The blogs and forums are all over with the underperformance of the CSM. The “Council of stellar management” is a player-elected group of players in EVE online who have direct connection to the developers of the game. It’s the seventh CSM, elected with more votes than ever, following the sixth which worked with great results. The players who used to praise CSM6 now curse CSM7 for incompetence, laziness, being unable to make decisions, communicating badly.
Of course none of them offer solution, besides the generic "work harder", "talk more to the players" nonsense. Reading lot of real life election news and editorials nowadays, due to the "47% scandal", I think I know what’s wrong with CSM: they try to represent the players. That can’t be done, because "the players" isn’t a group. Highsec miners are equally players as hulkageddoners. "F1-drones" are just as players as "l33t PvP-ers". FW AFK-orbiters are no less of players than highsec missioners. Gatecamping pirates pay the same subscription as haulers.
Such differences in real life are handled via the majority election. If the majority of the Americans believe that obamacare, medicare and high taxes are great, Obama will remain president. If they are minority, Romney will be it. The other group can eat cake, the president will act against their will, harming their interest. The focal point of the 47% scandal is that Romney told the truth that it’s not his job to care about the Obama voters. He wouldn’t be their president, just like Obama wouldn’t be the president for republicans, even if he is smart enough to claim the opposite.
What the CSM tries to achieve is the "great national coalition". Such things do happen in dire times. For example the former opposing parties of Greece united to try to save the country from bankruptcy. The monoclegate of CSM6 was such situation. "Greed is good" threatened all players, regardless of their playstyle. During this time the CSM had to be united and act as one. But that was the exception, not the rule. The normal way is constant arguing. The CSM should not have a common opinion outside of such cases of emergency.
If CCP asks "what about lowsec gateguns" the representative of the pirates should collect data and evidence against it. He should do his best proving that gateguns are harming a valid playstyle. The representative of industrialists and null/WH haulers should do the same for it. He should prove how gatecamps are just fun for a few dozens while ruins the life of thousands. They should not come to an agreement, CCP shall make the decision based on their arguments. The Mittani was considered great in CSM6 because he did his job. He represented his group, the Goons against everyone else. The titan nerf served no other than GSF (and TEST), as it stopped established players to be able to fight outnumbering newbies. The representatives of "elite" nullsec groups should have stop it from happening, that was their job.
Now, when CCP asks "what about lowsec gateguns", the CSM members answer with a guess about the opinion of the majority of the players. However their guess is just as good as yours or mine or any random CCP dev. Giving a random guess doesn’t worth an air ticket to Iceland. On the other hand they know for sure the opinion and arguments of their "party" and it would be valuable information for CCP.
I believe the bad state of CSM is more or less the result of the election and management process of it. CCP could make significant difference.
For trade and industrial discussions join Goblinworks channel.
If you want to get into nullsec but don't know how, go to the official forum recruitment thread and type the name of the alliance you seek into the search and start reading. I'm in TEST by the way.
Saturday morning report: 156.5B (5.5 spent on main accounts, 3.8 spent on Logi/Carrier, 3.2 on Ragnarok, 2.6 on Rorqual, 2.4 on Nyx, 2.8 on Dread, 17.4 sent as gift)
Sunday morning report: 155.8B (5.5 spent on main accounts, 3.8+1.0 spent on Logi/Carrier, 3.2 on Ragnarok, 2.6 on Rorqual, 2.4 on Nyx, 2.8 on Dread, 17.4 sent as gift)
On Monday there is no report because:
Of course none of them offer solution, besides the generic "work harder", "talk more to the players" nonsense. Reading lot of real life election news and editorials nowadays, due to the "47% scandal", I think I know what’s wrong with CSM: they try to represent the players. That can’t be done, because "the players" isn’t a group. Highsec miners are equally players as hulkageddoners. "F1-drones" are just as players as "l33t PvP-ers". FW AFK-orbiters are no less of players than highsec missioners. Gatecamping pirates pay the same subscription as haulers.
Such differences in real life are handled via the majority election. If the majority of the Americans believe that obamacare, medicare and high taxes are great, Obama will remain president. If they are minority, Romney will be it. The other group can eat cake, the president will act against their will, harming their interest. The focal point of the 47% scandal is that Romney told the truth that it’s not his job to care about the Obama voters. He wouldn’t be their president, just like Obama wouldn’t be the president for republicans, even if he is smart enough to claim the opposite.
What the CSM tries to achieve is the "great national coalition". Such things do happen in dire times. For example the former opposing parties of Greece united to try to save the country from bankruptcy. The monoclegate of CSM6 was such situation. "Greed is good" threatened all players, regardless of their playstyle. During this time the CSM had to be united and act as one. But that was the exception, not the rule. The normal way is constant arguing. The CSM should not have a common opinion outside of such cases of emergency.
If CCP asks "what about lowsec gateguns" the representative of the pirates should collect data and evidence against it. He should do his best proving that gateguns are harming a valid playstyle. The representative of industrialists and null/WH haulers should do the same for it. He should prove how gatecamps are just fun for a few dozens while ruins the life of thousands. They should not come to an agreement, CCP shall make the decision based on their arguments. The Mittani was considered great in CSM6 because he did his job. He represented his group, the Goons against everyone else. The titan nerf served no other than GSF (and TEST), as it stopped established players to be able to fight outnumbering newbies. The representatives of "elite" nullsec groups should have stop it from happening, that was their job.
Now, when CCP asks "what about lowsec gateguns", the CSM members answer with a guess about the opinion of the majority of the players. However their guess is just as good as yours or mine or any random CCP dev. Giving a random guess doesn’t worth an air ticket to Iceland. On the other hand they know for sure the opinion and arguments of their "party" and it would be valuable information for CCP.
I believe the bad state of CSM is more or less the result of the election and management process of it. CCP could make significant difference.
- At first they should point out that being on CSM isn’t a fun past time. There shouldn’t be drinking and partying in Iceland as it fosters friendship and niceness. Obama and Romney don’t go out for a beer night together. The miners hate Goons, if their representative is nice to the Goon one, he is practically betraying the people who voted him in. On the forums he should be their voice, openly treating Goons the way his voters want to (and of course receive the same treatment in return). He should go to Iceland in a "Fuck Goons!" T-shirt, just like The Mittani said in his CSM7 program "If you think that suicide ganking should be banned, I don’t want your vote. In fact, tell me where you hang out, so I can drop a Brutix on you.". The above can be factilitated by making the CSM meetings as formal and job-like as possible.
- CSM minutes should be more readily available, allowing the players to give faster feedback to their representatives. “call your congressman” is a common civilian movement, same should be with CSM.
- No NDA for CSM! CSM represents the people. Whatever they know should be known to the people. By giving them secrets, CCP makes CSM "inside men", loyal to CCP and not to the players. If something is not ready to be shown to players, CSM shouldn’t see it either.
- CSM should have a manageable size. There is no point for non-travelling members. They should be N equal representatives.
- A more equally representative election system. Had The Mittani wouldn’t lose his seat over being stupid, the Goons would still have one voice for 10K votes. The FW people has the same one voice for 1/4 as many votes. 1/4 of the votes were lost as given to candidates who don’t have seat. The complete STV (not the Trebor Daehdoow version) should be implemented: here if there are N seats, you need 1/N vote for a seat. Let’s say 50K voters, 10 seats, that’s 5000 votes/seat. If a candidate gets 6000, then 1000 votes will be transferred to their secondary candidate. So Goons with 10000 votes would have 2 seats. If everyone over 5000 votes got his seat, the lowest vote candidate is removed and the votes for him are changed to the secondary. So people who voted for him won’t lose their vote but it goes to the candidate who they think second best. On the vote ballot the voter can give 10 names in order, but he don’t have to fill them all out. If he leaves spots open, it’s automatically filled according to the template given by their primary candidate.
For trade and industrial discussions join Goblinworks channel.
If you want to get into nullsec but don't know how, go to the official forum recruitment thread and type the name of the alliance you seek into the search and start reading. I'm in TEST by the way.
Saturday morning report: 156.5B (5.5 spent on main accounts, 3.8 spent on Logi/Carrier, 3.2 on Ragnarok, 2.6 on Rorqual, 2.4 on Nyx, 2.8 on Dread, 17.4 sent as gift)
Sunday morning report: 155.8B (5.5 spent on main accounts, 3.8+1.0 spent on Logi/Carrier, 3.2 on Ragnarok, 2.6 on Rorqual, 2.4 on Nyx, 2.8 on Dread, 17.4 sent as gift)
On Monday there is no report because:
0 comments:
Post a Comment