I think CCP does a decent job of explaining this on various web pages, but few seem to read the words. It can certainly be presented better, than an external website requiring separate login. (I advocate baking it into the launcher.)
Then the campaigns start, and some candidates may do a disservice to the office by suggesting exactly what you point out, when they should probably use the words “push / advocate for” changes x,y,z. I appreciate that YOU and quite a few others, do get this right.
Agree with others that its too hard to figure out what a “none” vote represents. Is it a WH player? Highsec freighter pilot?
I would think a “none” vote would represent a player that is aware of the CSM, but not interested.
That would be enough for statistics… and when the uninterested players that still can be bothered to “vote” that they are “not interested” get large enough… then there is enough “proof” that the CSM thing is broken.
At the moment… CCP still go on about how the CSM is elected by the players and represents the players (read the reddit AMA from @CCP_Guard to see what they think).
It does not matter if players think it is broken, if CCP is getting value from the feedback received from these experienced players, then the CSM will continue. If CSM feedback is unable to forestall a firestorm after a change to highsec that the null-focused members did not predict, then CCP may begin to wonder. But so far, many null-sec players have interests in other areas of the game. Steve is on board again, and he knows just about everything in the “everything else” category and this has served well enough.
Despite the overpowering null-sec representation in the CSM, CCP did push through three nerfs to the rorqual following the introduction of excavator drones. Clearly not in the best interests of null, yet it happened.
The MER reporting detailed mining and ratting data was initially opposed by Goons, and continued being published despite objections. But now, the monthly Delve report is welcomed as a great recruiting tool.
The AMA is great, I think CCP Guard should link it in his top post, and link it again any time he makes a CSM post
If the CSM was anything more than a token nod toward the player base and a cheap facade shown the industry to cover up some really bad decisions, it would contain far more variation in its makeup and far more quality individuals willing to look outside their particular clique’s focus to make a better game for all. Instead, we get null sec lobbyist institutionally foisted upon the entire EVE community and told that these individuals (with few exceptions) are fairly going to represent the community as a whole, this despite many of them publicly voicing disdain and derision on those outside of their niche. I think CCP could save a ton of money and just email the null sec alliances any changes 3 months before they occur in game. At the moment, the CSM doesn’t represent my playstyle and they admit they don’t care about it,either. Based on the past results, I can predict where this year’s collaboration will be piloting EVE.
I appreciate the concerns many folks have here, and I’m sorry that so many people have such a low opinion of the CSM.
I will work hard to change that, although given my experience, I doubt there’s much I can do to alter opinions that seem to be set in stone and impervious to facts.
Thanks to everybody who voted and I look forward to helping CCP keep EVE going strong for another year.
You wish. This girl’s seen action in every war Goons have fought since 2012. I’m currently winning EVE, but I’ll always pop back in to harvest some tears.
My only question is, do any of us REALLY care about the CSM? Vast majority of the playerbase will ignore them. Its not like the Goons or TEST havent controlled the CSM for a few years anyway.
I just dont like having a backstabbing traitor on the CSM. But hey, he’s a Goon problem now.
CCP would not need to create a high profile group of representatives for the sake of disseminating information to benefit certain groups. They could simply do this, if they were inclined to, via private means.
It is technically possible to create an organization to call a great deal of attention to your own wrong doing and with whom you are doing wrongs, but I can’t imagine a reasonable person doing this.
The CSM is an attempt to bridge the players and the developers. It is a voice that can speak for us on matters that are not ready to become public knowledge, a power they’re granted by signing a NDA. Without the NDA, the developers would have no ability to disclose the information outside the development team.
Confidential information can be abused. It is possible to gain unfair advantage over the other players using this confidential information. I have not been made aware, though, of any such ploy that came to light and was not subjected to disciplinary action. CCP does not give me the impression they’d take anything but a very dim view of anyone who abused their position.
I’m not enamored with the CSM, but it’s better to have it, I think, than to not have it. CCP benefits from engaging their player base as a whole. I don’t think they’re going to lose sight of that. It is simply not feasible to bounce unfinished ideas off every tin-foil hat in the Eve universe. Nothing personal. Nothing nefarious. Just what is practical.
As usual the larger null sec groups are over represented in the csm…
As null sec is not the only area of gameplay that need love, CCP should do quotas, you can only run for 1 seat, and 1 seat max per coallition to get a true representation of eve ecosystem
3 seats for null sec (cuz they are more, ok we understood that.)
2 for high sec (carebears and sca…m…huuuu legit Isk tripler can speak too)
2 for Low sec (Where’s my YOHOHO?)
2 for W-space ( need improvement over the core functionnalities to bring more ppl in the adventure,#iwantmyalliancebookmarks#iwantmoretargets )
1 seat for a player who has been playing for less than a year.
and we should vote for each seat independently.
csm have to be about the game itself, not about goons.
Quotas are a bad idea. How do you define what constitutes a highsec player and how do you prevent a nullseccer to pose for one? And what happens if nullsec cartel tells members to vote certain highsec member in favour of their interests?
The only way to ensure that all players get the same access to CCP is to either make sure that everybody votes, or not let anyone vote and rather do as every other bloody gaming company does.
It’s like when special interest groups want to hijack public space for displaying their symbols: either everybody puts their symbol in public space, or nobody does for sake of neutrality.
CCP is kinda foolish by pretending to grant privileged access to winners of the player organisation meta… as either it’s false (clue: it is not what many think is) or it’s a very stupid way to disserve 90% of their customers who don’t vote at all.
I’m a fairly new player and didn’t get a chance to vote this time as I just didn’t have the time to check out the candidates. But after reading many of the comments here, and seeing the results of the CSM 13 voting, I’m kinda glad I didn’t vote. This whole process seems very similar to RL politics to me. “Back alley deals”, vote buying, etc, etc…
So I really see no point in voting in the future. Most, if not all of those on the CSM 13 don’t really represent me as a player. I find it kinda sad that something like this fails to be the great thing it could be and is ruined by deals and payoffs to get a small fraction of the player base represented to CCP. But that’s life I guess.
CSM 13 was the first time I have voted in over 10 years. Why? Because this time I chose to. Are the members of the CSM out for their (or their alliances) own ends - possibly. That is EVE.
With this election (as all I participate in) I reviewed every candidate and cast my vote based on the limited information I had. Was I biased by my null sec affiliation. No. Was it based on HS bias. Yes.
Sitting on the CSM is a bit like sitting on the council of owners on a strata. There is a lot of effort but the members receive very little kudos for the effort invested.
Best of luck of luck CSM 13 members…and Brisc, you ran a very good EVE campaign o7.
Shout out also to the candidates Commander Aze, Steve Ronuken, Solar Taranogas, Claevyan, Silver Suspiria who ran a good EVE platform.
For all the people who complain about CSM getting “dank leeks” for RMT machines consider how many times the CSM has collectively turned around and said “hey, that’s not the change we were cool with”. CCP isn’t stupid, they don’t share the full sum of any changes but instead skeleton frames with the CSM of what their plans are and ask the CSM do these plans sound ok. Even in the face of CSM disapproval, CCP can and has pushed them through (such as jump changes) the CSM isn’t some inner circle rmt club nor a mechanism for change from the bottom up. It’s an unpaid consultancy and customer focus group with the spectacle of an election that might just might keep CCP’s devs from falling to hubris at times.
As for complaints about not enough promotion I actually recall the launcher giving a little heads up that voting for the csm is active which I had to X away! So don’t say it wasn’t on the launcher if you closed that little pop up and forgot about it. If you care this much about the CSM anyways you’d be the kind thay aught keep on top of when the vote is happening. Disenfranchisement isn’t anyone’s fault but the players who clearly don’t understand what the CSM can and can’t do and don’t bother to do their due research. Even when elections like the police commission in the uk made top line national tv god damn news we still ended up with extremely low turn out, so promotion isn’t always the solution here but often instead voters just don’t care no matter how much you educate them.
As an aside this thread is going places! My bowl can only hold so much popcorn.
and this has served well enough.