ummm…there were far for NPC sell orders for items in 2008 than there are now.
1 Like
It sounds a lot like a media cycle because media and gaming are both forms of social engineering.
My guess is: EVE is to be an on board ramp to crypto and “The Name Stealers” ring of power.
But with a vigilant CSM there is a slim chance that that power could be decentralised.
It really hangs in the balance at this point.
Tying it back to the OP; how much say does the CSM have on monetisation?
I expect we will get a response at some point. I do not expect we will be successful in getting them to roll this back, but I am hoping we can at least get a few commitments on what happens in the future. I know those aren’t really worth the paper they’re written on, but given how long this has gone now, it seems likely that this thing is doing well enough that they aren’t willing to kill it and take the PR win.
3 Likes
The CSM has no say in any final decisions by CCP. As many CSM members are more than happy to tell you when CCP doesn’t end up doing what the CSM is demanding.
What you need to know, in case you weren’t around for the T20 scandal, is that the CSM was created as a public relations exercise. CCP had no intention then, as now, of letting them actually have a say in how things get done.
Mr Epeen 
2 Likes
I agree absolutely.
This is why the suguestion of protesting at Fanfest is a bad idea.
You don’t walk away from a negotiating table when you are the party with next to no power.
BUT, the CSM can get sunlight to the subject, and that is very important.
It is a soft power, yet vital.
1 Like
It largely depends on the CSM and on the CCP staff that are working with them. The bright lines put in place after the Summer of Rage in 2011, where commitments were made on aspects of monetization lasted quite a long time - at least, until the people who made those commitments left the company. We have worked with them on a variety of monetization issues in the past, and have done our best to explain where the average player draws the line at what is good monetization, e.g. cosmetics and what is not, e.g. selling ships and modules, gold ammo, etc.
In the end, CCP always makes the final decision, but we do have some influence on what they do and I am hoping we can convince them to at least come out publicly and explain what they did, why, where the lines are, what they will or won’t do in the future, and the like, even if the result is not ideal.
4 Likes
Honestly the only acceptable solution is the people who made this decision leaving the company.
1 Like
You have some influence on them, … as long as your view happens to agree with what they are going to do anyway. Otherwise your sh*t out of luck
2 Likes
That’s not been my experience. We’ve been able to persuade them to our views in the past. It certainly helps if they’re predisposed to do something, but we have successfully stopped and fixed things before they’ve blown up in their faces before.
2 Likes
that’s the thing, maybe if they were on the fence and needed some input. Then they might actually be swayed …
That’s ego talk.
Rheinhard Kurtz was right. The only time you get to say they listened to you is when CCP was going to do it anyway.
Mr Epeen
Sorry guys, again, that’s not been my experience, and I was in the room.
I know you’d prefer to imagine that none of that actually happened, because giving me and the rest of the CSM any kind of credit for anything makes you break out in hives, but facts are facts.
If you don’t believe me, feel free to ask anybody on the community team.
6 Likes
You don’t know what I do all day, pretentious person.
We were in the room as well back when CCP put on their little dog and pony show. Flying y’all out there, sitting down with you at the big table in the important looking room, looking like they were listening, and then patting you on the head and taking you on a tour or to the local pub. All with a full camera crew following every minute of it.
And then sending you home and doing whatever it was that they were going to do all along.
Like I said. Public relations. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Mr Epeen
And you don’t know whatever it was you said about me that caused me to respond to you. How about don’t start random forum arguments for whatever flex it is you are doing it for? Then I wouldn’t have to reply with the same tactic used on me.
Fair?
Mr Epeen
This is what I mean. If you think that the bulk of the actual work done by the CSM happened in a meeting room on camera, you have no idea what you’re talking about, lol.
Most actual work done by the CSM happens behind the scenes, at the bar, in slack, personal conversations between one member or a handful of members and a handful of devs, and the like. Just like in real life, meetings like the one you’re describing ARE for show. Just like diplomatic negotiations, just like union contract negotiations, just like board meetings and stakeholder meetings - the real work is done elsewhere with no cameras.
I mean, seriously - what you just wrote is the textbook “tell me you don’t understand what the CSM does without telling me you don’t understand what the CSM does.”
13 Likes
What I just wrote was a textbook example of public relations. Which was my point back at the beginning of this quote chain. You getting all offended and taking off on a tangent is on you, not me.
Mr Epeen
I’m not offended. I’m just laughing that you honestly think that people actually accomplish things in a board room, lol.
5 Likes
I think i should point out, in relation to all this “They listen to our input” @Brisc_Rubal
This type of sale, especially sprung without consultation with the CSM, has the potential to wipe out all of that progress - if it already hasn’t.
just saying.
Clearly CSM input not that required on this one.
Hence the letter this is all about.
I remember when you and Mike used to give ~monthly updates. That ended, along with a lot of the credit you refer to.
1 Like