against them regardless of what part of space they're from.


By devblog, I assume you mean the minutes from the December Summit? As an aside, drafting of the minutes was a task shared by CCP and some members of the CSM (well, just Trebor and myself, to be quite frank; I worked from a recording to complete the section on Core).

Trebor drafted the section on the null sec sessions and shared it for CSM and CCP comment and feedback over the course of a week. Only one person who was at the Summit asked for a change, which was minor and unrelated to the controversial topics. And this person was not Helen Highwater, who provided no input whatsoever (he did offer to do a style pass but failed to follow up on that).

Vuk and ElvenLord were not pleased with the draft but since they weren't at the Summit, they could hardly suggest content changes. However, I note that there is no evidence that they took any initiative to encourage null sec players who DID attend to refute the draft and demand that its scope or accuracy be changed if there were questions about that.


Devilish Ledoux
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.14 22:27:00 - [230]
 

Originally by: Jade Constantine

I met the player of Helen Highwater once or twice at the UK live roleplaying event "The Gathering" and suffice to say he really shouldn't be labelling anyone else "a dribbling idiot."


Counterpoint: You're Jade Constantine.

Bomberlocks
Minmatar
CTRL-Q
Posted - 2011.03.14 22:32:00 - [231]
 

Originally by: Devilish Ledoux
Originally by: Jade Constantine

I met the player of Helen Highwater once or twice at the UK live roleplaying event "The Gathering" and suffice to say he really shouldn't be labelling anyone else "a dribbling idiot."


Counterpoint: You're Jade Constantine.
Counter-counterpoint: Takes one to know one.

Devilish Ledoux
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.14 22:57:00 - [232]
 

Originally by: Bomberlocks
Originally by: Devilish Ledoux
Originally by: Jade Constantine

I met the player of Helen Highwater once or twice at the UK live roleplaying event "The Gathering" and suffice to say he really shouldn't be labelling anyone else "a dribbling idiot."


Counterpoint: You're Jade Constantine.
Counter-counterpoint: Takes one to know one.


Long exposure to Jade Constantine has inoculated me against him.

Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.03.14 23:44:00 - [233]
 

Originally by: HighlanderUK
As an industrial player & a corp mainly doing missions and industrial work, i would like to see some effort put into bringing the indy part of EVE some much needed care an attention. The last few updates and new add-ons seem to have been mainly aimed at PVP/0.0/alliances.

While I don't think you can make a case that the latest changes to the game are mainly aimed at PVP/etc (Heck, Incursion was PVE -- though not industrial -- and there's been lots of little UI tweaks that benefit eveyone, not to mention the contracts improvements), on a personal level, I agree with you. I like industrial stuff, and I even managed to have fun running a manufacturing/research POS, so I'd like to see that aspect of the game get more love.

But as I've pointed out, what I personally want cannot be allowed to affect my decisions as a CSM. So when I run into a potential conflict like this, I need to make extra sure I'm not fooling myself.

Thus, I need good metrics to make the case to CCP that putting effort into this area of the game will make them money -- either by attracting new players or retaining existing ones.

If you look at the November Crowdsourcing, you'll see several industry-related items did well, notably "Whatever happened to the Industry expansion?", at #20 with 13.18% support. And when related items were grouped, "POS Mechanics" came in at #4 with 29.75%.

Which means there is a reasonable amount of support, so I can in good conscience advocate that improvements to industry should be considered.

That said, the fact is that for some of the devs, improving the gritty infrastructure of the universe will not be high on their list of things to do, because it isn't :awesome:.

But one thing I try to remind them is that the players don't exist to provide them with chances to be awesome. They exist to serve the players, who fund their paychecks. Awesome isn't a reason for doing things, it's the emergent result of hard thinking, hard choices, and a ton of hard work.


Devilish Ledoux
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.15 01:44:00 - [234]
 

Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
Finally, something The Mittani and I can agree on!


Congratulations, you know that Eve's UI is horrible. Surely you are the first CSM candidate to ever mention this to CCP. That must make you the Al Gore of Eve UI improvements. OF COURSE, the UI is crap. OF COURSE, one way to improve the UI would be to give players the tools to come up those improvements on their own. Is there anyone with any sense who has ever said otherwise? No one is saying that you don't support the most obvious ways to improve the Eve Online experience. We're saying that your unique ideas are so abominably bad that CCP's development team would have to be hopped up on a gallon of rotten shark liquor to give any of them credence. (Hint: If none of your ideas are taken seriously, you are a waste of an international plane ticket.)

A candidate is judged by the views which distinguish them from everyone else, not the consensus opinions virtually every pilot holds. Your ideas - your actual, conceived-by-Trebor, unique ideas - are godawful. No, you can't claim credit for 'fix the UI' as a unique idea. Well, I guess you can TRY.

You and Mittens also agree that the sky is often blue, that water is wet and that trees are usually made of wood (he does, anyway; I asked). If you do make it onto the CSM (Heaven forbid) and meet in the flesh, there's probably no end to the things that the two of you will find you in common. Do you have two arms, two legs and a head? Hey, so does Mittens! Do you consume organic matter to stay alive? Mittens does that, too!

So yes, let's amend our official statement in re: your candidacy.

* Trebor Daehdoow is an idiot whose ideas regarding the direction that Eve Online should take are dangerous and ludicrous.
* He personally came up with the idea that Eve's UI is bad (just kidding, Mister Vice President).

Also, you call it a "smear campaign" (because it's you). We call it educating the electorate.

Rudolf Miller
Dawn of a new Empire
The Initiative.
Posted - 2011.03.15 02:06:00 - [235]
 

Originally by: Devilish Ledoux
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
Finally, something The Mittani and I can agree on!


hot air


so basically you're just trying to say that since the idea isn't original it doesn't count.

pray tell what :awesome: ideas can mr. mittens claim to be his own then? if it's gonna be ranting and raving and being an ass I got bad news for you.

Devilish Ledoux
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.15 02:23:00 - [236]
 

Edited by: Devilish Ledoux on 15/03/2011 02:31:48
In the spirit of educating the electorate (and so that I don't appear to be making unfounded assertions), let's review some of Trebor's terrible, terrible ideas:

"Pinball" style Doomsdays, which would be the FOURTH change to Doomsdays and which was shamelessly stolen from the Empyrean Age trailer). Oh, and it would do nothing to mitigate Titan proliferation.
Support for "Dominion-style" sov changes that have produced the opposite of their intended effect: enlarging and entrenching nullsec power blocs instead of shrinking them and making it easier to invade bloated ones.
Cumulative local chat delays, making it nearly impossible to say more than a few things in local before the delay becomes unbearable. I guess this is supposed to fix local spam, which is a massive concern, as local spam is killing Eve.
Some wacky scheme to encrypt packets travelling between the server and client. I don't even know what that's supposed to fix, but is sure could ruin a lot of things.
Reduce fleet sizes by making the client behave even worse than it already does in large fleet fights. Or maybe it would behave better, at the cost of making it impossible to actually fight. Who knows. It'll never happen, so who cares?
Don't ban bots: just let people in empire shoot them. Fun fact: He fails to realize that the problem is detection, not enforcement. At least he'll get Iskbank.com's vote.

I could go on (seriously, just look for his posts on eve-search; he's a crazyposting machine), but do I really need to?

Devilish Ledoux
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.15 02:27:00 - [237]
 

Originally by: Rudolf Miller
so basically you're just trying to say that since the idea isn't original it doesn't count.

pray tell what :awesome: ideas can mr. mittens claim to be his own then? if it's gonna be ranting and raving and being an ass I got bad news for you.


No, I'm saying that seeking validation for his campaign by saying "Oh, Mittani and I agree on this one thing; ergo, I should be taken seriously" is ridiculous.

As for Mittens ... I'd refer you to his campaign thread, but something tells me it would be like throwing a wicker basket into a well. You'd get wet, but you wouldn't retain much.

Sidus Sarmiang
GoonWaffe
Posted - 2011.03.15 03:39:00 - [238]
 

Originally by: Mynxee
Edited by: Mynxee on 14/03/2011 22:09:24
Originally by: Sidus Sarmiang
My understanding is that my representative did speak out against it. I can't see Vuk Lau having supported it either. The devblog had a narrative that they wanted to remove jump bridges and so of course they quoted the candidates that spoke out for it. As for the rest of the nullsec players; if any of them did agree with the idea that jump bridges need to be removed, then I'm against them regardless of what part of space they're from.


By devblog, I assume you mean the minutes from the December Summit? As an aside, drafting of the minutes was a task shared by CCP and some members of the CSM (well, just Trebor and myself, to be quite frank; I worked from a recording to complete the section on Core).

Trebor drafted the section on the null sec sessions and shared it for CSM and CCP comment and feedback over the course of a week. Only one person who was at the Summit asked for a change, which was minor and unrelated to the controversial topics. And this person was not Helen Highwater, who provided no input whatsoever (he did offer to do a style pass but failed to follow up on that).

Vuk and ElvenLord were not pleased with the draft but since they weren't at the Summit, they could hardly suggest content changes. However, I note that there is no evidence that they took any initiative to encourage null sec players who DID attend to refute the draft and demand that its scope or accuracy be changed if there were questions about that.




I'm not voting for Helen to begin with, and I'd like to hear his explanation as to why he didn't do more to stop this. As for Vuk and ElvenLord, lets ignore the fact they didn't speak out against it since, as you said, they weren't there. For the rest, it doesn't really matter to me where they came from as my point was that anyone who thinks removing jump bridges is a good idea is pretty clueless about how nullsec works and isn't getting my support.


Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.03.15 09:36:00 - [239]
 

Originally by: Sidus Sarmiang
Now this idiocy about how we want to use the CSM to buff our alliance. The value of technetium and the power of supercaps are two severe imbalances in the game that favor our alliance while hurting the rest of nullsec. We want both of them fixed, which should tell you where our priorities lie.

I entirely agree that The Mittani says that he wants these issues addressed. But he has produced no evidence that he actually does want them addressed. Actions speak louder than words, and since he has no track record on the CSM, until he is actually elected, no one can know what he really intends.

Furthermore, it should be observed that, from a meta-game standpoint, a nerf that hurts you is fine, as long as it wounds your opponents more deeply. So the argument that "I must be honest because I want to nerf this, and it would hurt my mates" is disingenuous.

The devil, as always, is in the details.

Originally by: Sidus Sarmiang
I'm not voting for Helen to begin with, and I'd like to hear his explanation as to why he didn't do more to stop [removing jump bridges].

I'll give you the most probable explanation. It is because he, like everyone else in the room, understood that what was going on was a very high-level discussion aimed at helping CCP define the parameter space of potential changes. The question wasn't "should bridges be killed (in isolation)?", but rather "is killing bridges totally out of bounds (as part of a package of changes that makes sense)?"

In reality, jump bridges are unlikely to get anything more than a gentle nerf, as part of a package of changes. But I personally think it's important for the GD staff to consider outrageous ideas from time to time. Sure, most of the time, those trips into the outer darkness will come to nothing, but occasionally they'll find a nugget of gold.

Finally, I would like to point out that I have consistently advocated that the devs subject their plans for big changes like a nullsec revamp to public tiger-teaming by player experts -- while they are still just on paper. No matter how knowledgable the 15 members of the CSM are, on any particular issue, there are 150 players out there who know more. CCP should use that resource -- it's just good business -- instead of hiding behind their "players don't do game design" mantra. Even if players don't do game design, "no game design survives contact with the players", so better for that to happen as early as possible.

The CSM, with its unique position straddling two worlds (connected to the players, and under NDA to CCP), is in a perfect position to organize and moderate such discussions, and produce a position document that will be useful to the devs. Sort of a summit report in reverse, if you will.

Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.03.15 10:18:00 - [240]
 

Edited by: Rakshasa Taisab on 15/03/2011 10:21:02
Originally by: Devilish Ledoux
"Pinball" style Doomsdays, which would be the FOURTH change to Doomsdays and which was shamelessly stolen from the Empyrean Age trailer). Oh, and it would do nothing to mitigate Titan proliferation.

You don't think Empyrean Age style DD would be cool? Boring goons are boring.

And he never claimed the change would mitigate Titan proliferation, and the use of the words 'giggles', 'comedy value' and a note that it was a mischievous suggestion should indicate that you are looking too hard for dirt.

Originally by: Devilish Ledoux
Support for "Dominion-style" sov changes that have produced the opposite of their intended effect: enlarging and entrenching nullsec power blocs instead of shrinking them and making it easier to invade bloated ones

Your comment makes no sense in relation to his comment, and if anything his comment is closer to what Dominion was _supposed_ to be, not what it became. As such we have no idea if the planned Dominion changes would have enabled smaller independent alliances entry to 0.0.

Originally by: Devilish Ledoux
Cumulative local chat delays, making it nearly impossible to say more than a few things in local before the delay becomes unbearable. I guess this is supposed to fix local spam, which is a massive concern, as local spam is killing Eve.

Local spam is a GS weapon of choice, so of course you'll find the suggestion stupid.

Originally by: Devilish Ledoux
Some wacky scheme to encrypt packets travelling between the server and client. I don't even know what that's supposed to fix, but is sure could ruin a lot of things.

Don't worry, you don't need to know that stuff yet still manage to live a perfectly happy life.

Preloading data, encryption and topics such as those aren't easy to understand for lay people. If you want an example of the use of preloaded data in the client, just check out that thing that comes up on the screen when you enter your password. That's preloaded data.

Also, you could read up on wikipedia about encryption, one-time pad encryption should give a nice introduction to why it wouldn't necessarily ruin everything. (Of course they wouldn't use one-time pads since they need to be the same size for theoretically unbeatable encryption, and there would need to be additional measures in place to make it difficult to guess the content type by size and timing but those are implementation details)

Originally by: Devilish Ledoux
Reduce fleet sizes by making the client behave even worse than it already does in large fleet fights. Or maybe it would behave better, at the cost of making it impossible to actually fight. Who knows. It'll never happen, so who cares?

I believe it was T'Amber (or someone) who said he also had wacky ideas like that until CCP gave the CSM delegates a lecture of what the real problems with fleet lag were.

Nor would Ireland's hunger crisis a few centuries be solved if the nobility started eating babies of poor families, which was the last time someone made a 'Modest Proposal'.

Trebor even said in the post it isn't 'the way to deal with lag', but rather a starting point for discussion.

Originally by: Devilish Ledoux
Don't ban bots: just let people in empire shoot them. Fun fact: He fails to realize that the problem is detection, not enforcement. At least he'll get Iskbank.com's vote.

Trebor was talking about punishment for botting, not detection of botting, a subtle but important distinction that is easy to miss when you're running a mud slinging campaign rather than trying to foster productive discussion.


Pages: first : previous : ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 : last (11)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only