I think the biggest fallacy in your argument here is that the CSM members are automatically from megablocs (Mike Azariah, Suitonia, Arisa Elkin, iBeast), and that those that are from megablocs only represent their members interests (Brisc Rubal). The other CSM members I don’t hear from or see their activities, so could fairly be criticised for that - though Innominate and Merkelchen are fairly prolific streamers, so they would likely object to my backhanded characterisation of them being “unavailable”! Certainly anyone with concern about the views they hold can and should watch some of their output to familiarise themselves with their positions to see where they agree and/or differ.
Looking at the above list though, we see at minimum 50% of the current CSM not fitting your assumption to start with. So that’s not a great start. Going deeper though, we see that these are all vastly experienced players who operate in a range of space, doing a range of things. Two reps from Karmafleet who are a huge (and hugely successful) new player corp with activities - particularly if you include the University - all over the map. More importantly these are prominent players with a sincere wish to improve the overall quality of the game, giving up their time for free to take grief from both CCP and the playerbase. It’s a thankless task at the best of times, seems to me.
So, while it’s never going to be perfect (what democracy is?), I fundamentally disagree with the assertion that the CSM is unfair either in its election or its application.
Now let’s look at the other part of the suggestion - working more with 3rd party tool developers than with the CSM. Some problems here (and I promise I’m not slandering any of these current Devs, just illustrating a point!). First, how do you know these Devs aren’t also part of megablocs? Second, how can you know whether someone building an excellent industry tool has relevant things to say about game balance, or sov changes, or whatever? Most importantly, what makes you think that someone making out of game tools has any more “pure” motivation than a CSM member, given that access to the data from these tools will provide these players with an INSANE amount of in-game intel benefit for them and their groups?
Think about that last point. If you’re the guy behind, say, Ravworks (great job by the way buddy!), you coukd aggregate the data on what people are searching for to determine industry trends before they’re visible and gain a leg up on the market. If you have access to the backend of Pathfinder (thanks for your work!), you have real-time data on where a significant proportion of wormholes are in the game at any given moment. Etc etc.
Like I say, I mean no disrespect to the people making these tools in what I’m saying - you are true heroes of Eve for (another!) thankless task of making these things that help Eve work for everyone. I fully hope and desire for CCP devs to look at, and work closely with, the stuff you do to learn and make improvements to the game.
However, player representation is a different, and difficult, job to do in its own right. Muddying the waters with unelected people drafted in to that specific role would be unhelpful and confusing - never mind leading to the sake criticisms as currently levelled at the CSM, just without the annual election (and now term limit) to soften the blows. I can well imagine what uproar would occur if something like the DBS got forced in with an un elected CSM!
As to how to address the issue of lower representation from non-null groups on the CSM, the solution is simple in theory. Get yourself a profile, build a campaign and work really bloody hard to get elected. Then keep working really hard to be as effective as you can.
The one criticism that is fully fair of the last couple of CSMs has been a total lack of minutes of meetings, schedules, etc. Obviously the change to how things work because of C-19 caused some of that disruption, but that’s no real excuse. I’d like to see CCP take up the slack on this, and commit to publishing at least quarterly updates on meetings held with the CSM, with minutes or notes of those where appropriate. CCP should take this on, as frankly lumbering the CSM with the leg work is not cool. There’s a community team for a reason, and it’s clear the community wants / needs some better reporting on CSM activities. It also allows the playerbase to hold accountable, publicly, those on the CSM who aren’t attending meetings or whatever. That is one thing I’d hope we can all get behind!