On Fon and CSM

TTI is known for its intellectuals. This is a place for thinkers to gather and exchange quotes, thoughts, or other topics that might not appeal to the average gamer.
Post Reply
User avatar
Alessandra Necova
 
 

Posts: 288
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 1:37 am

On Fon and CSM

Post by Alessandra Necova »

So for those of you that have been watching the CSM8 elections, you probably already know about Fon Revedhort. If not, you can listen to an interview he did on Crossing Zebra's show here (mainly towards the end): http://crossingzebras.com/csm8/

This is a sad day for EVE. Like Xander Phoena, I've recommended to friends not to vote for Fon Revedhort for his racist comments. He was the first person I checked off as "no way in hell gets my vote."

EVE Players together should have ended his campaign, but CCP has set a dangerous precedent by stepping in by stepping in and forcefully removing someone from the ballot based on "moral" grounds. I can understand if they didn't want him elected, and I don't think there was any real possibility of him being elected. He should have been left to the players to eat like sharks, not removed from the water.
Yes, I understand EVE and the CSM process is CCP's decision and game, and ultimately, they have the right to do with it as they please. However, changing an election's results like this undermines the entire CSM process. This is effectively saying that anyone can be a CSM...as long as they are handpicked by CCP.

This effectively has stopped many/most middle easterners from being elected. After all, women can't even drive in places like Saudi Arabia. Other places have other race/gender/religious discrimination that would effectively prevent people from becoming CSM.

Let me be 110% clear: Fon shouldn't have been elected. But CCP stepped over the line by disqualifying him. We, the EVE players should have crucified him (as we were doing), and prevented him from getting the ballots to be elected.
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Post Reply