Rather than discuss this amongst themselves over the last six months, the CSM decided to leave it be and waste pretty much an entire hour rehashing it all in Iceland again. Apparently, wasting CCP Xhagen's time is fine and dandy. It's not like they didn't have all summer and most of the fall to come to a consensus with each other. No. Better to just argue it out from scratch again.
What did we learn? We learned that Russians seem to understand democracy better than Americans. Irony, here, perhaps.
We learn that the CSM is really adamant that they'd be totally a-okay with CCP Xhagen determining who gets to go to Iceland. No, really, Xhagen, we would be happy if you did it. Truly. We wouldn't create a single fuss. Honest.
(The CSM suggests that of the seven people who get tickets to Iceland, CCP picks five of those people, and the CSM picks the remaining two.)
Xhagen would be a fool to start picking and choosing. Because if he picks "wrong", the CSM would be all up in his craw in record time.
Easy enough given past CSMs, where less than the allotted plane tickets actually spent any effort doing whatever it is CSM members are supposed to do. Picking five people, out of the six actually doing work, would be easy. What happens if we get a CSM where ten of the fourteen members are actually contributing? What happens then when Xhagen picks his five? Does anybody believe that the CSM would not turn on CCP at that point, that bad blood would not erupt, accusations and recriminations would not abound?
Hans was really quick to get butthurt during the session itself, when Xhagen put forth an example:
Xhagen: : So let’s say in 2013, CCP decides to work heavily on null-sec for the Winter Expansion. In that scenario, it makes sense to bring over more PvP / null-sec / supercapital experts. For example, why bring over a Faction Warfare guy to a summit where there will be no Faction Warfare work being done?You don't get a better illustration, of what exactly would happen the moment Xhagen chooses the "wrong" person, than Hans' quick and defensive response to the example given.
Hans: Do you think my value here is only because of Faction Warfare?
Sure, it sucks that some CSM members don't contribute, and possibly get a free trip for doing next to nothing, but by the same token, allowing CSM members to vote people off the island is immediately open to abuse. The CSM could start removing any voice they don't agree with. What safeguards are implemented to prevent petty politicking? How is member contribution codified?
CCP is not going to put themselves in a position where they can be accused of favouritism. Or politicking in their own favour. They already went through that mess with the T20 scandal, and I doubt they want to revisit that nightmare. These sorts of things can quickly spiral out of control.
I'd say the White Paper is fine as is. It's really up to the players to vote wisely. Again, this comes down to voter education. The more people that vote informed, the less likely that joke candidates like Darius III get in the door.