DUST Search - Will CSM Effect DUST? (EVE/DUST Politics)

Glen Duval wrote:

Omons wrote:

I've thought about this many times before. I feel that two ways it could go.

Option #1: A EVE CSM and a DUST514 CSM

Pros:
- This would allow for both games to have representation for their game secured.
- Each CSM could discuss specifically upcoming features of their game and improvements.
- EVE CSM doesn't need to be present and DUST514's CSM talking about DUST and vise versa.
Cons:
- Issues regarding both EVE + DUST would require a joint CSM session

Option #2: One CSM with both DUST + EVE representatives
- I won't list pro/cons for this option, but the clear con for me is having EVE representatives influence game-play aspects of a game they don't play and vise versa, but it would allow the CSM to tackle issues regarding both games easier.

Regardless, I think a minimum time requirement (as mentioned by others) should be necessary before running for CSM as a DUST player.

There is an additional CON for option 1.

- Remember what happened to the Roman Empire in real life when it was shared by two emperors? Both sides didn't agree with each other very well.

Option 2 reminds me of Congress and it's two-chamber system.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
[Veteran_Zion Shad] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 13:19:00 - [1] - Quote CSM is a Political process where players pick a Rep that meets and communicates with CCP on behalf of the GÇ£playersGÇ¥ about issues effecting both players and the game in EVE. With Dust coming in and having an effect on EVE, will DUST have itGÇÖs own CSM or will the EVE CSM be GÇ£RepingGÇ¥ both sides of the coin? One Universe // One War TCD ZionShad For those who don't know what this topic is about clickHERE for more info Other Thread on this TopicHERE Thank you Erroc Balferec For providing the link below
[Veteran_Cong Zilla] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 13:22:00 - [2] - Quote I would think it would need to be on group body to be effective.
[Veteran_JohnnyAugust] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 13:27:00 - [3] - Quote Zion Shad wrote: CSM is a Political process where players pick a rep that communicates with CCP about issues in EVE. With Dust coming in and effecting EVE, will DUST have itGÇÖs own CSM or will the EVE CSM be GÇ£RepingGÇ¥ both sides of the coin? TCD ZionShad If they do, hopefully it's not composed of EVE players.
[Veteran_Rasatsu] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 13:27:00 - [4] - Quote Probably a few seats will be allocated to the DUST community.
[Veteran_DrizzCat Sarum] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 13:49:00 - [5] - Quote I would hope that we get atleast One seat on the CSM - but then - All we need is a rep or two that plays eve that also plays dust.
[Veteran_Dasyu Asura] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 13:50:00 - [6] - Quote I think the CSM will have an impact, yes. They help decide what goes on both politically and developmentally, don't they? I haven't paid too much attention to them in recent years, but it looks like I probably should. I say we either elect our own CSM. If we just become another part of Eve's governing body, then that leaves more room for say... One person to take up multiple seats without other people knowing... Or something. I just had major dental work, I shouldn't be posting right now.
[Veteran_iwillrock yourworld] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 13:52:00 - [7] - Quote My guess if there is a CSM for Dust is that it would be a separate body. But, of course, some seats would be occupied by EVE players, simply because we multigame and certainly it would be easy enough to ellect people given the numbers soe entities have under their belt. Free gaame, so easy to build up a voter base. When there is meetings i think probably both councils would be summoned at the same time, and some meetings would be together for matters of interaction. ps.: CSM decides nothing, it has just a consultive pourpose. CCP can show the finger if they wish to their opinions, but usually they hear and take the opinions into consideration.
[Veteran_Erroc Balferec] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 14:10:00 - [8] - Quote Well, there was another thread covering the same topic. My take on the topic is that we should definitely have a voice, but anyone elected to serve as a CSM delegate would have to play and speak for both DUST and EVE The primary reason for this is because DUST (and additional PSNs) are free. If my Corp mates and I really wanted to push through our delegate(s), we could make a couple free PSN accounts and play DUST on them once a day for 30 days til it's time to vote.
[Veteran_Zion Shad] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 15:12:00 - [9] - Quote I would see room within the existing CSM for DUST candidates. I do not however see that the seats open would have to be filled by a person or persons who play both DUST and EVE at once. If this was the case then all in the CSM would have to play DUST also for equity. I believe it can be fill by a soul DUST Merc.
[Veteran_Zion Shad] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 15:16:00 - [10] - Quote TCD members this topic will be brought up in our voice chat Discussions tomorrow If you are not a member of TCD and would like an invite to join the discussion, please post a reply along with your PS3 game tag to get a friend invite by me. Discussion Starts at 8am PT /1500 EVE time in PSN Home NDA will be respected at all times

[Veteran_Erroc Balferec] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 16:25:00 - [11] - Quote Zion Shad wrote: I would see room within the existing CSM for DUST candidates. I do not however see that the seats open would have to be filled by a person or persons who play both DUST and EVE at once. If this was the case then all in the CSM would have to play DUST also for equity. I believe it can be fill by a soul DUST Merc. I agree about room for DUST candidates, but still believe that it should and would be an EVE subscriber as there isn't a viable way to have people that only play DUST vote (free accounts and all). Either way, there would be little reason to have a separate CSM as the current CSM would be inclusive of DUST (the whole "One Universe // One War" thing). For those of you who aren't quite sure what we're discussing, here is linkage for more information.
[Veteran_Zion Shad] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 17:03:00 - [12] - Quote Erroc Balferec: Going with the Beast that is Politics, we may never see eye to eye on this point. I will just add, it seems to me that the view you hold on this is only turned by qualification of voters and not the candidates themselves. Free accounts may simply be taken out of the equation by the same way people are allowed in this forum. They can tell who has a beta account. Going on this knowledge, I can see that they would also know and can exclude those accounts from voting. Put a 4-6 month requirement on voters. EVE itself also as a lot of multi account holders to. TDC ZionShad
[Veteran_Deadly] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 17:06:00 - [13] - Quote I think DUST players having a say in who gets into the CSM is important, however with the game being free 2 play it would just make the already corrupt system of voting in Eve even worse so I am not sure how you would execute it.
[Veteran_Zion Shad] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 17:12:00 - [14] - Quote Deadly wrote: I think DUST players having a say in who gets into the CSM is important, however with the game being free 2 play it would just make the already corrupt system of voting in Eve even worse so I am not sure how you would execute it. Same point I gave Erroc just above. "Free accounts may simply be taken out of the equation by the same way people are allowed in this forum. They can tell who has a beta account. Going on this knowledge, I can see that they would also know and can exclude those accounts from voting. Put a 4-6 month of play requirement on voters."
[Veteran_Danfen Stark] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 17:31:00 - [15] - Quote Aye, a certain play time requirement or some other requirement of somesorts would be good to prevent corruption. My view though, is that there should be the one CSM, that includes members from both games. Having specific seats reserved just for Dust and EVE players would help towards preventing a one sided council, however saying that...I don't think it would be too hard to believe that some of the more popular candidates from EVE would also play Dust as well, or have some affiliation towards it. Afterall, a lot of candidates tend to come from 0.0 alliances (with the winners usually being leaders/directors in said alliances), and so they'd all have some stake in Dust as well to make it worth their while getting involved. So yes, I could see it being created so that EVE players can run for (lets say half) the seats, while Dust players can run for the other half. But don't forget (or be suprised) that there'll be crossovers as well i.e. People who primarily play EVE may play Dust and also vice versa, and so both sides should have some experience with the other to help both games progress well. It'd 'hopefully' eventually also be a case where these types of players are the most popular. + another good reason for splitting the chairs is voter base. If Dust takes off, then the potential voter base from it may be MUCH higher then the EVE voter base, so we also do not want to see bias against EVE candidates
[Veteran_Erroc Balferec] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 20:25:00 - [16] - Quote Zion Shad wrote: Put a 4-6 month requirement on voters. See, this is something I could agree to. Specifically, that DUST players would merely have a longer period of activity before being able to vote. This would compensate for the fact that the account is free. Obviously CCP would have to determine the length of time. I personally like the 4-6 month requirement as a basis though. Regarding the multi-account holders in EVE though, I don't particularly see a problem there as those alternate EVE accounts are at least being used for something (mining, pvp, etc) and being paid for versus the needs for an alternate account in DUST (merely voting or spying/sabotage). As a side note for the future though, CCP plans on combining all accounts (eventually) to allow discounts etc. Perhaps this'll include combing both EVE and DUST so that voting is more standardized with one vote per person (assuming people don't try to cheat the system). Either way, I agree with the below quote as it just about sums up my thoughts on the matter completely. Danfen Stark wrote: My view though, is that there should be the one CSM, that includes members from both games. Having specific seats reserved just for Dust and EVE players would help towards preventing a one sided council, however saying that...I don't think it would be too hard to believe that some of the more popular candidates from EVE would also play Dust as well, or have some affiliation towards it. Afterall, a lot of candidates tend to come from 0.0 alliances (with the winners usually being leaders/directors in said alliances), and so they'd all have some stake in Dust as well to make it worth their while getting involved.
[Veteran_Omons] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 20:35:00 - [17] - Quote I've thought about this many times before. I feel that two ways it could go. Option #1: A EVE CSM and a DUST514 CSM Pros: - This would allow for both games to have representation for their game secured. - Each CSM could discuss specifically upcoming features of their game and improvements. - EVE CSM doesn't need to be present and DUST514's CSM talking about DUST and vise versa. Cons: - Issues regarding both EVE + DUST would require a joint CSM session Option #2: One CSM with both DUST + EVE representatives - I won't list pro/cons for this option, but the clear con for me is having EVE representatives influence game-play aspects of a game they don't play and vise versa, but it would allow the CSM to tackle issues regarding both games easier. Regardless, I think a minimum time requirement (as mentioned by others) should be necessary before running for CSM as a DUST player.
[Veteran_Glen Duval] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 20:36:00 - [18] - Quote Considering that CCP has years experience in dealing with corrupt candidates and members, it's best to leave it up to CCP to figure out how to arrange this. But I would like to see at least three seats in the Eve CSM devoted to representing DUST players.
[Veteran_Glen Duval] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 20:39:00 - [19] - Quote Omons wrote: I've thought about this many times before. I feel that two ways it could go. Option #1: A EVE CSM and a DUST514 CSM Pros: - This would allow for both games to have representation for their game secured. - Each CSM could discuss specifically upcoming features of their game and improvements. - EVE CSM doesn't need to be present and DUST514's CSM talking about DUST and vise versa. Cons: - Issues regarding both EVE + DUST would require a joint CSM session Option #2: One CSM with both DUST + EVE representatives - I won't list pro/cons for this option, but the clear con for me is having EVE representatives influence game-play aspects of a game they don't play and vise versa, but it would allow the CSM to tackle issues regarding both games easier. Regardless, I think a minimum time requirement (as mentioned by others) should be necessary before running for CSM as a DUST player. There is an additional CON for option 1. - Remember what happened to the Roman Empire in real life when it was shared by two emperors? Both sides didn't agree with each other very well. Option 2 reminds me of Congress and it's two-chamber system.
[Veteran_Omons] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 20:41:00 - [20] - Quote Glen Duval wrote: Omons wrote: I've thought about this many times before. I feel that two ways it could go. Option #1: A EVE CSM and a DUST514 CSM Pros: - This would allow for both games to have representation for their game secured. - Each CSM could discuss specifically upcoming features of their game and improvements. - EVE CSM doesn't need to be present and DUST514's CSM talking about DUST and vise versa. Cons: - Issues regarding both EVE + DUST would require a joint CSM session Option #2: One CSM with both DUST + EVE representatives - I won't list pro/cons for this option, but the clear con for me is having EVE representatives influence game-play aspects of a game they don't play and vise versa, but it would allow the CSM to tackle issues regarding both games easier. Regardless, I think a minimum time requirement (as mentioned by others) should be necessary before running for CSM as a DUST player. There is an additional CON for option 1. - Remember what happened to the Roman Empire in real life when it was shared by two emperors? Both sides didn't agree with each other very well. Option 2 reminds me of Congress and it's two-chamber system. Yeah, I knew I didn't think of all the cons, just doing a basic summary that I could think of. Either way, I'll be interested to see how CCP decides play this out.

[Veteran_Danfen Stark] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 20:56:00 - [21] - Quote One other point for the requirement of being a player for 4-6 months (or so)... If they time it right with release, they could have it so quite a few players 'should' be meeting the requirement by the time the next elections start next year Get the ball rolling quick & smooth.
[Veteran_Zion Shad] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 22:40:00 - [22] - Quote I want to take the time to Thank all of you for keeping this thread on track and being respectful of of your fellow Mercs. This is a topic that could otherwise generate heat and u guy are doing Great
[Veteran_Glen Duval] 0	Posted - 2012.06.15 23:57:00 - [23] - Quote Zion Shad wrote: I want to take the time to Thank all of you for keeping this thread on track and being respectful of of your fellow Mercs. This is a topic that could otherwise generate heat and u guy are doing Great OMG, we're being nice? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
[Veteran_Zion Shad] 0	Posted - 2012.06.16 14:08:00 - [24] - Quote Was thinking of qualification for DUST CSM. One for sure is you have to be able to fly to Iceland for meetings. And I donGÇÖt think CCP pays for thatGÇª
[Veteran_RolyatDerTeufel] 0	Posted - 2012.06.16 14:14:00 - [25] - Quote I believe they do pay for it after you have won the election. you get 2 visits to Iceland and 4 email gameplay change requests. For EVE Online. will that change for dust CSM if allowed to run? only CCP knows.
[Veteran_Nu11u5] 0	Posted - 2012.06.16 19:42:00 - [26] - Quote I believe they also have monthly meetings over Skype with key developers sitting in.
[Veteran_Zion Shad] 0	Posted - 2012.06.16 19:44:00 - [27] - Quote RolyatDerTeufel wrote: I believe they do pay for it after you have won the election. you get 2 visits to Iceland and 4 email gameplay change requests. For EVE Online. will that change for dust CSM if allowed to run? only CCP knows. If this is true, I'll run
[Veteran_IRobbedAGoon Andilikedit] 0	Posted - 2012.06.16 19:52:00 - [28] - Quote A lot of the players on the CSM come from major alliances and they will all have their own dust faction so its safe to assume dust will have some sort of impact on the CSM.
[Veteran_Zion Shad] 0	Posted - 2012.06.16 21:16:00 - [29] - Quote IRobbedAGoon Andilikedit wrote: A lot of the players on the CSM come from major alliances and they will all have their own dust faction so its safe to assume dust will have some sort of impact on the CSM. I agree to this. I still would like a pure and a almost pure DUST Merc run.
[Veteran_SILENTSAM 69] 0	Posted - 2012.06.16 22:55:00 - [30] - Quote I think personally think that all New Eden players should get to vote for the CSM candidates, and that DUST players are just as open to be able to run for CSM.



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page