While I agree that the community needs to make the content in Dust 514, the only way that can happen is if CCP provides the tools with which that content is made. They've done a good job but we're incredibly limited, despite all that Dust 514 is.

We need to get our foot in the door and have more to work with, honestly. There's a lot of candidates out there that make these epic promises but all of it just seems so self important, honestly... Like, virtually every veteran I can think of off the top of my head is running this year and I'm either so jaded that I'm just seeing a big cloud of all the same things or they really are running for all the same things. I dunno. /shrug

I'd rather the community have more opportunities to represent themselves than have these crazy elections where a handful of people toss their hat in and hope for the best. I think we should work toward that.

I like to think that Rattati and I both react well to a very analytical approach on topics. He's always been very responsive to my discussions with him because I approach things in a very factual manner. So when he comes up with an idea that just doesn't make sense, and I explain to him why it doesn't make sense, he's been very willing to change his position on the topic.

What he doesn't respond to well is emotionally driven rants and demands, which is something I always try to avoid in my conversations.

:: seeding a thought ::

I feel he can focus too much on numbers though...maybe he does look at other stuff too, but I think too much weight is placed on numbers. This is why having more heads involved is always a good idea to get all angles. Anecdotal and observational evidence has its place as does realising that balance is not necessarily achieved with perfect symmetry

I think including Kirk and mclovin honestly turns it into a popularity contest.

Being perfectly honest I don't have too many problems with Kirk, but he's biased, argumentative, doesn't look all that hard at facts or really concern himself with trying to get to the bottom of things and a whole slew of other negatives... And honestly I don't think I've really seen him do much of any positive contributions to the game (not saying that he hasn't, just that I've never seen him put forth any real effort). Quite a few of these are dealbreakers next to candidates like pokey or cross. Amusingly a decent chunk of these are reasons I myself wouldn't run over or ever vote for myself because of.

Mclovin is someone I only know through FW interactions... And honestly he's a troll, and a bad one at that. When he gets himself kickbanned for constant awoxing & friendly fire he or his friends from OH come to run his mouth in STF, usually on alts. He is singlehandedly (slight exaggeration, his friends 'contribute' too) the reason that Outer Heaven as a corp has almost been removed from state task force. Now add in a lot of the things that I've said about Kirk that probably apply as Mclovin is essentially an unknown and ask yourself do you *really* want someone who behaves in such negative ways so frequently to be a representative of the community? I'd rather have an upstanding, levelheaded, fact oriented person representing me.

I want candidates who are willing to get to the bottom of things and either be knowledgeable, or be willing to communicate with people who are knowledgeable. I'm not interested in biased egomaniacs (eg Viktor Hadah) or trolls (eg spkr4thedead).

It's very simple:

It's not a matter of "do I like these people."

It is a matter of "Do I think these people will genuinely push progress to improve the game, spot break points, address exploits and endorse ideas that can improve the quality of the game?"

I'll be the first to admit. Some of my more fond ideas are ones I culled from other people. Most of them are from over a year ago, so I cannot remember WHO was the original poster.

One of the ideas I can confirm came from a person who I wouldn't **** on to put a fire out. Doesn't mean that person didn't have anything good to contribute.

Look at the people running. Look at the legwork they do.

Do they contribute? If yes, vote for them.

WILL they contribute? If yes, vote for them.

Do you feel someone else will do a better job? Then vote for that guy.

I'm a very results-driven individual. I don't give a rat's ass if I like you if what you say has a provable foundation. I value function over form, balance and parity, and because it's a game, the focus should be on making it more enjoyable to play at every turn.

If I'm not elected, cross and pokey are at the top of my list because cross has proven that he can get things running, and I work well with pokey because he provides excellent input.

He also doesn't agree with me unless he feels my data justifies it.

The odds of either playing "yes man" rapidly approach zero once you start poking at how they do things.

It's very simple:

It's not a matter of "do I like these people."

It is a matter of "Do I think these people will genuinely push progress to improve the game, spot break points, address exploits and endorse ideas that can improve the quality of the game?"

I'll be the first to admit. Some of my more fond ideas are ones I culled from other people. Most of them are from over a year ago, so I cannot remember WHO was the original poster.

One of the ideas I can confirm came from a person who I wouldn't **** on to put a fire out. Doesn't mean that person didn't have anything good to contribute.

Look at the people running. Look at the legwork they do.

Do they contribute? If yes, vote for them.

WILL they contribute? If yes, vote for them.

Do you feel someone else will do a better job? Then vote for that guy.

I'm a very results-driven individual. I don't give a rat's ass if I like you if what you say has a provable foundation. I value function over form, balance and parity, and because it's a game, the focus should be on making it more enjoyable to play at every turn.

If I'm not elected, cross and pokey are at the top of my list because cross has proven that he can get things running, and I work well with pokey because he provides excellent input.

He also doesn't agree with me unless he feels my data justifies it.

The odds of either playing "yes man" rapidly approach zero once you start poking at how they do things.

There is creating content...

Now there is a thought, we can always create some additional "content" by voting for the candidates who are least likely to do a good job, or most likely to get kicked off the CPM...

Perhaps we can combine the different kinds of content?

Like CPM meets Survivor? They start out as 12 and then one by one they vote each other off the CPM? >:)

Naturally we would need weekly episodes to follow the CPM...

Instructions uncleared, voted for TheD1CK

PS: Skrab d1ck, you did this for the likez, ALL FOR THE LIKEZ!!!
You forum warrior!!

things

You would be incorrect.

I am actually more data-driven. I am merely better at putting it into context for other people.

Pokeys points of contention with me have nothing to do with data points. They have to do with practical application functionality and ease-of-use as well as personal aggravation factor.

I firmly believe that you have misjudged him.

I'd agree with this, it's why you'll likely get voted for without even trying to gain any votes, I think Breakin is the rare-gem that will look at things both factual and from anecdotal experience, along with being able to post feedback that all gamers will relate to

A lot of us don't come here to debate, which happens way to often rather than just discussions being open, at least with Breakin Stuff he will just flat out tell you your wrong, take your logic and beat some sense into you with it

Pokey makes good points on exactly why CCP do not communicate often with most players, but I'm not the one running for CPM so I lose nothing by not taking this as seriously and factual as they might like, I am anecdotal evidence

10% of the Dust community can engage in thoughtful, logic based discussion while the remainder are those who fill emotional rants that get them nowhere and they walk away feeling that no-one gives a damn in the first place, hence the really low number of players interacting within these Forums (Douche514 Forums) I don't blame them I have seen first hand the sh!t the monkeys throw at you when they want a disagreement, 80% of arguments are won by the better logic, while the better point is lost.

Mina, the remark for mclovin is a troll, fight fire with fire if that's enough to gain him some votes then the voters deserve to be castrated so we don't fear them reproducing and inflicting us with stupid. On the otherhand 'Sgt Kirk' squad leader and organiser for a GalFW group, seeing as I am biased towards those I think will have an in-game impact, why note choose him? We need CPM who can deal with a room full of bloodhungry mercs and show us that we voted for Players, not just Speakers

Delt.. if you're more worried about the weiner not liking you (I do btw) than posting some reasons you would make a good CPM maybe even that crazy ass option of adding something to the discussion at hand would work for you?? Most of Dust are aware you want to be CPM, you need to show what you will add to the table, how will you interact with the community??

It's important to remember that CCP Rattati is an Engineer, so he's -going- to focus on the numbers first.

Exactly why I mentioned it - because putting like-minded alongside him (as in Pokey's example) misses the other aspects, as you and others have already pointed out in later posts re: how stuff *feels*.

Instead of (or indeed as well as!) breaking down into small groups of like-minded and having isolated discussions, then rejoining to disagree with equivalent other groups, inclusive discussion involving all the types involved should achieve better results.

Exactly why I mentioned it - because putting like-minded alongside him (as in Pokey's example) misses the other aspects, as you and others have already pointed out in later posts re: how stuff *feels*.

Instead of (or indeed as well as!) breaking down into small groups of like-minded and having isolated discussions, then rejoining to disagree with equivalent other groups, inclusive discussion involving all the types involved should achieve better results.

The Weiner comment was made in jest, to add to this conversation I will say I think the players in game really need to join the group chat in game that I made (CPM2 Candidates) and squad up and talk to the candidates themselves, in 'person' and really get to know them. I have always been a fan of 1 on 1 communication and larger communication between the community and myself so they get to know the real person.

Also, still playing mfw? Havent squared in a while.

Opinions about people are never wrong, sorry to break your heart. I'm not 'wrong' because of the way I feel about someone. Maybe I misjudged him, maybe I misunderstand him, maybe I misinterpret him - doesn't make the feeling I get from the guy 'wrong'.

But, that's the core of my issue with Pokey, isn't it..?

Aeon, kirks bias is pretty clear and if I wasn't on my phone I could go grab some of the stuff Nothi has documented. On a tangent, opinions about people *can* be wrong, they are based in feeling not fact. Opinions are by definition fallible as they're not facts - you're allowed to have your world view and dislike things for whatever reasons but that doesn't prevent it from being wrong. There is a big difference between an opinion and an informed opinion.

D1ck, being a good squadlead isn't something I'd consider all that important. Again, not trying to diminish or belittle him but if both Kirk and I were to run I'd vote for neither of us for mostly the same reasons, we'd probably be better than some, but not as good as many others.

For dealing with CCP no, but if CPM had more in-game activity that could be an asset, either way being a squad lead, what is the first requirement there?? Knowing the in's and out's of the game and managing players.. I think that could be of some use to CPM, and until you do post your stuff it does seem like you are trying to diminish and belittle him tbqh