I've been going over all the candidates, and there's really a big separation between those treating this as an actual chance to make a positive contribution, and those looking for a free trip to Iceland. What's extremely important at this point is for the general community to reward those who take this seriously and show their support for the system by VOTING. It's not hard people. Do it in real life and do it in EVE. You should care about both worlds.
I'm actually impressed by a few candidates. Eva Jobse has (like a few others) a whole site dedicated towards her campaign. For a candidate NOT to have at least a blog or MySpace page dedicated to their campaign is insulting and shows a lack of dedication. Charlie Eriksen even took out an ad in E-ON magazine. If you want to consider an incumbent like Charlie, I urge you to look at his past performance and make it part of your decision. Having a resource like past accomplishments and meeting minutes are gold to a voter. Bjorn-Erik G Townsend seems to have unique issues that usually get little attention, like better cross-platform support. Brian Simonson seems eloquent and able to be original and creative in his approach.
You'll notice I'm referring the candidates by their real names and not their handles. That's because we're voting for REAL PEOPLE. Having success in tournaments or in-game politics means nothing in the real world. While a deep appreciation, understanding and experience with the game is an asset, having a titan or a fat wallet doesn't mean the candidate knows how to improve to the game or talk toCCP in a way that will facilitate the meaningful discussion of issues.
PLEASE DO NOT VOTE FOR PEOPLE ON THESE ISSUES:
They live in your country
They are a member of your corp, alliance or are “blue” to you.
Tourney accomplishments or other in-game career success.
Ghost training. It's a dead issue. Same with lag.
They seem funny. This isn't Last Comic Standing.
I'm not going to tell you who to vote for or not to vote for. You need to do your research, figure out who you think will do the best job and make an educated choice based on real factors. Resigning the concept of theCSM to failure rests with the players, not CCP.
Posts
4 comments:
Good comments.
On the issue of not voting for someone simply because they are in your corporation/alliance I noted that there are seven Goon candidates. Are the Goon's bidding to control the council?
Good observation. If they are they're really going to have to work really hard for it.
Also consider base anti-Goon sentiment being amplified by people making the same assessment as you just did.
It could just be a coincidence. There are a lot of goons out there.
Excellent post. I believe bloggers need to give this entire issue more attention in order to encourage people to vote thoughtfully.
Good comments. I'm concerned about the Goons also. Maybe limit amount of people from one alliance who can run may be a good idea. The danger is one corp's agenda being put forward and actioned over all others.
I'm thinking of running next year personally. I didn't this year as although I've been playing a while in a few characters, I'm not known to most people... I want to push the industrialist agenda, and get better corp management tools added to the game personally - but until next year I am sitting, watching...
I know who I'm voting for, do you?
Post a Comment