Hey, I made it back onto the CSM, to the surprise of exactly no one. At this point I don’t really have a whole lot else to say on it until that results blog comes out, aside from ‘if you supported me, thank you!’

One common theme I’ve heard throughout the election season (and then more at Fanfest) was “you should write more”. Well… okay, we’ll give that a shot. I was thinking about this the other day and I think that at least one of the things that held me back quite a bit was a compulsive need to write and re-write and re-write sections of whatever I might be writing at the time. Time consuming, and usually led to frustration and garbage-binned posts. So instead, I’ll just toss them off with minimal revision, and hopefully it goes well.

Ironically, re-wrote that section just before hitting publish. Not a good start.

As I’d originally planned when I started this blog, I’ll write about whatever I want. Why else would you start a blog? If there’s something you’re just burning for my thoughts on, though, drop me an evemail (just don’t forget the third ‘n’, else you’ll not likely get a reply!) On top of that, as already noted by Jester (thanks for that…) I’m going to try to do my own weekly CSM updates as well, on the principle of ‘more the merrier’.

So on that CSM Note..

Still no results yet, but we’re not without some minor bit of news. As anyone reading this no doubt has already heard elsewhere many times, we’ve elected to do away with the traditional positions. There will be no Chairperson, nor Secretary, nor the Vices. In CSM8 people picked up tasks as needed, regardless of who was supposedly in charge of what and I’ve got every confidence that’ll happen with this council, as well. Humorously enough, TMC commentator Arrendis points out that we’re not even straying from the CSM White Paper. That document specifies officers be selected within seven days of the close of the election, not – as CCP Dolan had laid forth when the election opened – at the first Summit.

Note to self, prod CCP Dolan and CCP Leeloo to update that document.

How about a few common criticisms? We’ll just grab these out of the thread,

This is just the vets railroading over the newcomers!

Actually, the idea was initially proposed by Sugar Kyle and enthusiastically embraced by several of the other new members, though incumbents weren’t far behind.

Without specified roles isn’t there a chance certain things might slip through the cracks?

Sure is. Having officers doesn’t inherently prevent that. Frankly, I feel that even with officers everyone on the council needs to stay on top of things, which requires communicating amongst ourselves. The only real difference here is that failure to do so means it’s probably collectively our fault, and there’s no one to scapegoat.

So what about the permanent positions?

Those require a longer answer, I’ll come back to them.

There’s value in a bully pulpiteer and/or a “Decider”.

Anyone with a good enough point and/or the sheer force of will can play bully pulpiteer just fine, with or without a title. Does anyone really believe that The Mittani wouldn’t have been as effective as he was in his time without “Chairman” as a title? As to a “Decider”, why? I suppose past CSMs voted on everything and a tiebreaker was occasionally needed, but we didn’t operate that way on CSM8 and sure don’t plan to on CSM9. What we did do was debate (or argue or, let’s be honest, occasionally bicker like children) amongst ourselves and argue our respective points. If we came to consensus, awesome. If not, well, I can’t really think of anything that came up over the past year that would have been better served by only presenting the majority side, and odds are a dissenting argument that’s persisted through a debate is worth passing on.

So about those permanent seats…

The council exists to represent the interests of the players, and I daresay that the combo of permanent attendees and attendees picked by CCP & CSM collaboration does that far better than a pure electoral based (as in years past) or purely CCP selected (as in… well, never, really) set of summit attendees would. The permanent slots give direct voice to the players by means of their votes. They also ensure there are people present at the summits chosen by and beholden to the community and the community alone – not CCP.

The remaining five are selected by CCP in collaboration with the CSM, with “how well are they performing” being the foremost criteria, followed at some distance by “how well does their expertise apply to the topics of discussion.” The purpose is to help ensure the summits are as productive as possible, and it goes without saying that attendees picked based on the election results fall well short of that goal. One notion I saw floating around was to hold additional mini-elections in the run-up to the Summits and pick attendees that way. Personally, though, I’d prefer to get actual work done rather than be stuck campaigning throughout the term, and I say that as someone whose bloc support would assure me attendance every time.

This is just the cartels tightening their grip on the game by sweeping away what little autonomy the CSM had left!

Wait, so the cartels run the game and dominate the CSM but the officer elections were somehow autonomous?













That’s all, for now! With any luck repeated prodding is successful and we get things rolling this week, otherwise the upcoming CSM Update will be awfully sparse. Until then, have some work-in-progress Lego.

13 thoughts on “Relaunching

  1. “Hang together, or assuredly we (you) shall all hang separately”. As if any of the CSM were accountable anyway

    No question the bed has been made. Hopefully, it does work out as communally planned. I wish that rather than simp0ly use CCP’s change as cause for your own, you would have chosen to hold their decision to the flame. The decision to breach to White Paper. I really do hope it works because each successive CSM election will either build or detract strength from the next. And we can just go with change, after change, after change and expect the players will find a level of comfort in the CSM being worth more than what the coalitions make it into.

    By the way, good to see you back blogging


    • I’ve read all your posting elsewhere and I can’t quite decide if you’re tremendously bitter or something else…

      Anyway, Arrendis’ comment I linked because I found it amusing, but it never did actually come up when we were talking amongst ourselves about the idea.


      • Forgive the horrible grammar above. It was written mid-show when I saw your twitter post.

        But to answer your original comment, it really depends on the topic. Bitter is a tough term because it’s too easily tossed about by anyone who disagrees with an opinion. Tired of some of the BS? Sure. Maybe that’s bitter vet or just bitter.

        I’m pretty sure what you’re doing is probably what is right. Not that it matters. There probably should never have been officer positions in the mix at all. Keep it light; it’s a game an all. But after reading the White Paper, someone, somewhere decided to take some time and effort to craft a rather extensive document regarding the purpose and structure of the CSM. In that light it probably shouldn’t be so easy to disregard it based on the whim of the day. It’s EVE. It changes. We adapt.

        By the way, I’ve read a lot of what you’ve written and enjoy it. Hope you do more.


  2. I still don’t see the issue with getting rid of the entire “Permanent Attendee” concept altogether, especially if CCP and the CSM are coming to a consensus together on who to send to each summit.

    Granted, permanent attendees doing the work was not a problem with CSM8, and it will likely not be a problem with CSM9 either, but why not nip any future problem in the bud now, rather than let CCP struggle with the problem down the road (and we all know how good CCP is with tackling problems).

    BTW, will there be two summits still, given that the development cycle has changed? Basically there’s one expansion now (a big announcement of the next year’s primary focus/ii at each Fanfest, then 6-10 updates along those lines for the next year).


    • I do assume there will still be two summits, scheduled at more or less the same times, but now that that’s actually out in the open we may hear otherwise. It goes without saying that the faster release cycle is going to dramatically shake up how things work, though… most likely for the better.


      • It wouldn’t surprise me if CCP cut back to one summit, since they seem to be wanting to save money here and there. The entire cost of each summit (flying 7 dudes out, plus accommodations, et. al.) couldn’t be more (or much more) than $30K.

        I think two is still worthwhile, for both the CSM and CCP. So hopefully that remains the same.


  3. awesome lego collection BTW.
    Now on to serious business – do you think after the summer indy rebalance come to pass, the moon goo prices will go up?
    as the bottleneck to T2 bpc – the copy slots are no more of a concern.


  4. Pingback: CSM9: Week One | The Third N

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s