Lydia vanPersie wrote: Xenuria wrote:
On the subject of Grr goons it's disingenuous to lump me in with that /r/eve grr goons crowd or any grr goons crowd. My primary grievance with goons had nothing to do with anything in a spaceship game and everything to do with my home address and personal information being posted in a CSM thread by The Mittani.
Given that, how can you continue to play in an alliance that includes induviduals such as Digi? Or is doxxing only bad when it happens to you?
I do not see my presence in the alliance as an endorsement of what some members of the alliance say or do.
If and when somebody does something that I personally feel is inappropriate or messed up I let it be known. Do to how I am, I don't believe in showing favor to anybody because of rank, social status, influence etc. If a director in the imperium did something really messed up or creepy I would put them on blast.
I feel it's not only possible for people who don't agree on everything to work together, I believe it's essential to the survival of this game.
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
Ok, Lets try a little game of lets be serious.
The CSM has had an up and down year, some members have done an amazing job (you know who you are) and some less so (likewise) what reforms do you envisage that would encourage the best of us to apply and give their all, without suffering discouragement, whilst eliminating the wasters and attention seekers and those who just want to ruin the game for the rest of us?
Answers on a postcard to.... Well here would be a good start.
I think vigilance and oversight are the hallmarks of a good participation system. Obviously there are some aspects of how participation is measured that I am not privy to, that said I have some ideas.
When I work on anything as a behavioral consultant or even in security work, I always like to document the time I spend and what I spend it doing. Punch in - Punch out, is simply not sufficient for something like this so I would concoct a To-Doo system that allowed members of the CSM to claim or assign themselves to tasks they felt themselves best suited to. Id Est
: CCP has a bunch of gameplay changes/proposals that need to be looked over half are wormholes and the other half have to do with PVE in HS. Member A of the CSM can say "I got the wormhole stuff unless anybody else want's it or wishes to collaborate with me on it."
Member E says "I am not that well versed in WH stuff but I know alot about how HS mission runners think, I'll take that part"
. With a system like this is becomes painfully obvious via data and trends who is just not doing anything.
Lauresh Thellere wrote:
Why do you feel the need to "bite" are you once again labeling me a troll simply because I don't swallow your entire campaign without questions and criticism?
Also assuming everyone will immediately know what you mean when you say things is poor form, sadly nobody has Mind Reading trained to V so we need to have things explained to us and reforming the CSM is something that can happen any number of ways so it's not at all assumed prior knowledge.
I'm looking for specific information on how you plan to overhaul the CSM based on your understanding of how the CSM works, you seem to be assuming that everyone can guess your plan and are instead relying on pretty vague statements. You said it's difficult for you to explain yet you're running your entire campaign on it, a CSM member needs to be articulate and specific and so far you've shown neither.
You seem like you want to ask a question. Unfortunately I am unable to find one other than why I should feel the need to respond to you. Honestly, based on your previous history of posting in my threads; I don't.