Welcome to Jester's Trek.
I'm your host, Jester. I've been an EVE Online player for about six years. One of my four mains is Ripard Teg, pictured at left. Sadly, I've succumbed to "bittervet" disease, but I'm wandering the New Eden landscape (and from time to time, the MMO landscape) in search of a cure.
You can follow along, if you want...

Tuesday, August 21, 2012

The middle way is none at all

It was nearly impossible for me to listen to the CSM7 Town Hall without thinking about CSM6... and CSM5, for that matter.  And contrasting what we have today with what we had last year, and the year before.

From an external observer's perspective, being on the CSM has always been a tricky balancing act best exemplified by the old graphic to the left.  I've only been a particularly diligent CSM watcher since CSM5.  Before that, I was vaguely aware there was a CSM but it didn't strike me as particularly important.  It really reminded me of nothing so much as a student council.  I guess I wasn't unique in that view.  ;-)


CSM5 changed that in a lot of ways but probably one of the big ones was that they started to become part of that "players rock" instead of getting crushed by it.  This fostered a relationship with CCP that turned out to be a little more adversarial than CCP probably expected.  It's certainly not every CSM that's been referred to as "terrorists" as CSM5 infamously was when they posted their Open Letter regarding Incarna.  I said at the time that I thought the Open Letter was a mistake, even if a lot of what was in it has over time proved true.

That was probably the first time that I ticked off some CSM members.  It certainly won't be the last.  ;-)

So, even if you believe that CCP went a ways toward freezing out that CSM, you could argue that CSM5 leaned a little too aggressive in their dealings with CCP.  The danger there is that if you're being frozen out of the process and you complain about it, you create a vicious circle where you're even more frozen out.  Take it far enough and the players ignore you except as a source of entertaining drama.  You certainly can't influence game development!

Not long after that, CSM6 came on board.  At the time, I wrote a little open letter of my own directed to the CSM's new Chair, advising him as one of his first tasks to work on that relationship.  And he didn't need my advice in that regard; it was clearly part of his plan from the beginning to leverage the relationships he'd already built in the company.  Still, to a certain extent it meant that he'd be throwing off the sense that the CSM was on the player's side.  The Mittani had to pivot to CCP's side in order to be effective.  As a result, CSM6 was accused -- quite often! -- of being little more than a CCP mouthpiece and not really caring what the players wanted or thought.

By taking the side of the devs and decision makers, the danger there is that the player base regards the CSM as a worthless publicity stunt.  The player-elected body has a chance of being lumped in with the rest of CCP's Public Relations machinery... part of the wall that the players are banging against.  Take it far enough, and the players start to ignore you as a walking, talking CCP press release.

I didn't believe that about CSM6, but it's arguable that CSM7 has crossed the line.

After I listened to the Town Hall, I headed over to Failheap Challenge.  I hadn't visited their CSM section in a while and I was curious what the people there thought of it.  Answer: they don't think anything about it.  The last post in that section is a month old.  There's nothing about it in the EVE General section, either.  Their thread on the CSM Summit Minutes is 20+ pages of bitching about off-grid boosters and has very little to do with the Minutes.  And in retrospect, I guess that shouldn't have surprised me.  Taken as a collective group, FHC is firmly in the "CSM is a CCP mouthpiece" camp, and I suspect CCP Xhagen and CCP Manifest showing up with the CSM on EVE Radio just reinforced that impression.  CSM members have stopped posting there, except very occasional sly comments.

The opinion of the Kugutsumen community of the CSM is, by and large, not that much better.  Two step routinely gets ripped up pretty hard there and Endie's opinion of Seleene is something you have to read yourself to appreciate.(1)  Needless to say, there are no posts about the Town hall there, either.  CSM members have stopped posting there too, except for Elise who had an obvious relationship with Kugu before he was on the CSM, and Two step, who apparently has masochistic tendencies that we weren't aware of.  ;-)

"The favored topic of CSM7 appears to be CSM7," says Wilhelm Arcturus, The Ancient Gaming Noob.  He's joking about the opening 41 pages of the Minutes, which are -- yeah -- about the CSM process in general.  But then he goes on:
They are trying to be witty or amusing.   They have personal agendas or axes to grind.  They seem to obsess about petty hair splitting.  But most of all, they seem to be very much focused on themselves for 30 freaking pages to no useful purpose.
Ouch!  But absent other official, easy to find communications, stuff like the Minutes or the Town Hall is all we've got.(2)  And that's what people are going to respond to.

CSM7 seems to be cheerfully willing to use their own player experiences to guide what they tell CCP.  And sure, that's their right the minute the voting is over.  But without a crowd-sourcing initiative or some other active means of drawing in player input, what motivation are players going to have to pay attention to CSM7 or ask them for help?

"In politics the middle way is none at all," said American President John Adams more than 200 years ago.  And the CSM often refers to themselves as Internet spaceship politicians.  But I believe to be taken seriously on the CSM, you must strike the middle path.  Otherwise, you are likely to be ignored by one side or the other.

What say you, Dear Readers?  Are you paying attention to this CSM?  Or did I just spend a day's posting on a topic you don't care about?  ;-)  If that's the case, come back tomorrow.  I have something really fun to write about.

EDIT (22/Aug/2012): The graphic at the top of the post was created by CSM5 Chair Mynxee.  She's included her comments in the comments section.  Thanks, Mynxee!  <3


(1) Come to think of it, it will be very interesting to see what, if any, coverage CSM7 gets on themittani.com.  I just checked and so far there are only three articles there so far that even mention the CSM.  None of them have anything to do with the CSM as an organization.  None of them are written from a news perspective.
(2) Seleene mentioned during the Town Hall that one of his goals for the second half of CSM7's term was to blog more himself and encourage other CSM7 bloggers to do the same.

41 comments:

  1. In re: your first footnote, Mittens appended this to one of his reposted columns, #74 -

    "I won this one pretty handily, netting 10,058 votes, and promptly pissed it away by making an inappropriate joke while on live TV. Whoops! Because of that, I'm going to refrain from commenting on how well/not well CSM7 is doing/not doing; as I learned in CSM6, it's a huge pain in the ass to have former CSMs taking potshots at you from the unaccountable safety of retirement."

    Doesn't mean the rest of us writers won't get to it (I'm sure we will) but there you go.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, I don't necessarily equate "themittani.com" with Mittens. There are lots and lots of other writers that could take on CSM-related topics that aren't.

      Delete
  2. I don't blame it on the CSM per se, that lack of threads about them or the minutes.

    Its just the winter expansion and what is coming to EVE, sounded boring as shit. I just think with nothing exciting coming to the game, be hard for CSM to shine, or be in a lot of threads.

    Least CSM 6 had a lot of new and dramatic changes during their year, so they were in threads a lot and talked about. No nothing is coming it seems or feels like.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'd pay more attention to CSM7 if they made more noise, and stopped being elitist jerks expressing a very one-eyed view of the EVE Online community and universe.

    Elise in particular with that comment along the lines of "if FW cynojams systems we'll infiltrate and break FW forever". Seleene in particular for comments along the lines of everyone having ship replacement programs and how losses are meaningless because we're all rolling in ISK. Issler Dainze for riding the industrialist ticket, then failing to open her mouth except to put her foot in it. CSM7 overall for promising to talk more, then simply clamming up.

    Hans Jagerblitzen is the best of a bad bunch. Two Step is worth paying attention to. Trebor is (as always) the quiet achiever with a better grasp on the game as a whole than any of the null sec twits.

    The very least that they could be doing is running the crowdsourcing effort as an ongoing project. We have the features & ideas forum to serve as a fermentation bed for crowdsourcing. It just needs to be moderated better. I have contributed a few words to the "write down all the things" project, and this is something that the CSM needs to be working on in conjunction with the players and CCP: even though it is merely a token, it's a great way to let players vent their frustrations constructively, and a great way for CCP to see which preconceptions of the player base need to be addressed.

    Crowdsourcing isn't just bread and circuses: it's a useful tool for communicating subconscious intent and desires.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I don't understand how the CSM can think that EvE players are rich? Sure there are plenty of avenues for making money, and "most respect Alliance's have ship replacement programs" but not everyone wants to play the game for hours on end! A little self analysis of the CSM would be awesome, as in them realizing that most of them are part of large power blocs that have ridiculously large amounts of consolidated power a la Europe before and during World War 1

    tl;dr

    Annoyed at fake politicians!
    Firgure your shit out CSM. >.<

    P.S. Jester great job writing about current affairs!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The worst part is that they go with the following line of thought: "My alliance and the alliances I play with/against are so rich that it is impossible to inflict meaningful losses, so ... let's reduce income across the board all around the game by an order of magnitude".

      How does that even solve the (specific) problem they are trying to solve? It doesn't suddenly remove the existing wealth from these alliances. It doesn't deal with the source of that wealth (tech). It doesn't prevent these alliances to leverage their current wealth and organization from exploiting whatever the best form of income currently is and employing it to keep losses being meaningless. And it makes it even less likely to materialize the myth of the new power-block that arises out of nowhere and somehow amasses enough manpower and assets to challenge the established ones.

      Delete
    2. Whether you agree with PLs agenda or not, you have to give Seleene credit for being transparent about it. PL HAS to push it's agenda hard now, because they probably won't get another chance.
      Besides, their experience is valid; form the top of the heap the value of isk becomes increasingly meaningless and trained pods in the field are more valuable.

      Delete
  5. Hmmm I love your blog but CSMs are all about drama and skewed perspectives. Is the middle way being "wishy washy, waffling, mediocre, skewed" OR is it about "balance, unity, encompassing, expanding"? So far I think its about being skewed! CCP is catering to the old PVP players be it for money or whatever. The game is not "engaging" for the majority of the new just like so many other older MMOs.

    I know i will be slammed for this and perhaps justly (read profit) so but new blood brings new ideas and that idea seems to have been lost on CCP.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Seleene and Elise are only there to defend their PL superblob way of life. I don't agree with most of their opinions and they will do nothing to improve the game for the average player.

    "16-17 Titans", my ass.

    Appreciate the blog Jester. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  7. who was it? khrushchev? the soviet who banged his shoe at the UN? lol. I'D VOTE FOR THE RUSSIAN WHO DID THAT AT CSM8

    ReplyDelete
  8. imo, the Eve-O forums are more important than the CSM for representing us

    ReplyDelete
  9. The CSM is pointless. Crowdsourcing, polls, workshops etc will get you relevant and targeted customer feedback. A gaggle of floating egos will not.

    A number of user needs analysis techniques are at CCP's disposal. Isn't it in CCP's best interest to direct and oversee initiatives such as crowd sourcing themselves, instead of delegating to the CSM to do it for them? They may think the CSM does it for free ... but at what cost (to CCP) if done poorly due to poor implementation, bias, lack of care etc?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Gah, now that was about as bad as Alekseyev Karrde, cherry picking a quote that sounds a lot worse without all the context around it. I was pointing out that the CSM were people with all the foibles that entails, and that transcripts, as opposed to minutes, brought that point home more than we probably needed or wanted.

    Of course, Alekseyev Karrde apparently brushed past ~1000 words I wrote on how CSM7's biggest problem is they have no great issues with which to wrestle so he could Tweet a complaint that I called CSM7 the "doofus" CSM in a follow on comment.

    I think you win on points Jester.

    @MinorFreak - Yes, Khrushchev at the UN in 1960. Great political theater.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Very few things are ever actually self-evident when it comes to statistics. When I actually do statistics, they almost invariably surprise me. :) And CSM is in the exact same boat as we are when it comes to seeing actual data, even though they're acting like internet-spaceship-politicians.

    That's what actually annoys me about CSM. Instead of basing their positions on anything that has even a slim pretense of objectivity, pestering CCP to release any kind of actual data that would allow them to confirm or deny player experiences as 'common', trying to wrestle information out of actually available data, or even simply collecting player experiences, CSM seems to be all about personal experiences of it's members. Which, with the gigantic disconnect between all the variety of Eve playstyles, clearly doesn't cover all, or even most of Eve. Naturally the most glaring examples of that are "players are rich" and "16 or 17 titans isn't a lot", but "can't stop someone from having friends" also ranks up high in there. (It's not that "you should nerf friends" like Goon players are fond of posting on the forums, that obviously isn't possible. It's that some people have more friends than others, because they don't have to make them in Eve like everyone else.) CSM minutes are full of inconsequential statements and are kind of like an Italian strike, where regulations are followed to the letter to make a point. You wanted openness, here, eat it.

    I'm seriously going through everything they ever said since being elected with a proper by-the-book content analysis one day.

    ReplyDelete
  12. The previous CSM was entertaining to watch because the content they produced was exciting. Mostly that's Mittens social manipulation voodoo or whatever. I am hoping you get what I mean.

    The current CSM is a bit of a non-event. I don't really feel that they have revealed any information and I really don't see that they have influenced CCP in any positive way.

    tbh, current CSM is failing pretty bad. We need silly pictures with captions I think, may make the situation salvageable.

    ReplyDelete
  13. My guess is that the majority of the eve player base has suffered from battle fatigue and just want's to chill for a while. It's pretty hard to maintain a heightened level of emotional frenzy without recuperation.

    Shaushtatar knows all the jedi mind tricks, he's saving the fire and brimstone for when he needs it.

    No-one wants a swamp of words to wade through, they want to know who to hold accountable for misdirecting the devs. fat minutes are just flint and rubble for axe grinders to sharpen their edgy edges on.

    I don't think there is a way to speed up the release of the minutes. Sure you can paint the discussion with broad strokes but getting a committee to agree to that editorial would just take even longer.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Dear Jester,

    No need to tell us that CSM sucks, everyone sees that. (Hans is an exception). Tell us what can we do about it! Do you know a candidate we can vote for? Do you know of a campaign running that we can join by spreading a word? Do you have a plan to fix it or at least know about the plan of someone else you'd suggest?

    ReplyDelete
  15. CCP has like it or not another CSM which is the mouth piece for NULL sec alliances. If CCP asks for them to rewrite what the CSM is they will gerrymander it towards thier own interests which is not the interests of Eve as a whole

    ReplyDelete
  16. I actually agreed with the "we are too rich" part, because it is true... for them. Those alliances are too rich and they need to become poorer, so losses matter to them again. Like they do for most players. I thought they were acknowledging that fact, but maybe they just meant us being too rich, not themselves.

    Btw Jester, you may want to take a look at this topic where wormhole dwellers are arguing with Two step, who has, as it turns out, visions for POSes that are quite different from what most wormhole dwellers want: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=140049

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So CCP has their reasons for getting rid of POS forcefields, but those reasons are wrapped inside an NDA. What could those reasons possibly be? Speculation welcome (not asking anyone to breach their NDA).

      Delete
    2. If that is what you are getting from that thread, you aren't reading the whole thing.

      Delete
  17. I've said it from day one, the CSM isn't "like" a student council, the CSM IS a student council. And in seven iterations I've seen nothing to prove that statement otherwise. They can decide the theme for the prom, the colors, the music as long as none of those decisions are contrary to the goals of the administration. The school administration isn't going to change anything based on the student council's recommendation, nothing of significance. They can't.

    And just like any student council, the majority of students pay no attention at all to the politics and inner workings. But, having said that, there is always a small niche of students that follow such dealings religiously and think the sun rises and falls on the decisions, politics and inner workings of the council.

    In the end, those that choose not to pay attention - while reviled and looked down upon those that do - are actually the ones who care the most. Because they see the pointlessness of the entire system, the wasted effort, the cycle of fruitlessness of inactivity and indecision that is a direct result of an entrenched administration beholden to community taxes, federal and state law, and centuries of "this is the way it is done".

    The ones who don't care are the smart ones. The rest are wasting their time. There are far more effective ways to effect change and to make your points and suggest reform. The student council is not one of them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think your student council analogy oversimplifies the potential of the CSM slightly, but not by much. In fact, my realization of the reasons why CSM could never truly be an effective agent for change and why it is in a tricky (and maybe impossible) position when it comes to being useful to both players AND CCP is part of what inspired the old blog post for which I created the graphic that Jester is sharing above.

      That said, I think CSM5 and CSM6 were instrumental in raising awareness about CCP's planned direction for EVE and helped force CCP to change its focus back to spaceships and do a better, more consistent job of keeping players informed about what was in the development loop. That was what was needed at the time. CSM7 (and CCP, quite possibly) has enjoyed the benefits of those two very controversial terms and as a result productive discussions are now possible. Whether the details of those discussions (to the degree they are shared by the CSM or CCP) are favored by players, whether the CSM members reflect the community as a whole in terms of perspective and playstyle, well...those are different matters altogether.

      There certainly seems to be a concerted effort by CSM7 to "play nice" with CCP. If that keeps CCP devs coming to the table, great. It's a reasonable approach so long as the bro mentality does not interfere with the CSM playing hardball should CCP go seriously off course again (which seems unlikely, fortunately--at least based on the information being supplied to the community). And as long as stuff still gets done. I read the minutes. Lots of talking, sure, but if you analyze it, how many actual decisions got made and action items committed to? Didn't seem like very many for 160 pages worth of conversation.

      -- Mynxee

      Delete
    2. Oversimplified yes. Confines of comments and all that. But you and I both agree, I believe, that the confines of CSM/CCP relationships - since the very first CSM, are what they are. And in that confined environment, within that framework, very little actual, concrete, action is possible.

      This does not in any way mean the CSM does not have a function, or that we'd be better off without them. It simply means that being perfectly honest with ourselves is much better than being self-deluded.

      Delete
    3. Rixx speaks the truth. Couldn't have said it better myself.

      Delete
    4. Indeed. There is a sort of baseline function to serve as on-call subject matter experts speaking with the voice of the community (supposedly). But CCP gives the CSM plenty of room for evolutionary experimentation. That is why each council has been encouraged to define itself and its agenda, and push on boundaries. Doing so helps discover what is possible and what is feasible.

      Consider CSM-as-Stakeholder. It was a big boundary stretch when CSM4's proposal for that got approved. CSM5 attempted to stretch the boundaries even further by embracing that role and requesting processes be put in place to support it. Ultimately, the stakeholder role as envisioned by CSM4/5 didn't work out--but the reasons why it couldn't only became clear once CSM5 started grappling on the fly with what CCP's definition of stakeholder was and what fulfilling such a role required. Not surprising that the concept seemed to get dropped in CSM6.

      As for whether there is room for further evolution of the CSM's function, who knows what might be inspired by circumstance or creative thinking and what CCP's tolerance will be for it at the time.

      Delete
  18. CSM5 and CSM6 could not be ignored if you were an EvE player, and even if you weren't. CSM7 may as well not exist for all the impact it's having.

    CSM6 (or their related actions) regularly made it onto general gaming news websites. CSM7 can barely make it onto EvE specific websites, have no chance of being mentioned on a general MMO news site. Do you think Eurogamer would write several articles about CSM7, or interview the chairman?

    The only significant coverage CSM7 has and will get was the Mittens scandal, other than that CSM7 is a non-event, putting it straight after CSM6 is a cruel joke.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Agree with Jester when he says that the CSM needs to find a way - crowdsource - of finding out what the rest of the players, who aren't as rich as Croesus or Goonies, want and what their motivations are.

    They need to note in particular that not every one wants to do/is good at PvP. yes, it's important, yes it's one of Eve's best features and yes, it's a huge driver of the economy. But by the same token,someone has to make and sell stuff that's blown up, so representing that side of Eve is also important.

    I'd agree incidentally too that at least the Goons perma-geddon seems to have prodded CCP into buffing mining barges and exhumers so a 1m ISK boat can't just come along and trash a 200m ISK barge. What's a pity though is that the CSM wasn't pushing for that, or anything else in that area.

    Or have I missed something?

    ReplyDelete
  20. My opinion is very straight forward.

    Their comments are bias towards 0.0'period.

    Low sec and high sec players aren't that rich. Ccp pretty much plans to kill merc work in high sec. Tech moons apparently aren't a problem( really wth?).

    Oh and supers are fine k thx be ausemcsm says so and they MUST be right.. Z they have tons of skill points!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The CSM bias has dysenfranchised anyone living in HI SEC from bothering to post questions to them or voting in the elections.

      Delete
  21. I don't require that the CSM get into the press (would CSM6 have, if CCP's struggles weren't also making the press?). I don't care if many hard decisions were reached, because CSM is a sounding board, and CCP made it clear at the outset that they will be used as early in the development process as possible. I'm fine with that. I don't want a game where the players get to elect the project managers.

    As for Elise, I think he's an incredibly valuable asset on the CSM. If CCP wants to know firsthand what's broken about nullsec, it's personified right there on the committee, and they can bounce ideas and questions off him in real time to discover what will simply prolong the brokenness, and what might actually fix it. It's *good* for CCP developers to hear, first hand, that there is a dominant group in the game for whom supercap warfare is assumed, who are so rich that they don't experience loss, and who don't even acknowledge the existence of alliances--and players--which have neither supers nor trillions of ISK. That gives them something to work from.

    A negative example is still an example. (Not that I voted for Elise, or ever will.)

    ReplyDelete
  22. What i just dont understand is why hans doesnt push more for changes to FW's LP store and plexing issues. the combination of terribly 'cheap' LP from tier 5, easy plex LP farming and low entry barrier to the lot as described (pretty late) by jester simply defeats the concept of FW and redistributes isk to the already-rich, which if manipulated properly by a large group, could potentially break the game

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Few things:
      1. low entry to FW is exactly what CCP wants as they want new players to go to low-sec and PVP. Hell, this should be what every pvp player wants.
      2. redistributes isk to the already rich?? FW LP is the easiest way new players can make good isk. Nerf tech before you nerf FW LP

      Delete
  23. Glad I was not the only one wondering was the fuck was happing on FHC thread about the minutes... I created an account here cause there were some CSMs who were posting during CSM6, but now I don't have any reason to browse it... I don't play WoT after all...

    Concerning the 165 pages and the 30 about themselves, people need to think a second about it ;
    they said they wanted to try doing a pannel as direct translation.
    They choosed this one, I think, cause there would be no NDA issues (if you have to cut part of something due to NDA, the point of being very precise totaly vanish...), and because it was the first pannel.
    But well, it was a wrong choice ; doing it for something like the ships changes pannel would have been way better ; there's no NDA on it, and players would like for sure seeing the exact process on how the devs think.
    but stop saying they've wrote 30 pages about themselves because they have a crazy high ego, it's wrong, and you know it.

    I do agree with Jester about their position on supercap or technium however... mostly technium, cause I wasn't that bothered by supercaps these last weeks, while technium is a real problem from everyone...
    They really should rebalance tech2 need, wouldn't need lots of works on creating a new feature, and would help a lot making north moons less valuable and south moons more valuable.
    and of course it would be more interesting for trader and producers... and consumers.
    It's true I have a feeling about CSM7 being a bit too close to CCP on how they see things, and not close enough from players...
    I was shocked learning there wouldn't be any crowd-sourcing this year... hey even if you can't use it to help CCP choose what to do has they can't change short term goals, it's always good to KNOW what players thinks.

    But if people are wondering about CSMs views, others are also wondering about yours Jester, as Poetic said on his last blog, some guys are begining to wonder what you are doing... you seems to have changed your way of doing things lately, and you seems more far away... too much centered on what YOU think should be done, without doubting all players agree.

    ReplyDelete
  24. It is a paradox of the CSM that one of the long-term goals of the CSM is to make the CSM much less necessary. After all, if we do our jobs right, CCP will be going direct to the players for most things they consult CSM on now.

    We are starting to see that more and more -- CCP Fozzie and the rebalancing work is a good example. CSM helps give him a sanity check, but then he goes direct to the players for more detailed feedback and iterates on that.

    While there will always be things that, for business reasons, will be NDA -- and for which CCP needs CSM-style input -- I would like things to evolve to where this is the exception, not the rule.

    The reason that you are not seeing a lot of drama in CSM7 is there is not that much to be dramatic about. While we certainly can (and do) disagree about priorities (and all agree that we'd like more resources to address them), such disagreements are best handled by persuasive argument, not torches and pitchforks -- and the tentative changes that were agreed upon at the summit about CSM input on release planning and providing direct feedback to teams during sprints are a promising experiment that may address those goals.

    Finally, Dear Jester, can you please stop beating on the nullsec guys for the "too rich" comment -- it's like you're Fox News bleating about "You didn't build that". It is obvious that they were talking about how rich the big alliances are, and pretty much everyone agrees that the passive income tits like Moon-goo have to go.

    The real questions are: what will replace them, how much work will it be, how will it interact with other things players want, and when can it be done. Reasonable people can disagree about all of these things, but disagreement does not mean one side is right and the others wrong, it just means different people have different perspectives and priorities.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jester should stop beating on you "nullsec guys" when you all the it through your heads that empire dwellers make your world possible. Stop craping on those of us who's backs you ride. Stop yelling to nerf any empire income that comes anywhere near nullbear income. "Incursions are too much cash for no risk" out of one side of your mouths all the while having titan ratters making 2.5 BILLION ISK a DAY! "Rewards should match risk" on one hand while you have tech moons pumping out billions of risk free passive income a month. The list goes on and on and on where nullbearing makes mountains and you folks want to crap on empire molehills. You treat empire peeps like crap and then expect them to lay off the dumbass comment? Yeah, right. HTFU.

      Besides, if all you nullsec tough guys really think it is so great out there, then I dare you all to biomass your empire alts/traders/haulers/RvB alts/etc.

      BTW, super simple solution to the tech problem that apparently gets tossed out and ignored. Make each moon produce a lot less tech and then spread tech throughout null space all over. Make some moons produce more, some less, then you have some conflict drivers.

      Delete
    2. Pretty much everyone agrees that Moon-goo has to go ? Oh, really ?! Then why do I hear in the Town Hall Meeting that the Tech situation is all fine ? I hope I missed something...

      And Jester is quite right in continuing to beat the hell out of z 0.0 people on their "too rich" comment. Because in the Town Hall meeting I did not feel much of a conceding move on their part; instead, they insisted that everyone had enough money.

      Delete
    3. It's all just so far off my game experience. :(

      P. S. : if anything, I'm doing Frigate races these days. It's a sandbox, remember ?

      Delete
    4. I *would* get off the "too rich" comment except for Two step saying that player incomes should be reduced across the board. That indicated that the feeling was shared a bit more broadly across the CSM than just a few super-rich null-sec alliances.

      Delete
  25. "that the player base regards the CSM as a worthless publicity stunt"

    That is all it has ever been and all it will ever be. CSM5 comes closest to what I would consider the "proper" attitude and demeanor for a CSM. I don't think they were so much "frozen out" by CCP as much as the fact that we were in that period of EVE history now infamous for :18months: coupled with the fact that CSM5 wanted to hear about Incarna gameplay. CCP couldn't tell them anything about that because there WAS no Incarna gameplay, and CCP knew it.

    Meh. CSM5 best CSM. CSM7 worst CSM. And in the end, it doesn't really matter one way or another except for those getting free trips to Iceland that include free booze.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I was totally put off by the town hall meeting, shut it down half way through as my husband and I were disgusted by what hit us as arrogance in the monologue held by Seleene and Elise. They totally appear to be out of our EVE world.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.