Feat. Ali Aras, DNS Black, Jayne Fillon, and Xander Phoena
-What’s the biggest thing wrong with the NPE?
-How do we balance for new players while keeping veterans engaged?
-Little Things vs. Big Things
-What do the candidates think about the EVE Roadmap and CSM’s role in executing it?
-How much of EVE’s core gameplay brings out ruthless competition and to what extent will candidates stick up for the “villains” of EVE?
We have some bonus content from this panel we’ll release later. Don’t blink or you might miss it; make sure you’re subscribed to our feed!
GO VOTE! Declarations of War recommended ballot
Honestly didn’t expect the Issue Panel on War Decs to be topped, but I think this one represents what I was really looking for when you put out the call for comments concerning the panels.
Both DNSBlack and Xander really hit home the point that they’re not screwing around – they won’t roll over and play nice with CCP should CCP need a wake up call – and they aren’t afraid of reputation tarnish if that’s what it takes to do what’s best for the players and the sandbox.
We need people on the CSM with no bullshit attitudes – that aren’t willing to be shrugged off and swept under the rug. I support all 4 of these incredible personalities and should they be elected I hope they can cooperate effectively, harness their intensity when it needs to be and wield it like a doomsday when it doesn’t.
DNS Black makes it hard to want to get behind him. He escalates his voice too often and easily. Because of this instead of being objective he seems to be emotion driven.
The “Bonus Room” thing has a certain level of greyness. Sure EVE Online was the medium used to get the situation put together but the “offense” was done outside of the game. The issue isn’t whether what happened was right or wrong. The issue is whether you believe that CCP has a role in out of game activities. The victim was not FORCED to do anything, it was a decision they made to join TS and stay on there for the duration. The difference between “Torture” and Masochism is willingness to endure.
For somer blink, action was taken to stop the activities. Though there may not have been an official statement of the stance CCP is going to take on that there is a precedent based on action. They may not be proactive in preventing GTC to isk transactions, but if there is another incident then the action they will take is already known. I’m not convinced there was much more to do with that situation.
Just finished the Declarations of War panel discussion on CSM/Community Relations. DNSBlack has my vote if we ever need a CMS member who won’t listen to a single word anyone says, won’t answer the question he’s asked and will drone on and on about something off-topic without letting anyone else get a word in edgeways. First podcast I’ve ever listened to that made me so angry I had to stop listening. How many poor US ports metaphors does one man need to express “make things a bit better”? If I hear the phrase “Jesus Feature” or “Oiling the glove” one more time I may have to resort to violence.
On the Erotica1 issue, its within CCP’s jurisdiction because the leverage over the player “abused” was exerted using CCPs game. Doesn’t matter where (or on whose systems) the actual abuse took place. Simples.
In this case, the leverage over the player was “exerted” on the decision of the player. It was a chain of unfortunate decisions sure, but they were decisions none the less. He put himself in that position of his own free will and perhaps he learned a valuable life lesson. And that’s one of the great things about this game. You have the ability to learn these kinds of lessons in a manner that is much lower impact than real life events of the same type.
Regardless of what Erotica1 did the “abusee” always had the ability to opt-out. And i bet you from now on he will.
I very much disagree with Ripard’s “Torture” analogy because of this disparity in choice.
I stopped listening about a third in out of sheer irritation after DNSBlack had gone way over his alloted time, *and* browbeat the host into letting him have an extra “20 seconds” which felt like definitely more than that, *and* talked over Ali less than 20 seconds (20 real seconds) into her own part. But then I had already listened to 1.5 of his CSM9 interviews the past few weeks, so I was biased.
My vote would be for the moderator to mute him after he’s spent his alloted time, or do some serious editting afterward. Because he does make some valid points, and he’s probably a nice person, but that’s no excuse.
Huge kudos and thanks for putting up these panels, though. I loved the industry one and will listen to the nullsec one before trying to catch the end of this one … in a few!
Oh man, the amount of polemic catch phrases DNS Black spews is really hard to listen to and discredits the few shallow points he actually makes.
The rest is engaging and informative and would have loved to hear more of the others, including a back and forth between them.