Statement of CSM 15 Regarding the Upcoming Nullsec Empire War

[MB_ThePhotographer]

Ah, get this outta the way 1st.

[MB_ThePhotographer]

Now the conspiracy theory kicks in! How much warning did the CSM give the null blocks on this and would it even matter?

[Brun_Warbear]

@Mike_Azariah

I am unsure how it can be self serving to drag something out into the open and say that we (the CSM) DON"T want to metagame the hell out of a war.

If you don’t know how public statements can be self serving you shouldn’t be making them. Watch literally any political broadcast. What you choose to say in public tells people a lot.

You’re also describing a classic conflict of interest, to which the appropriate and ethical response is not to “promise” to be “impartial” or to shift responsibility to another party (CCP in this case) to not create a situation in which a CSM member might be construed as biased.

■■■■ or get off the pot, this doublespeak ■■■■■■■■ is dishonest.

@Mike_Azariah

Me? I want you to call us on ■■■■■■■■ and metagaming and yes I do want CCP to continue to develop things in the months ahead

I’m calling you on your ■■■■■■■■. Your entire statement is an abdication of responsibility.

@Mike_Azariah

THIS is, for me the key statement to that effect. Make sure that the changes do not suddenly swing the war to one side or end it prematurely.

So the rest of the game suffers or waits to preserve your precious war? What makes this war the top priority? Why is it more important than changes to the game that may affect it?

So much for representing all players.

@Mike_Azariah

I count on the player population to be watching (and maybe participating) and the ‘boilerplate’ above? That is us saying WE are watching as well. If and when changes come? Well let us know whether they are good or bad or Red Dots. I’ll still be here, listening.

And protecting positions of privilege with falsehoods of impartiality.

[Xeux]

Poor Mike. He was supposed to advocate for a better New Player Experience, but Brisc has made him the patsy for the usual CSM cloak-and-dagger metagame.

[MB_ThePhotographer]

@Brun_Warbear

So the rest of the game suffers or waits to preserve your precious war?

I’m sure this was worked all out in CCP’s timeline of releases in the background already. Between CCP, Null and the CSM, were all screwed…

[Brun_Warbear]

The war is all theatre anyway.

What enemies spend months literally planning their war together in public?

It’s not a war; it’s choreography.

[Xeux]

The great summer scrimmage of 2020.

[MB_ThePhotographer]

Can we watch on Twitch!

[Brisc_Rubal]

@Brun_Warbear

If you don’t know how public statements can be self serving you shouldn’t be making them. Watch literally any political broadcast. What you choose to say in public tells people a lot.

It does. And in this situation, the entire CSM chose to tell the players, before an issue arose, that they asked CCP to be careful in their game changes in the near future because of the war and the negative impact those changes - whether perceived or real - could have if they seem to benefit one side or the other.

@Brun_Warbear

You’re also describing a classic conflict of interest, to which the appropriate and ethical response is not to “ promise ” to be “ impartial ” or to shift responsibility to another party (CCP in this case) to not create a situation in which a CSM member might be construed as biased.

Your entire premise about conflicts of interest is flawed because this is not a decision-making body. It’s just a focus group. Nobody could actually be self-dealing here (defined as making a decision that would benefit theimselves), because - at best - they’re just proposing or providing ideas, not deciding things. There’s no need for anybody to recuse themselves or resign, as you suggested (which is absurd, btw).

@Brun_Warbear

I’m calling you on your ■■■■■■■■. Your entire statement is an abdication of responsibility.

Mike posted the statement on behalf of the entire CSM. He was not the author, so don’t attack him for being the messenger.

@Brun_Warbear

So the rest of the game suffers or waits to preserve your precious war? What makes this war the top priority? Why is it more important than changes to the game that may affect it?

So much for representing all players.

If you actually read the statement, you’d recognize that nowhere in it did it say we demanded they stop making any changes, even in nullsec.

Honestly, I don’t see how you get from “This does not mean, however, that they will recommend CCP stop work on potential game changes that could impact the war, simply that they carefully consider the effects of implementing any changes[,]” that we’re asking them to not do anything that could impact the war.

[Brun_Warbear]

@Brisc_Rubal

Your entire premise about conflicts of interest is flawed because this is not a decision-making body. It’s just a focus group. Nobody could actually be self-dealing here (defined as making a decision that would benefit theimselves), because - at best - they’re just proposing or providing ideas, not deciding things. There’s no need for anybody to recuse themselves or resign, as you suggested (which is absurd, btw).

Wrong. Elected to represent the players by the players, and you don’t have to be making a decision to effect it. Get out of here with your self-serving intellectual dishonesty.

Political advisors have no decision making power yet are subject to conflicts of interest. Your opinions are requested specifically to influence decision making. That is the whole and entire stated purpose of the CSM.

@Brisc_Rubal

Mike posted the statement on behalf of the entire CSM. He was not the author, so don’t attack him for being the messenger.

My attack is on the entire CSM, as the statement was made on their behalf. Also if you see the quote Mike specifically asked for ■■■■■■■■ to be called out.

@Brisc_Rubal

If you actually read the statement, you’d recognize that nowhere in it did it say we demanded they stop making any changes, even in nullsec.

Nor did I make any such claim. Don’t try to put words in my mouth to build your little straw man. You have asked for changes that may affect the war to be considered in those terms over and above the rest of the game. Even if those changes are of benefit to some other aspect of the game.

[MB_ThePhotographer]

I’m out. I was trying to have a little fun. Now it’ just a troll fest…

edit; again.

[Xeux]

Once Brisc shows up to educate us all - this is the inevitable result.

[MB_ThePhotographer]

Over the years, I still find ANY feedback good. Brisc has been a wealth of knowledge weather I agree with him or not. At least I can tell if he’s trying to be honest or pushing his own endgame. You can’t? We ALL have our own endgame in mind when we post. While I respect your opinion as well, that doesn’t mean I believe what you say any more than what he says. Sry…

[Brisc_Rubal]

@Brun_Warbear

Wrong. Elected to represent the players by the players, and you don’t have to be making a decision to effect it. Get out of here with your self-serving intellectual dishonesty.

Political advisors have no decision making power yet are subject to conflicts of interest. Your opinions are requested specifically to influence decision making. That is the whole and entire stated purpose of the CSM.

Political advisors are employees, and can be subject to conflict of interest rules. Lobbyists are not. At best, we’re lobbyists, and we’re not subject to any conflict of interest rules, other than potentially lobbying the same issue on behalf of opposed clients.

You don’t know what you’re talking about.

@Brun_Warbear

My attack is on the entire CSM, as the statement was made on their behalf. Also if you see the quote Mike specifically asked for ■■■■■■■■ to be called out.

I took the “statement” in your comment to mean the statement in the original post, not something Mike said.

@Brun_Warbear

Nor did I make any such claim. Don’t try to put words in my mouth to build your little straw man. You have asked for changes that may affect the war to be considered in those terms over and above the rest of the game. Even if those changes are of benefit to some other aspect of the game.

“So the rest of the game suffers or waits to preserve your precious war? What makes this war the top priority? Why is it more important than changes to the game that may affect it?”

That’s pretty straightforward, dude.

Again, we are not saying don’t make changes. We are saying carefully consider the impact of the changes on the war.

If you don’t think the biggest war in nullsec in 4 years is not something that the Devs should keep in mind after the YEARS of whining about stagnation, “why don’t the big blocs fight,” and the rest, I don’t know what else to tell you. This war hasn’t even started and EVE’s getting solid earned media off of it. If it’s as big as the Casino War was, there’s going to be a lot of free advertising for the game and CCP likes that. Telling them to be careful not to mess with it while it’s happening seems common sense to me. And us being able to say later that we told them before the war starts will head off the inevitable screeching if they do make a change that one side decides was designed to screw them in the future.

@Xeux

Once Brisc shows up to educate us all - this is the inevitable result.

I apologize for trying to explain the obvious to people who keep missing it. Perhaps you’d be better off reading another forum.

[MB_ThePhotographer]

More “horse apples” coming…

[CowRocket_Void]

If the CSM really wanted to show that they are not metagamming… they’d step down.

[Xeux]

@MB_ThePhotographer

that doesn’t mean I believe what you say any more than what he says.

But I don’t say anything.

[MB_ThePhotographer]

You speak volumes!

Crap, I thought I was outta here?

[DragoFire]

If CCP wants a massive WAR, they should be exspanding the Trig vs Edencom war to cover moreregoins and get the nulsec corps to join one of these NPC forces and push its agenda.

This would engage all player groups from all regions and last more than a day or two.

But the question would be if the nullsec corps/alliances form backroom agreements with each other. I would suspect they would back the NPC that best favors their agendas and leave the other NPC force and its supporters to flounder.

[Mike_Azariah]

I can do both. I have actually started my NPE project already. Been talking to the Rookie chat vets and am plowing through with another new character to re confirm the pain points. Input is welcome.

Patsy is just a side gig (that I volunteered for)

m