open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Political Parties for the Eve Government?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Darius III
Caldari
Interstellar eXodus
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2011.08.01 09:58:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Darius III on 01/08/2011 09:59:01
Nearly every Democracy known in the modern world has some form of political party to consolidate their voter base, and work towards common goals. Usually the parties are corrupt and work towards clinging on to power at whatever the cost. Why should Eve be any different?

I don't think there will be any official recognition ever in this issue from CCP, but I would love to see political parties in Eve. To that end, I have formed 'The Pirate Party', what hopefully will be a loose coalition of people with Pirate issues they would like to see supported. From suicide gankers to Low sec, 'Old School' pirates to scammers Awoxers and griefers in general, the pirate party welcomes all thieves and supporters of thievery and piracy across New Eden.

The first official meeting will take place during Fanfest where the party members will have an opportunity to meet in person. Even now we are trying to reserve an entire bar, and are looking for ideas for making the in person gathering in Iceland a political event to remember. Topless dancers have been outlawed in Iceland-but we will come up with something.

Why a political party now? To break up the monopoly of CSM members with a 0.0 agenda for starters. Nearly the entirety of the CSM is made up of Wormhole or large 0.0 alliance leaders. The common players of Eve would greatly benefit by having political parties to get behind and break that monopoly.By forming power-blocs with more regular players-the CSM could easily become more balanced.

The primary benefits of the members would be easier access to CSM members, and easy ability to be heard without posting in "Jita Park Speakers Corner" only to have their good ideas buried in a mountain of crap.Perhaps we could provide a tax shelter or meetings in cities with 'adult entertainment' down the road, but our primary goal is to unify the criminals of Eve into a voting bloc.

Darius III
Caldari
Interstellar eXodus
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2011.08.01 10:01:00 - [2]
 

Reserved-D3

Guttripper
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2011.08.01 10:15:00 - [3]
 

The CSM has come across nothing more than lip service for CCP that seemed to have been easily swayed with ~emergency~ meetings containing NDA presentations. So why would CCP listen to anything another group of players that gathered together to post complaints and issues in their particular favor? Unless your particular group has something that is aligned to what marketing states is the current driving force, CCP will not give your group the slightest thought.

Just my opinion, of course.

Darius III
Caldari
Interstellar eXodus
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2011.08.01 10:21:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: Guttripper
The CSM has come across nothing more than lip service for CCP that seemed to have been easily swayed with ~emergency~ meetings containing NDA presentations. So why would CCP listen to anything another group of players that gathered together to post complaints and issues in their particular favor? Unless your particular group has something that is aligned to what marketing states is the current driving force, CCP will not give your group the slightest thought.

Just my opinion, of course.


If you had been present at the Monoclegate emergency summit and seen the interaction with CCP and the CSM, I 100% guarantee you wouldn't say that. They really do listen.. They even listened to me, which stunned me as neither CCP nor the other CSM members are very fond of me in any way shape or form. Progress was in fact made, and I can say with all honesty that it is NOT merely 'Lip Service'. I have no reason whatsoever to lie about it. As the only troll candidate-even my few suggestions were taked seriously. The CSM does indeed have a voice, and CCP does in fact, listen to it. Although maybe a bit lateYARRRR!!

Guttripper
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2011.08.01 10:46:00 - [5]
 

I believe it might be a case of perception to the situation at hand.

To me, CCP proceeded with a course of action they felt would benefit their company in both the long and short term. Whereas CCP knew there would be some negative reception to changes, because of the sudden emergency summit, I feel the overall negative reaction was much greater to what was acceptible limits. Add the other minor issues over the past few months to years that players have been annoyed over, players as a whole had enough of CCP (and perhaps Eve) and made their own statement by actually (or at least threatening) leaving in mass. Because the CSM is the ~elected~ body by the players, CCP went to them as a resource to stop what might have (or still is) an exodus of players. Whereas CCP's original plan of action has been delayed, eventually it will still proceed as planned. Talking to the CSM, and even you, might have been a front to show the masses, "Hey, we're listening!"

Again, my opinion.

RAW23
Posted - 2011.08.01 10:49:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Darius III
Progress was in fact made, and I can say with all honesty that it is NOT merely 'Lip Service'.


Could you clarify which major issues progress was made on? I was under the impression that there were no real issues and that all CCP got wrong was their 'messaging'.

Darius III
Caldari
Interstellar eXodus
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2011.08.01 10:56:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: Darius III on 01/08/2011 10:58:44
Thanks for putting your $0.02. And I definatly agree with you that it was expedient for them to "do something" and I don't doubt for one minute the motives behind the summit were anything but pure-but progress was made. I too am cynical about the whole process.

I would like to steer away from the whole "is the CSM a joke" debate though in this thread. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't. But the 0.0 players completely dominating the CSM is definitely an issue, at least for me and many people I have talked with.

The Pirate party has the aim of keeping at least one seat away from the power-blocs. If there were a missioner and a mining party-I think that they could liberate more seats and better represent the entire community, perhaps even displacing the chairmanship. Worth a shot I think, with as many dedicated players as Eve has-progress can be made and the CSM made more Democratic. Maybe not thoughugh


Originally by: RAW23
Originally by: Darius III
Progress was in fact made, and I can say with all honesty that it is NOT merely 'Lip Service'.


Could you clarify which major issues progress was made on? I was under the impression that there were no real issues and that all CCP got wrong was their 'messaging'.


There is some stuff coming out shortly that will clarify what was done at the emergency summit. I am leery of touchingn on specifics though as I would hate to lose my seat for violating the Non Disclosure Agreement-I have had quite a bit of Rum (pirate party official drink) am not at my best mentally-D3

XIRUSPHERE
Gallente
Deadly Intent.
Posted - 2011.08.01 15:53:00 - [8]
 

I would say having political parties in this game could be inherently dangerous and fruitless. The reason being at least in my opinion that eve attracts a disproportionate amount of passionate players because of the amount of effort and down right masochism this game takes to play.

So I ask you, without breaching NDA can you shed any light on the metrics of the player base, are the passionate people in this game the 2% that EA snubbed or are we talking a much greater percentage of the base being passionate.

Florestan Bronstein
24th Imperial Crusade
Posted - 2011.08.01 16:02:00 - [9]
 

I think Ankh had something very close to a party - a core team of "experts" on different areas of the game and candidates from that team taking turns at elections.

Karl Planck
Labyrinth Obtaining Chaotic Kangaroos
Posted - 2011.08.01 16:03:00 - [10]
 

Edited by: Karl Planck on 01/08/2011 16:04:04
Originally by: XIRUSPHERE
I would say having political parties in this game could be inherently dangerous and fruitless. The reason being at least in my opinion that eve attracts a disproportionate amount of passionate players because of the amount of effort and down right masochism this game takes to play.

So I ask you, without breaching NDA can you shed any light on the metrics of the player base, are the passionate people in this game the 2% that EA snubbed or are we talking a much greater percentage of the base being passionate.


no, i think darius has a point here. I mean, wtf happened with this last election. 0.0 all the way. While that segment of the game does have the ability to pull the most centralized voting power (leadership already in place) it doesn't really do justice to getting a proper perspective on the player demographics of this game

Gwenywell Shumuku
Posted - 2011.08.01 16:05:00 - [11]
 

political parties in EVE would only work if members of said party are willing to cancel subs whenever its needed.

Thats the only metric CCP listens to. Now, are ppl here willing to do that? I don't think so, not enough to matter anyway.

XIRUSPHERE
Gallente
Deadly Intent.
Posted - 2011.08.01 16:08:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Karl Planck
Edited by: Karl Planck on 01/08/2011 16:04:04
Originally by: XIRUSPHERE
I would say having political parties in this game could be inherently dangerous and fruitless. The reason being at least in my opinion that eve attracts a disproportionate amount of passionate players because of the amount of effort and down right masochism this game takes to play.

So I ask you, without breaching NDA can you shed any light on the metrics of the player base, are the passionate people in this game the 2% that EA snubbed or are we talking a much greater percentage of the base being passionate.


no, i think darius has a point here. I mean, wtf happened with this last election. 0.0 all the way. While that segment of the game does have the ability to pull the most centralized voting power (leadership already in place) it doesn't really do justice to getting a proper perspective on the player demographics of this game


I agree with the spirit of it, I just don't believe that when you polarize groups into specific parties despite that being what has occurred that you will encounter much success. I don't see other parties being able to tap the resource of large napsec voter blocks. But perhaps that is just pessimism on my part.

Abdiel Kavash
Caldari
Paladin Order
Fidelas Constans
Posted - 2011.08.01 16:28:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Karl Planck
no, i think darius has a point here. I mean, wtf happened with this last election. 0.0 all the way. While that segment of the game does have the ability to pull the most centralized voting power (leadership already in place) it doesn't really do justice to getting a proper perspective on the player demographics of this game


It does justice to the part of the demographic who care enough about the future of EVE to press one button once a year. You don't need any amount of ISK, you don't need sov space, you don't need a supercapital fleet to vote. Anyone with an active account can make their voice heard through the CSM. If you choose not to do so, why should your voice be listened to?

According to the so often quoted QEN, 10% of EVE population lives in nullsec. If even as much as one out of five "non-nullsec" players cared about the CSM, they could outvote any "nullsec" voting group.

In my opinion, a major portion of the purely highsec demographic simply does't care, and views EVE as another "theme park" MMO. If CCP changes the game for the worse for them, instead of rallying and trying to convince them otherwise, they would simply leave for another game.

Kerrisone
Posted - 2011.08.01 16:46:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Gwenywell Shumuku
political parties in EVE would only work if members of said party are willing to cancel subs whenever its needed.

Thats the only metric CCP listens to. Now, are ppl here willing to do that? I don't think so, not enough to matter anyway.


That is one of many tactics but probably the most powerful tactic any group of people in EVE could exercise against CCP.

In the end CCP isn't going to radically shift their gears just because so and so group canceled their thousands of accounts one week. There will come a time, we may already be there, that canceling won't have much if any impact on CCP, ie they'll make promises, token gestures etc but that's it. Canceling only works to show your power the first time and to reinforce it at some later date, it can't be used over and over before you are written off. That is especially true when the direction of the game is changed to move beyond the people making demands of CCP and towards those open to whatever CCP decides to give them.

De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Norse'Storm Battle Group
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2011.08.01 16:49:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Darius III
Political Parties for the Eve Government?


Don't we have enough damned problems with this game without introducing a way to make the CSM even more useless than they already are? I mean seriously, you may as well just get rid of them now. It would actually accomplish more than introducing a bunch of "I won't vote for your idea even though it's a good one because it was your idea" sycophants.

Karl Planck
Labyrinth Obtaining Chaotic Kangaroos
Posted - 2011.08.01 16:53:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Abdiel Kavash
Originally by: Karl Planck
no, i think darius has a point here. I mean, wtf happened with this last election. 0.0 all the way. While that segment of the game does have the ability to pull the most centralized voting power (leadership already in place) it doesn't really do justice to getting a proper perspective on the player demographics of this game


It does justice to the part of the demographic who care enough about the future of EVE to press one button once a year. You don't need any amount of ISK, you don't need sov space, you don't need a supercapital fleet to vote. Anyone with an active account can make their voice heard through the CSM. If you choose not to do so, why should your voice be listened to?

According to the so often quoted QEN, 10% of EVE population lives in nullsec. If even as much as one out of five "non-nullsec" players cared about the CSM, they could outvote any "nullsec" voting group.

In my opinion, a major portion of the purely highsec demographic simply does't care, and views EVE as another "theme park" MMO. If CCP changes the game for the worse for them, instead of rallying and trying to convince them otherwise, they would simply leave for another game.


You missed the point of what i was saying. Null sec can motivate large portions of players who really DON'T care because of the structure of null sec. Furthermore, coallitions can make sure that at least one represenative will have an extremely high chance of getting in.

This doesn't exist for high sec/lowsec/wh/fw. While someone might be able to rally everyone of their respective platform (that plans on voting) the chances are extremely slim, which means those areas are going to be underrepresented.

This is disadvantageous to the players and CCP, and is missing the point on what the CSM is supposed to provide. It is supposed to be a venue for CCP to get player derived feedback in a unique way that can't be obtained through the general player base due to NDA's. That's not what they are getting atm, so something should change.

It has nothing to do with people being politically active for their demographic, its supposed to be an example of the playerbase. If its not, then something needs to change.

To XIRUSPHERE, you have a point and i agree with you on being cautious. Like you, i agree with this in spirit at the least

Takamori Maruyama
Amarr
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2011.08.01 16:54:00 - [17]
 

Just don't invent a Tea Party here and I will be happy.

Gwenywell Shumuku
Posted - 2011.08.01 17:00:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Takamori Maruyama
Just don't invent a Tea Party here and I will be happy.


It would be called Quafe-Party

Henry Haphorn
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.01 17:44:00 - [19]
 

Hell no! I have observed a lot of political bickering in the United States during the past 10-15 years of my life. So far, a party system is a terrible idea. Usually it's because a party system will typically result in one or two parties (out of God knows how many party we start off with) gaining a monopoly-like strangle hold on the system and then using this to their advantage. In real like, the US two-party strangle hold (Liberals and Conservatives) is pretty much similar to the 0.0 alliances (Northern Coalition and Drone Region Federation). Both sides will do whatever they can to ensure no one takes their influence and both sides will do everything they can so that the middle (Independents) will never have any position.

It is for this reason that the First President of the United States (under the US Constitution) George Washington opposed the very idea of a political party system.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/washing.asp

"The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the Constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government.

All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests." - George Washington, 1796 Farewell Address

Rexxov
Posted - 2011.08.01 20:13:00 - [20]
 

I think if Chribba would host the mining party platform-they could get two or more candidates elected easily.

Also: shouldn't there be a noob party? Twisted Evil

Meryl SinGarda
Caldari
Belligerent Underpayed Tactical Team
Posted - 2011.08.01 20:18:00 - [21]
 

Yeah, let's create another reason to divide the playerbase.

We'll call the whiners the Derper party and the players with the ability to adapt to change and what-have-you, the Real EVE Players party.

Borun Tal
Minmatar
Space Pods Inc
Posted - 2011.08.01 20:30:00 - [22]
 

Eve has, effectively, regional (as in large areas, not regions as in Amarr, Citadel, etc) shadow governments that establish their general guidelines for operation, demand taxes, and do limited "good" works for the people in their domain. The CSM is in effect nothing more than a city council: their own petty little agendas, no real power (beyond the developers and others with the real money), and interested in getting their own faces in the press. Sure, you get an occassional Ron Paul type (American politics), but on the whole their effectiveness against the money and various shadow governments is limited. The political parties (ie, large alliances) in Eve are only as powerful as their reach, and are subject to the same corruption, flaws, and avarice that any real-life government and political party is.

Eve takes it one step further in that CCP makes it perfectly clear that Eve, as a whole, is nothing more than trapped slaves in that snowglobe a child plays with only rarely, and never really puts an effort into enjoying.

Vyl Vit
Minmatar
Cambio Enterprises
Posted - 2011.08.01 20:49:00 - [23]
 

It's not "impropriety". It's "the appearance of impropriety". It's not that the CSM doesn't represent and CCP doesn't listen. It's the appearance. I'd, in this instance, place the blame for the questioning of their integrity squarely on the CSM. I hasten to add, probably through no real fault of their own.

This is a lesson that is very difficult to get through to management organizations. They know whose side they're on. So should everyone else. The problem is people need to be told, and often reminded. I haven't seen, for instance, a communication organ the CSM can use to "keep in touch." For the few CSMs I've communicated directly with I'd add "...with the little people."

This has little or no effect as long as nothing is happening. But, should the door blow in, it's much to late too try to rectify with heartfelt steps. You're fast into the "what else would they say?" territory at that point.

Had the CSM regularly communicated with their constituents in some way (and it would seem if they take their role seriously they could have found the time and a method to do so) then their credibility wouldn't have been so easily shaken. As it happens such was not the case, and they were thrown into the obvious role of being in cahoots with the headshed.

Furthermore, if the CSMs think this keeping in touch with their constituents constitutes driving through systems and waving royally in local as they pass, which is what I've seen so far, then they can expect all they've generated is contempt. As soon as the opportunity arose, this is what they were shown. (Their emergency meeting in Iceland then appeared to be no more than a paid vacation - on the house.)

One way is crisis management. The other is management by crises. Either way it's the responsibility of the actors involved, not that of the constituency to create the confidence.

Olleybear
Minmatar
I R' Carebear
Posted - 2011.08.01 21:33:00 - [24]
 

Political parties in the CSM? No thanks.

The CSM needs to be filled with leaders, not filled with the popular people in political parties who only want to be rulers.

Political parties in RL are corrupt and never do anything that doesnt ensure they stay in power. People who go seeking power inside these parties are generally more sociopathic, ie. they do things in their own best interest and damn everyone elses interest that isn't helping theirs.

The last thing I personally want, and perhaps even the majority of the playerbase wants, is a select few people steering this game to benefit only the political CSM elites and their buddies.

If we want the game to succeed and be fun for the majority of players, we need a CSM that thinks beyond themselves and about the greater community of players.

Darius III
Caldari
Interstellar eXodus
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2011.08.02 00:23:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: Olleybear
Political parties in the CSM? No thanks.




The last thing I personally want, and perhaps even the majority of the playerbase wants, is a select few people steering this game to benefit only the political CSM elites and their buddies.




This is what you have now my friend.

Olleybear
Minmatar
I R' Carebear
Posted - 2011.08.02 01:45:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Darius III
Originally by: Olleybear
Political parties in the CSM? No thanks.

The last thing I personally want, and perhaps even the majority of the playerbase wants, is a select few people steering this game to benefit only the political CSM elites and their buddies.




This is what you have now my friend.


Then my own ignorance truly is bliss.... lol.

poeke
Posted - 2011.08.02 04:36:00 - [27]
 

I'll join the Pirate party, how do I get in?

Lady Spank
Amarr
In Praise Of Shadows
Posted - 2011.08.02 05:27:00 - [28]
 

I have a proposal in the Assembly Hall right now that I would like to see pushed to the attention of CCP. Can I bribe you by making you a new signature perhaps? You still have to pay me so it is not seen as a favour but I am awesome.

Tron Flux
Caldari
Midnite Madness
Posted - 2011.08.02 05:44:00 - [29]
 

You all realize that eve isn't actually a democracy, right? Not even a republic? You aren't actually confusing a game created by a company that you pay to play with reality are you . . . oh wait.

CanIHave YourStuff
Minmatar
In Praise Of Shadows
Posted - 2011.08.02 06:05:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Tron Flux
You all realize that eve isn't actually a democracy, right? Not even a republic? You aren't actually confusing a game created by a company that you pay to play with reality are you . . . oh wait.

Who are you? Just some scrub crying about the power-players in this game of political espionage and spying. If you think this is just a spaceship pew-pew game with a bit of dress-up dollies on the side then you should just run along and play now.


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