CSM Campaigns

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
17 Pages123Next pageLast page
 

CSM X - What are you voting for?

First post First post
Author
#1 - 2014-12-04 01:14:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
My closing statement.

This is an interview.
Look at the different people that are applying for this job.

All you need to ask yourself is this:
  • Will this person try and help CCP in their efforts to make the game more balanced and think outside of the box for new and innovative ways to play?

If you vote for someone based on their alliance, whether you like them personally or on some reputation as a player, you will be doing EVE a disservice and shooting yourself in the foot.
That is the essential problem with democracy. Incompetent people are winning elections based upon charisma and social connections.

You deserve the CSM group that you vote in to the jobs.


Blah blah stuff follows


Simply put, two over riding goals:

  • More good fights and less easy kills
  • Proportional representation on the CSM

The mechanics are in favour of the attackers.
For example, I suspect there has been no play testing to check the reactions of gate campers and miners when they stare at one object for a few hours.

Null Sec is far and away over represented due to having voting bloc. People vote to represent their groups and personal interests.
I suggest we have one negative and one positive vote or alternative you can abstain. One coalition can not down vote all the candidates that they do not like, while the whole of EVE can knock one candidate down.

Whether ideas are good or bad they can still generate new game concepts:

- Orca and Rorqual mini-bubble-POS shields
- Absorb modules
- Auto D-scan (slower than manually clicking but saves your mouse and fingers, worm hole love)
- Further consolidate null sec
- Anti-AFK cloaking SOV structure
- Force Recons become cloaky hunters.
- Getting veterans to break away and maybe take newbies with them from NPC corps.
- Missions, NPC protection & Contracts (bounties and escorts)
- Mining Discussion
- SOV alternative
- Blobs and system performance.
So on and so forth.

Misc

As for how I handle things, I do try to add a bit of humour to my stance. Probably fail a lot and if people are laughing it is probably at me but hey ... laugher is still good for us all.

My EVE story
I have a dream!

Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
It seems you guys think I am shooting EVE down, being negative about it, how about looking at it from this perspective:
Arrow I think EVE is a fantastic game Attention

The fixes, improvements and such that I am campaiging for are relatively small things in order to take what I feel is excellent toward perfection!


Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
I am not so much trying to stop ganking, as I am trying to push for ways that the victims can counter ambush or stand up against the gankers instead of running. Add another layer to this aspect of game play.
See now this is an idea I can get behind. It has always bothered me that mining ships are so one-sided. They should be given the tools to fight back, even if fitting for combat reduces their mining output. That's a choice to let the player make, not one that should be forced upon them.

You know what I'd like to see on mining ships? Utility highs with unbonused missiles, instead of or along with drones! ... And the beauty of unbonused launcher hardpoints is how easily you can instead fit a cloaking device, probe launcher, or capacitor mod in them. ...

I just feel that a big part of why miners feel powerless is because their ships ARE powerless.


Proc now + 2x missile launchers, possibly?

Arrow I need YOU.

If you do think that I or any other candidate will do a good job then it is your responsibility to inform people in your local, corps and friend lists.

There is nothing more effective at spreading an idea than word of mouth.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Gallente Federation
#2 - 2014-12-04 02:51:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Dradis Aulmais
I agreed with most of what you say:

Miners need a way to fight back if they are not AFK and you have some good ideas on that.


I don't not like you cloak solutions

The purpose of any recon and stealth is to get info on your enemies. There should be a counter but fuel and timers aren't the best solution I think to this problem. I do think that cyno should be removed from everything smaller than a cruiser. SB should not have that capability.

Your close to getting my vote.

Dradis Aulmais, Federal Attorney Number 54896

Free The Scope Three

#3 - 2014-12-04 03:06:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
If you do not want to vote for me, please consider one or more of the following:

New candidates:
Lorelei Ierendi
Trinkets friend had to withdraw. Sad
Ambar Khardula withdrew Sad - raises valid concern of impairment compatibility.
Marlona Sky - biomassed. Shocked EVE? WTH?! Sad

Current CSM recurring candidates:
Mike Azariah
Sugar Kyle
Corebloodbrothers
Corbexx
Sion Kumitomo Yes, "GRRR Goons," but I like how he says what is on his mind in a straight forward way.

There have been a lot of questions regarding me and Core, whether somehow we are gaming the system or not. It is purely coincidental. I just set out to try and prove this .... but apparently, the first time I had any involvement in CSM matters, I had already heard of Volt.

So, all I can say is that if you look at what we write about, I am not some sort of ghost writter trying to gather more voters to support him.

I am surprised and really disappointed in people that this could reach this point:

Marlona Sky wrote:
Alundil wrote:
This makes me sad to see a small vicious part of the community run someone out of the game completely. That speaks volumes and there ought to be a lot of shame felt by those involved.

Poor form.

Fly safe IRL I guess

Well I decided it would be best to just biomass so no one gets funny ideas that I have somehow bought myself via a fake sale and thus that poor person now gets animosity from them. I think I will just donate the assets and ISK to the Magic School Bus Mike runs as it will allow me to do the contracts very fast as I am in a completely different time zone than Chribba. And the thought of helping new players makes me happy. Big smile


Marlona Sky wrote:
In the end defenders should want to fight. Even outnumbered and or outgunned, there should always be a way to engage the enemy at some capacity. Even if you still lose. Bombers originally (or so I thought) were meant to be a tool for those outnumbered had something to fight back when massively outnumbered. But, it just turned into another tool for the large blocs to use to oppress small non-bloc entities.

While there should be different things that fall under home field advantage, nothing should ever enable AFK empires. If they are not there using the space, there should be nothing for them to use to keep a very small group, even just a corp of 5 pilots, from taking it from them without them knowing about it.

Use it or lose it.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

#4 - 2014-12-04 13:35:39 UTC
I think if there were a negative vote, you would have one and again one positive vote. ( Keeping it in balance with the EVE universe. RollP ) I feel that it would play out like this (random numbers follow):

3000 Goons vote for their leader
1000 CoalitionB vote for MrXexy
500 Goons vote against MrXexy
2500 Goons vote against other CSMs
20 000 high sec dwellers vote against Goons
5000 vote high sec dwellers vote for MrXexy

Total MrXexy 5500 and Goons -17000

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Lin Kuei Kokuryukai.
#5 - 2014-12-04 16:06:13 UTC
Jenshae:

As an old boss of mine used to quote to me many times, "Democracy is the worst form of government...except for all the others."

Yes, democracy and the CSM are far from perfect, I agree. History has shown, however, that the CSM has been effective in stopping the abuses that spawn it, so that can be seen as a win.

I've been through some of the earlier posts that you referenced and find problems there as well. You don't seem to offer any reasonable alternative to the CSM, and a few of your ideas, such as making sure someone is "qualified" to be on the CSM either don't work on the face of it, or need to be far more developed.

You may be right that large voting blocks control the CSM, but I am not convinced. If, however, that is the case, I think a reasonable stab at the situation might be to improve the apathy and misconceptions that the player base has about the CSM.

What do you think?

-- Alan Mathison, Explorer & Industrialist, Star Tide Industries

The Volition Cult
#6 - 2014-12-04 17:30:11 UTC
freedom of speech matters but ffs, u are in my alliance lol, your voice is your own ofc, not mine nor provi bloc
Goodluck
#7 - 2014-12-04 18:17:00 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
20 000 high sec dwellers vote


If you can actually make that happen, you have a heretofore undiscovered talent.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!

#8 - 2014-12-04 18:30:19 UTC
Dersen Lowery wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
20 000 high sec dwellers vote


If you can actually make that happen, you have a heretofore undiscovered talent.


That's the problem.

I would actually like to see a possibility of actively voting for "no one", so people can show that they are interested, but can't/don't/won't support any current candidate.

http://hisec-carebear.blogspot.de/

Goonswarm Federation
#9 - 2014-12-04 18:51:55 UTC  |  Edited by: GOB the Magician
EDIT: Due to your decision to no longer run on the platform of abolishing the CSM I'm forced to pull my support.
#10 - 2014-12-05 00:53:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
One thing to fix would be these #$%@ing forums! I just wrote three full replies and it threw them away because it throught there was some html in it somewhere, rather than just leaving it there and maybe high lighting what it does not like. XEvilX

Alan Mathison wrote:

As an old boss of mine used to quote to me many times, "Democracy is the worst form of government...except for all the others."
{snip}
You may be right that large voting blocks control the CSM, but I am not convinced. If, however, that is the case, I think a reasonable stab at the situation might be to improve the apathy and misconceptions that the player base has about the CSM.

What do you think?


I am still in the process of writing a book on how to take societies forward into a Technocratic Meritocracy with Socialistic tendencies. How could Technocratic structures be applied to EVE?
CCP are fantastic at analysing the data that we produce, market trends, ship usage, some really bizarre stuff too. It wouldn't be beyond possible to analyse who are the most active and in what types of space. There are aspects to it, how many lead fleets, how many do it without having roles, how many corp or alliance leaders are out there ratting, mining and such with their teams. The scope is boundless. Thus, it would be possible to seek people out and approach them to run for CSM.

"Those that seek power are often the worst to hold it." (Yes, I know CSM doesn't really have all that much, relatively speaking and yes that is more of a RL thing)
Additionally, to misquote The Poet, "Some are born to represent, some strive to represent, and some have the role thrust upon them." Give me more of the third upon the first and curb the second.

CCP could send out messages in all local chats. A pop up much like the Down Time message could come up three times a day for three days leading up to the final vote.
corebloodbrothers wrote:
freedom of speech matters but ffs, u are in my alliance lol, your voice is your own ofc, not mine nor provi bloc
Goodluck

I doubt that I shall garner more than a few votes tossed at me; as nothing more than a lark. As I said in your thread, you have my vote.
I probably won't get past this stage but hopefully there will be some discussion toward maybe getting CCP to stop serving up victims that don't have a chance against a little gang of thugs. We need more ability to fight back AND save ships!
Lorelei Ierendi wrote:

I would actually like to see a possibility of actively voting for "no one", so people can show that they are interested, but can't/don't/won't support any current candidate.


That is exactly one aspect that I strive for with this. Thank you.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Caldari State
#11 - 2014-12-09 03:23:59 UTC
Well hello there!

My name is Lanctharus Onzo and I am one of the co-host and writers of the Cap Stable Podcast.

In early 2014 our podcast interviewed a great majority of the candidates for CSM9 and we will be doing the same for CSM10.

Here is our announcement: http://capstable.net/2014/12/01/council-of-stellar-management-x-call-for-candidate-interviews/

As we stated in the announcement, you can contact us to schedule your one on one interview via any of the following methods:

Email: podcast@capstable.net
Twitter: @CapStable
Or via our contact form

We look forward to speaking to you about your particular skill set and expertise in EVE Online and we hope you success in your candidacy.

Sincerely,

Lanctharus Onzo
Co-host & Writer of the Cap Stable Podcast
Military Director, Alea Iacta Est Universal

Executive Editor, CSM Watch || Writer, Co-host of the Cap Stable Podcast || Twitter: @Lanctharus

#12 - 2014-12-09 15:31:15 UTC
Started a blog and updated the orginal post to try reflect a more considered approach.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

The Devil's Tattoo
#13 - 2014-12-10 13:38:10 UTC
you have to be trolling.

for starters, if you think battleships are weak, then mail me in game and you can fight mine.

the rest of it must be a troll.. No sir, I dont like your version of eve at all.

your rantings sound like the rattles of a teen with too much time on her hands.

You know what eve needs?
MOA PONIES!!!!
#14 - 2014-12-10 13:47:40 UTC
Darth Terona wrote:

You know what eve needs?
MOAR PONIES!!!!


Know how the Gurista logo is on some ships? I can get on board with some ponies on a ship. Little easter egg for those that zoom in far enough. Lol

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Test Alliance Please Ignore
#15 - 2014-12-11 15:54:03 UTC
I admire your enthusiasm for balancing out the power, but removing the CSM is really just going to put EVE back to the way it used to be, when it was more like other games and CCP didn't hear the voices of the playerbase. I think there really is less imbalance in allowing nullsec blocs to control the voting power than you think. For instance, it was not until The Mittani went into the CSM (CSM 6) that the game development took its major swerve away from adding new features and into fixing what was available. He may have taken a little too much credit for everything that happened, but his efforts were no doubt instrumental in things that most would say really benefited people outside of nullsec, like the industrial and mining barge updates. And while he didn't focus on the wormhole aspects, he demonstrated that a player voice can matter, and then there was an outpouring of voices which eventually led to the major turn toward giving wormhole gameplay some love in CSM 8 and 9.

I think the best way to get good representation is to make sure everyone knows how to make their voice heard. For newer or less experienced players (which highsec has a larger number of), that involves taking them under our wings one by one and showing them the ropes. I've also seen a trend among the longer term highsec players in that many of them are unaware of what goes on in the rest of the game. Perhaps another big way to help get them contributing and taking advantage of the power they have is to make better ways of informing them. Maybe player-run news corporations that control in-game banners in high security space. But I think the biggest cause of unfair representation is uneven awareness of what a person can do.




Darth Terona wrote:
for starters, if you think battleships are weak, then mail me in game and you can fight mine.

Poor argument, you haven't compared battleships except for a generalized taunt that in a one-on-one, you believe you would win. Ship balance isn't all about one-on-one fights, and even when it is, different pilots still have different skills (in-game and as a player) and different access to other valuable bonuses. You winning against another ship in your battleship proves nothing about their viability. Statistically speaking, battleships are underused in most PVP-combat-heavy areas in EVE.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

#16 - 2014-12-11 17:34:07 UTC
Your post history is full of making gamebreakingly bad suggestions. And little else.

-1.

Oh, and a little tip? Defining yourself solely in opposition to something does not actually comprise having any substance. Since you pretty much have nothing but "Grr Nullsec!" and your horrendously bad ideas to recommend you... you might consider trying to stake out an actual position before running for CSM.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

#17 - 2014-12-11 18:36:26 UTC
Darth Terona wrote:

You know what eve needs?
MOA PONIES!!!!


FRAKK YEAH!
BRING TEH PONIEZ!

Invalid signature format

Test Alliance Please Ignore
#18 - 2014-12-11 19:36:23 UTC
Darth Terona wrote:
You know what eve needs?
MOA PONIES!!!!

I also would like to see ponies on the Moa.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

#19 - 2014-12-11 20:12:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Oh, and a little tip? ... you might consider trying to stake out an actual position before running for CSM.

This thread isn't even two pages long and you missed something. I have no hope of becoming a CSM. That is not why I am doing this.
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Darth Terona wrote:
for starters, if you think battleships are weak, then mail me in game and you can fight mine.

You winning against another ship in your battleship proves nothing about their viability. Statistically speaking, battleships are underused in most PVP-combat-heavy areas in EVE.

I admire your enthusiasm for balancing out the power, but removing the CSM ...

I've also seen a trend among the longer term highsec players in that many of them are unaware of what goes on in the rest of the game. Perhaps another big way to help get them contributing and taking advantage of the power they have is to make better ways of informing them.


I can't think of anyone that wasn't disappointed when they realised how flimsy battleships are the first time.

Quite happy to settle for a vote of no confidence in a candidate and have struck out the lines that people seem to get so hung up on.

This CSM section should be linked in every local chat channel right now as a MoTD.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Test Alliance Please Ignore
#20 - 2014-12-11 20:24:43 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
This thread isn't even two pages long and you missed something. I have no hope of becoming a CSM. That is not why I am doing this.

I believe it's in the rules that in order to run you must be prepared to win a seat. If you want to express ideas to the CSM, there is the assembly hall for that. If you wish to express ideas about the CSM or candidates to other players who may be voters soon, then you might better spend your time replying to the CSM candidacy threads.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

17 Pages123Next pageLast page
Forum Jump