High Sec Candidate

Council Of Stellar Management CSM Campaigns
1

Hello! It’s me! Shadwell…

Well… not really.

My name is Lorelei and I am announcing my candidacy for CSM XIV. I have just submitted my application to CCP. I am running whilst focused on High Sec. I am a self-confessed High Sec Carebear and am proud of it. I have – as I do every year - analysed the commitments planned/coming up in my life for the next year and have decided that I can afford the time to run for CSM XIV!

I really haven’t changed, neither has what I am thinking, (and therefore neither has my opening campaign post, really) and I am looking forward to discussing with you all!

I waited a while and really thought hard and talked to people before running again… Having seen that @Mike_Azariah is returning to the fray, it seems like it might be counter-productive to split the carebear vote between two of the more popular candidates. If you do end up voting for me, make sure to put Mike on your list too.

My (soon to be reanimated) blog contains links to previous campaign threads, interviews, posts about me and so on. If you are interested to know more it is worth a look. The copy of this Campaign Post also has more linkage, to articles that explain and expound on the things I am saying and/or thinking:
Here: http://hisec-carebear.blogspot.de

Just to recap my CSM history:

For CSMX I came in 15th for the 14 seats. Because of the way the Voting was calculated, with transfers and so on, I did not get called to replace the people that left or were removed. In another election I managed to come in before an incumbent member running again, whilst still not getting elected. In the elections for CSM13 I came in 14th… which would have gotten me a seat if CCP had not reduced the membership for CSM to 10 beforehand… such is my luck.
My last campaign thread: High Sec Candidate

I have been excited about many of the developments that EVE has taken in the recent past. Even though noone with a real “High Sec” Ticket has made it onto the CSM in a while… many of the issues that we have been discussing have been worked on and taken up by CCP… even if I am not totally happy with how they did it / are doing it… at least they are doing it!!! And that is reason enough to keep on running in the CSM elections… to give the High Sec population a chance to show their interest and support for some issues.

But to recap for people that do not want to jump to other web sites:

Is there room for a High Sec candidate on the CSM? Someone that has the well-being of the multitude of High Sec pilots at heart?
I would like there to be a “High Sec” platform, for a candidate for the CSM.
The problem with High Sec space is that the players there are all independent. There is no feeling of “we”. This lack of “we” is a problem. The lack of “we all stand together” is a problem. The “apathy of the carebear” is a problem…

This I know. I know that, although numerically High Sec has the largest number of log-ins… accounts… players… I know that High Sec will probably never be able to gather together enough in order to support a CSM candidate. But that is no reason to not try!!
Come on, High Sec! If something is important for you, stand up for it!!!

Who am I?

I am a High Sec Carebear, and proud of it!
High Sec Carebears tend not to socialize too much, and are only members of NPC or small corporations. If you are reading this thread, then sadly you probably do not belong to the player-metric that I mostly represent!

Well, this is not the first character I have created in order to play “EVE”. I have never been a member of a big alliance or coalition. I have never been a member of a big corporation. I wouldn’t know what one would do to “define” a big corporation. Hell, I have never really left High Sec space before the CSMX Election…

I gained my love of Spaceship games by playing Elite… way back on my ZX Spectrum 48k+ (with a jammed SHIFT key (jammed as in… raspberry jam)). Back then it was possible to try docking with a space station and to accidentally line up with the back of the station… and die whilst trying to fly through the back of the station to the entrance. Fun times.

I graduated to Frontier: Elite II on a 486 PC, and spent my time happily flying between Barnard’s Star, SOL, and Wolf 359. I should have been studying, but flying a (mostly harmless) panther fully loaded with robots was more fun.

I kept my eyes open for an online version of a space-sim… and that is where EVE comes in.
I really enjoy (as in “really”) flying transports, fulfilling contracts, and, sometimes, mining.

My CSM Interests for 2019:
I think it is important for people to know what the CSM is, and can achieve. I could not run claiming that I would make all spaceships pink. As a member of the CSM I would not be in a position to dictate to CCP or enforce any “election promises”. The scandals of the past have meant that the Player Base has lost some trust in this institution.

But well, check out all my old threads for more about what/how I think… but here is what is mostly on my mind at the moment:

None Of The Above: An opportunity for people to vote in the CSM, but to vote for None Of The Above. It’s like a survey to try and gauge player interest… The problem of player participation is disproportionately affecting those of us in high sec (because we carebears are not exactly non-solo)

In order to increase the possibility of player participation, maybe CCP could get some more Popups/Emails rolling. Reminding players to vote is not a bad thing, and I remember thinking when all those “Agency” popups/notifications started flowing… that CCP could also do something good for the elections (if they were interested in the CSM).

Ganker: I would like at least a 50% chance of walking away from a gank. At the moment this is not the case. On my blog, in the past, I mentioned some changes to Concord that I would like to see. I would also like to see some changes to Ice Spawning (maybe in random systems?) that would mean that the gankers would have to move around to gank ice miners! Local chat could also be changed to provide less free “intel” to people. No need to announce to everyone who is in local… just the number of pilots.
I would like to clarify, I am not in favour of stopping ganking completely. I am not in favour of just AFK mining the whole day. EVE is what it is, and the game developers have been quite clear over the years where they stand on this issue.

Please read my last threads before posting questions… we really do not need to cover the points that have been discussed before… high sec is worth fighting for!

New Player Experience: That has been a WOW change in the last years. I have managed to try it. It is about a bazillion times better than the old way. It does however need observing, and I am looking forward, as always, to the statistics from Fanfest!
On the subject of Fanfest, I missed the (missing) Team Security presentation last year. That was, for me, one of the highlights!

Player Corporations: In previous years in the campaigns, some other candidates also took up this banner… that I only started with in the run up to CSMX. Inventing some way to let people socially interact without having to deal with a bunch of tedious stuff can only help player retention – especially in an area (High Sec) where people are otherwise isolated. Now it is possible to be in a player corporation, have all the social benefits, without being wardecced or something. Of course, that raises issues with things like Taxes (The NPC corporations have a higher tax on players to previously be immune to war decs…). And of course… that leads to discussions on war decs.

War Declarations: This is a work in progress for CCP, and I must say, that I am glad they finally got around to it. Since they started the changes I have been involved in war in high sec (both on the receiving and the giving end). Although I find it more interesting than before, it still needs a lot of work. This is also tied up with things like the Citadel invulnerability mechanics.

See my (soon to be updated) blog and previous posts in Campaign threads for details. The need for player groups that are just social has not changed.

But when all is said and done, I believe a CSM member needs to be a conduit for information exchange between CCP and the players. I do not think that the CSM should be used for the Metagame.

Thank you for reading this far. I am looking forward to working with you / hearing from you, and although I am always busy at this time of year, I promise to read every post in my thread.

Links to other posts about me: http://hisec-carebear.blogspot.de/2015/03/csmx-lorelei-posts-links.html

Edit 9th June: Decided to do some interviews this year. Here are the links:

13 Likes
2

Welcome to the race. Good Luck, LL

m

5 Likes
3

Welcome !!!

1 Like
4

Welcome and good luck, hope you get it this time

1 Like
5

Thanks for the good wishes. If the CSM was still 14 members, I would have gotten it last time. Now that it is 10 members there is even less of a chance to come on against the null interests and the long running incumbents.

But as I said, this is no reason not to campaign and no reason not to vote. Participation shows the interest of the player community… and that is something that high sec sorely needs!

1 Like
6

any candidate will need around 2k votes, you can count with mine - not that 3 votes are much but it’s a start

1 Like
7

Every vote counts.

m

2 Likes
8

Every vote counts… and after the first couple of elections that became more and more my priority.
Just getting people to vote. Or raising awareness.

@Ripard_Teg has an interesting Reddit thread up at the moment… based on his term on the CSM.

2 Likes
9

So True… Would either yourself or @Lorelei_Ierendi be willing to share votes?

1 Like
10

Hi @Xenuria

I stand for getting people to vote, no matter what. I am also in favor of having people being able to vote for “none of the above”… at least to increase the chance of player participation in the CSM Elections.

I have been known to write a list of the candidates that I would support, recommend or endorse. I have been known to do this shortly before the election starts.

If… when the time comes the information in your thread is compatible with the things I endorse… I will place you on the list. If it is not compatible I would not. But then I would hope that any thinking voter would at least take the time to inform themself about the candidates they are voting for rather than blindly following some list that someone publishes… (I know that I am naive).

2 Likes
11

Spread the word! :heart_eyes:

2 Likes
12

Do you have any statistics or evidence based position to support the ideas that you are championing?

For example, what evidence do you have to support:

being a good change?

2 Likes
13

Thank you for coming to my thread!

Where would I get statistics or evidence from? Or at least statistically significant evidence. That is only something that CCP could really provide.

If you read my previous campaign threads, you would know that I was challenged and tried ganking. I have a (literally) 100% success rate (I reimbursed the victims… the story is out there).

Those times I have been ganked, whilst being at the keyboard (although apart from insta-locking ships, those were times before the grid size was larger) I was never able to do anything to avert my fate.

So my personal experiences: Ganking 100% success.
Being ganked: 100% death.
(and BTW trying to use game mechanics (Logi/ECM etc) to save people from getting ganked… pretty much 0% as well).

Why is this so?

When ganking the people I solo-ganked (and then reimbursed, to demonstrate a point to the Gankers talking in my campaign thread) I did my homework and prepared. I succeeded.

When being ganked (also/mostly on alts), and losing my ship, I assume that the people did theirs. I’ve also lost tanked skiffs to bored Gankers who felt like throwing a group of Taloses at me worth more than my Skiff (even assuming everything dropped).

Being put in a situation where I can’t win or survive… even if I try… is not so much fun. Of course, I would like to have more than a 50% chance of winning… because… who doesn’t want to win!? Any other examples from my post that you want to know about?

Just don’t overestimate the chances of the CSM causing any changes in CCP. (although I do remember hearing somewhere that Bowheads came from ideas from @Mike_Azariah …)

But thank you for your interest in the CSM campaign threads! Remember to vote in the elections!

1 Like
14

This is a pretty poor way to start explaining your position. Why are you advocating for a change when you aren’t even supporting the change with any evidence? You then deflect and put the burden on CCP to provide this evidence.

Looking through your killboard, you don’t actually appear to have performed many ganks. It seems like a vast majority of your “ganks” were whoring on the kills during times when Goons were participating in their annual Burn Jita event. I don’t think these are worth mentioning as “ganks” because they’re easy pickings having triggered Criminal timers already.

This, imo, is the wrong question to ask. You’re asking “why does a defenseless ship that cannot fight be lose to an attacking ship that can fight?” It’s a non-starter because that’s literally how the game mechanics allow for the interaction to work.

Because I don’t want to gank a ship knowing that no matter how well I prepare and how unprepared my victim is, that the outcome is effectively a coinflip. Why would a coin flip be better?

This kind of question dodging and side stepping of issues presents a big concern for me that does not give me the confidence to vote for you as a CSM candidate. It appears as though you are being disingenuous and exaggerating your experience as a ganker to try and present a facade of knowledge, but your killboard shows otherwise. Yet you conveniently choose to gloss over this issue.

Finally, you present a proposition (that people should be able to survive 50% of ganks) yet you have no evidence to support why this would be a good change, and when asked, you simply deflect, claiming that it’s CCP’s responsibility.

3 Likes
15

I have not performed many ganks. I don’t like ganking. That story is in the CSMX campaign thread.

None of those were “ganks”. They were attacking criminal ships. For those I did not get CONCORDED!

As long as you do vote in the election, I am happy!

2 Likes
16

Yes, this is why I brought it up. You don’t have experience in actually ganking ships. You have experience in killing ships that are already set as Criminals.

So my concern is, why do you believe you are knowledge enough about Ganking (when you are not experienced in it, nor have the statistical/evidentiary support for it) that you are proposing a change for how the mechanic works?

17

I think I ganked three ships. I got Concorded. Even for someone with no history of ganking it was easy.

Not sure how effective the CSM are at proposing anything… did you read @Ripard_Teg"s AMA on Reddit?

1 Like
18

And I believe that this is fine. You are proposing a change otherwise (that people survive 50% of ganks).

I have read it. Why are you proposing this idea if you’re unsure how effective the CSM are at proposing anything?

Why is it part of your opening message and something that you’re trying to explain to the playerbase as an idea that you hold?

19

Because it is an idea that I hold!

1 Like
20

Well then I hope others who come in and see you thread see you for who you really are. Someone who holds ideas that are not supported by stats or evidence, who believes that certain mechanics need to be changed but doesn’t have the experience to back that change up.

Good luck to your CSM campaign, and I hope you are honest with your voters instead of trying to sidestep and dodge issues.

1 Like