Actually, I haven’t failed on anything in my plan, because I didn’t make hard promises that these things would be fixed, simply that I would ask CCP to investigate them. And I did that, in all of these instances. I would also note that we’re less than halfway through this term in office and I’m confident many more of the things I campaigned on will see progress.
I spent nothing on my campaign website - it was donated to me by my corpmates.
My point isn’t that you can’t win, it’s that you’re not going to be added to the candidate list because you’re openly advocating to end the CSM, and past candidates who have run on that platform have been excluded from the qualified candidates list. CCP has made it clear they want a CSM, and they mostly likely aren’t going to allow a candidacy based in that regard.
You want to run on being “incorruptible” etc, that’s fine. But disbanding the CSM isn’t going to happen, so you’re likely wasting your time in that regard.
@Salvos_Rhoska I have a question regarding your goal of removing ‘financial incentives’ like the free flight and lodgings in Iceland (a place where everything else costs the CSM members more than it would anywhere else in NA/Europe):
Do you think that relatively short-duration (1-3h), remote meetings via teleconferencing are as productive as spending extended periods of time (8h+ for 5-7 days) in direct proximity, isolated from outside distractions, followed by continued direct interaction in social environments?
@Salvos_Rhoska I just held a poll with 4 of my friends while playing EU4 and it turns out 5/5 of us think that CSM should continue to exist in some form or function. The 3 that didn’t play eve agreed too but I didn’t think it fair to include them. Looks like you represent the minority on that Poll
It’s actually pretty simple. I don’t think that it is important who is in the CSM. I think the CSM is important because they are keeping CCPs super dumb ideas from making it into the implementation phase. They are a filter basically, nothing else and to do their job they just don’t have to be CCP fanboys and be disagreeable.
Now @Salvos_Rhoska is disagreeable AF so he is perfect for the job. On top of that we had a forum argument about the power of the CSM and he thinks it is far greater than it is, so a good opportunity to win a stupid forum argument as well (very important!!!).
Also I really want to see some meeting minutes salvoshed.
The platform of changing/disbanding the CSM is a valid one, and one a substantial proportion of the playerbase support. The CSM is an aspect/element of EVE, just like any other.
It was communicated from CCP that the only way to discuss and/or effect CSM change/disbandment, is by running for a seat and via voting, so that is what I will do.
You compared 1-3hrs of contact via internet, with 5-8hrs per a period of days at HQ.
I dont think it has been demonstrated the latter is more efficient, or more productive, than an equivalent amount of hours via internet.
The CSM itself, much less on location summits by it, are not indispensible, or immutable. There are other ways to get player feedback for development and for playerbase/staff interaction.
Summits frequently have had CSM members that did not attend on location, instead via internet, to no deleterious effect.
Internationally and also in large corporations, tele-conferencing is preferred.
If the Summit is conducted via internet, it allows participants to view and respond to the material on their own schedule.
Tele-communication incurs far less costs.
There is less risk of influence peddling/lobbying/suppressing views of others when contact and relationships are strictly “professional” as relating to game issues and development, rather than inter-personal.
To my knowledge there is no proof that an on location Summit is more productive/efficient for CSM business, than an equivalent amount of hours of Summit conducted via tele-communication.
if he is actually running.
