Wednesday, February 20, 2013

What is the Role of the CSM?

In recent days, I have written on the subject of my CSM platform, and I have also offered some helpings of real talk. Today I will delve more deeply into the question of what the CSM's job is, and how I would approach the task of being a CSM rep, should I be elected.


There's been so much debate over the last year about what the CSM is actually supposed to do once they have been elected. We've heard terms like "communication membrane", "junior developer", "unpaid intern", "marketing gimmick", and "doormat" thrown around. None of these terms cut it. Obviously the CSM needs to make decisions about the development of the game, but nobody wants to be a "junior" anything.

To determine the proper function of the CSM, we need to go back to the reason the CSM was formed in the first place. The CSM was created at a time when CCP was doing an overhaul of how they interacted with the EVE community--in the wake of Kugutsumen's scandalous discovery of the BoB-CCP connection in 2007. CCP understood that there needed to be a channel of communication between CCP and the EVE community, and that BoB's directorate wasn't it. The CSM was born.

Communication isn't the end of it, of course. There's no point in communicating with CCP unless CCP does something different as a result. It wouldn't make much sense for the CSM to offer a bunch of ideas, CCP to reject them, and everything goes on as before. Nor does it make sense for CCP to set an agenda, get feedback from the CSM, and then make a few minor modifications based on that feedback. After all, CCP can already get feedback of that nature from EVE-O, e.g. the "I want your little things" thread.

My platform is based around fixing the catastrophic problems with highsec and risk/reward. Suppose highsec and risk/reward aren't on CCP's agenda for the next term. In reality, we know highsec and risk/reward are likely to be on the agenda, since all of the recent expansions have involved nerfs to highsec risk and/or buffs to highsec reward. But let's suppose CCP is interested in tackling something entirely different. Would I be idle? Of course not. It would be my job to change the agenda. I believe it's the CSM's job to set the agenda for each term, not CCP's.

Some gasp at such notions. I would direct the gaspers' attention to CSM6, almost universally considered the most successful and consequential of the CSMs. In 2011, CCP had an agenda. It involved walking in stations, the buying and selling of pants and monocles, and inflammatory ideas from the infamous "Greed Is Good" memo. If we were to take the advice of the gaspers and self-styled "moderates", CSM6's role should have been to give CCP suggestions about how best to implement walking in stations, what kind of pants and monocles should be sold, and which of the unacceptable "Greed Is Good" items to give priority.

CSM6 had other ideas. Led by Chairman The Mittani, CSM6 wielded the rage of the EVE playerbase as a useful instrument, persuading CCP that they must radically transform their agenda. CCP threw its own plans into the dustbin and adopted The Mittani's "flying in spaceships" agenda. CCP, CSM6, and EVE all benefited as a result. That's how it's done. In the New Order, we often say that we save the miners from themselves. In effect, the CSM6 saved CCP from itself.

CSM7 took the opposite approach. They permitted CCP to decapitate the CSM by removing The Mittani (the threat of a mass-resignation would likely have been effective). Until the Winter Summit of December 2012, CSM7 pursued a moderate, cooperative, friendly course. Gaspers had no cause for gasping, since there were no extremists on board to make anyone uncomfortable. The result? Look no further than the recent CCP/CSM7 meeting minutes from pages 19-22 (among others):
Two step: "Part of the problem for us is that we not only don't know about the decisions until after they're made, we don't even know they are being made."
These are the fruits of "moderation".

Some would point to the difference in the conditions under which CSM6 and CSM7 had to operate. CSM6's victories occurred against the backdrop of Monoclegate and the Jita Riots, the "Summer of Rage". CSM7 had no such controversies or community passions to leverage.

Change often requires a precipitating incident to serve as a trigger. Some are organic and fortuitous, others are manufactured. All are potentially useful. The Summer of Rage and the manner in which it was directed toward positive change by CSM6 didn't just happen. It's the responsibility of the CSM to fan the flames, or if necessary, to light them and guide them in an appropriate direction.

48 comments:

  1. So, in your opinion CSM is junior game developer. You quibble about "junior" but it seems accurate to me. The CSM has no means beyond persuasion to get any ideas implemented. It does not have source; it does not have rank or even employment in CCP; it does not know the passwords to the servers. Junior.

    I have no strong opinion on what the CSM's job should be. Yours seems to be as valid as another.

    I would like to see you write more about how you plan to deal with being in a minority. I expect many CSMs will have modest sympathy with "nerf highsec into oblivion". But this will be limited in most cases. And many CSMs -- i.e. Jester -- will oppose you.

    (Indeed, I would probably oppose you. I want highsec nerfed too, but not in the same way you do. I feel that instead of making highsec's rich commons worth much less, they should keep their value but be nerfed by making them privately owned but contestable. Private ownership means conflict means war means spaceship battles. You seek to nerf reward in highsec; I feel that increasing the risk side of the equation is better for dark and gritty EVE.)

    Anyway, I can see you getting a certain amount of good done in the minority. Hold the highsec buffers' feet to the fire of public opinion. But still there appears to be a great deal of work the CSM does that is not junior game developer. This is what I'd like to see you speak about. CSMs seem to think it is a lot of work. Do you agree? Will you do the work regardless of whether CCP lets you design their game?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. CSMs are a think tank, not junior dev. They are analysts and researchers and help think out a "plan". The devs take the plan and translate that into workable code.

      As much as it can be "easy" to say "this needs fixing", you need to have a reason WHY. That's where the CSMs come in. They tell the devs WHAT and WHY of what needs fixing. It would be more accurate to consider them (CSMs) as a consultancy.

      You ever see the Cinemax show House of Lies? That's CSM for you =)

      Delete
    2. Or Showtime... I forget what channel it was...

      Delete
  2. But we are doing exactly what you propose for highsec right now. James laid claim to highsec, set terms, and recruited people to enforce his terms. The New Order is your vision ffs.

    You see it now? When you do please vote James 315 for CSM8.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nony, I do see it now, and I have supported the NO on that basis. I'm a shareholder! James' proposed nerfs, ironically, would kill the NO. Whereas what I'd like to see is built-in support for people staking enforceable claims to asteroid and ice belts. The NO could then claim belts and freely punish ninja miners. And miner corps might outbid us for some of the fields. But then we could wardec them and take control of that field back. Imagine a highsec that has wardecs over valuable grids.

      And yes, I will probably vote for James anyway. His positive vision does not match mine but OTOH, his negative vision does. And IMO nobody is going to let him be junior game designer. The other CSMs won't and CCP certainly won't. Therefore, his positive vision does not really matter, whereas his negative vision would. His roles within CSM will be that of gadfly and whistleblower, attempting to hold the line against further safety creep. These are useful roles. But there is more to CSM (or so I have the impression), than those two roles. And that is why I query him further.

      Delete
    2. "James' proposed nerfs, ironically, would kill the NO. "

      After the war is won, most of the army goes back to civilian life. This does not "kill the army", quite the contrary. Winning the war is not made into defeat by the fact that victory nullifies the need for full armed mobilization. Victory is victory. James's proposed nerfs being implemented would be Victory for the New Order.

      Now, if you disagree with his vision, that's another thing. But to disagree merely because you're afraid of Victory, is foolhardy in the extreme.

      "Imagine a highsec that has wardecs over valuable grids. "

      Ok...imagine that valuable ores and ice are found only in lowsec, and imagine fighting over that. This is a superior vision, as wardecs are lame.

      Delete
    3. Audrik, wardecs are lame now. They do not have to be. It is entirely a question of risk and reward -- just like James says. Here is another game mechanic where the two are out of balance. Why would a weak defender ever undock? He risks costly ships in combat, and for what? His reward is, if he plays very well, maybe a few PVP kills. He still cannot carry cargo or mine or mission safely. Better to just dock up for a week. Or drop roles and spend the week in an NPC corp.

      Of course, a weak defender would not undock in a system as I envision either. The difference is not whether the weak have an incentive to fight the strong. The difference is whether the weak have an incentive to become strong. Currently, they do not. And this is the problem with wardecs. Wardecs are lame because the deccee never fights; they never fight because they are weak; and they are weak because they have almost no incentive to be strong. Getting strong is costly; so the only reason a rational highsec bear will do it is because he needs to do it to make isk. Well, that is what I propose should be done: change the game so making isk in highsec requires strength. (Or stealth -- I am all about seeding the bottom of the foodchain with ninja miners.)

      I can certainly imagine valuable ores and ice removed from highsec. This would work in the sense that it nerfs highsec and creates combat outside of highsec. But I feel that in laying highsec waste, we'd be losing something important. Highsec should serve as the training ground for lowsec and beyond. But highsec also can be an interesting and unique region in its own right, with its own unique play style.

      Delete
    4. In your hypothetical world, where wardecs are fixed until they are awesome instead of lame, and thus provide enough risk so that the massive rewards of highsec are now balanced, then sure, I agree with you. Until I see this wonderful new world of wardecs live on at least Singularity, I'm going to keep supporting the balancing of highsec by massive nerfs to highsec income. Wardecs have already undergone multiple rounds of revisions and they're still so, so far away from what you're talking about, that to base any other opinions on that wonderful possibility is naive. Sorry.

      Delete
    5. Wardecs are not the problem. They are already an effective method to prosecute conflict. The problem is the lack of meaningful conflict. Conflict arises over scarcity. Well, neither missions nor asteroids nor ice are in any significant sense scarce in highsec. So, either we can make them scarce "naturally" (i.e. move all ice to lowsec), or we can make them scarce "artificially" -- by creating ownership of them. Your method has the advantage of a certain simplicity. It has the disadvantage of rendering highsec a wasteland. My method is complicated to code. But it creates an entirely new zone of PVP in EVE -- highsec. It sounds like fun to me.

      As for which is more naive, they both sound quite naive to me. You appear to believe that James can control CCP. I believe that I understand economics.

      Delete
  3. "Obviously the CSM needs to make decisions about the development of the game"

    "I believe it's the CSM's job to set the agenda for each term, not CCP's."

    What do those statements mean? Are you expecting the CSM to have decision making powers concerning the development of the game? Because if there's one thing I can guarantee is that that will never happen. No good product has ever been designed by the customer, an eve player has zero stake in the success of CCP. Certainly we'd like them to do well but if the company collapses we just move on.

    The CSM's powers will always be limited to a consultant level, and the CSMs of CSMs as you say did their awesome work with that amount of power. I'm very interested in knowing how you will operate as a CSM member if your power to affect change is based solely on your reasoning and persuasive skills because that's how its going to work. And I can't in good conscious cast a vote in your direction if I don't know if you can operate in that arena, or else I'm wasting my vote.

    "It's the responsibility of the CSM to fan the flames, or if necessary, to light them and guide them in an appropriate direction."

    Now that sounds more like what the CSM is about, I hope you can do that without the requirement of game design decision authority.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think the purpose of the CSM is what the candidate makes of it. I like that James has strong ideas about what he wants to do and how he wants to do it. There is no chance for greatness without a good measure of aspiration. Why would you want to be a part of the CSM, taking a huge chunk out of your personal time with very little recompense to be a mediocre yes man? The last thing we need is another do nothing mumbler like Issler wasting space and being of very little use. We need a representative who's willing to kick some ass and take some names, and it's really looking like James 315 is that person.

    W. Steele

    ReplyDelete
  5. James is a idiot and a bully. Not voting for him and persuading others not to.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've been waffling on whether to return to EVE Online, but posts like this might just force my hand. If I subscribed to EVE now and made a new character (having deleted my old one out of disgust for the progressive stagnation of highsec) would I be able to vote for James 315 in the coming election?

      Delete
    2. Yes you can vote for James with a new paid character; personally i will resub my account only to give my vote to James. Yes i know one vote doesn't matter in the end but........

      Delete
    3. @Anonymous and Kazacy
      I think Eve would benefit from people with a bit more commitment than 'I'll resub' to vote. Even if James gets elected any change or opinion he voices will not be implemented for many months if ever.
      PS. Also apart from vague commitments he has given no details so it is really stupid of you to vote for someone without hearing the details particularly since hes sounding very confrontational to get his changes through regardless.

      Delete
    4. Bobbins: they're not enjoying the game right now, but they could if the game changed according to James' vision. Therefore they want to pay for a month of gametime they don't really want to use right now just to give a vote to him. That is commitment.

      EVE is what players make of it. Those are the players we don't want to lose: active, content creating players who enjoy the emergent gameplay that defines EVE. Players who quit silently without whining, unlike the carebears. Anon is an example, I always hear people saying that EVE has to keep the carebears for their money, even if they don't bring anything to the game. Now, EVE has to keep players like Anon up there, players that will bring to EVE their money AND their contribution to the gameplay. Those players are quitting/not staying in game due to the state of EVE, they just do it without whining on the forum.

      Delete
    5. @Anonymous
      'Anon is an example, I always hear people saying that EVE has to keep the carebears for their money'
      People who say that are basically wanting 'free ships' - typical nullsec rubbish when the tech moons are removed from the game and the goons get rid of all the free isk they got from them them we will talk about entitlement. Until then I will let you ponder where all this tech money went?

      Delete
    6. @Bobbins,

      No, I'm talking about the carebears' subscription, their real life money who goes to CCP.

      Delete
  6. Nice revisionist history here re: CCP decapitating CSM7.

    You seem to fail to understand that the CSM exists thanks to CCP's good graces. A threat of mass resignation would have more likely resulted in CCP being thankful for the saving of 7 airline tickets at worst. At best they would have declared the whole thing a farce and initiated a re vote and disallowed anyone who was running to run again.

    You put your position across eloquently and you make a fine politician James, but fallacious reasoning, revisionist histories and arguments based on false nostalgia do nothing for you. Why not just run on a position of "I want to fuck highsec for the lulz" and be done with it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "CSM exists thanks to CCP's good graces"

      No. CSM exists because CCP had to do something to recover from the T20 scandal. You have to rebuild your opinion from scratch now.

      Delete
    2. Why CCP created CSM has nothing to do with why it continues to exist.

      The T20 scandal warranted throwing the players a bone but CSMs very existence then, and continued existence now is thanks to their good graces.

      Players have no resource beyond unsubbing if CCP decide that CSM is a liability and trash the whole program. CSM being petulant idiots by threatening a mass resignation because CCP felt they had to protect their brand by removing a drunken idiot who advocated the community harass an individual to the point of suicide would give CCP the perfect excuse to end CSM in its entirety.

      My opinion stands.

      Delete
  7. 'My platform is based around fixing the catastrophic problems with highsec and risk/reward'

    Your platform is flawed if it concerns highsec only. You cannot fix highsec without fixing null sec and low sec.
    It is funny how you target mining as a risk/reward, the returns on mining in highsec are poor and the risk is moderate. I am interested in your suggestion for moving mining and industry from highsec while not just making targets of the industrialists. I would also like to know what credentials you have to make massive changes to industry as the only input you have seem to have done is destroy the means of industry and have not come up with 'solutions' other than kill miners.
    If you are moving industry from highsec the the revamp in the POS system is pretty much essential, what are your views on the fact a revamp of the POS system is not on the agenda during the next term of the CSM.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "You cannot fix highsec without fixing null sec and low sec"

      That is almost true. in fact, the rewards of null and low have to be buffed in addition of nerfing high sec to oblivion. But I think that the more important concept is:

      You can't fix low and null sec without nerfing high sec. And no matter what carebears like to think, EVE is a game built around not consensual conflicts and emergent gameplay. EVE is at its best in a low or null sec environment. Industrialists will be tanked or protected if they are smart. People are not stupid like the pro-carebears think, not every industrialist needs a safe high sec to make money. On the contrary, the good industrialists will make more money and the bad ones will make none, like ti should be.

      Delete
    2. @Anonymous
      'On the contrary, the good industrialists will make more money '
      Or just stay away if the rewards are sufficient for the risk and work. BTW what is the plan to encourage industry outside highsec?

      'Industrialists will be tanked...if they are smart.'
      Why do I feel this statement is really dumb?

      Delete
    3. "Or just stay away if the rewards are sufficient for the risk and work. BTW what is the plan to encourage industry outside highsec?"

      Stay away from what exactly? In this vision, High Sec is worthless for veterans. It will be like a lvl 20 zone in WoW. You will be able to do almost everything, but if you want to gather something very useful and worthy, you HAVE to go to low sec. You can stay in high sec if you want, but your only way of making big money will be trading, all the rest will be worthless for you unless you're not a newbye. Good rewards will be reserved for people who take risks and create content, because this is EVE, and EVE is based on players' emergent gameplay. Someone will quit if they can't be easily rich in high sec? Let them, they're playing the wrong game. The EVE concept is appealing to a different kind of gamer, the kind we have to gain and keep around for the good of EVE.

      "'Industrialists will be tanked...if they are smart.'
      Why do I feel this statement is really dumb?"

      Probably because you didn't think about it enough. In the new low sec, where good industralists will thrive, they will have to defend what they have. By tank, protection, deception. And those good industrialists will make more money, because right now they have to suffer the competition of the afk carebears, who mine all day with no effort involved. Those will be gone, and the smart industrialists will be finally free to be above the leeches.

      Delete
    4. @Anonymous
      There is a reason that industry is limited beyond highsec. To sort those things out would need changes to the game. If the only policy is to force people out of highsec people would be unwilling to risk significant assets for little reward and just stop doing industry. Very little is known about the policies to change industry from its present state from James 315 or even if he intends to remove it all together. Could a trade hub like jita exist in lowsec?

      'In the new low sec' - So what changes is there going to be in this new lowsec? By tank which has never worked. By protection which even concord can't protect miners in highsec. By deception yay stealth mining barges etc. I can't imagine PvPers staying around several hours (to 24 hours) a day protecting industrial resourses can you? Freighters in lowsec, well I suppose they'll make nice expensive targets. etc

      Delete
    5. The problem with trying to balance nerf and buffs in regards to lowsec null and highsec is the fact that you would only encourage bot aspirant behavior if you "nerfed" highsec. Lowering the rewards for mining in highsec won't make people who multibox move to a different sector. They will just escalate in retaliation by increasing their "bots" to make up for the loss.

      If you as a 1 man fleet of 10 make 1bil a week mining and then all of a sudden due to nerf make 300mil a week instead... you just might increase your 1 man fleet to 20 to recoup losses. In the end, it is either 1 account you are interacting with (using a multiboxer) or still NONE if you in fact run bots.

      It still will be buying plex with ingame isk and no interaction change from the player.

      Make low/null more APPEALING is the trick... because why would someone who isn't playing the game want to move somewhere else to continue NOT playing the game?

      This is why James needs to get highsec nerfed into "oblivion". It cannot just be a subtle change, it needs to be so drastic it is impossible to survive on mining alone.

      Delete
  8. I would like to thank you James and The New Order for a fine Job.I'm a muti-account High-Sec miner.I would like to point out a few things.First by attacking all the High-Sec Miners and preventing them from mining,Your preventing them from selling ore on the market. That makes the price of ore go up and makes mining more profitable for me at least. So thank you and keep up the good work. Drive those prices throw the roof. :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You see? If we destroy the bad AFK mining leeches, the good, active miners will make moer money. Money will go where there's merit, not where there's only slumber and grind. Dear miner: get your permit if you don't have one already, follow the Code, update your bio and enjoy your new life in the world that the New Order is building for you.

      Delete
    2. Dear NO, it has come to our attention you have not yet purchased a permit for a permit of collection permit, please do so in order to legally receive your permit payments under the permit for collecting permits while you permit the mining under the permit mining and collection scheme permit permit.

      Delete
    3. New Order Accounts PayableFebruary 22, 2013 at 12:02 AM

      "Dear NO, it has come to our attention you have not yet purchased a permit for a permit of collection permit"

      "2012.12.14 13:23 Void S 197.12 20,000 ISK Justice Jita IV - Moon 4 - Caldari Navy Assembly Plant"

      Upon inspection of our records as excerpted above, it appears that such a permit was purchased on 2012.12.14 at 13:23 EVE time. Thank you for your concern. Good day.

      The New Order

      Delete
    4. We filed a permit for a permit of collection permit some months ago, it is currently located in our HQ.

      If you want to inspect it please forward us a copy of your permit to inspect permit collection permits and we can permit you to inspect ours.

      Time permitting, obviously.

      Delete
  9. #1 Posted: 2012.04.27 01:26
    By the time you finish reading this Manifesto II, you will understand why the highsec miners--the ones who don't bot--are the biggest problem facing EVE today. You will learn about the damage they have already caused and gotten away with, you will learn how they almost shut down EVE, and you will learn what the miners are not-so-secretly doing right now to ruin your game--unless we stop them before it's too late. This is the first line of James Maniresto.

    So please explain to me why i would as a muti-account high-sec miner support James 315?

    Here's a quote from James him self " He must have known it was a futile gesture, but when his ship continued to be fired upon, he demanded an explanation all the same.

    James 315 > You're my enemy. I lied." So why would i pay for a permit and still get ganked?

    Honestly I don't mind getting ganked. I have Muti-Fitted Barges and sets of implants ready just for that reason. I do not think of myself as a carebear. I don't want to make high-sec any safer. I don't want people to not be able to gank. I think thats all just part of the game.

    I would like someone to address my questions please.
    Thank you for your time.

    I would like to see more of a reason to mine low-sec.The few times i've tryed i got blown up with in 3min of warping into low-sec. lol

    ReplyDelete
  10. Congratulations, James. While your previous CSM-posts have been utter and complete bullshit, this one actually made me somewhat interested in voting for you. And I'm one of your enemies, a risk-averse high-sec carebear, by the way!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Champion the Wonder HorseFebruary 22, 2013 at 10:13 AM

    I can just see it now - CSM 8 summit meeting about the winter expansion...

    CCP: "So, CSM members, got any ideas about a theme for the winter expansion?"
    Trebor: "Yes, I've got a. Maybe an industrial based theme that will help get players out of high-sec and involves making POSes much more..."
    James 315: "NERF HIGH-SEC!"
    CCP: "Errr yes thank you James. Trebor was just talking us through his idea for a winter expansion theme. Nerf high-sec isn't really a theme is it James? Do continue Trebor..."
    James 315: "NERF HIGH-SEC NOW!!!"
    CCP: "Okay, not sure you fully understand the concept of a marketable theme there James. Anyone else?"
    James 315: "NERF HIGH-SEC. NERF HIGH-SEC. NERF HIGH-SEC"
    CCP: "Please let others speak, James. Others are allowed a voice you know! Anyone else?"
    Ripard Teg: "I was thinking we could have a theme that encourages players into low / null and would appeal to new players by..."
    James 315: "SHUT UP IDIOT!!!!! You are a CAREBEAR who wants a theme park even though you've categorically stated you don't want that at all and would despise it. NERF HIGH-SEC INTO OBLIVION NOW, BITCHES. NOWWWWWW!!!!!!"

    A few seconds silence passes. All other people in the room look at each other and reply in unison...

    Everyone: "James, please leave."

    That's just my prediction if James 315 ever makes it onto the CSM. Can't see it being much more different to that anyways. And no, I'm not a miner or a high-sec resident. Just thought I'd state that before James' disciples start frothing at the mouth, being abusive and making stuff up because they can't handle the thought of a low / null resident actually having issue with James 315's methods and ideals.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Just thought I'd state that before James' disciples start frothing at the mouth, being abusive and making stuff up..."

      It's okay, you beat us to frothing at the mouth while making stuff up. We'll leave it up to you.

      Delete
    2. Someone didnt watch his interview it looks like lol! I would definitely suggest listening to it. You might be pleasantly suprosed.

      Delete
    3. Champion the Wonder HorseFebruary 22, 2013 at 4:55 PM

      To say that went over your heads would be an understatement. See ya.

      Delete
    4. If by "went over (y)our heads" you meant "I was clearly frothing at the mouth while making stuff up" then by all means I clearly agreed with you in my post. If you were trying to say that somehow you had made a witty and intelligent post, I'll let the post you made itself show what a laughable concept that is.

      To say that you have no idea what you're talking about would be an understatement. (See what I did there?)

      Delete
    5. Champion the Wonder HorseFebruary 22, 2013 at 5:58 PM

      Like I said...

      Delete
    6. If you listen to his interview, you will understand that James is a gentleman, a scholar, and the Supreme Protector.

      Delete
  12. Champ, did you or did you not listen to the "Crossing Zebras" interview?

    ReplyDelete
  13. I did too listen to the interview and all he wants to do is NERF-HIGHSEC o and kill miners that supply the ore you need to make the Ships you use to Suicide Gank with.

    Your a smart one there James.

    ReplyDelete
  14. My fellow High Sec Industrialists,

    When our forefathers found themselves staring at the gates of EVE they had visions of a grand new world. This world would be a place where future generations could work together or independently, to build our own lives and our own futures. We sustain our livelihoods by mining local resources and selling our wares on the local markets. By choosing to exist in this Space, we have thereby accepted the boundaries that CCP and Concord has put into place. They have created sectors in Space that have defined rules of engagement, all of which have been inspired by the needs of Industrialists and Fighters both.

    Everyone who comes to EVE starts in High Sec. It is the sector that creates a sense of security, to help each Pilot train skills and prepare for more dangerous sectors. We as new Pilots create alliances with other Pilots by building Corporations and these Corporations grow in High Sec until they are strong enough to make the move to more profitable Low or Null Sec. It is this maturation process that allows us to move forward with the skills needed to survive. Without the time in High Sec to cultivate these necessary skills, a premature move into Low/Null would likely end in catastrophe for the Pilot or Corporation.

    These are the proven methods of being a successful Pilot and growing a successful Corporation in EVE.

    But now there exists a group that threatens our existence. The New Order cult claims that the High Sec Industrialist is ruining EVE, but we stand up to say they are wrong. The New Order cult, which spurns the entrepreneurial spirit, which vaunts the spirit and conquest, which derives strength and perverted pleasure from persecution, uses with pitiless brutality the threat of murderous force. This cult cannot ever be allowed to gain a stronghold on EVE.

    The New Order cult’s effort is about gaining power against the 99%... the hard-working, blue-collar Industrialist who is simply trying to survive, by imposing a random set of self-aggrandizing rules to give this cult some semblance of meaning in EVE. They cannot gain relevance in the low security systems so they come to High Sec to pick on Pilots who have shown no aggression towards them in the least. The claim that the High Sec Industrialist is ruining EVE is preposterous. They claim the Industrialist lobbies CCP for a change in High Sec rules, thus making it harder for Low and Null Sec Pilots. They have not realized that it is exactly the actions the New Order cult that are the genesis of these rule changes. They refuse to accept the order of EVE, so they break them and then cry about the consequences. If they allowed High Sec Industrialists to build up our operations, we would be very willing to move to Low and Null when the time is right. But their constant harassment in High Sec delays that move indefinitely.

    The cult hides behind their propaganda by saying there will be no more New Eden if High Sec Industrialists survive, but if that is the case, why offer us a way to survive by paying a 10mil ISK ransom? The New Order claims to accept a ransom in return for non-aggression, but not one person believes there is a magical “list” of miner names that will prevent all attacks in the future. There is a story James 315, the leader of the New Order cult, says in his ramblings online. He speaks of an orca Pilot he is in the process of attacking, and talks of his conversation with the Pilot under fire. He says that he offered survival to the Pilot if he paid a ransom, and when the Pilot paid, he continued the gank and podkilled the capsule. The Pilot had paid the ransom but was still killed by the cult. Why? In James 315’s own words to the orca Pilot, “You’re my enemy. I lied.”

    ReplyDelete
  15. We shall not fall victim to his traps any longer. We shall not be led down the road to being “under the protection” of the New Order cult. In short time, we would be confronted with demands with which we shall no doubt be invited to comply. Those demands would likely mean the surrender of more of our rights for the interest of their cult.

    It is for this reason that I am announcing a new alliance. This alliance will stand for the rights of all Industrialists in New Eden, beginning with our High Sec Industrialists. We will band together to protect each other from the terrorism of the New Order cult, and fight for our right to exist in New Eden. We are a collection of miners, manufacturers, traders, and fighters, who all believe that there is room in New Eden for everyone, as long as they follow the rules and accept the consequences of breaking those rules.

    We are High Sec Industrialists and we will work together defend our way of life.



    Pattrick Henry
    High Sec Industrialist

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not a legitimate movement until you've made a new thread in Crime and Punishment to announce it!

      Also, I do a little highsec industry on occasion. May I join?

      Delete
    2. Champion the Wonder HorseFebruary 23, 2013 at 8:51 AM

      "It is for this reason that I am announcing a new alliance."

      You mean like an in-game EvE alliance of corps? If so, here's another of my predictions: Wardec incoming in 3, 2, 1...

      Delete

Note: If you are unable to post a comment, try enabling the "allow third-party cookies" option on your browser.