open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked Question For The Candidates
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Il Reverendo
Minmatar
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2008.05.05 13:17:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Il Reverendo on 05/05/2008 13:19:02
Is there anyone running for election to the CSM on the basis of NOT using the position as a soap box from which to harangue CCP about their own pet peeves with regard to game design and balance?

Are there any candidates running solely under the auspices of providing a little accountability and transparency to CCP's actions, with the sole aim of avoiding epic tinfoil-hattery and providing players with the trust and information necessary to prevent and defuse threadnaughts the likes of which spawned the idea of the CSM in the first place?

In my eyes no candidates appear to be campaigning to fulfill the originally intended role of the CSM, but rather seem intent on winning public opinion on the strength of their promises to make noise about the nerfing of x, the boosting of y or the implementation of z. I for one am not comfortable with the idea of a player committee, each member of which has been voted for by a small percentage of the players, having the avowed intent to bend CCP's ear on their own favourite 'issues'.

The way I see it the CSM should function as damage control and extra community relations in times of "crisis" (by which I mean groups of idiots shouting "omg omg bob has a special msn line to the devs!!11!" and posting conspiracies to every sit they can think of) , not as some kind of experiment to bring the horrendously flawed concept known as democracy to eve. In fact, I think the entire idea should be scrapped altogether.

However, my gripes aside, back to the original question: Is there anyone with a campaign not based upon an avowed intent to try and get eve changed in some fashion in line with their own personal ideas of balance and gameplay? If there is I want to vote for them.

Tom Harry
Posted - 2008.05.05 13:24:00 - [2]
 

I second that. It didnt even take the CSMs a day to lose track of their own purpose.

Nofonno
Amarr
Posted - 2008.05.05 13:34:00 - [3]
 

I think that the "damage control" should be one of the functions of CSM... not even primary function.

Having said that, I'm running for CSM too. You may have noticed that I have not presented any consturcted manifesto or programme as is customary. I'm not here to brainwash anyone.

My basic intent is to play devil's advocate -- to pinpoint issues that are not usually considered, facilitating dialogue and exchange of opinion. Of course I have my opinions on how should things work, but I won't sacrifice the productive critical dialogue to them. It's just not worth it.


Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.05 13:51:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: Il Reverendo

Are there any candidates running solely under the auspices of providing a little accountability and transparency to CCP's actions, with the sole aim of avoiding epic tinfoil-hattery and providing players with the trust and information necessary to prevent and defuse threadnaughts the likes of which spawned the idea of the CSM in the first place?


It is impossible for the CSM to fulfill its original intent without opening up CCP employees to potential abuse. This is not necessary nor warranted. It would be nice if we are able to overview what IA is doing, but it is going to be pretty much impossible to get specific information since that is much to easily abused to put out, even among only a small group of elected representatives.

That is likely why no one is campaigning as such. It is a promise that they have no way of keeping. Where as making sure that CCP is doing the right thing for the game they certainly can.

Arithron
Gallente
Gallente Trade Alliance
Posted - 2008.05.05 14:16:00 - [5]
 

Yes, there are candidates who have no hidden agendas, pet peeves and the like to push forward to CCP (ie, use CSM for their own aims, or their corp/alliance ones). One of them is myself. I comment on improvements and ideas for improvements when asked, but my job on the CSM (if elected) will be to LISTEN to player CONCERNS and IDEAS through the CSM forum, and debate those that get the required support in a CSM meeting. I doubt I will raise any topics on the CSM forum myself. Thats not what I am being elected to do - I am being elected to listen to your ideas etc.

Take care,
Bruce Hansen (Arithron)

zoolkhan
Minmatar
Mirkur Draug'Tyr
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2008.05.05 14:27:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: zoolkhan on 05/05/2008 14:32:03
edited for termination of some embarassing typos

Originally by: Il Reverendo


<some frustration, something else>

However, my gripes aside, back to the original question: Is there anyone with a campaign not based upon an avowed intent to try and get eve changed in some fashion in line with their own personal ideas of balance and gameplay? If there is I want to vote for them.


i am tempted to say, if you would bother to read you should have figured out.

But if you need teh shortcut: vote me

I want to highlight, that most of us - at least me, limit their SOAPing
to answering incoming questions. It would be rude to not do that.

If someone wants to know from me "what would you change" then i answer that question honestly
w/o questioning his question or if it makes sense in the light of the CSM purpouse or not.

I am no member of an alliance, i have no seven page marketing agenda - my statement is quiet simple.

i respond and answer, i remain what i am, and i have the distance to my own desires
i expect the CSM will not have half of teh powers that some voters seem to think
but that doesnt keep me from answering their questions.

that doesnt mean i am "using the position as a soap box from which to harangue CCP about their own pet peeves with regard to game design and balance"

or does it?

Now, vote me - for i speak frank, or follow your instincts wherever they lead you otherwise

may the gods shine your path bright and lead your voting finger to the checkbox of wisdom :-)


Omber Zombie
Gallente
Frontier Technologies
Posted - 2008.05.05 15:55:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Il Reverendo

Is there anyone running for election to the CSM on the basis of NOT using the position as a soap box from which to harangue CCP about their own pet peeves with regard to game design and balance?

Are there any candidates running solely under the auspices of providing a little accountability and transparency to CCP's actions, with the sole aim of avoiding epic tinfoil-hattery and providing players with the trust and information necessary to prevent and defuse threadnaughts the likes of which spawned the idea of the CSM in the first place?

Is there anyone with a campaign not based upon an avowed intent to try and get eve changed in some fashion in line with their own personal ideas of balance and gameplay? If there is I want to vote for them.


yes, read my blog Very Happy

Arduron
Posted - 2008.05.05 17:19:00 - [8]
 

I am definately not here to better my own personal agenda. I have voiced my opinion on many popular questions and debates opened on the forum, because that is what the voting populace has asked of the candidates. But I still stand by my initial statement. That I am here to give the players a VOICE to ccp.

The purpose of the CSM is to provide a single channel of communication, through a group moderated filter before going to CCP employees. It also provides 2 way communication and accountability. So that the community gets feedback.

While yes, my platform talks about maintaining balance in game, and improving the new player experience. Those are simply issues that I think are important (and every player who plays eve, no matter if they are candidates or not, have issues that they feel are important. EVERY one...) The players want to know what issues we feel are important so that they can vote for someone closer to their own views. That is the reason I post my opinions and my ideas. Not to put myself on a soapbox.

I hope that satisfies your question to some degree.

Thanks!

Max Torps
Nomadic Conglomerate
Posted - 2008.05.05 17:25:00 - [9]
 

I have opinions but not an agenda. My campaign is about taking player issues forward and working as part of the CSM team.

Of course, everyone has opinions and they may influence the flow of discussion but the checks in place to counter that are other CSM's and the biggest check of all is the CCP Council.

Thanks.

Bunyip
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2008.05.05 17:35:00 - [10]
 

I'm running for CSM for the players. I have many ideas on how to help with some topics, but 90% of them come from other players.

Our job is going to be to filter the ideas which players present, and I'm demonstrating my ability to do so. I have listened from both the PvE and the PvP sides of the playerbase to develop the ideas, many of them have been balanced in the suggestions forum for some time.

If my concept of the CSM as a filter is wrong, don't vote for me. I have opinions on how to make Eve work better, as all candidates do, but the players have the power. I'm only a vessel and coordinator.

TornSoul
BIG
Gentlemen's Agreement
Posted - 2008.05.05 17:54:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Il Reverendo

Are there any candidates running solely under the auspices of providing a little accountability and transparency to CCP's actions


Not *solely* but also.

I've tried to "make a swing" for more questions to the candiates about stuff that are not directly game-mechanics related, but involves CCP procedures etc.
It can also be seen on my campaign website


TornSoul campaign website : It's about "The BIG picture"


Darius JOHNSON
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.05.05 18:35:00 - [12]
 

I haven't particularly espoused any pet peeves. I also don't believe that the purpose of the CSM is to do that and your assessment regarding the true purpose of the organization is fairly spot on.

I think reading the CSM documentation, or the simple version located on my site at www.dariusjohnson.net could be of some help there.

The CSM is not intended, nor is it structured in such a way that lends itself to abuse. It is possible some will attempt to do so, but garnering the 51% vote from a diverse field of candidates would be difficult.

The best way that you can ensure the CSM isn't used to push pet issues is to vote and campaign for candidates who don't.

Ben Derindar
Dirty Deeds Corp.
Posted - 2008.05.05 20:08:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Il Reverendo
Edited by: Il Reverendo on 05/05/2008 13:19:02
Is there anyone running for election to the CSM on the basis of NOT using the position as a soap box from which to harangue CCP about their own pet peeves with regard to game design and balance?

It's only my number one issue.

/Ben

Vox Pop
Posted - 2008.05.05 20:43:00 - [14]
 

Yes and no, Il Reverendo. I'm not running to further my own agenda as such, apart from one big issue. I'm donating my vote to the population of EVE, my issue being that the CSM is unnecessary with the technology available.

Your problem with a player committee pursuing only their own favourite 'issues' will not occur in my case. I will not raise any issues at all. All I will do on the CSM is represent all EVE players, and their majority opinion. They will decide what I vote, and what I defend on the CSM.

Have a look at my thread, I'm curious at what you think!


Peri Stark
Gallente
Blood Covenant
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.05.08 19:12:00 - [15]
 

I could say yes but since you don't know me there is no reson you should believe me but there are a lot of people in this game that do know me and they know that its true based on my actions and the way I play the game.

Inanna Zuni
Minmatar
The Causality
Electus Matari
Posted - 2008.05.09 10:12:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Il Reverendo
Is there anyone running for election to the CSM on the basis of NOT using the position as a soap box from which to harangue CCP about their own pet peeves with regard to game design and balance?


Yes.

Originally by: Il Reverendo
Are there any candidates running solely under the auspices of providing a little accountability and transparency to CCP's actions, with the sole aim of avoiding epic tinfoil-hattery and providing players with the trust and information necessary to prevent and defuse threadnaughts the likes of which spawned the idea of the CSM in the first place?


Not solely. If a candidate has only a single aim then why would you want them in a position to discuss other topics they haven't defined their position on?

Originally by: Il Reverendo
I for one am not comfortable with the idea of a player committee, each member of which has been voted for by a small percentage of the players, having the avowed intent to bend CCP's ear on their own favourite 'issues'.


I'm not going to bend anyone's ear(s); I'm looking forward to reasoned two-way discussions.

Originally by: Il Reverendo
Is there anyone with a campaign not based upon an avowed intent to try and get eve changed in some fashion in line with their own personal ideas of balance and gameplay? If there is I want to vote for them.


Thank you for supporting me ;-P

IZ

Breha Organa
Posted - 2008.05.10 00:50:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Il Reverendo
Edited by: Il Reverendo on 05/05/2008 13:19:02
Are there any candidates running solely under the auspices of providing a little accountability and transparency to CCP's actions, with the sole aim of avoiding epic tinfoil-hattery and providing players with the trust and information necessary to prevent and defuse threadnaughts the likes of which spawned the idea of the CSM in the first place?




Il Reverendo, Any candidates responding to this question who claims to "not" have an agenda is deluding themselves, and not being entirely honest. All of us has thoughts and opinions about the game itself and what would make it more fulfilling for the player. One of the tasks CSM will be given in June is to go over a list of agenda items, given to us by CCP, and we will need to provide them with things like how high a priority is this? Do you want to see this or that solution to problem y? So, whether we want to or not, we are going to have to generate opinions and make recommendations about gameplay.

That said, I am personally extremely concerned about the lack of transparency with regard to CCP actions and review of player petitions. You better believe that I will make every effort to convince them to provide players with real data and show them direct evidence when a ruling is made concerning a possible exploit. I am also extremely concerned about the perceived sense that CCP consists of employees who are "corrupt" in the sense that friends of GMs and such seem to benefit from many of the rulings CCP makes, especially in the area of confiscation of ISK.

More transparency of what CCP does is tops in my mind, and I've stated as such on my campaign webpage. But, you must also understand that we are ultimately beholden to the job CCP asks of us.


 

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