CSM Campaigns

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
3 Pages123Next page
 

Kyle Aparthos for CSM XI

First post First post
Author
Rejection Of Sovereignty
#1 - 2015-10-12 19:07:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Kyle Aparthos
Greetings to all of New Eden,


My name is Kyle Aparthos, and I have finally made the decision to run for CSM XI.

As some of you who read TMC (or CZ) may know, I have been writing and publishing columns about the state of EVE Online under the moniker of "Opinionated Analysis" for some time. Where we were, how we got to where we are, and where we might go from here. If you haven't read any of those, and you're still interested in what I have to say by the time we get to the end of this post, then here are a couple examples.


To condense a whole lot of long-winded writing into a few short statements: I am an analyst, writer, (currently retired) diplomat for Spacemonkey's Alliance, and general guy who goes out and talks to LOTS of people and gets their opinions on things. Most relevant to the CSM is my ongoing role as an analyst who studies the mechanics of EVE online in a very in-depth sense, publishing diatribes and making suggestions for the future. As a result of this role I have gained quite a lot of analytical experience, especially pertaining to EVE mechanics beyond just the surface level of "this sucks and I don't like it because it inconveniences me."

This has been especially useful when combined with the communication skills gained from all the time spent talking to people on platforms ranging from SMA comms (where people love me) to reddit (where people hate SMA and thus it takes a little more effort to note be hated by association).Over the course of my career, as a result of many of these roles, I have gained a fair bit of insight into group interaction, as well as how medium and large groups have reacted to the changes to EVE over the last year. Ultimately this leads to me having a solid knowledge of how to put player behavior together with the actual mechanics of the game.

My experience has led me to believe in two things:


  • That player agency, both at the level of the individual and the group, is the single most important aspect of EVE.
  • That player agency can only be enhanced through combining "little things," (quality-of-life changes to be exact) and broad, sweeping alterations to the game.


As a result, when I examine announced changes to EVE, my primary concern is how groups of players will react to these changes. The human element, as it were. I feel very strongly that many members of our community have focused too heavily on analyzing these changes from a mechanical perspective only - how the mechanics fit into one another and trying to make the people fit into the mechanics, rather than give equal weight to both the mechanics and the players using them.

Because of this belief, I am basing my campaign on the notion that player cooperation is the mainstay of EVE, be it in huge alliances or smaller groups. More importantly, all of these groups deserve a greater sense of agency and individual involvement, and more tools to further their personal goals, no matter how large or small the group is. While there are a huge number of different ways to achieve this goal, I shall (at least initially) focus on a few of these in my campaign:

[Continued in next post]

Opinionated analyst, CSM XI candidate

Get in touch with me via tweetfleet slack (Kyle Aparthos), reddit (u/KyleAparthos), in-game, or via email (kyle.brashear@hotmail.com) for all of your Analysis needs :)

Rejection Of Sovereignty
#2 - 2015-10-12 19:08:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Kyle Aparthos
[Continued from previous post]

One: Alliance-level management deserves some love. Currently, just about every medium-to-large alliance must rely on out of game tools in order to support themselves. Some of these out-of-game functions, such as teamspeak servers and alliance websites, are spectacularly useful and hard to emulate. However, alliance leadership also finds itself forced to utilize out-of-game tools for such tasks as blacklist management, tax collection (for those who do so), and SRP. In addition, the existing in-game mechanics such as role management and hangars simply do not exist in any fleshed-out state at the alliance level. I firmly believe that if we can overhaul and add to the number of in-game tools available to prospective alliance leaders, both old and well-established alliances, as well as those who are struggling to get off of the ground, will prosper.

Two: Player customization of space should be an integral component of the investment in Sov. While the upcoming structures due to be released in Spring of 2016 are slated to be usable just about anywhere, some of their possible functions (specifically, those proposed at Fanfest 2015 that would allow for serious customization of space, such as alteration of security status, rat type, and warp speed within a system) should be specific to players who have invested in their space. Not necessarily invested a boatload of ISK, but rather invested their time and effort in acquiring a Sov system, and living in it and defending it. The more time and effort you put into your little slice of paradise, the more you should be able to customize and alter it to suit your particular playstyle, so long as those customizations are still occupancy-dependent . This would allow the ability to utilize, enjoy, and defend your space to be more dynamic than simply "how much have you ratted and mined in your space in the last week, and how high is its strategic index," while simultaneously retaining the underlying theme of occupancy sovereignty.

Three: Players should have multiple different avenues for taking and holding space. As I detailed in one of the columns linked above, while Fozziesov certainly has its merits and I am not advocating for a return to Dominion Sov, I do not believe that Entosis Links should be the only method of Sov acquisition. This is especially pertinent given the current usage of Entosis Links to destroy Sov structures outright: it simply does not make any logical sense in my mind that a Sov Lazor should be capable of making a huge structure detonate. As a result, I think that CCP had the right idea with how they treat stations currently: Entosis Links cause the station to flip once all levels of node contesting have been completed. With the announced return of a partial structure grind to destroy the new structures, it is my belief that the most reasonable way to proceed with Sov is to allow Entosis links and node contesting to be used to capture structures, and the limited structure grinding to be used to destroy them. When combined with the different force multiplication tools that are possible with the new structures, this produces a much wider variety of ways to engage in Sov warfare, and thus more ways to engage the player base.

In short: we have succeeded in making Sov somewhat more accessible in that an enormous blob of supers is no longer required to hold your space. However, we have not made either holding Sov or fighting for it much more engaging at all. The updates that the next year holds must make being part of an alliance, sov or no, more engaging for everyone involved.

If you're interested in getting in touch with me to share your ideas, comments, or concerns, you can contact me in-game at Kyle Aparthos, via Tweetfleet slack under the same name, or via reddit.
I hope to hear from you guys soon :D

Opinionated analyst, CSM XI candidate

Get in touch with me via tweetfleet slack (Kyle Aparthos), reddit (u/KyleAparthos), in-game, or via email (kyle.brashear@hotmail.com) for all of your Analysis needs :)

ChaosTheory.
#3 - 2015-10-12 19:11:06 UTC
first reply!

obligatory grr goons
Rejection Of Sovereignty
#4 - 2015-10-12 19:14:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Kyle Aparthos
Since the first two posts are essentially filled up, the Reserve post is where I'll put my interviews thusfar so you don't have to go digging to find them Smile


CSM Watch

SCC Lounge


EVE-Guardian (Same interview as SCC Lounge)


EVE_NT

And more to come!

Opinionated analyst, CSM XI candidate

Get in touch with me via tweetfleet slack (Kyle Aparthos), reddit (u/KyleAparthos), in-game, or via email (kyle.brashear@hotmail.com) for all of your Analysis needs :)

Minmatar Republic
#5 - 2015-10-12 20:51:35 UTC
Kyle for CSM!
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#6 - 2015-10-12 21:09:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Steve Ronuken
You do know that structures won't be affected by Entosis, right? (Not talking about sov structures. Things like Citadels)

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

Rejection Of Sovereignty
#7 - 2015-10-12 21:14:35 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
You do know that structures won't be affected by Entosis, right? (Not talking about sov structures. Things like Citadels)


I do know that as of the latest devblogs on the topic they are not slated to interact with Entosis Links.

What I'm saying is that they should, but not in the way that current Sov structures do. Rather, the new structures (assuming that they are all destructible like Citadels) should be captureable via Entosis and destructible via the already-outlined DPS method.

I'd like to think that such a system, if done right, would offer multiple different avenues for sov warfare and thus make the process a little bit more nonlinear/interesting. If you're interested in reading more about this idea, even if solely for the purpose of telling me why it's a dumb idea, I encourage you to read the 2nd page of this column.

Opinionated analyst, CSM XI candidate

Get in touch with me via tweetfleet slack (Kyle Aparthos), reddit (u/KyleAparthos), in-game, or via email (kyle.brashear@hotmail.com) for all of your Analysis needs :)

Pandemic Horde
#8 - 2015-10-12 22:03:39 UTC  |  Edited by: SilentAsTheGrave
I just don't see a reason to vote for you. There is nothing that stands out that says, Hey, we need this guy on the csm! Sounds harsh, but it's the truth. I've read some of your stuff, but it is rather bland. Not to mention I had to put up with that eye cancer web layout you continue to blog at - TMC. The other things that can't be ignored is you are part of the CFC, the worst offending coalition that prides itself on keeping the status quo when null desperately needs more things to shake it up to break up the cancer that is giant coalitions. You brag that SMA is a force to be recorded with, but everyone knows SMA has been nothing but cannon fodder for CFC since the beginning and would wither away and die before the sun set on their first day on their own in null. SMA couldn't win a coin toss on their own.

Not to just bash on your alliance, but we need people with fresh ideas to help put EVE back in the fun zone and grow. You simply have nothing to offer. Ugh
Circle-Of-Two
#9 - 2015-10-12 23:21:04 UTC
So what would your response be to someone who asked why a person who actively sold his alliance mate out and straight up lied in a article on tmc to appease the goons, and then instantly back tracked. Why would we want someone who so clearly lacks a back bone on the csm?
Rejection Of Sovereignty
#10 - 2015-10-13 00:56:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Kyle Aparthos
Bisu Deckryder wrote:
So what would your response be to someone who asked why a person who actively sold his alliance mate out and straight up lied in a article on tmc to appease the goons, and then instantly back tracked. Why would we want someone who so clearly lacks a back bone on the csm?



So, I've responded to this one about a thousand times before, but not usually in such a public forum:

The evidence placed on my desk at the time showed that he was in fact a defector, and I agreed with his purging with a heavy heart. Privately I was as close to heartbroken as you can get over a space video game, though publicly I honored my obligation as a reporter who was on the scene at the time, and reported based on the evidence and statements that I had in front of me.

Less than three days later, new evidence showed up that exonerated him - I was one of the first in line banging the pots and pans calling for his exoneration, and I could not have been happier when SMA leadership as a whole agreed that he deserved a full apology and a reversal of the previous decision.

I have, quite frankly, never been so ******* happy to be wrong in the entirety of my EVE career and the first thing I did when Rayonar got back onto our TS was pull him aside and beg him to forgive me for making the mistakes I did. The second thing I did was immediately go over to TMC and write a retraction of my previous statements. I had a ridiculous smile on my face the entire time I wrote it because I got a chance to make things right and not lose a friend.

Rayonar was, and remains, a very good friend of mine. As far as I'm concerned, if he managed to find it in his heart to examine the words coming out of my mouth and determine that I was worthy of his forgiveness, then why should the rest of EVE make a shitshow out of it?

Opinionated analyst, CSM XI candidate

Get in touch with me via tweetfleet slack (Kyle Aparthos), reddit (u/KyleAparthos), in-game, or via email (kyle.brashear@hotmail.com) for all of your Analysis needs :)

Rejection Of Sovereignty
#11 - 2015-10-13 01:34:05 UTC
Bisu Deckryder wrote:
So what would your response be to someone who asked why a person who actively sold his alliance mate out and straight up lied in a article on tmc to appease the goons, and then instantly back tracked. Why would we want someone who so clearly lacks a back bone on the csm?


Hi, pilot in question.

This stigma really needs to end. I've grown very tired of everyone outside of the Imperium even pretending they know how this all ended. Let's go ahead and try to end this entire political nonsense right here and now: Mistakes were made, and we will probably never be able to live down what happened. But, the sad fact remains that regardless of how little it comes up, 95% of the time, it comes from an outside entity that would just use it as 'Grr Gons' fuel until they turn red in the face.

I'm honestly super tired of hearing about it. I will in no way ever change the stance that in my 10+ years of MMOs, I never had a worse few IRL days from a video game. But let's go ahead and end some notions like I was cold shouldered by everyone in the Imperium, let alone SMA.


  • Blarf, the Skymarshal at the time, reached out to me within 12 hours of it happening. He tracked me down on Skype personally to touch base, and to get dialogues started on what exactly happened as he wasn't present at the time.
  • Kyle, Widget Zombie, various other SMA Directorate (the brothers specifically), and countless others were on my side and had my back, and support.
  • For every one person that even BELIEVED what happened wasn't bullshit, there was a herd of others than didn't.
  • Kyle, to this day, apologizes to me for having to write the article. I'm not mad at him. Really, I'm not. People act like I should be gutting him and spreading his entrails over the streets. It get's boring when people decide how mad or upset I should've been.
  • Kyle, again, to this day, still receives threats outside of EVE, harassment, all sorts of ****, over an ARTICLE. For a VIDEO GAME.


With these things said, to base someones entire candidacy on a single mistake that he openly regrets to this day, and has worked hard to move past, is pretty narrow. You're openly avoiding the fact that he is very well versed and informed in this game, despite not being a 5+ year bitter vet player, just to turn about and **** on him for 'Grr Gons' and 'LOL SMA BURNED HIS FRIEND'.

I would vouch for Kyle for CSM regardless of whatever the outcome was. He's proven to be a great neutral ground on almost everything he's written article wise, something most people pitching for CSM should probably take note on these days. Guy does his research, and isn't afraid to approach something from different angles that people refuse to chance, to look terrible in public eyes. Guy has a lot more spine than the people that harass him, as far as I'm concerned.



TL;DR - Stop digging up the past, didn't happen to you, and I don't really care any more. I'd vote for him instantly, especially based on his knowledge, ability to learn, and his willingness to compromise on most topics that most people just don't care to do more than bury their head in the sand on.
#12 - 2015-10-13 02:00:09 UTC
#QuieroEVEenEspañol

Support making a EVE Client in Spanish and I will consider your candidacy

There is no shame in saying you don't know something, and there is no glory in keeping knolege to yourself.

Pandemic Horde
#13 - 2015-10-13 08:14:51 UTC  |  Edited by: SilentAsTheGrave
Rayonar wrote:
Bisu Deckryder wrote:
So what would your response be to someone who asked why a person who actively sold his alliance mate out and straight up lied in a article on tmc to appease the goons, and then instantly back tracked. Why would we want someone who so clearly lacks a back bone on the csm?


Hi, pilot in question.

This stigma really needs to end. I've grown very tired of everyone outside of the Imperium even pretending they know how this all ended. Let's go ahead and try to end this entire political nonsense right here and now: Mistakes were made, and we will probably never be able to live down what happened. But, the sad fact remains that regardless of how little it comes up, 95% of the time, it comes from an outside entity that would just use it as 'Grr Gons' fuel until they turn red in the face.

I'm honestly super tired of hearing about it. I will in no way ever change the stance that in my 10+ years of MMOs, I never had a worse few IRL days from a video game. But let's go ahead and end some notions like I was cold shouldered by everyone in the Imperium, let alone SMA.


  • Blarf, the Skymarshal at the time, reached out to me within 12 hours of it happening. He tracked me down on Skype personally to touch base, and to get dialogues started on what exactly happened as he wasn't present at the time.
  • Kyle, Widget Zombie, various other SMA Directorate (the brothers specifically), and countless others were on my side and had my back, and support.
  • For every one person that even BELIEVED what happened wasn't bullshit, there was a herd of others than didn't.
  • Kyle, to this day, apologizes to me for having to write the article. I'm not mad at him. Really, I'm not. People act like I should be gutting him and spreading his entrails over the streets. It get's boring when people decide how mad or upset I should've been.
  • Kyle, again, to this day, still receives threats outside of EVE, harassment, all sorts of ****, over an ARTICLE. For a VIDEO GAME.


With these things said, to base someones entire candidacy on a single mistake that he openly regrets to this day, and has worked hard to move past, is pretty narrow. You're openly avoiding the fact that he is very well versed and informed in this game, despite not being a 5+ year bitter vet player, just to turn about and **** on him for 'Grr Gons' and 'LOL SMA BURNED HIS FRIEND'.

I would vouch for Kyle for CSM regardless of whatever the outcome was. He's proven to be a great neutral ground on almost everything he's written article wise, something most people pitching for CSM should probably take note on these days. Guy does his research, and isn't afraid to approach something from different angles that people refuse to chance, to look terrible in public eyes. Guy has a lot more spine than the people that harass him, as far as I'm concerned.



TL;DR - Stop digging up the past, didn't happen to you, and I don't really care any more. I'd vote for him instantly, especially based on his knowledge, ability to learn, and his willingness to compromise on most topics that most people just don't care to do more than bury their head in the sand on.

I think it is absolutely appalling that there exists alliances that empower a person such as Digi. Someone that knows no bounds on where the meta should end. He is in fact the one who claimed you were a spy and thus, CFC blindly following his every word, had your titan killed. You seem to support such actions with no shame, same as OP who is wanting to be on the CSM.

Unfortunately for you, and OP, guilt by willing association with such scum is something the player community does not need on the CSM. I fear that you and OP have been under the yoke of the CFC for so long you have Stockholm syndrome and can't see the evil that transpires in front of your noses. Digi survives because cowardly players feed him information on other players that he uses against them in and outside the game world.

Break your ties with the CFC and stand on your own. Cast aside trash like Digi and then, maybe then members from SMA could be seen as a legitimate candidate for the CSM and not just another sock puppet.

I mean how do you think this image was made?
Rejection Of Sovereignty
#14 - 2015-10-13 12:59:42 UTC
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:

I think it is absolutely appalling that there exists alliances that empower a person such as Digi. Someone that knows no bounds on where the meta should end. He is in fact the one who claimed you were a spy and thus, CFC blindly following his every word, had your titan killed. You seem to support such actions with no shame, same as OP who is wanting to be on the CSM.

Unfortunately for you, and OP, guilt by willing association with such scum is something the player community does not need on the CSM. I fear that you and OP have been under the yoke of the CFC for so long you have Stockholm syndrome and can't see the evil that transpires in front of your noses. Digi survives because cowardly players feed him information on other players that he uses against them in and outside the game world.

Break your ties with the CFC and stand on your own. Cast aside trash like Digi and then, maybe then members from SMA could be seen as a legitimate candidate for the CSM and not just another sock puppet.

I mean how do you think this image was made?


That's not an SMA Problem, that would be a Goons Problem. If they continue to support Digi, than that is there prerogative, not ours. Yes, he claimed I was a spy, turned out he was wrong, eh? But it turns out I wasn't, and my assets were replaced, and I got back to doing the things I wanted to do.

Guilt by association is easily the most half-assed excuse for not liking someone. Just because I'm in the general area of someone you don't like, I'm as bad as said person? Pretty awful. We walk amungst criminals daily, yet we're not labeled for what they do. The Stockholm Syndrome line is also very old and boring. I love how everyone just can't get over the fact that I wanted to continue to help an Alliance that I'd been a part of for many years grow, above all else. You're a member of Brave, who has collapsed and rebuilt countless times over endless drama, and yet you don't see me calling you a masochist, because some people do have the respect for someone who has the willpower and charisma to keep a good thing going, where others would call it mental illness out of spite.

In respect to my friend who actually wants a chance to make this run, I will no longer be posting in this thread. If you want to argue your personal gripes with me, eve-mail me. I really don't care to see this level of sperg on an open forum. But since you want it, here it is. Enjoy it, I guess. Otherwise, reach me by other means.
Rejection Of Sovereignty
#15 - 2015-10-13 15:52:33 UTC
Rayonar wrote:
Bisu Deckryder wrote:
So what would your response be to someone who asked why a person who actively sold his alliance mate out and straight up lied in a article on tmc to appease the goons, and then instantly back tracked. Why would we want someone who so clearly lacks a back bone on the csm?


Hi, pilot in question.

This stigma really needs to end. I've grown very tired of everyone outside of the Imperium even pretending they know how this all ended. Let's go ahead and try to end this entire political nonsense right here and now: Mistakes were made, and we will probably never be able to live down what happened. But, the sad fact remains that regardless of how little it comes up, 95% of the time, it comes from an outside entity that would just use it as 'Grr Gons' fuel until they turn red in the face.

I'm honestly super tired of hearing about it. I will in no way ever change the stance that in my 10+ years of MMOs, I never had a worse few IRL days from a video game. But let's go ahead and end some notions like I was cold shouldered by everyone in the Imperium, let alone SMA.


  • Blarf, the Skymarshal at the time, reached out to me within 12 hours of it happening. He tracked me down on Skype personally to touch base, and to get dialogues started on what exactly happened as he wasn't present at the time.
  • Kyle, Widget Zombie, various other SMA Directorate (the brothers specifically), and countless others were on my side and had my back, and support.
  • For every one person that even BELIEVED what happened wasn't bullshit, there was a herd of others than didn't.
  • Kyle, to this day, apologizes to me for having to write the article. I'm not mad at him. Really, I'm not. People act like I should be gutting him and spreading his entrails over the streets. It get's boring when people decide how mad or upset I should've been.
  • Kyle, again, to this day, still receives threats outside of EVE, harassment, all sorts of ****, over an ARTICLE. For a VIDEO GAME.


With these things said, to base someones entire candidacy on a single mistake that he openly regrets to this day, and has worked hard to move past, is pretty narrow. You're openly avoiding the fact that he is very well versed and informed in this game, despite not being a 5+ year bitter vet player, just to turn about and **** on him for 'Grr Gons' and 'LOL SMA BURNED HIS FRIEND'.

I would vouch for Kyle for CSM regardless of whatever the outcome was. He's proven to be a great neutral ground on almost everything he's written article wise, something most people pitching for CSM should probably take note on these days. Guy does his research, and isn't afraid to approach something from different angles that people refuse to chance, to look terrible in public eyes. Guy has a lot more spine than the people that harass him, as far as I'm concerned.



TL;DR - Stop digging up the past, didn't happen to you, and I don't really care any more. I'd vote for him instantly, especially based on his knowledge, ability to learn, and his willingness to compromise on most topics that most people just don't care to do more than bury their head in the sand on.



This may actually been the nicest thing I've ever heard you say. I really appreciate knowing at least one person has this opinion of me <3

Opinionated analyst, CSM XI candidate

Get in touch with me via tweetfleet slack (Kyle Aparthos), reddit (u/KyleAparthos), in-game, or via email (kyle.brashear@hotmail.com) for all of your Analysis needs :)

#16 - 2015-10-13 21:25:36 UTC
Kyle, you're a great guy and have done a lot for us. I really love your articles on TMC and support you. Some people may only see CFC and "grr goons" and that's fine, that's how they choose to see the game. But some of us don't let that get in the way of seeing the people behind the character. SMA has amazing people, and you're one of them. #Kyle2016
#17 - 2015-10-14 06:44:59 UTC
I'm no fan of SMA, the brother's specifically I hold in great contempt for reasons that will become apparent if you ask them about my corp. But trying to hold the whole Rayonar thing above Kyle's head is pretty damn childish. I wish you the best of luck but as long as you are affiliated with SMA and the brothers I cannot in good conscience vote for you.
Circle-Of-Two
#18 - 2015-10-14 16:45:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Bisu Deckryder
Rayonar wrote:
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:

I think it is absolutely appalling that there exists alliances that empower a person such as Digi. Someone that knows no bounds on where the meta should end. He is in fact the one who claimed you were a spy and thus, CFC blindly following his every word, had your titan killed. You seem to support such actions with no shame, same as OP who is wanting to be on the CSM.

Unfortunately for you, and OP, guilt by willing association with such scum is something the player community does not need on the CSM. I fear that you and OP have been under the yoke of the CFC for so long you have Stockholm syndrome and can't see the evil that transpires in front of your noses. Digi survives because cowardly players feed him information on other players that he uses against them in and outside the game world.

Break your ties with the CFC and stand on your own. Cast aside trash like Digi and then, maybe then members from SMA could be seen as a legitimate candidate for the CSM and not just another sock puppet.

I mean how do you think this image was made?


That's not an SMA Problem, that would be a Goons Problem. If they continue to support Digi, than that is there prerogative, not ours. Yes, he claimed I was a spy, turned out he was wrong, eh? But it turns out I wasn't, and my assets were replaced, and I got back to doing the things I wanted to do.

Guilt by association is easily the most half-assed excuse for not liking someone. Just because I'm in the general area of someone you don't like, I'm as bad as said person? Pretty awful. We walk amungst criminals daily, yet we're not labeled for what they do. The Stockholm Syndrome line is also very old and boring. I love how everyone just can't get over the fact that I wanted to continue to help an Alliance that I'd been a part of for many years grow, above all else. You're a member of Brave, who has collapsed and rebuilt countless times over endless drama, and yet you don't see me calling you a masochist, because some people do have the respect for someone who has the willpower and charisma to keep a good thing going, where others would call it mental illness out of spite.

In respect to my friend who actually wants a chance to make this run, I will no longer be posting in this thread. If you want to argue your personal gripes with me, eve-mail me. I really don't care to see this level of sperg on an open forum. But since you want it, here it is. Enjoy it, I guess. Otherwise, reach me by other means.

Si are non goon cfc members still pretending that they don't direcctly benefit from digis blatant doxxing, and that he doesn't also dox their own members?
Rejection Of Sovereignty
#19 - 2015-10-14 17:24:23 UTC
Bisu Deckryder wrote:


Si are non goon cfc members still pretending that they don't direcctly benefit from digis blatant doxxing, and that he doesn't also dox their own members?



To be honest it has nothing to do with pretending. I literally don't remember the last time that Digi was involved in anything to do with an SMA member - he was only tangentially involved even with the Rayonar business, and that was the one time during my tenure as a member of SMA leadership that I saw his name crop up on my desk.

As Rayonar already explicitly stated, Digi is a GSF member, not a member of SMA. What Digi chooses to do with his time has nothing to do with my work in SMA. And more to the point, my work inside SMA has nothing to do with my CSM campaign, other than that my time working as a diplomat has exposed me to thousands of people and I have learned something from listening to so many people talk about how they feel about EVE, which is hardly SMA-specific.

I am not campaigning as "SMA guy who wants to advance SMA agenda." I am campaigning as "analyst, diplomat, columnist, and guy who tries to solve problems through reasoned discourse." So, with all due respect, I think it is fair to ask that critiques of my campaign come from my ideas - there is certainly no shortage of writing available where I have been very open and honest about what ideas I have for the future of EVE. In fact, I continue to publish new ideas at least once per week.

So rather than examine me from some preconceived notion that an SMA candidate must be a "dirty goon puppet," examine the ideas that I have put forth and shall continue to put forth. I promise you won't find any shortage of material upon which to base your opinion.

Opinionated analyst, CSM XI candidate

Get in touch with me via tweetfleet slack (Kyle Aparthos), reddit (u/KyleAparthos), in-game, or via email (kyle.brashear@hotmail.com) for all of your Analysis needs :)

Northern Coalition.
#20 - 2015-10-27 12:01:47 UTC
If you're a CFC endorsed candidate this whole thread is more of a formality for you than anything. But in any case I'd like to know how you would differentiate yourself from other CFC CSMs or if you will just echo the party line. What is unique about you compared to your peers?
3 Pages123Next page
Forum Jump