Cough. Sorry. Got carried away. ;-)
Anyway, point is: we're told that "the CSM" essentially agrees with each other on major issues. As I said yesterday, this is a great political ploy for getting CSM6 members re-elected, but not so great from an accountability stand-point. How is the voter to know which CSM6 members to vote for? In the CSM December Summit minutes, we are told many many things "the CSM" thinks, but hardly anything at all that individual members think. It would be useful to understand what individual CSM members think about the many controversial issues raised in the December Summit minutes, don't you agree?
With that in mind, I present you with a partial list of...
Things the CSM Thinks
- Pilots -- most particularly super-carrier pilots -- should be given a "partial respec" of their skill-points (page 12).
- The Naga is too powerful (page 13).
- Super-carriers should be able to dock in stations (pages 13 and 17); and,
- super-carriers should not be treated as "special snowflakes" (page 13).
- Super-carriers should be given a super-carrier-specific mod for tackling other super-capital ships (pages 13 and 17).
- Incursion Vanguard sites offer minimal risk (page 13).
- Drones should just give ISK bounties instead of dropping alloys (page 16).
- Alliances should be able to tax member ratting income (page 16).
- Wars in EVE are driven by hatred and grudges rather than resources (page 16).
- Fleets of Rifters should be able to tackle and hold down a Titan (page 17).
- There both should and should not be a new class of capital ship specialized in tackling (page 17).(1)
- There should never be new super-capital ships added to EVE (page 17).
- Outposts should be destructible (pages 17 and 18).
- There are multiple alliances which live in NPC stations, amass super-capitals, and hold high-value moons (page 18).
- NPC station services should be destructible (page 18); and,
- when destroyed, should not be repairable but should regenerate over time (page 18).(2)
- Station service hit-points are at the right level (page 19); and,
- they should not be a viable target for small gangs looking to force sov-holders to defend their territories (page 19).
- Faction Warfare leaders should be elected (page 20).
- Faction Warfare corps should be able to set the tax rates of NPC stations in low-sec (page 20).
- Rewards in low-sec, particularly Faction Warfare rewards, are not high enough (pages 20 and 25).
- There should be some sort of wormhole stabilizer to make invading w-space easier (page 20).(3)
- Sleepers should attack POSs and/or pod people (page 20).(3)
- Electronic Attack Frigates should be able to "impact" super-capital ships immune to e-war (page 21).(4)
- Drakes should lose their shield resistance bonus and their kinetic missile damage bonus (page 21); and,
- be given a rate of fire bonus and missile velocity bonus instead (page 21).
- An Infrastructure Hub upgrade should be produced to further reduce POS fuel costs for sov-holders (page 24).
- Sov bills are too high, and sov-holders don't receive any benefit from them (page 24).
- Sov-holders should be able to build a module in their own space that hurts other people's sov space (page 24).
- Null-sec is about hate and cruelty (page 25).
- There is little enjoyment to be found in low-sec (page 25).
- The contraband system should be removed (page 25).
- Buying a PvP ship should be an investment that brings in ISK (page 25); and,
- a destroyed frigate should provide less rewarding drops for those that destroy it than a destroyed battleship (page 25).
- The person who destroys your ship should get 10-20% of your insurance pay-out for that ship (page 26), including if they gank you in high-sec (also page 26).(3)
- Despite the fact CCP has a large number of assets for the NeX store, they should not be released at this time (page 30).
- Players should be able to train more than one pilot per account by paying for this privelige with PLEXes (page 30).
- Players don't care about their corporation logos (page 30); and,
- they care about their alliance logos much more (page 30).
- The unique attraction of EVE is "you can grief people" and "it's not a game for wusses" (page 32).
Feel free to use this list as a guide-post for your questions for individual CSM members running for re-election. Oh, and one more that's just fun: "the CSM" thinks fire is hot and it burns (page 30).
Finally, it's worth noting that "one" CSM thinks that high-sec income should be nerfed whenever possible (page 20), but that "other members of the CSM were quick to object to that suggestion." Guess "the CSM" doesn't agree on every single thing after all.
(1) And I thought I was good at simultaneously believing two incompatible things at once.
(2) I'm quite sure that sov-holders definitely would not create daily blobs designed to knock out these services in NPC stations in their spheres of influence.
(3) Only "some" of the CSM think this.
(4) Titan-nerfing Sentinel is a go!