A couple of my recent posts were caught up on the edges of the Null Sec change maelstrom and garnered more attention than usual.
The first pointed out that change was coming, and rather presumptuously reminded people to be discerning when reading the related discussions.
The second took a moment to consider the emotion shown by those being directly impacted, and indicated I thought change was necessary, and at a high level why and what impact I would like to see.
Light-weight stuff focused more on the mechanics of the discussion than the mechanics of the subject.
The second post generated a somewhat curious discussion on Twitter,
It was triggered by this comment from current CSM9 member @FunkyBacon
My Favourite answer – in the “I wish I had thought of that” way was from blogger @Kirithkodachi
This is of course one of my main pet topics on this blog – how EVE players do themselves no favours with their inability to properly debate topics. (Obviously that is more of a worldwide phenomenon, not just confined to EVE.)
While it pays to be succinct when debating, twitter probably takes that too far. I mostly just watched the discussion from the sidelines. I figured I should be thankful that for a brief moment in time a few people had stopped to consider the topic.
To take it a little further though, just who should be allowed to have an opinion on the Null Sec changes?
I have been playing EVE for 8 years; I have lived in High, Low, Sov and NPC Null Sec space. I currently day trip into Wormholes and Null Sec, own 3 jump capable capital ships, pay a reasonable level of attention to what is going on in the game, and would consider returning to Null again in the future.
Is that enough? Who do I ask to judge and give me a star or a stamp or label which says I am allowed to have an opinion?
The answer is obvious. Anyone with an interest in Null Sec is welcome to their opinion. Whether it is worth listening to or not should be judged on its merits. Trying to define who is allowed to voice an opinion is a transparent attempt to stifle or control the debate. It also means you fail to take the opportunity to educate or exchange ideas.
There are of course people who you just can’t be bothered listening to. For example, I know I’m right on top of my wife’s list. I am also not suggesting I have anything of note to say. (My wife would agree.) Unlike some though, I am not stubbornly unreceptive to new ideas, so am happy to have my opinions refined and improved from the input of others.
I do wish CCP the best of luck in finding the most useful inputs into this discussion from amongst the avalanche of feedback. I expect the concept is set in stone, but I am confident they will tweak to improve or and to reduce unexpected consequences where players can raise the suggestions coherently.
I do have some specific thoughts on how the new jump distance and fatigue changes might impact me, and they will, but I want to undock instead of write more.