CSM Meeting Minutes 5.010 raw log

CSM Meeting Minutes 5.010 raw log

Meeting took place on 24th Oct 2010

[ 17:01:19 ] Mynxee > .==================================CSM MEETING 010 CALLED TO ORDER==================================.
[ 17:01:31 ] Mynxee > x up for roll call please
[ 17:01:34 ] Mynxee > x
[ 17:01:34 ] Vuk Lau > x
[ 17:01:36 ] Trebor Daehdoow > x
[ 17:01:36 ] mazzilliu > x
[ 17:01:37 ] Korvin > x
[ 17:01:42 ] Dierdra Vaal > XXX
[ 17:02:01 ] ElvenLord > .I..
[ 17:02:04 ] TeaDaze > x
[ 17:02:07 ] ElvenLord > :P
[ 17:02:30 ] Mynxee > alrighty
[ 17:02:51 ] Mynxee > no reminders i can think of that wont be covered in other business, anyone else got any?
[ 17:03:10 ] Dierdra Vaal > hm
[ 17:03:22 ] Dierdra Vaal > we mentioned having a public CSM roundtable in the past - but I guess thats other business
[ 17:03:24 ] Mynxee > hm?
[ 17:03:31 ] Mynxee > yeah
[ 17:03:33 ] TeaDaze > I've not had any apologies from anyone missing
[ 17:03:34 ] Dierdra Vaal > ok
[ 17:03:43 ] Mynxee > me either Tea
[ 17:03:52 ] TeaDaze > Reminder to let us know if you can't attend meetings
[ 17:04:14 ] Mynxee > Email to Mynxee and Tea, in such cases, would be good, or the list if you prefer.
[ 17:04:31 ] Mynxee > Okay then...cruising onto the issues
[ 17:04:44 ] Mynxee > First up, Dierdra's Wreck outposts. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Wreck_outposts_%28CSM%29
[ 17:04:49 ] Dierdra Vaal > :D
[ 17:04:56 ] Mynxee > dierdra, present :)
[ 17:05:14 ] Dierdra Vaal > ok, basically its proposes that some way of destroying outposts in implemented
[ 17:05:34 ] Dierdra Vaal > as we cannot actually destroy ('remove') an outpost due to technical reasons, instead it proposes to simply 'wreck' them
[ 17:05:49 ] Dierdra Vaal > causing widespread damage, disabling docking, station services, etc etc
[ 17:06:08 ] Dierdra Vaal > the outpost would cease to function as an outpost, though the wreck would remain in space
[ 17:06:33 ] Dierdra Vaal > on top of the suggestions for the base wrecking mechanic, I've also included some suggestions on how to retrieve assets or on how to wreck the outpost
[ 17:06:44 ] Dierdra Vaal > however, I want to stress that those are only suggestions of how it COULD work
[ 17:06:54 ] Dierdra Vaal > not a strict description of how it SHOULd work
[ 17:07:06 ] Dierdra Vaal > any questions or comments?
[ 17:07:15 ] TeaDaze > !
[ 17:07:17 ] Trebor Daehdoow > !
[ 17:07:25 ] Mynxee > i like the idea of being ble to rebuild them. [end]
[ 17:07:28 ] Mynxee > teadaze go
[ 17:07:37 ] TeaDaze > Firstly I dislike this as a stand along thing. I think that it should be part of an iteration on SOV
[ 17:07:53 ] TeaDaze > With SOV as it is I can't support this type of thing
[ 17:08:05 ] Dierdra Vaal > I'm not excluding that it could be part of a sov overhaul
[ 17:08:15 ] Dierdra Vaal > (in fact, knowing CCP it probably would be)
[ 17:08:34 ] TeaDaze > As to rebuilding. I think the wreck could "decay" so if you try to rebuild it ASAP it needs less materials than if it has been left for weeks [end]
[ 17:08:49 ] Mynxee > trebor go
[ 17:08:50 ] Vuk Lau > nice idea
[ 17:08:52 ] Trebor Daehdoow > I am generally in favor of the concept. I think it would add some spice to nullsec conflict. Tea's point on sov iteration is also well-taken, perhaps that could be added as a caveat? [end]
[ 17:08:53 ] Dierdra Vaal > that is an interesting suggestion - I can add that if you want?
[ 17:08:57 ] Korvin > !
[ 17:09:12 ] Dierdra Vaal > (mynxee can you give me an opportunity to respond to the questions/comments? :P)
[ 17:09:37 ] ElvenLord > !
[ 17:09:40 ] Mynxee > I like teh "decay" idea too......and sure. DV. it's just hard to tell if you're going to [end]
[ 17:09:43 ] Dierdra Vaal > also trebor, I'll add that as a Con, ok?
[ 17:09:51 ] Trebor Daehdoow > FBM
[ 17:10:44 ] Mynxee > do you have more responses, DV, or can i call on Korvin?
[ 17:11:20 ] Mynxee > (i think DV is updating wiki) Korvin, go
[ 17:11:25 ] Dierdra Vaal > go for korvin :)
[ 17:12:04 ] Korvin > 1. what will be with a player assets, who have to take a break from eve for a long period
[ 17:12:06 ] Mynxee > yup korvin, go.
[ 17:12:20 ] Dierdra Vaal > ! (respond)
[ 17:12:28 ] Mynxee > respond DV
[ 17:12:33 ] Dierdra Vaal > basically, the assets would become trapped - they do not get destroyed
[ 17:12:34 ] Korvin > 2. why player will want to destroy the outposts instead of take them over
[ 17:12:40 ] Korvin > [end]
[ 17:12:46 ] Dierdra Vaal > in the proposal I've suggested 2 ways for players to get their stuff back
[ 17:13:08 ] Dierdra Vaal > either by treating the outpost as a sort of hangar array, or by allowing pilots to rebuild it
[ 17:13:25 ] Dierdra Vaal > I talked to malcanis about this, who originally proposed this
[ 17:13:44 ] Dierdra Vaal > they're currently chewing through -A- outposts, and he says he wants to do nothing more than destroy them because he hates them
[ 17:13:54 ] Dierdra Vaal > I also know some alliances (like in provi) have some surplus outposts
[ 17:14:07 ] Dierdra Vaal > destroying outposts could also be a strategical objective to use against your enemies
[ 17:14:13 ] Dierdra Vaal > go in, destroy their outposts, laugh
[ 17:14:17 ] Dierdra Vaal > end
[ 17:14:22 ] Mynxee > elven go
[ 17:14:39 ] ElvenLord > this idea has been discussed during february summit a lot, and as much as I like the idea under current sov system I would have to say no
[ 17:14:45 ] ElvenLord > If it was apart of some future overhaul of the sov system where this would be an integral part of the sov mechanics fuck yea
[ 17:15:11 ] ElvenLord > otherwise it would just be one thing arifitialy attached to what we have now
[ 17:15:18 ] Dierdra Vaal > !
[ 17:15:34 ] Vuk Lau > ignore elven he is ovulating :p
[ 17:15:46 ] ElvenLord > kiss my ass Vuk
[ 17:15:50 ] Dierdra Vaal > I added (by trebors suggestion) to the 'cons' that it could be best part of a sov overhaul. end
[ 17:15:50 ] TeaDaze > !
[ 17:15:54 ] ElvenLord > next time you will build and outpost
[ 17:16:02 ] ElvenLord > and see how awesome it is
[ 17:16:07 ] ElvenLord > [end]
[ 17:16:15 ] Mynxee > dv go
[ 17:16:24 ] Dierdra Vaal > (I typed my response, sorry)
[ 17:16:31 ] Mynxee > right
[ 17:16:34 ] Mynxee > tea go
[ 17:17:01 ] TeaDaze > I also dislike the idea of letting the executor self destruct them without having to use the wrecking structure, because whilst it would be hilarious, we don't really need to give *more* power to metagaming alliance takeovers[end]
[ 17:17:13 ] Vuk Lau > !
[ 17:17:30 ] Dierdra Vaal > ! (respond)
[ 17:17:36 ] Mynxee > vuk go
[ 17:17:38 ] Vuk Lau > if you are already retarded to get Haargoted you deserve to have outposts wrecked
[ 17:18:01 ] Korvin > !
[ 17:18:07 ] Vuk Lau > also I generaly agree that it would be the best as part of new sov rework
[ 17:18:13 ] Vuk Lau > but I will vote for this
[ 17:18:24 ] Vuk Lau > end
[ 17:18:31 ] Mynxee > dv
[ 17:18:40 ] Dierdra Vaal > It was only one suggestion - the other suggestion doesnt involve executors (or any roles) at all. Also keep in mind that the excutor self destruct (as described) includes a long timer, giving others ample time to ....
[ 17:18:50 ] Dierdra Vaal > ...notice SPAI directors and their shady business.
[ 17:18:58 ] Dierdra Vaal > and then deactivate the self destruct.
[ 17:18:59 ] Dierdra Vaal > end
[ 17:19:10 ] Mynxee > korvin go
[ 17:19:37 ] Korvin > i have to mantion, that CCP have plans to introduce the mysterious Incarna
[ 17:19:51 ] Korvin > and might have some plans to outpost aswell
[ 17:20:05 ] Dierdra Vaal > ! (respond)
[ 17:20:12 ] Vuk Lau > totaly 2 unrelated issues
[ 17:20:19 ] Korvin > and afaik we were told on a feb meeting
[ 17:20:36 ] Korvin > that destroying outposts is not a part of their plan
[ 17:20:39 ] Korvin > [and]
[ 17:20:47 ] Korvin > [end]
[ 17:20:53 ] Mynxee > dv go
[ 17:21:07 ] Dierdra Vaal > while this is true, atm incarna is not planned for outposts if I recall correctly. Even then, maybe you cant walk around anymore because everything is depressurized? Either way, that would be an issue for way in the future which CCP can deal with at...
[ 17:21:09 ] Dierdra Vaal > that time.
[ 17:21:10 ] Dierdra Vaal > end
[ 17:21:44 ] Dierdra Vaal > can we vote?
[ 17:21:46 ] Mynxee > while not a 0.0 player, i personally see some creative ideas in this proposal; i like that they are presented as "coulds"; ccp is going to do their own thing with such ideas if they were ever to implement them. I feel comfortable supporting the proposal
[ 17:21:51 ] Mynxee > yeas we can vote
[ 17:21:57 ] Dierdra Vaal > to note:
[ 17:22:03 ] Dierdra Vaal > I added teadaze's 'decay' idea
[ 17:22:10 ] Dierdra Vaal > and trebors sov overhaul con
[ 17:22:28 ] Mynxee > Y or N for DV's Wreck Outposts:
[ 17:22:30 ] TeaDaze > n (as a stand alone proposal, Y as part of the Sov Iteration)
[ 17:22:37 ] Trebor Daehdoow > Y
[ 17:22:39 ] Dierdra Vaal > Y
[ 17:22:42 ] Mynxee > Y
[ 17:22:45 ] Korvin > N (not at this time)
[ 17:22:46 ] Vuk Lau > y
[ 17:22:47 ] mazzilliu > yes
[ 17:23:04 ] Dierdra Vaal > wewt \o/
[ 17:23:08 ] TeaDaze > 5 for, 2 against
[ 17:23:10 ] Dierdra Vaal > elvenlord?
[ 17:23:15 ] Dierdra Vaal > isnt elven an alt here?
[ 17:23:15 ] ElvenLord > no at this time, Y if part of iteration on sov
[ 17:23:21 ] TeaDaze > 5 for, 3 against
[ 17:23:25 ] Trebor Daehdoow > !
[ 17:23:31 ] Mynxee > go robert
[ 17:23:39 ] Dierdra Vaal > I'd be happy to have this rolled into a sov overhaul idea at a later point btw
[ 17:23:57 ] Trebor Daehdoow > DV, you might want to note in the writeup that if it is part of a sov overhaul, the vote would have been 8-0. Your call. [end]
[ 17:24:08 ] TeaDaze > Agreed
[ 17:24:20 ] Dierdra Vaal > okk
[ 17:24:27 ] Mynxee > ok, moving on...
[ 17:24:43 ] Mynxee > Robert's 5P issue: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Possibly_Practical_POS_Performance_Proposal_%28CSM%29
[ 17:24:56 ] Mynxee > robert, present !
[ 17:24:58 ] Trebor Daehdoow > OK, this is basically a list of (hopefully) simple things that could be done to make POS use less of a pain. We'd all love a total POS makeover, but that isn't on the cards short-term AFAICT
[ 17:25:05 ] Trebor Daehdoow > As mentioned in email, since the list of items in the proposal was crowdsourced, it has to be trimmed down; any items that have significant opposition by anyone here should be removed (or perhaps edited to address concerns).
[ 17:25:12 ] Trebor Daehdoow > For example, TeaDaze and I agree that items 4,7,12,19,28 should be eliminated, for the reasons given in my email this morning, and #1 needs to have a specific "inside the shields" restriction.
[ 17:25:18 ] Trebor Daehdoow > Does anyone else have any other items that they think need amending or outright deletion? [end]
[ 17:25:24 ] Vuk Lau > !
[ 17:25:51 ] Mynxee > go vuk
[ 17:25:54 ] Vuk Lau > can we vote individualy for the each proposal?
[ 17:26:05 ] Vuk Lau > they are prety obvious so we can do it fast
[ 17:26:13 ] TeaDaze > !
[ 17:26:23 ] Trebor Daehdoow > !
[ 17:26:25 ] Vuk Lau > end
[ 17:26:31 ] Mynxee > tea go
[ 17:27:00 ] TeaDaze > I'd rather not vote through lots of options now, it would be better to batch them into related groups and vote on those
[ 17:27:24 ] Vuk Lau > btw item 20 is sorted by UI team
[ 17:27:28 ] Dierdra Vaal > !
[ 17:27:52 ] TeaDaze > For the record I disagree with grab bag proposals where lots of the items have never been discussed because it makes it very hard to support or reject if there are a few items that you disagree with [end]
[ 17:27:55 ] Mynxee > vuk, would prefer you not speak out of turn please.
[ 17:28:14 ] Mynxee > dv go
[ 17:28:20 ] Dierdra Vaal > "Review and revamp POS permissions, please. " while I kinda know what this is about, is there a list anywhere of exactly what permissions should be changed and how?
[ 17:28:21 ] Mynxee > oops
[ 17:28:35 ] Mynxee > trebor is next. btw. i just suck at !
[ 17:28:54 ] Mynxee > trebor go
[ 17:29:41 ] Trebor Daehdoow > OK, I understand where T is coming from; to make life easier for everyone, it might be simpler to just give everyone a veto. If there is an item on the list you think is horribad, we'll cross it off.
[ 17:30:14 ] Trebor Daehdoow > If there is an item (like pos permissions) that needs more discussion, we can either do that or defer that to another, more in-depth and specific proposal. [end]
[ 17:30:16 ] ElvenLord > why, CCP will do it anyways :P they always do it
[ 17:30:34 ] ElvenLord > POS code is one of the last legacy parts of eve they do not dare to touch
[ 17:30:51 ] ElvenLord > same like roles and grantable roles
[ 17:30:51 ] Mynxee > Trebor: you've asked for input on this proposal internally prior to this meeting; did you get substantive feedback and questions?
[ 17:30:55 ] Mynxee > elven.
[ 17:30:59 ] Mynxee > remember !
[ 17:31:13 ] Trebor Daehdoow > Except for TeaDaze (list given above), no.
[ 17:31:45 ] Trebor Daehdoow > (and he read my mind, basically) [end]
[ 17:32:20 ] Mynxee > I wonder how long the excuse of POS legacy code is going to fly for CCP. [end]
[ 17:32:28 ] Dierdra Vaal > !
[ 17:32:34 ] Korvin > !
[ 17:32:35 ] Mynxee > dv go
[ 17:32:58 ] Dierdra Vaal > CCP will have to refactor POSes eventually - when it happens is of course a matter of priorities but they will do it some day, that is certain.
[ 17:32:59 ] Dierdra Vaal > end
[ 17:33:08 ] Mynxee > korvin go
[ 17:33:11 ] Vuk Lau > !
[ 17:33:38 ] Korvin > 1st of all, like i said in internal forum - 4 is no good, andi agree with Teadaze list aswell
[ 17:33:42 ] Korvin > 2nd
[ 17:33:53 ] Korvin > Review and revamp POS permissions, please.
[ 17:34:02 ] Korvin > can you be more specific?
[ 17:34:32 ] Korvin > [and]
[ 17:34:36 ] Mynxee > respond freely to questions robert
[ 17:34:48 ] Trebor Daehdoow > OK, well, 4 will be gone, no problem.
[ 17:35:21 ] Mynxee > (you're next in queue Vuk, after trebor answers korvin)
[ 17:35:36 ] Trebor Daehdoow > As for review and revamp, there were some discussions on the AH thread about that; I am looking for them now, will post the link in a minute. It can get lost if there is no way to reasonably describe it as part of this proposal [end]
[ 17:35:47 ] Mynxee > go vuk
[ 17:36:06 ] Trebor Daehdoow > http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1382061&page=1#15
[ 17:36:09 ] Vuk Lau > we shouldnt care about legacy code issues as its proven it doesnt mean shit, and for the sake of being efficient I support the whole list even if I slightly disagree with some of the issues
[ 17:36:15 ] Vuk Lau > end
[ 17:36:37 ] Dierdra Vaal > !
[ 17:36:39 ] Mynxee > That's why i think it is a good idea to keep pushing POS related stuff to CCP. To keep it on the radar and make sure community wants are continuously communicated. [end]
[ 17:36:43 ] Mynxee > dv go
[ 17:37:21 ] Dierdra Vaal > I agree that its good to do this just to get CCP to look at POSes. Once that happens, I'm sure there will be more discussion about the specifics. As such I'd be happy to support this issue - even though some items are vaguely defined. end
[ 17:37:49 ] Mynxee > do we need more discussion or can there be a vote, after Robert summarizes updates falling out of this dicsussion?
[ 17:38:33 ] Trebor Daehdoow > Delete: 4,7,12,19,28Amend 1 - must be inside shields.20 - already done.
[ 17:38:58 ] Trebor Daehdoow > POS permissions - I will add a caveat that this may require a more specific proposal [end]
[ 17:39:07 ] Dierdra Vaal > awww, 7 was such a cool one.
[ 17:39:13 ] Dierdra Vaal > popular too
[ 17:39:42 ] Vuk Lau > !
[ 17:39:47 ] Mynxee > vuk go
[ 17:39:54 ] Vuk Lau > I disagree with deleting those
[ 17:40:03 ] Vuk Lau > except majority is against them
[ 17:40:07 ] Vuk Lau > end
[ 17:40:11 ] Korvin > !
[ 17:40:18 ] TeaDaze > !
[ 17:40:29 ] Mynxee > korvin go
[ 17:40:32 ] Korvin > can we vote to allow Vuk to disagree? :D [end]
[ 17:40:45 ] Mynxee > lol. tea go
[ 17:41:10 ] Trebor Daehdoow > ! (answering vuk)
[ 17:41:13 ] TeaDaze > Now that pos are not part of sov claiming (that is you don't need pos spam anymore) I don't see the need to make putting up pos so trivial as to setup a queue and then go afk for 8 hours [end]
[ 17:41:30 ] Mynxee > trebor go
[ 17:41:57 ] Dierdra Vaal > !
[ 17:42:03 ] Trebor Daehdoow > Vuk, I am OK with listing them as being objected to by 1 or more CSMs, but available for any CSM to raise as a specific issue [end]
[ 17:42:14 ] Mynxee > DV go
[ 17:42:32 ] Dierdra Vaal > I disagree with that Tea - setting up a POs is boring, soul destroying work mostly consisting of waiting for timers to finish. While I have no problem with removing the others, I feel item 7 (queue) has enough merit to be included.
[ 17:42:34 ] Dierdra Vaal > end
[ 17:42:47 ] Vuk Lau > !
[ 17:43:10 ] Mynxee > vuk go
[ 17:43:28 ] Vuk Lau > it can be balanced nicely not to make the task of setting POS a easy thing but still to shorten the process
[ 17:43:37 ] Vuk Lau > but it should be on the list IMHO
[ 17:43:39 ] Vuk Lau > end
[ 17:44:17 ] TeaDaze > !
[ 17:44:18 ] Trebor Daehdoow > ! (answer)
[ 17:44:26 ] Mynxee > tea go
[ 17:45:27 ] TeaDaze > Queue means being able to seup guns etc without having to be vulnerable - that is my main objection to most of the items I picked. Anything that means you can stay safe while things ate being deployed or fueled etc. [end]
[ 17:45:36 ] TeaDaze > are*
[ 17:46:15 ] Mynxee > that concern might be added (as could others) [end]
[ 17:47:28 ] Mynxee > trebor go
[ 17:47:34 ] Trebor Daehdoow > I would be happy to re-raise any issue, like the queue, that anyone thinks is important as a new issue for the next meeting. We could gather more input from players during that time -- and have a more in-depth debate.
[ 17:47:55 ] Trebor Daehdoow > The real point of this proposal is to get the non-controversial stuff listed. [end]
[ 17:48:07 ] Mynxee > taht seems the most efficient approach. [end]
[ 17:48:23 ] Korvin > !
[ 17:48:31 ] Mynxee > korvin go
[ 17:48:52 ] Korvin > i suggest to make items 7 and 10 as a separate issues
[ 17:49:05 ] Trebor Daehdoow > ! (answer)
[ 17:49:12 ] Korvin > [k]
[ 17:49:20 ] Mynxee > go trebor
[ 17:49:26 ] Trebor Daehdoow > Each would be a separate issue. [end]
[ 17:49:42 ] TeaDaze > FBM
[ 17:50:26 ] Mynxee > ok let's vote. i think we've discussed this sufficiently. Y or N for Robert's 5P proposal?
[ 17:50:30 ] Dierdra Vaal > Y
[ 17:50:33 ] Trebor Daehdoow > Y
[ 17:50:33 ] Mynxee > Y
[ 17:50:40 ] TeaDaze > y (with discussed amendments)
[ 17:50:49 ] mazzilliu > Y
[ 17:51:04 ] Korvin > y (with questionable items removed)
[ 17:51:26 ] Dierdra Vaal > morsus mihi?
[ 17:51:41 ] Korvin > they are buzy selling their account :D
[ 17:51:49 ] ElvenLord > I lost interest after 6th line
[ 17:51:52 ] ElvenLord > but y
[ 17:52:04 ] Dierdra Vaal > poke vuk to respond
[ 17:52:07 ] TeaDaze > 7 for waiting on Vuk
[ 17:53:06 ] Dierdra Vaal > well 7/0 is a quorum
[ 17:53:13 ] Dierdra Vaal > vuk'll have to respond on time next time v0v
[ 17:53:14 ] Mynxee > yes
[ 17:53:33 ] Mynxee > consider teh vote concluded
[ 17:53:51 ] TeaDaze > passed 7/0 then
[ 17:53:51 ] Trebor Daehdoow > 7-0-? (grin)
[ 17:54:00 ] Mynxee > alright, next issue
[ 17:54:11 ] Mynxee > Dierdra's Combat Boosters Revamp. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Combat_boosters_revamp_%28CSM%29
[ 17:54:13 ] Dierdra Vaal > (incoming wall-o-text)
[ 17:54:18 ] Mynxee > dv, you have teh floor LOL
[ 17:54:18 ] Dierdra Vaal > First of all, I hope you've all read the wiki page as it explains things much better than I can do here through chat. If not, please take some time to read it :)
[ 17:54:30 ] Dierdra Vaal > The proposal suggests changing boosters so they become (much) more popular. The key change would be a change in the way the side effects are applied, which I think will significantly increase the appeal of boosters for players.
[ 17:54:38 ] Dierdra Vaal > Keep in mind that I explicitly stayed vague about numbers (like the duration of the side effects/crash, their severity, etc) because that is all up to CCP.
[ 17:54:49 ] Dierdra Vaal > In addition to the core proposal of changing the side effects, I have two optional proposals. One aimed at profiling low sec as the place to be for booster related industry, and the other to expand on the existing boosters.
[ 17:55:00 ] Dierdra Vaal > As you can see, at the core of the proposal is the idea to make booster use and industry much more widespread and common. A clear downside of this is that boosters may become much more important to compete in pvp. I feel this is acceptable as the...
[ 17:55:08 ] Dierdra Vaal > same thing happened with rigs and that has gone fine.
[ 17:55:11 ] Dierdra Vaal > end
[ 17:55:18 ] Dierdra Vaal > questions/comments/flames?
[ 17:55:35 ] ElvenLord > !
[ 17:55:40 ] Dierdra Vaal > (and yes I'm trying to put all your kids on drugs, its the dutch way)
[ 17:55:45 ] Mynxee > EL go:
[ 17:56:04 ] ElvenLord > on what basis did you get that combat boosters have low usage?
[ 17:56:13 ] ElvenLord > I can not agree with that statement
[ 17:56:23 ] ElvenLord > as all on NC use them on regular basis
[ 17:56:27 ] ElvenLord > [/end]
[ 17:56:56 ] Mynxee > answer at your leisure, DV.
[ 17:57:09 ] Dierdra Vaal > I based this on market orders (there is no real booster market), as well as the fact that you hardly see pilots flying around all boostered up outside big 0.0 fleet fights
[ 17:57:28 ] Dierdra Vaal > while the NC may use them a lot, the NC is still only a small subset of the entire eve population
[ 17:57:30 ] Korvin > /emote will vote yes for this awesome idea (gone for bio-afk)
[ 17:57:53 ] TeaDaze > !
[ 17:58:02 ] Dierdra Vaal > and I think booster usage has a lot of room to griow
[ 17:58:05 ] Dierdra Vaal > end
[ 17:58:19 ] Mynxee > go tea
[ 17:59:09 ] TeaDaze > I'd like to see Nanite Control drop from more than one region - perhaps lowsec only. It is a key skill for using boosters. [end]
[ 17:59:36 ] Dierdra Vaal > ! (respond)
[ 17:59:39 ] ElvenLord > !
[ 17:59:42 ] Mynxee > go dv
[ 17:59:50 ] Dierdra Vaal > I agree - part of the proposal is to make booster resources more abundant (esp. in low sec).
[ 18:00:01 ] Dierdra Vaal > I didnt mention booster related skills specifically but it is implied
[ 18:00:07 ] Dierdra Vaal > I could clarify that if needed. end
[ 18:00:12 ] Mynxee > go elven
[ 18:00:28 ] ElvenLord > dont get me wrong I love the proposal espetially adiction part, a good dynamic design proposal As for the production we dont sell those, we produce a lot and just drop in hangars for ppl to use free.
[ 18:00:34 ] ElvenLord > They are kinda mandatory for capital fights and I notice ppl use them a lot in regular fleets
[ 18:00:52 ] ElvenLord > and I noticed a lot of other entities outside NC use them a lot
[ 18:01:00 ] ElvenLord > also self production
[ 18:01:19 ] ElvenLord > you do know you can not sell them on some markets as they are contraband :P
[ 18:01:26 ] ElvenLord > [/end]
[ 18:01:33 ] TeaDaze > !
[ 18:01:33 ] Mynxee > Boosters see regular use among pirates as well; but what i love about this proposal is low sec focus and the addiction factor as well. Plus it would be nice to see some additional types...there is a lot of creative room there. [end]
[ 18:01:36 ] Dierdra Vaal > /emote is in jita atm and just bought a standard blue pill booster
[ 18:01:56 ] Mynxee > tea go
[ 18:02:01 ] TeaDaze > Ensure they are not contraband in lowsec ;) [end]
[ 18:02:17 ] Dierdra Vaal > ! (respond)
[ 18:02:23 ] Mynxee > go dv
[ 18:02:37 ] Dierdra Vaal > atm they are contraband - meaning customs officers may give you a penalty when they find it in your cargohold
[ 18:02:43 ] Dierdra Vaal > you can still trade them on the market just fine
[ 18:02:51 ] Dierdra Vaal > its just moving them around empire high sec that is tricky
[ 18:03:13 ] Dierdra Vaal > increasing the regular (public) booster market means smugglging could become a real professions.
[ 18:03:26 ] Dierdra Vaal > right now, 1 POS can keep the jita market supplied, which is a bit silly
[ 18:03:26 ] Dierdra Vaal > end
[ 18:04:00 ] Dierdra Vaal > /emote sees a bright future with all the empire bears drugged up
[ 18:04:20 ] Mynxee > quick survey of VETO has answers all over the place, but generaly 50% usage on avg, btw. With about a dozen responses in corp chat [end]
[ 18:04:34 ] Mynxee > do you feel we are ready to vote, DV?
[ 18:04:44 ] Dierdra Vaal > I am fine with that :)
[ 18:05:04 ] Mynxee > ok, please vote Y or N on Combat Booster Revamp.
[ 18:05:06 ] TeaDaze > y
[ 18:05:07 ] Mynxee > Y
[ 18:05:08 ] Vuk Lau > y
[ 18:05:09 ] Korvin > Y
[ 18:05:09 ] ElvenLord > y
[ 18:05:10 ] Trebor Daehdoow > Y
[ 18:05:11 ] Dierdra Vaal > y
[ 18:05:16 ] mazzilliu > y
[ 18:05:16 ] Dierdra Vaal > wewt \o/
[ 18:05:23 ] Vuk Lau > also add my vote Y for the previous issue
[ 18:05:29 ] TeaDaze > passed 8 for
[ 18:05:31 ] TeaDaze > Sure Vuk
[ 18:05:34 ] Vuk Lau > thanx
[ 18:06:08 ] Mynxee > ok
[ 18:06:13 ] Mynxee > moving on to other business, just a couple of quick things
[ 18:06:43 ] Mynxee > 1) Petur delivered the list of CSM backlogged items and statuses via email, so that's another "CCP Deliverable" from teh June Summit delivered; wiki is updated.
[ 18:07:22 ] Mynxee > 2) October Meeting Minutes: hooray for Robert's efforts. If you haven't provided feedback and are fine with the doc as is, please do post to say that.
[ 18:07:30 ] Mynxee > (in the therad,_
[ 18:07:33 ] Mynxee > *thread
[ 18:08:04 ] Mynxee > 3) CCP asked for a list of sessions for teh December Summit by 15 November; there is a thread for it, please post your thoughts and ideas for what sessions you want to see
[ 18:08:52 ] Dierdra Vaal > /emote has some other business too, once you're finished mynxee
[ 18:09:11 ] Mynxee > also regarding teh summit, as I told petur when we were in Iceland the other week, my work situation is such that I wasn't sure I could go and now it looks like it for sure. So iain Compton presumably will go instead.
[ 18:09:43 ] Dierdra Vaal > oh god, a goon back on the council ;)
[ 18:10:01 ] Dierdra Vaal > though he seems to be a more srs bsns goon
[ 18:10:03 ] Mynxee > there are other summmit actions items that will come more alive...but...keep an eye on the internal forums so you can contribute thoughts etc in a timely way.
[ 18:10:04 ] ElvenLord > isnt he 0utbreak?
[ 18:10:05 ] Mynxee > and last...
[ 18:10:30 ] Mynxee > CSM issues wiki pages got a lot of updates; I still need to finish CSM2 and do plan to do that
[ 18:10:42 ] TeaDaze > (Alpha is outbreak, Helen is Goon)
[ 18:10:43 ] Mynxee > Just need 48 hours days or a time machine
[ 18:10:46 ] Vuk Lau > looks like I will not be able to come in December too, still dont know for sure
[ 18:10:47 ] Mynxee > anyways
[ 18:10:55 ] Mynxee > :(
[ 18:11:07 ] Dierdra Vaal > maybe vuk can stop playing tanks and do some work on the CSM2 wiki :P
[ 18:11:15 ] Mynxee > i may not even be employd by then, but we'll see. Won't be crying about THAT, for sure. LOL.
[ 18:11:19 ] Mynxee > ok, DV your other business ?
[ 18:11:22 ] Dierdra Vaal > yeah
[ 18:11:26 ] TeaDaze > Same Mynxee :P
[ 18:11:42 ] Vuk Lau > i didnt played more then 20 matches of WoT in last 10 days
[ 18:11:44 ] Dierdra Vaal > first, to remind everyone that the issue submission deadline for our december meet is the 31st of this month - 1 week from now
[ 18:11:57 ] Korvin > thats 2 matches per day
[ 18:12:01 ] Dierdra Vaal > if there is anything you desperately need to bring up, say it now
[ 18:12:29 ] Dierdra Vaal > if not we wont need to have a meeting next sunday, but if there is something..
[ 18:12:46 ] Dierdra Vaal > guess not then :)
[ 18:12:48 ] Dierdra Vaal > ok second thing..
[ 18:13:07 ] Dierdra Vaal > we mentioned a public CSM roundtable, and I think it would be really good to do it before the december summit
[ 18:13:07 ] Mynxee > i think we can work that out on the forums, DV
[ 18:13:13 ] Mynxee > people just need to be atteentive
[ 18:13:30 ] Dierdra Vaal > I dont mind taking point on that and get it set up, if you guys are ok with that.
[ 18:13:40 ] Vuk Lau > cool with me
[ 18:13:54 ] Mynxee > fine by me
[ 18:13:57 ] TeaDaze > sure
[ 18:14:06 ] Trebor Daehdoow > Great
[ 18:14:12 ] Dierdra Vaal > ok, I'll make some terrible forum posts about it in the near future then :)
[ 18:14:20 ] Dierdra Vaal > thats all I had to say
[ 18:14:36 ] Mynxee > i dont have very much bandwidth right now, timewise. thanks for taking the lead on that.
[ 18:14:37 ] TeaDaze > Good plan DV, we need somebody to take over bad poasting from T'Amber ;)
[ 18:14:44 ] Mynxee > lols
[ 18:14:53 ] Dierdra Vaal > :P
[ 18:14:56 ] Mynxee > any other business before we adjourn?
[ 18:15:03 ] Dierdra Vaal > oh yes
[ 18:15:11 ] Dierdra Vaal > Muse - Starlight is a kickass song
[ 18:15:12 ] Dierdra Vaal > that is all
[ 18:15:39 ] Mynxee > ok, folks, thanks for your participation
[ 18:15:42 ] Mynxee > .===============================CSM MEETING 010 ADJOURNED===============================.