That’s fine. One of the best ways to learn is to be wrong. No, I’m referring to me, not him. I welcome scrutiny.
Edit: PVP is central to EVE. It’s why I’m here after all.
1 Like
I dare not engage.
My idea of what was going to happen: 3 random alts posting memes and ISD closing the thread.
What happened: total CHAOS.
Mission accomplished I guess. 
1 Like
Or CCP politely tells you that you’re going to lose access to the game with continued communication.
PS: this is not Destiny posting this message, but me, Destiny’s cat. Meow and stuff.
3 Likes
I dont like meddlers and schemers, I don’t trust politicians and dislike the concept of lobbying. I dont like Goons or null blocks in general. We couldn’t be any more different if we tried.
But every time some dumb mofo starts word jousting with Brisc using completely idiotic logic or reasoning where Brisc just parries it in the most minimal way, handing him more rope post by post (and very obviously enjoying every second of it which I can appreciate) to hang himself, that mofo forces me to agree and side with Brisc.
And I hate it every time that happens.
3 Likes
I see and understand your reasoning here. But I can never side with someone who is employed in a position where the qualifications include being immoral and corrupt. As well, he’s only impressive when arguing with mental deficients.
Scroll back through the many threads where he’s practically in tears because he chose the wrong opponent to pick on.
Mr Epeen 
2 Likes
By all means. I think I gave enough rope by now, especially when I explicitly wrote why I stand where I do and asked whether that came across properly specifically because I want a counter-argument. So far the only thing that even looks like it has a solid foundation is “oh well people say things and if they think a word means something then that’s how it is”.
I am sitting in a plex with no tackle waiting for someone to throw some interesting ■■■■ at me. I’ve announced where I am and what I am, so you know… come get. Am I good at it? I wouldn’t know, so not yet, but how am I gonna find out if not through field testing?
What is believed to be real becomes real thou, people give their power over so easily these days.
I didn’t assume your gender. Plenty of women have tried mansplaining things to me over the years.
I’ve been a public official. I had “power” on paper. In actuality, I had plenty of people who ostensibly should have been required to do what I told them in postions where they could thwart, delay, and otherwise impede what I wanted to do. At the same time, I’ve been outside government in positions of influence where a phone call and a meeting could get a positive outcome. Did I have the power to cast the vote? No. Did I ensure the vote was cast the way I wanted it to be? Yes.
Tell me that’s not power.
There’s the rub - the illusion of power is often what many people consider to be actual power, and vice versa. See my discussion above.
Again, this is a colloquial use of the term democracy, not some kind of college treatise nobody will ever read. Give them a pass and enjoy your login rewards. If you think the CSM has no power, go on thinking that and don’t vote.
5 Likes
This bit is where I disagree. Everything else besides telling me what to do or not do is spot on though.
First and foremost, if you are given a choice and you’re ambivalent about it and I ask you to choose option A over option B, it’s not because I have power that you will make any sort of choice, it’s because you do and I’m asking for the privilege. This could be a good deed or this could be a favor I’d repay.
In other words, if I have a spare penny and stumble upon a beggar, the beggar doesn’t hold any more power over me than I give him.
Now, if you’re not ambivalent then obviously it would take more to influence your decision. This ability to influence would be considered power, which would take the form of a bribe or a threat… or whatever is the equivalent with less negative connotations. Lobbying?
This would be the equivalent of the beggar having a big knife or something.
Now is there any way in which this model doesn’t suit your case of influential phonecalls? Anything I misunderstood?
Edit: I am so sorry, in part for the tone in this one…
…but also for what I think is straight up baneposting. “Do you feel in charge?” Jesus…
Edit 2: “The penis mightier than the sword”. Sure, you can influence a person by painting them a false picture. Sure, you could call that power, but at that point it seems more like a proper bluff. Not entirely sure how to tie this case into the rest of it.
You don’t need to make a comparison, but ok, CCP Hellmar is a little like a beggar. And that beggar needs to know what the odds are his new and fantastic idea will be loved by the users and draw in millions more. That is why he consults the CSM every Omega can vote for. But the power level you think the CSM (person with wealth -of knowledge-) does not reflect reality as the CSM members will always give it their best to explain issues players have or consequences changes will have.
So it’s up to the beggar to use the ‘wealth’ of knowledge to improve himself or just throw it away.
Or like, CCP Hellmar asks for $50 for food and the CSM is like we will buy you food and then give it to you and Hellmar gets very verbally abusive.
Also a very good comparison as the beggar (CCP) depends on the right people to pass by to survive. Another time you have proven the extreme importance of the voting in your posts.
I have to admit, I’m not really following some of those comparisons.
I hope what I got across at least was that any sort of “power” that CSM ultimately holds is the ability to influence CCP on matters that they don’t care for in the first place, (empirically speaking) just as the beggar ultimately only gets the money you wouldn’t notice went missing. Hell, the beggar has more power than CSM at this point.
I would also like to mention that my initial point was that this crap isn’t “democratic”. You as a paying customer have influence, not by the virtue of having the right to vote but by the virtue of not buying the product if it becomes ■■■■. The right to vote might be consequential or it might not, but that’s not what makes anything democratic.
If I have the power to decide, I don’t care and I let you make the decision as to what I pick, that is basically delegation. This happens all the time.
Think about it this way, if the law gives the power to make a decision to a governmental official and that official delegates her power to a bureaucrat, and the bureaucrat exercises that delegated authority, do they have power? On paper, no. De facto? Yes.
So if CCP says “we are considering doing this, do you all have any serious objections to it” and I say “yes, this is awful don’t do it” and they then scrap the plans, did I not just exercise power? You may call it privilege, but in the end, the outcome was what I chose.
The players have the ability to choose the people who go and have these opportunities. Sometimes we have more sometimes less, depending on how much CCP wants to listen. But it’s still a form of power even if it’s completely discretionary on the part of the decider.
You can do this exactly once, lol. After that, your credibility is shot and you won’t get access or influence anymore.
2 Likes
Because on purpose I sought to invert the comparison. Looking at something from different angles sometimes gives better insight.
What Brisc and I try to explain to you are the following points :
- Democracy is used slightly loose here. But we do see a clear comparison to what it represents.
- The players (who have an omega account) can vote for representatives.
- The representatives will be in official communication with CCP giving expert advice on items CCP explains to them. If the CSM can convince CCP, CCP will take actions.
I guess we have different opinions on the matter, and that is fine. I have seen the results of the CSM and think they did good work. Others might disagree and that is their constitutional (EULA/TOS) right. 
First off, hell yes, now we’re talking. I’d realy love to tackle this one but I’d like to reserve it for after a question or two and maybe a nap.
1: It still seems like there’s a gap here. CCP don’t “delegate” power as much as they value your angle slightly higher than, well, the reddit masses and whatnot. CSM don’t end up with any power, strictly speaking. If CCP have an agenda, I doubt you could make them compromise judging by the very ass the economy is currently in. I’m not saying it’s not fair, I’m saying it’s not democratic. So the first question is: Has CCP had ideas in their agenda that were stupid enough for CSM to intervene, and was the attempt successful?
2: I hope I got my point across regarding my slight vehemence regarding semantics. I’ve seen firsthand the direct consequences of dictionaries “modernizing” definitions, and I expect you to be familiar enough with legal lingo to appreciate precision in language. Question number 2: Am I wrong about seing a similarity between “EVE is very player-driven! We even have community politicians! Much activity, much privilege, come be part of something” and “Best phone, very good, buy now, only 12 left, five dollar!”? Cause to me the selling point about this illusion of power is… well… this. ■■■■■■■ player attraction/retention.
I just happen to see a lot of comparison to what would qualify as a mechanism marketed as democracy but that only exists to keep the masses sufficiently pleased. Pushed the button I suppose.
There are a few candidates that really spark interest towards the coming Faction War.
Could we agree that New Eden shares space with four different monarchs?
Highsec
LowSec
Nulsec
WHS
I am seeing it this way and hope that the next CSM is strongly focused on LowSec.
Please correct me if I am wrong to assume such.
Most people have ancient democracy totally wrong. Anyone eligible ( which was only males over 18 ) could turn up for the Ekklesia, the primary governing body. It was not people that were voted for…it was issues.
But…the Ekklesia only decided upon issues that were passed to it by the Council Of Five Hundred. They were the real ‘power’ base. And they were not elected at all, but gained their position by lottery.
So, strictly speaking, actual people never got elected by vote.
4 Likes
The moment that a man is suspected of giving advice, however good, we feel such a grudge against him for the gain which after all we are not certain he will receive, that we deprive the city of its certain benefit. Plain good advice has thus come to be no less suspected than bad; and the advocate of the most monstrous measures is not more obliged to use deceit to gain the people, than the best counsellor is to lie in order to be believed. The city, owing to these refinements, can never be served openly and without disguise; he who does serve it openly being always suspected of serving himself in some secret way.
4 Likes
Thucydides for the win.
4 Likes
Well about time I learned that.
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.