open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked Elections!! Another Rigging or a REAL initiative?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Glitter kitten
Posted - 2008.05.13 10:22:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Glitter kitten on 13/05/2008 10:25:42


Just been reading about eve, actually i was looking for stuff about PVP as being a care bear i havent really touched on PVP in the time ive been playing. Never really gotten the hang of it. Ship setups etc...(if anyone want s to post one please do) ANYWAY, more to the point, as i was skimming web pages while drinking my Decaf supreme mint choc chip mocha, i came accross this...

Linkage (as well as some others)

Now i am by no means trying to open old wounds.... i'm just havin a poke to see if they are real.

I didnt realise there was actually PROOF when it all kicked of some time ago now. I thought it was just propoganda tactics in order to 'restrict' an alliance's activities until an investigation had uncovered absolutly nothing. Yes.... a conspiracy if you will. One that was aimed at allowing one allaince to engage another while their hands were tied for a short period.

I then went to the elections site and i was a bit perturbed. Not only did i find a number of people who are running for council, whos sites are totally irrelavant to eve. I mean.....wtf is a spaghetti monster!! A new belt rat? Yeah ok we want to know who the real people are that are going to be representing us but there was nothing on their pages that was indicative of how they percieve the eve universe, what they would like to see, or not see. How they plan to help CCP overcome the issues surrounding the various allegations etc... There was even a couple of n00bs on there. Or characters that APPEARED to be. However i have a suspicion (and this is my own opinion and not that of anyone else's), that the above mentioned may be alts for the already council running 'LARGER ALLIANCE' main characters. Or PADDING to direct people to the other main characters. (As in OMGWTF he's a n00b... ill vote for the other guy instead)

My concern is that instead of moving Eve forward for the entire Eve community, it will be moved forward for those at the top, and those at the bottom will get left behind and there will be no real improvments in Eve at all. From reading the article ive posted above its would read like the council is purley to AUDIT CCP. Visit the centre and make sure they arn't handing out BPO's for motherships to those big allainces, or even ships, isk etc... But if that was the case... why not just invite the top peeps from each allaince to come for a visit instead of the big 'Election' thingy? QuestionConfusedConfusedConfusedQuestion

Anyways im gonna leave it at that. As for my voting, i have abstained on all 3 of my accounts as i'm not sure an 'effective' council will be formed. I'll await the comments and flames with equal anticipation. Maybe a word from a dev or summin would be nice.

edit: Appologies for the title, but i thought it would catch peoples attention as i really do want to hear peoples opinions.(or maybe its a big experiment Wink)

Primnproper
Posted - 2008.05.13 10:28:00 - [2]
 

Read the stuff in the dev blogs abouyt what this council is actually for its not for auditing ccp at all its to bring players view and concerns to ccps attension in a more organised and regulated way....

Ben Derindar
Dirty Deeds Corp.
Posted - 2008.05.13 10:39:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: Ben Derindar on 13/05/2008 10:41:21
Originally by: Glitter kitten
As for my voting, i have abstained on all 3 of my accounts as i'm not sure an 'effective' council will be formed.

Well if everybody abstained like that, of *course* the CSM wouldn't be effective. Wink

EDIT: this has been discussed before; it's well established that the original aim of the CSM is quite different from what we have now. And no, not everybody's happy about that. But I still think we should see the process through before shooting it down altogether.

/Ben

Darius JOHNSON
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.05.13 15:01:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: Ben Derindar
Edited by: Ben Derindar on 13/05/2008 10:41:21
Originally by: Glitter kitten
As for my voting, i have abstained on all 3 of my accounts as i'm not sure an 'effective' council will be formed.

Well if everybody abstained like that, of *course* the CSM wouldn't be effective. Wink

EDIT: this has been discussed before; it's well established that the original aim of the CSM is quite different from what we have now. And no, not everybody's happy about that. But I still think we should see the process through before shooting it down altogether.

/Ben



Actually any item brought up in council and voted on with a 51% margin needs to be responded to in some way by CCP... This could include any allegation or oversight-esque concerns. I know there's some questions I've had in the past.

Arithron
Gallente
Gallente Trade Alliance
Posted - 2008.05.13 15:57:00 - [5]
 

Quote:
Not only did i find a number of people who are running for council, whos sites are totally irrelavant to eve. I mean.....wtf is a spaghetti monster!! A new belt rat?


I take it this is a direct reference to the link I placed on my Candidate info. I find the Church of the flying spaghetti monster amusing and thought they would appreciate the exposure, and players visiting the site might find it amusing also.

Now, you seem to insinuate that I am 'padding' for larger alliances, a stooge or suchlike? I can assure you that I am very much Bruce Hansen (Arithron), founder of the Gallente Trade Alliance which supplies cheap Conflagration M Crystals to pilots on many markets. Arithron is my main, I have listed alts on another thread.

I'm representing the type of players that many other candidates aren't; namely, new players, traders, industralists, manufacturers, small corps and Empire dwellers. I also would like to think that other types of players will vote for me!

I hope this clears those concerns of yours up!

Take care,
Bruce Hansen (Arithron)

Ben Derindar
Dirty Deeds Corp.
Posted - 2008.05.14 06:56:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Darius JOHNSON
Originally by: Ben Derindar
this has been discussed before; it's well established that the original aim of the CSM is quite different from what we have now. And no, not everybody's happy about that. But I still think we should see the process through before shooting it down altogether.

Actually any item brought up in council and voted on with a 51% margin needs to be responded to in some way by CCP... This could include any allegation or oversight-esque concerns.


Originally by: http://myeve.eve-online.com/download/devblog/CSM.pdf, page 18, subsection: CSM communication with the CCP council
CCP is unable to accommodate any issue considered detrimental to the collective interests of EVE, particularly if the issues(s) touch upon meta-level concerns.

/Ben

zoolkhan
Minmatar
Mirkur Draug'Tyr
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2008.05.14 13:09:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Primnproper
Read the stuff in the dev blogs abouyt what this council is actually for its not for auditing ccp at all its to bring players view and concerns to ccps attension in a more organised and regulated way....


readingt NY times and other offiste articles written by people w/o a clue doesnt
really makes sense. If you find more accurate information on the source itself on that topic.

When i applied , then not because i am worried ccp would be corrupt and need my supervision.
(we would not be able to see if theyre still "corrupt" and i think that story has been hyped beyond reality anyays. in a 200k subscriber universum it does not really matter if a single person or even a handful of persons would cheat and be corrupt in the full sense of the accusations)

No this isnt about that. Abstaining oh well.. if you already abstained.
why the XXXXX did you spam this forum section afterwards?

Whatever we now tell you, it doesnt matter anyways. It would not even matter if you come to your senses and change your mind.

Next time, discuss first - then choose to abstain.

I am sorry we all disappointed you. I am sorry you disappointed me.

Inanna Zuni
Minmatar
The Causality
Electus Matari
Posted - 2008.05.14 14:43:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Glitter kitten
As for my voting, i have abstained on all 3 of my accounts as i'm not sure an 'effective' council will be formed. I'll await the comments and flames with equal anticipation. Maybe a word from a dev or summin would be nice.


Opinions are always welcome and each pilot (account) has the right to determine their own future.

That aside, there is a wonderful quote that "if voting changed anything they'd make it illegal". With this Council pilots are voting for some (nine) representatives to discuss a wide range of player-selected issues with CCP, in a manner which CCP has said it will respond to. CCP didn't have to start this representation process, but they have and I and the other candidates want to see if it works. As, indeed, you should too.

If you don't try, you cannot succeed. This first CSM, serving for the next six months, is a way for all pilots to get some say. Just like PvP you will lose if you don't gank in some way. To not vote is like tanking: eventually you will lose out because you'll get no say.

IZ


CCP Xhagen

Posted - 2008.05.14 18:35:00 - [9]
 

Like has been said earlier in the thread, the idea in regards to the council have changed rather extensively since it was first made public. In fact the scope of the council has been broadened quite a lot.

That being said, I just want to remind everybody that should the need arise, I have no problems with the council asking for a meeting with the head of IA, Arkanon. In fact I have requested it to him that he makes himself available during the council's visit if the need arises.

Thus, the council is no longer the audit authority the OP is referring to, but they can easily get responses from that front.


 

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