Inanna Zuni

CSM picture post

Some pictures I took at the recent CCP - CSM meeting ...

Ankhesentapemkah, aka Eva Jobse

and if you missed her rear on the video ;-P

Bane Glorius, aka Alex Kravitz

Darius JOHNSON, aka Sean Conover

Hardin, aka Niall Dologhan

Jade Constantine (with LaVista), aka Andrew Cruse

LaVista Vista, aka Charlie Eriksen

Serenity Steele, aka Shayne Smart

Xhagen, aka Pietur

Sadly, my camera didn't work too well on some photos, so I don't have a good one of Valentijn (Dierdra Vaal)

Some general shots:


CSM Voting

One of the film crews, at þingvellir

© ALL PHOTOGRAPHS COPYRIGHT Alison Wheeler, London aka Inanna Zuni, 2008
Inanna Zuni

Done (in)

Well, the first CSM - CCP Devs meeting finished last night up in Iceland. I wouldn't say the three days of discussion were 'fun' (they were indoors in a dark room which needed better air conditioning as we brought the heat and nonstop sunshine with us) but I think they were really productive.

Some things we were told are very unlikely to happen because of the system design at the server end to make it run as fast as possible, but many others will either be implemented pretty asap (which might still be a while) or will get folded in to future release plans.

All in all, a useful experience. And sfaiaa nobody died (yet! there is still the flight home ...) and I'll give some more updates on the topics discussed over the next week.

Inanna Zuni

Meeting with CCP in Iceland

I am currently sitting around a table with a dozen people from CCP - including Devs - and some press guys in the corner (we had a tv crew too earlier) and a number of issues have already been successfully discussed ;-P

More as it happens!
Inanna Zuni

My position on how the CSM should work

Thank you everyone who has contacted me over the last few days - I am gratified to see so many posts appearing in the forum Assembly Hall and that so many EVE pilots are taking the time and energy to be constructive about their thoughts and ideas. I do however want to make a few points to clarify my own position on some subjects.

1. Who got elected
Nine Council members and five alternate members were elected, from various corps and alliances. NONE of them are "delegates" from those corps or alliances - though clearly they bring that knowledge and experience with them - but each represent *all* podpilots throughout EVE.

That this time around two were from Goons is, for me, something to be *welcomed*. While (in ingame terms) you might dislike (or like) how they play, the bottom line is that they are paying members of the community, like it or not, and have the same rights for their members to stand in the recent election as does every other pilot.

To reject the right of any elected member to sit on the CSM therefore is something I will *never* support. CCP / Devs have the power to remove someone but outside that I will believe the best of anyone who has put their 'real name' and identity out there to stand and will respect their decision to do so.

2. Confidence in those elected
This incarnation of the CSM will sit for six months. In five months or so there will be a new list of candidates appearing for you to select from. As such asking for recalls or removals of *any* member of the CSM is pointless as the next election will arrive before that could happen. You don't like what someone does *IN THE CSM* then vote for someone else. What they get up to ingame should not, indeed must not, affect how you see their CSM capabilities.

The 11% turnout was, clearly, not great and I want to bring forward some ideas to improve that next time around, including taking note that not all players speak english and we need to make materials available in other languages. Similarly one vote each when selecting nine people is wrong too.

3. Proposals to the CSM
In general terms, I am unlikely to support changes to specific ships or racial ship classes. All pilots will naturally want their favourite ship buffed and their usual targets nerfed; it is to be expected. Outside that though there are certainly some ship classes which need to come into existence and I will not ignore any proposal entirely.

What I personally would like to see is *discussion* - including both pros and cons - about topics which affect large numbers of pilots all over EVE, not just lines of 'me too' posts. The CSM is an *alternative* to the other methods of drawing attention to issues and, for us to be effective, we need to have good ammo which includes why, how, what alongside the 'please'.

4. Time
Since the afternoon before the results of the ballot were announced I've had little time to actually get 'in pod' and do 'game' things! Yes, I and my colleagues on the Council asked for this - and we intend to serve you all well - but we can't read and reply to these and other forums 24/7 no matter how much we or you would like us to! Be clear how your write and about what you think and we can do our best, but sometimes we might miss something when speed-reading hundreds of posts and comments if you troll or don't get to the point.

5. Costs
You, as individual pilots, pay to play this game, as do the members of the CSM, and that doesn't change with the creation of the CSM. CCP are funding the overheads of their experiment of getting this closer involvement, not you. The members of the CSM are giving up their time, their loss of income too, and a hell of a lot of privacy in doing this.

6. The 5% 'rule'
See this comment on the EVE forums:

If we don't make this work it will be for the worse for all players, so give us your support so that we can make things better, for *all* of us.

Thank you.

Inanna Zuni

SiSi testing ;-P

2008.05.16 12:22:00

Victim: GM Icini
Alliance: NONE
Corp: Game Masters
Destroyed: Sleipnir
System: FD-MLJ
Security: 0.0
Damage Taken: 21823

Involved parties:

Name: Xoudan
Security: 5.1
Alliance: NONE
Corp: Hotel Moscow
Ship: Unknown
Weapon: Hobgoblin II
Damage Done: 10246

Name: Inanna Zuni (laid the final blow)
Security: 4.7
Alliance: Electus Matari
Corp: The Causality
Ship: Drake
Weapon: Terror Assault Missile
Damage Done: 6592

Name: mis Kity
Security: 1.5
Alliance: NONE
Corp: Mark Septim Corp
Ship: Drake
Weapon: Scourge Heavy Missile
Damage Done: 4985

Name: Joghert
Security: 0.6
Alliance: Phoenix Rising Alliance
Corp: Sylver Gryphons of Unity
Ship: Unknown
Weapon: Small Nosferatu II
Damage Done: 0

Destroyed items:

Targeting Range Dampening (Cargo)
Capacitor Power Relay II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Scan Resolution Dampening, Qty: 2
Gyrostabilizer II
Remote Sensor Dampener II, Qty: 2
Domination EMP M, Qty: 200
ECM Burst II
Dread Guristas Scourge Heavy Missile, Qty: 33
Medium Armor Repairer II
425mm AutoCannon II, Qty: 3
Particle Dispersion Projector II, Qty: 2

Dropped items:

Targeting Range Dampening (Cargo)
Capacitor Power Relay II
Warp Disruptor II
10MN MicroWarpdrive II
Domination EMP M, Qty: 80
Heavy Missile Launcher II
425mm AutoCannon II, Qty: 4
Inanna Zuni

The lobbying begins?

Via an EVEmail I just received this from a pilot by the name of Azzma:

"Hi I am a Japanese player and I have noticed there is no candidate that represents anything for Japanese players, which is a sizeable population of Eve.

Therefore, I am willing to be your Japanese spokesperson (A group unreachable and without a candidate) for 100 mil ISK (negotiable). I will campaign in Japanese forums, channels, corp channels, etc which are unnavigable to all other candidates. I am familiar with almost all Japanese players, who are very close knit because of the language barrier. Spreading your message to this group of voters who currently do not have a candidate will definitely be one of the sure moves to aid your campaign.

Please be a voice for a group of eve citizens often neglected in this large bureaucratic mess.

Please feel free to respond with any questions or concerns
Thank you,


Personally, I am standing as a candidate for *all* pilots, from whatever planetside geography they hail from. I am based in London, England, but ingame our 'Earth-bound' location is irrelevant except for some technical issues such as internet response delays and occasional mis-translations of the EVE interface (which are taken care of through existing systems.)

I hope that Japan-based pilots - and japanese-speaking ones too - will support me for my platform and support for *all* pilots no matter their nationality, language, gender or age, and not because I might pay someone to speak on my behalf. Needless to say I will not be taking up Azzma's offer.

Inanna Zuni

Here we are then ...

Today is the start of voting in the ballot for members of the Stellar Council of Management. You get two weeks in which to cast that vote, so it isn't urgent that you do it *right now*, instead you can take the opportunity to reflect on the range of candidates and, hopefully(!) like many others who have sent me their support, decide that you want to vote for me.

Although I haven't added anything here recently, you will find a number of comments and responses to other pilots on the EVE forums:

  • Suicide ganking
  • Local channel
  • Hi-sec isk farmers
  • Contact with the pilot community
  • Balance within the CSM

    and a topic at Jita Park Speakers Corner which so far includes Q&A about being a woman in EVE, invention, industry and security levels, and missioning.
  • Inanna Zuni


    At heart this breaks the spirit / intent of EVE online as a multi-*player* game; you aren't playing if you aren't watching. BACON does't offer anything to the player who is actively ingame; all the information this available via local and a decent overview setup. One could almost argue that CCP should include something similar as part of the game under disability anti-discrimination requirements for those players who do not have perfect eyesight and need auditory assistance (eg. we can see when our warp drive is active, but we get the voice anyway).

    Does it create unbalance between pilots using BACON and those not using it? Yes, if they aren't actively involved in the game, but otherwise not so much. Does BACON benefit the macro farmers and those who set out to abuse EVE? Yes, and if they hadn't written such a program before they sure know about it now and could invent new uses for the idea. At corp and alliance level though, integrating the data from multiple pilots and alts, it clearly advantages the BACON-using side who can create a real-time map of traffic in as many systems as they have alts.

    Is it, or should it be, illegal? So far the TOS appears to not be broken but, more to the point, because it accesses local client files, it would be very difficult for CCP or anyone else to prove that there hasbeen unauthorised use of the logfiles. Unless you remove some elements of the logging process, or recode the whole logfile subsystem to encrypt its output, then any external program using that data cannot be stopped. But even that would probably not be sufficient as there are many tech geeks around. Something that made it impossible to run the local logserver without each-time permission from CCP is impracticable and, now the cat is out the bag, one could probably write some Wireshark code to 'watch' the EVE data anyway.

    As regards nerfing local, that would just play into the hands of users of BACON and similar programs, giving them a massive advantage over the pilot who actually plays the game in the way that CCP intended. BACON doesn't read 'local', it uses the whole stream of data required by the client, and while there are some arguments to change how local works BACON isn't one of them.

    Personally, the level of automation I currently find acceptable ingame is the autopilot. And I don't use that. Tools like BACON, Beetracker, and the rest, using the logfiles for other than their intended purpose are exploits. They can't be stopped by not accepting they exist nor could you say they contravene the TOS without a way to prove that they are actually in use. To stop them requires a change of the logfile format. These tools break the heart of the reason for EVE and produce inequality between pilots and I would support the removal of their ability to continue to work.


    (see for the full thread on this topic)