open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [Issue]: Your vote does NOT count.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Trickster Lokee
Minmatar
Under the Wings of Fury
Atrocitas
Posted - 2008.06.15 10:50:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Trickster Lokee on 15/06/2008 10:55:14
Currently these are the top 15 player supported issues in the hall:

30-90 day GTC 603 votes
Use of eve mail as a logging system 465 votes
Skill q 177 votes
Should not post to support 155 votes
Cyno jam / jump bridge 149 votes
Remove jade from office 144 votes
pos flogging dead horses 131 votes
suicide ganks 117 votes
Minmatar caps 106 votes
player ban 103 votes
looting kills should flag you to me 102 votes
Vote of no confidence in CSM chairman 99 votes
unfinished story arc 95 votes
option to change all ammo at once 91 votes
replace in game models of titans with monster trucks 84 votes


These are what your delegates are working on.

Removal of 30/90 day gametime codes
Logserver exploitation and Bacon (Irrelevant as of EA)
Making suicide-ganking more difficult
General Eve Forums improvement/fixing (Not a top vote)
Drone Implants (Not a top vote)

Delegated to: Bane Glorious
Skill Queue Functionality

Delegated to: Darius Johnson
Re-examination of 0.0 Sovereignty (Not a top vote)

Delegated to: Dierdra Vaal
Evaluation of empire war dec mechanics (Not a top vote)
Reload all Ammo

Delegated to: Hardin
Improve Bombs (Not a top vote)

Delegated to: Inanna Zuni
5% voter issue (Not a top vote)
Alliances and Faction Warfare (Not a top vote)
Proposals for UI Improvements (Not a top vote)
Replace double-click in a chat channel (Not a top vote)
Cargo hold size of ships in hanger but not in use (Not a top vote)

Delegated to: Jade Constantine
Improvements to Black Ops (Not a top vote)
CSM should vote for its own chairman (Not a top vote)
Feasibility of Outposts going boom (Not a top vote)
Aggression timer is too short/variable hull fix (Not a top vote)

Delegated to: LaVista
Science Industry + Secondary Market (Not a top vote)
Rigged ships and cargo (Not a top vote)
mid sized freighters (Not a top vote)

Delegated to: Serenity Steele
Jumpbridges and Cynojammer fix
Transferable Killrights (Not a top vote)
Funky POS Alterations (Not a top vote)


Of the 24 issues your CSM are working on only 5 of these were actually supported by even a minuscule portion of the user base. Two of the highest voted on topics deal directly with removing people from office. Again, these issues are not on the agenda. One issue raised is simply ridiculous "monster trucks", however it should not be up to the CSM to decide the merit of the issue raised but to represent the people's decision to raise it. They are not "The Decider" as Jade "GW Bush" Constantine would like you to believe but rather they are REPRESENTATIVES of the player base. If CCP wants to shoot down a stupid idea let them. But if the players choose to bring it up LET THEM.

Now part of the fault here is that the hall only has a yea vote and is lacking a nay vote. I am certain we would get a much more accurate idea of what people want brought to the table that way.

We can not, however, simply assume that an abstaining vote is a vote against an issue, nor can we simply allow the CSM to decide for us what should and should not be brought up before CCP. Their job is to represent us not themselves.

CCP has laid down the law on the 5% rule, we do not however have to accept the CSM's cherry picking of issues. A popular vote should determine whether or not an issue is raised in the event that no issue reaches 5% or not enough issues reach 5%. Picking weaker topics simply because the CSM dislikes one which has more votes is not a justifiable reason to ignore the people.

Support this issue if you demand that popular vote be the determining factor in issues raised and support this issue of you demand that an explicit "do not support(thumbs down)" vote be added to the forum. The CSM must represent the player base.

(in before the trolling)

Radix Salvilines
legion industries ltd
AAA Citizens
Posted - 2008.06.15 10:54:00 - [2]
 

supported

We want to be heard! XD

Akiba Penrose
The Praxis Initiative
Posted - 2008.06.15 10:57:00 - [3]
 

Signed

Ethaet
Gallente
Aliastra

Posted - 2008.06.15 11:02:00 - [4]
 


Shade Millith
Caldari
Macabre Votum
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2008.06.15 11:03:00 - [5]
 

Pretty much yes on all accounts

Hori To
Masuat'aa Matari
Posted - 2008.06.15 12:36:00 - [6]
 

you're pretty much wrong, I am glad that the CSM ignores topics like "monstertrucks".

As I understand it the CSM acts like a filter between CCP and the playerbase. the 5% rule makes it so that it is possible to force an issue through the CSM and to CCP. In other words, if monstertrucks gets 5%, it goes to CCP.

nice stats though, and interesting read.

LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
Posted - 2008.06.15 13:25:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: LaVista Vista on 15/06/2008 13:50:29
Originally by: Trickster Lokee


30-90 day GTC 603 votes


Being worked on
Originally by: Trickster Lokee

Use of eve mail as a logging system 465 votes


Well, why haven't Darius raised it to the council?
Originally by: Trickster Lokee

Skill q 177 votes


Is already sent off as a part of the agenda

Quote:
Should not post to support 155 votes

Already being worked on by CCP, as per the first chat log.

Quote:
Cyno jam / jump bridge 149 votes

Already raised

Quote:
Remove jade from office 144 votes

This is already raised as a part of the "CSM should vote for its own chairman"

Quote:
pos flogging dead horses 131 votes

This is the "Funky POS Alterations" issue. So you are contradicting yourself.

Quote:
suicide ganks 117 votes

Ankh raised this.
Quote:
Minmatar caps 106 votes

Get one of your CSM representatives to raise it. I don't know why it wasn't raised beyond time issues.

Quote:
player ban 103 votes

We are requesting to talk the IA. This could very well be a part of it. But we have to make the request first.

Quote:
looting kills should flag you to me 102 votes

I don't know why this wasn't raised

Quote:
Vote of no confidence in CSM chairman 99 votes

There is no such thing as a vote of no confidenec from what I understand from CCP. But this kinda goes hand in hand with the voteable chairman.

Quote:
unfinished story arc 95 votes

At the time of our last meeting for the Iceland agenda, the topic hadn't received 7 days discussion.
This issue is being brought up tonight at our meeting. We hope CCP will adopt it to the Iceland agenda.

Quote:
option to change all ammo at once 91 votes

This was raised
Quote:
replace in game models of titans with monster trucks 84 votes

This means the CSM works as intended. Filter trough stupid ideas.




LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
Posted - 2008.06.15 13:33:00 - [8]
 

Quote:
Logserver exploitation and Bacon (Irrelevant as of EA)

But people would whine if we didn't raise it. It was raised as it was a concern at the time.

Quote:
General Eve Forums improvement/fixing (Not a top vote)

Yet a very very big issue as large parts of the community experiences it

Quote:
Drone Implants (Not a top vote)

It was a topic which at the time had significant support compared to other topics

Quote:
Re-examination of 0.0 Sovereignty (Not a top vote)

Reaches out to a lot of people, had a good amount of support at the time. Had support from CSM Member.

Quote:
Evaluation of empire war dec mechanics (Not a top vote)

Was sponsered by CSM member I believe


Quote:
Improve Bombs (Not a top vote)

Generally high support at the time.

Quote:
5% voter issue (Not a top vote)

Important issue, so that YOU guys can push forward issues onto CSM for next term.

Quote:
Alliances and Faction Warfare (Not a top vote)

High support at the time

Anyways. You get the drift. I won't waste more time making the same point.

At the time of their posting they all had very high support % or they had CSM sponsorship.

Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2008.06.15 13:46:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Trickster Lokee

looting kills should flag you to me 102 votes



I'm bringing this one up in todays meeting.

LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
Posted - 2008.06.15 13:48:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Hori To
you're pretty much wrong, I am glad that the CSM ignores topics like "monstertrucks".

As I understand it the CSM acts like a filter between CCP and the playerbase. the 5% rule makes it so that it is possible to force an issue through the CSM and to CCP. In other words, if monstertrucks gets 5%, it goes to CCP.

nice stats though, and interesting read.

Well, small point. But it's not entirely true that the 5% rule will force an issue trough CSM. It merely means CSM has to discuss the topic at their next meeting. The issue still have to receive support from the council.

Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2008.06.15 13:49:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: Jade Constantine on 15/06/2008 13:50:24

Originally by: Hori To
you're pretty much wrong, I am glad that the CSM ignores topics like "monstertrucks".

As I understand it the CSM acts like a filter between CCP and the playerbase. the 5% rule makes it so that it is possible to force an issue through the CSM and to CCP. In other words, if monstertrucks gets 5%, it goes to CCP.

nice stats though, and interesting read.


And this. We're there to read the issues and make sure the important ones that can be good for the game get onto the agenda. Part of the job is filtering out high vote "issues" that don't do anything good for the game.

-edit (and yep. 5% means we have to discuss it on the csm - it still needs to pass a CSM vote to be raised to CCP discussion in the conference.)

Tesseract d'Urberville
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
Posted - 2008.06.15 13:50:00 - [12]
 

Raw number of votes isn't necessarily the only important statistic for gauging support for an issue. What about average votes per day (since some topics have been around longer than others), the vote-to-reply ratio, the sympathetic-to-unsympathetic reply ratio, etc. Some topics disappeared into the background when a CSM rep announced that they would sponsor them, so it's very unscientific to say that some of those wouldn't have had a great deal more support if no CSM rep had weighed in on them when they did. The reps preempted what they thought were worthwhile topics.

CSM is not obligated to put every topic on their agenda; if that were the case then we wouldn't need a CSM at all. They're doing what they're supposed to be doing; I have no complaints about their choice of topics.

If certain topics continue to build popularity, then yes, ultimately CSM will probably take them on. It's a long time between now and Iceland, though, so relax.

LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
Posted - 2008.06.15 13:53:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Tesseract d'Urberville


If certain topics continue to build popularity, then yes, ultimately CSM will probably take them on. It's a long time between now and Iceland, though, so relax.

There's 4 days. Our submission deadline was 3 days ago.

So no Sad

JVol
Amarr
The IMorral MAjority
Posted - 2008.06.15 15:50:00 - [14]
 

Seems like you guys forgot about rights to pvp loot and wrecks, its over 9 pages long and has mostly support, over 100

Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2008.06.15 15:52:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: JVol
Seems like you guys forgot about rights to pvp loot and wrecks, its over 9 pages long and has mostly support, over 100


Its item 4 on the agenda today. I'm bringing it up.

Tesseract d'Urberville
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
Posted - 2008.06.15 16:26:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: LaVista Vista
Originally by: Tesseract d'Urberville
It's a long time between now and Iceland, though, so relax.
There's 4 days. Our submission deadline was 3 days ago.
So no Sad

Whoops! Wow, time flies. I suppose that's for the better, though; the first CSM was always going to have much more to talk to CCP about than any subsequent CSM - gotta get through several years of backlog.

Sir Ibex
Posted - 2008.06.15 16:56:00 - [17]
 

While I do agree that our votes are often ignored, in this particular case the most significant issue concerning Time Cards, IS being worked on. Therefore it looks like our concerns are being heard, at least to an extent.

Also, you gotta admit that it is silly to compare a 603 vote TC thread to a titans<-->monster trucks 84 vote thread. 603 votes is at least enough to get noticed, 84 votes, is just "a few" people. Off course they will get ignored. I see nothing wrong with that.


PS: I want to thank LaVista for working on mid sized freighters, and rigged ships and cargo. This might not be a "top vote" to some, but it is a very significant issue that can improve the game in many ways and allow newbie traders to get to the top within any reasonable time frame. The way it is now, for many traders, acquiring a freighter is just about as hard as acquiring one in real life...
I've been playing for a while now, and I grind for hours on end, but I'm no closer to having a freighter now, than I was when I started. I understand that this ship is something that is not supposed to be accessible to newbs, but he way it is now, is the rich will only get richer, and the poor can only dream of getting there... ever. There is no "inbetween phase".


I'll give "a half of a thumbs up". The other half, is thumbs down.


Farrqua
Minmatar
In Igne Morim
Posted - 2008.06.15 18:03:00 - [18]
 

I think half the problem is seeing what is out there as a popular topic and have decent support. There is so many different ideas and issues flying around it is a daunting task at best to see everything or catch them all.

Also the current work load of the counsel should have some sort of limit due to the fact there are limits to how much each one can actually do. Some issues are so complex that a rep may only take on one while some others might be more of straight forward proposal.

The counsel has a finite amount of time to spend on a certain number of issues. So we have to understand that if you have 100 well supported issues the counsel has to be able to pick the top "x %" of that group for this time around.

I think if we can somehow employ some tools that would make the issues/ideas by showing a more of clear proof of support I think that would help both the counsel and the player base.

(Aye votes: x )( Naye votes: x) (Base support: x%)

From there the CSM can quickly see what has some support and react appropriately.

As far as "Monster truck" posts. Its not a hard stretch to see that was a troll post. It does not take that much use of the brain stem to actually identify the fact that it is not a subject to be brought up to CCP. If the CSM can not tell the difference between a troll post and a real issue you are doing it wrong.

Yorda
Battlestars
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.06.15 19:45:00 - [19]
 

Someone please raise the minmatar capital issue, they're really terrible (especially the naglfar).

Dippin Dots
Posted - 2008.06.15 23:51:00 - [20]
 

The CSM is disfunctional to the point of being useless. They don't even know what they're supposed to be doing, and dont have the common sense to figure it out for themselves.

Kelbesque Crystalis
Minmatar
Posted - 2008.06.16 20:49:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Yorda
Someone please raise the minmatar capital issue, they're really terrible (especially the naglfar).


This. Raising a specific stat on a single ship (Nighthawk needs more PG) was brought before the CSM, yet a whole line of ships for one race being out whack was not. I'll add that the Minmatar cap ships thread has had much more support than the Nighthawk thread.


ToxicFire
Phoenix Knights

Posted - 2008.06.16 20:55:00 - [22]
 


Daelin Blackleaf
White Rose Society
Posted - 2008.06.16 22:15:00 - [23]
 

I'd like to know the CSM's comment on CCP's actions regarding the 30-90day ETC. They were aware of the issue, and surely aware that it was being taken into consideration. If the issue was beyond the CSM's level should we not all have been informed?

Allowing us to vote on an issue that has already been decided shows a very poor level of communication between CCP, the CSM, and the community.

MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2008.06.16 22:49:00 - [24]
 

Edited by: MotherMoon on 16/06/2008 22:57:42
there are two ways for it get on.

A:A csm members can support it
B:it can get 5% support of total voters. (needs to be looked at though but still)

so vote and it can count.

or elect better candidates next time.

Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings
Posted - 2008.06.17 01:53:00 - [25]
 

What I don't support is this forum or this thread.

All those issues seems more important than what you've been lobbying for in here.
With the exception of POS' being just that still, pieces of s***.

Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2008.06.17 02:06:00 - [26]
 


Yeah this is whine topic for people who think that getting 200 alliance mates to post mindless spam "supports" should override the discerning analysis of CSM reps accountable to their electorate. The op should probably get out more.


Tennents Supra
eXceed Inc.
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2008.06.17 02:21:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: Jade Constantine
The op should probably get out more.


That's pretty rich coming from someone who campaigned to be important in a virtual world of internet spaceships.

Rolling Eyes

LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
Posted - 2008.06.17 08:28:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Jade Constantine

Yeah this is whine topic for people who think that getting 200 alliance mates to post mindless spam "supports" should override the discerning analysis of CSM reps accountable to their electorate. The op should probably get out more.



Lets not start throwing with mud here, shall we? That comment wasn't called for by any means.

Rhonyn Peacemaker
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.06.17 09:12:00 - [29]
 

Originally by: LaVista Vista
Originally by: Jade Constantine

Yeah this is whine topic for people who think that getting 200 alliance mates to post mindless spam "supports" should override the discerning analysis of CSM reps accountable to their electorate. The op should probably get out more.



Lets not start throwing with mud here, shall we? That comment wasn't called for by any means.


Unfortunately, that is indicative of Jade's general disposition with anyone sporting a "goon" ticker. No matter how thoughful, supported, or detailed a suggestion is, he is found insulting members of a single group simply because he disagrees with him. Moreover, no matter the value or merit of a suggestion, merely because he does not like the group, he actively makes attempts to subvert and damage that groups' attempts at improvements to the game.

There can be no question that goonfleet encompasses the entirety of the game, from mission running to industry, full scale pvp war to ratting; because of this significant body of experience to pull from, goonfleet represents the very best in think tanks. This can be said of any long term and hardened 0.0 alliance, as long as their opinions remain politically agnostic.

It is unnecessary to bring it out here, as two threads are currently present detailing the wishes of the community to remove Jade; but the fact still remains, there is a hostile entity at the head of a group who is responsible for being the voice of the community to CCP. Because of his overt and constant bias, certain ideas are quite likely to be left behind. It is the job of the other CSM representatives to be a check on this bias. Individuals who can step up and side not with politics but with good ideas for gameplay enhancements. I truely hope that you will find yourself on the side of the game, and not Jade's side.

Kinkie Yuuki
Posted - 2008.06.17 09:53:00 - [30]
 

Quote:
that is indicative of Jade's general disposition with anyone sporting a "goon" ticker


Goons started it.


[=


Pages: [1] 2

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