The biggest problem with what you're suggesting Finn, is who decides who would sit on this player run/operated board?

How would it be policed/regulated?

Who decides what the group talks about, and what is sent off to CCP?



I don't think an arbitrary gathering of players would work, no matter how well intentioned. Like someone said above : Popular Vote among the uninformed can sink the ship. Anything that is run/operated by players is subject to the personal feelings of those players. Why listen to people they don't like? Why allow people they have grudges with to have a say to CCP?

You might not think people are that petty.... But a lot of them are. CCP should not and cannot have a vested interest whatever a group of players like this say unless they are sure that whoever's running it is giving everyone a fair shake.

I disagree.

While connected, the two games are not the same. The CSM summits are already packed trying to condense tons of subjects into just a couple days for Eve.

Neither game would get sufficient attention or time if they had to accomodate both in the same summit. Both games have things that need to be discussed with CCP and given proper attention. A joint council cannot do that.

Dust CSM dudes could maybe pop in via Lync if the Eve CSM folks are discussing the link, and the opposite is true for Eve CSM if they are talking about stuff that affects Eve.


I personally feel that Dust should have it's own representative body that reports to CCP Shanghai. And while I feel this is absolutely necessary, I want to make it clear that I have no intention on running for such a body. (Unless I feel the people running would do more harm than good, but with the people we have in this community I highly doubt I would need to do this, and would not want to.)

It's also well worth pointing out that when people say current CSM campaigns don't have anyone with any interest in Dust that's tot true.

Mynnna is running for CSM and knows all about Dust through me.

The biggest problem with what you're suggesting Finn, is who decides who would sit on this player run/operated board?

How would it be policed/regulated?

Who decides what the group talks about, and what is sent off to CCP?



I don't think an arbitrary gathering of players would work, no matter how well intentioned. Like someone said above : Popular Vote among the uninformed can sink the ship. Anything that is run/operated by players is subject to the personal feelings of those players. Why listen to people they don't like? Why allow people they have grudges with to have a say to CCP?

You might not think people are that petty.... But a lot of them are. CCP should not and cannot have a vested interest whatever a group of players like this say unless they are sure that whoever's running it is giving everyone a fair shake.

I know about the new COD from friends, they tell me all about it, but until I go play COD I am not really going to be familiar with it as much as players who play 2 to 10 hours a day.

Just saying experience is worth more then word of mouth from another player. Also your view point will be the only view point Mynnna hears from, imagine if politicians did this..

We need a CSM that does play Dust and Eve, not an EVE player getting word of mouth from Dust players..

Mynnna's a goon. He only need's another goons opinion to know what's in our interests and whats not.

I see the point you're trying to make, but it's not right at all.

Like people have said I doubt very much we will have any say this year other than the form of forum votes (which is good enough for me) I think maybe we should start taking ourselves seriously but independently of CCP. A separate entity like finn suggested earlier.

CCP doesn't think we need a CSM yet and rightly so; What have we done to show them we can produce a competent band of like minded representatives who won't bicker after the niceties have passed? Nothing.

I think we should set up an independent body with a different medium than the forums to discuss what the community has brought up. As finn said, we can elect an amount of members to this committee and leave it up to CCP to refine what they want at a later stage when they are ready.

In the mean time we can still avidly discuss solutions to common problems amongst ourselves and submit this to CCP. It's up to us to go about this in a professional, inviting scope so CCP doesn't take us for a premature group of fps players that high tail it when things don't go our way.

Like was said above, we are far too new (in the world of gaming) to be deemed a worthwhile investment to CCP - even the EVE CSM thinks this. But I don't think that means we should be complacent while we wait for other people to decide when it's our turn to show we care about this game as much as CCP / CSM cares about EVE.

From the CSM minutes I seen, it was more reactionary than proactive talk which I think doesn't achieve what the community wanted you to set out to do. Sitting there and nodding your head isn't what the community needs, I know that not only does CCP not have much time, have their own requirements to discuss and can't diverge what every member wants to make an epeen point about, but the CSM should come prepared with an already documented solution to each of their problems so that very meting isn't a brainstorming session but a many to one relational discussion and leave it to CCP to take on board.

I have setup a #dustCSM channel which is invite only (so it doesn't get jam packed with random people who don't want to talk about the channel topic) and will make a separate thread for invites. At present I will invite anyone with a vested interest in the a dust CSM, but once the making of the dust CSM is documented, I think it would be best to make it CSM representatives only. I will then pass on channel privileges to those voted and let the elected take over.

I'll setup a dust CSM site (nothing special for now) to help with documentation, news, updates, file management etc

Why doesn't one universe equal one vote?

I can't see why you should have to pay for EVE to vote for what impacts DUST.

Aren't these games connected?

Shouldn't DUST players be able to campaign in DUST?