open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [Issue] CSM members banned in forum/game = immediate removal from CSM.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7

Author Topic

Trzzbk
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.10.09 06:25:00 - [91]
 

Edited by: Trzzbk on 09/10/2008 06:36:24
Edited by: Trzzbk on 09/10/2008 06:25:01
Originally by: Drake Draconis
Personally... if you get banned from the forums... you should get banned from the game and vice versa... as there's no real reason to be one or the other without the other.


Ahahahahahahahahahahahaha

A permanent in-game ban (on all of your accounts) should be grounds for CSM dismissal, nothing less.

White Rabbid
Posted - 2008.10.09 06:58:00 - [92]
 

There are a couple things ppl seem to forget:
The CSM was founded following some rather stupid actions on CCP's part.
Sooooo, if csm can be banned at the discretion of the moderation team, then the whole thing is just a silly stunt.

Seeing how the CSM is elected by the players, the removal should also be in the hands of the players. OK... say he broke the rules. In this special case, (being a CSM member) things could go through a different process than for a regular joe imho they should allow some sort of player controll before removal.
A vote by the other csm members
A players vote
some sort of mechanism to put the power back in the hands of the players and not in ccp's untrustworthy team again.
I VOTE NO

Cindy McCain
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.10.09 07:03:00 - [93]
 

How about no.

Arcika Toalen
GoonFleet
Posted - 2008.10.09 07:16:00 - [94]
 

Wow look at that poorly veiled attempted to get Bane and DJ kicked from the CSM and stop any member of GoonSwarm every standing again so that certain parties can have their faux influence over CCP and suggest yet more meaningly crap in the name of a free trip to Iceland.

On top of that would then put the make up of the CSM in the hands of CCP forum moderators and GM which of course have no vendettas against inderviduals or corps/alliances since they are totally impartial.

Why not just come out and say it? You don't want abrasive people who think differently to you in your little circle jerk as it means you might have to oh god... debate things rather than just act as a rubber stamp for solutions to problems that don't exist.

The CSM is about as ligitmate and has as much control over EvE as the East German Government did and their Icelandic Masters are just pulling the strings behind the illusion of allowing the players to have a say on what gets broken next.

With this in mind I am going to say... no.

DaiTengu
Gallente
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.10.09 07:25:00 - [95]
 

This is a horribly veiled attempt by Jade Constantine to get Darius kicked off the CSM. Nothing more, nothing less. If the moderators had one ounce of intelligence, they'd lock this thread.

Myk Taison
Unknown Force
SOLAR WING
Posted - 2008.10.09 07:29:00 - [96]
 

Forum moderation is inconsistent. This would be too. DNW

Cancer Face
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.10.09 07:34:00 - [97]
 

This is an excellent idea*

*no it isn't

AlphaViscera
Posted - 2008.10.09 09:07:00 - [98]
 

No, forum bans, and in-game bans are two separate things.


Goose Hypocrisy
Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2008.10.09 10:33:00 - [99]
 

Unfortunately, EVE-O moderators suck. Hard. This just can't work.

In-game bans, now that's a different thing.

nikhan
Igneus Auctorita
Posted - 2008.10.09 11:24:00 - [100]
 

This would be a pretty effective tool for CCP themselves to remove people they are finding a pain in the arse from the CSM system. A CSM member would then have to be afraid of voicing any opinion of the player base because the mods could find one silly rule, forum ban you and then you lose CSM. (yes this is serious tinfoil but it is something you would need to take into account)

Letting the CSM council vote anyone they feel like off after a forum ban is also stupid. Games of goading eachother into saying stupid things on the forum (like earlier in this term) just to have a power bloc vote them off could become an issue. Players voted them there for a reason and they should stay there.

A definate no to this stupid idea. You clearly didn't think this through. jesus.

Nastasia Muse
Caldari
Ultrapolite Socialites
Posted - 2008.10.09 11:33:00 - [101]
 

So if two people are banned for the same offence (which implies the sort of constancy in the current moderation team that we know isn't there) then both will come up for a vote in the CSM team. That vote will then be decided by whether the majority of the CSM sees it as advantageous to ban someone they disagree with.

Please don't pretend that the current CSM would not use it as a chance to opress the minority: that is the whole point of this motion in the first place.

The members are democratically elected by the player base. It is not for a democratic body to alter its own makeup so as to affect the results of an election. After all, it's only been a couple of thousand years and change in which it has been said that delegatus non potest delegatur: the delegates may not, themselves, delegate.

The Proletarian
Posted - 2008.10.09 11:38:00 - [102]
 

Jade, stop trying to use your little cat's paw Serenity to help you alter the makeup of the CSM.

Like the bulk of those posting, I disagree with this transparent attempt at election-stealing. Fortunately, there's not a slug's chance in a furnace of CCP being stupid enough to fall for this ridiculously childish play: they know it would stand a chance of further devaluing an institution that they must be desperate to see rid of its drama-queen hijacker of a chairthing.

Peasant John
Posted - 2008.10.09 12:23:00 - [103]
 

No. This kind of policy would only make things worse, as it would open up another place for the CSMs to slapfight. Whether it's people targeting goons, goons targeting others, or random other parties on each other, the players would not be well served.

Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2008.10.09 12:53:00 - [104]
 

Originally by: Serenity Steele
Well I'm glad this is a contentious topic :) Always more interesting debate. Darius' point about the CSM not having influence over the Forum Mods is correct AFAIK, but that doesn't stop the CSM being given the ability to take action on forum bannings.

The interesting risk (again by Darius) is that a majority council could effectively "war-report" a fellow-CSM member they wanted kicked out (think thread-nought with reports); At the risk being forum banned themselves for repeatedly reporting posts that didn't deserve it. However that would be a neutral action, as the "war-reporting" majority wouldn't vote one of their own out of the Council.

On the otherhand, the "war-reporting" CSM would also be unable to communicate (or) do further reports.

The only way I can think to counter that is to simply remove a banned persons right to vote, and let alternates step up. As Alternates are sequential, this can also be gamed. Ideas?



I think its probably fair enough that a temp banned CSM delegate gets temp-replaced with an alternate according to the previously established tally of voting. So if X delegate got a 1 week ban he or she would be replaced as a voting member by the next alternate for the duration of the ban.

If it was a permaban then they'd obviously need to be permanently replaced.

Now the problem is that the moderators might not like to share the status of the ban upon another player (for privacy reasons and such) - so the CSM would need some way of ensuring it was correctly kept up to date on the ban status of its members. Perhaps it could be added to the CSM signup docs that the delegates agree to do their best to avoid forum disciplinary action and give their permission for the CSM officers to be informed about potential forum bans and suchlike.

To the few dozen identical posters in the thread above I'd say don't personalize this - its going to be something that does come up in future CSMs and the delegates need a way to resolve the situation.


Tector
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.10.09 12:59:00 - [105]
 

Edited by: Tector on 09/10/2008 18:47:24
Edited by: Tector on 09/10/2008 13:01:19
I have real concerns about the demonstrated inconsistency of the moderation team and the potential for abuse as outlined by Darius and Serenity.

Voting no.

Edit: Rather, I'd vote no had I the option. What sort of poll is this?!

Interval
DarkStar 1
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.10.09 13:06:00 - [106]
 

Edited by: Interval on 09/10/2008 13:06:25
If these kinds of well thought out topics is what the CSM spent their time on I ask for CSM to be dissolved and new sol nodes be bought with the money saved from it.

Fulber
Posted - 2008.10.09 13:10:00 - [107]
 

CSM People trying to metagame other CSMs into being banned should be removed from the CSM.

I mean, come on, this is probably the most transparent CSM powerplay to date. Serenity, well done on completely hosing what was left of your public image, we now know whose music you're dancing to.

Arcika Toalen
GoonFleet
Posted - 2008.10.09 13:13:00 - [108]
 

Originally by: Jade Constantine


To the few dozen identical posters in the thread above I'd say don't personalize this.




Prince of Lies

Caius Proximus
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.10.09 13:30:00 - [109]
 

Originally by: Jade Constantine

I think its probably fair enough that a temp banned CSM delegate gets temp-replaced with an alternate according to the previously established tally of voting. So if X delegate got a 1 week ban he or she would be replaced as a voting member by the next alternate for the duration of the ban.

If it was a permaban then they'd obviously need to be permanently replaced.

Now the problem is that the moderators might not like to share the status of the ban upon another player (for privacy reasons and such) - so the CSM would need some way of ensuring it was correctly kept up to date on the ban status of its members. Perhaps it could be added to the CSM signup docs that the delegates agree to do their best to avoid forum disciplinary action and give their permission for the CSM officers to be informed about potential forum bans and suchlike.

To the few dozen identical posters in the thread above I'd say don't personalize this - its going to be something that does come up in future CSMs and the delegates need a way to resolve the situation.




Cut it out already. The CSM was not put into place to be some venue for you to LARP an intergalactic douche-bag.

Do you remember one of the original reasons for CSMs? It was put into place as a response to outcry against one of CCP's employees being caught cheating, the initial response to which was mass bannings from the former moderation team. Under that light, don't you think this "law" might create somewhat of a conflict of interest?

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.10.09 13:31:00 - [110]
 

Originally by: Jade Constantine

To the few dozen identical posters in the thread above I'd say don't personalize this - its going to be something that does come up in future CSMs and the delegates need a way to resolve the situation.




Resolve what problem?

Brmble
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.10.09 13:33:00 - [111]
 

this is dumb, ban op, close thread

Orion Moonstar
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.10.09 13:39:00 - [112]
 

No, because that would mean that CCP is choosing the reps, instead of the players.

Popperr
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.10.09 13:50:00 - [113]
 

No, the forum and the game are independent if each other. I'd go so far as to say that a banned CSM member is not banned from the CSM forums as one is more important than the others. Netiquette is independent from knowledge of this game, don't try and make one about the other.

Machine Delta
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.10.09 13:58:00 - [114]
 

This idea allows a body that has no ties to the CSM or input from the player base to effectively nominate CSM members for removal.

I see no logic behind allowing this course of action and thus cannot give it any support whatsoever. I strongly encourage my fellow players to do the same.


Machine Delta
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.10.09 14:01:00 - [115]
 

Edited by: Machine Delta on 09/10/2008 14:04:18
Furthermore,

Jade Constantine

Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2008.10.09 14:03:00 - [116]
 

Edited by: Jade Constantine on 09/10/2008 14:04:53

The assembly hall is not an excuse for flaming and personal attacks and I'd like to ask the Goonswarm posters in this thread to stop it immediately. It should be possible to debate and even disagree without the need to be openly abusive towards other Eve players.



Dr Felonius
Caldari
Civilian Purposes Limited
Posted - 2008.10.09 14:04:00 - [117]
 

I don't like or trust CCP's forum moderation policies, especially the way we aren't allowed to discuss them. I loathe this idea.

Wodan Violence
Minmatar
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.10.09 14:06:00 - [118]
 

Weak-kneed pubbies should not be able to remove OUR CEO from the council.

Machine Delta
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.10.09 14:06:00 - [119]
 

Originally by: Jade Constantine
Edited by: Jade Constantine on 09/10/2008 14:04:53

The assembly hall is not an excuse for flaming and personal attacks and I'd like to ask the Goonswarm posters in this thread to stop it immediately. It should be possible to debate and even disagree without the need to be openly abusive towards other Eve players.





We're roleplaying being goons here so stop raining on everyones parade.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.10.09 14:06:00 - [120]
 

Originally by: Jade Constantine

The assembly hall is not an excuse for flaming and personal attacks and I'd like to ask the Goonswarm posters in this thread to stop it immediately.



The assembly hall is not an excuse to ignore debate.

I ask again, what problem?


Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7

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