Eveconomics

I recently made a post on the EVE-Online forum about how I think CCP might be able to learn something from 2 pieces of literature:

• The cluetrain manifesto
• "What would google do?"

I thought that I’d go over the cluetrain manifesto and compile a list of gems that applies very well to CCP.

• 1. Markets are conversations.
• 6. The Internet is enabling conversations among human beings that were simply not possible in the era of mass media.
• 12. There are no secrets. The networked market knows more than companies do about their own products. And whether the news is good or bad, they tell everyone.
• 13. What’s happening to markets is also happening among employees. A metaphysical construct called "The Company" is the only thing standing between the two.
• 15. In just a few more years, the current homogenized "voice" of business—the sound of mission statements and brochures—will seem as contrived and artificial as the language of the 18th century French court.
• 18. Companies that don’t realize their markets are now networked person-to-person, getting smarter as a result and deeply joined in conversation are missing their best opportunity.
• 19. Companies can now communicate with their markets directly. If they blow it, it could be their last chance.
• 20. Companies need to realize their markets are often laughing. At them.
• 21. Companies need to lighten up and take themselves less seriously. They need to get a sense of humor.
• 22. Getting a sense of humor does not mean putting some jokes on the corporate web site. Rather, it requires big values, a little humility, straight talk, and a genuine point of view.
• 26. Public Relations does not relate to the public. Companies are deeply afraid of their markets.
• 27. By speaking in language that is distant, uninviting, arrogant, they build walls to keep markets at bay.
• 28. Most marketing programs are based on the fear that the market might see what’s really going on inside the company.
• 34. To speak with a human voice, companies must share the concerns of their communities.
• 35. But first, they must belong to a community.
• 38. Human communities are based on discourse—on human speech about human concerns.
• 39. The community of discourse is the market.
• 40. Companies that do not belong to a community of discourse will die.
• 59. However subliminally at the moment, millions of people now online perceive companies as little more than quaint legal fictions that are actively preventing these conversations from intersecting.
• 60. This is suicidal. Markets want to talk to companies
• 61. Sadly, the part of the company a networked market wants to talk to is usually hidden behind a smokescreen of hucksterism, of language that rings false—and often is.
• 62. Markets do not want to talk to flacks and hucksters. They want to participate in the conversations going on behind the corporate firewall.
• 63. De-cloaking, getting personal: We are those markets. We want to talk to you.
• 64. We want access to your corporate information, to your plans and strategies, your best thinking, your genuine knowledge. We will not settle for the 4-color brochure, for web sites chock-a-block with eye candy but lacking any substance.
• 72. We like this new marketplace much better. In fact, we are creating it.
• 74. You’re invited, but it’s our world. Take your shoes off at the door. If you want to barter with us, get down off that camel!
• 75. We are immune to advertising. Just forget it.
• 76. If you want us to talk to you, tell us something. Make it something interesting for a change.
• 78. You want us to pay? We want you to pay attention.
• 84. We know some people from your company. They’re pretty cool online. Do you have any more like that you’re hiding? Can they come out and play?
• 85. When we have questions we turn to each other for answers. If you didn’t have such a tight rein on "your people" maybe they’d be among the people we’d turn to.
• 86. When we’re not busy being your "target market," many of us are your people. We’d rather be talking to friends online than watching the clock. That would get your name around better than your entire million dollar web site. But you tell us speaking to the market is Marketing’s job.
• 93. We’re both inside companies and outside them. The boundaries that separate our conversations look like the Berlin Wall today, but they’re really just an annoyance. We know they’re coming down. We’re going to work from both sides to take them down.
• 94. To traditional corporations, networked conversations may appear confused, may sound confusing. But we are organizing faster than they are. We have better tools, more new ideas, no rules to slow us down.
• 95. We are waking up and linking to each other. We are watching. But we are not waiting.

So what is the point here? It’s the recent threadnaught and mass-moderation that has been going on. It’s the lack of communication and the tone of that which has been communicated.

CCP is getting to point where it needs to learn that communication makes or breaks it. I have a feeling that the recent rabble on the forum has been extremely damaging to CCP’s reputation. And I’m not trying to say that the world is ending, however I want to make the point that it’s a highly undesirable thing to have happen.

I really do think that every single CCP employee ought to read the cluetrain manifesto, or at least this subset of it. It’s a fundamental part of our new interconnected world. The way of thinking that was present in the early 1990’s is going to get you in trouble nowadays.

How might we fix it? The answer is simple: More live dev-blogs. I can’t emphasize how valuable of a tool this was. Please, for the love of god CCP, bring them back! Let the developers out of the cage and let us talk to them in a live dev blog.

I have been thinking a lot about the how companies like CCP communicate. I have been trying to iterate all the channels of communication that CCP seems to use. However I must admit that off the top of my head, I haven’t been able to list a whole of actual means of communication.

Here’s what I have been able to find:

1. Dev-blogs and other things posted on the information sub-forum
2. Press releases and news-items on the front-page(Often not cross-lined)
3. Live dev-blogs
4. Fanfest
5. Occasional dev(Especially PrismX) posting humorous, yet (occasionally) information forum post

And that’s really it. And even then, there is some flaws with this list:

1. Developer blogs comes in batches every so often, usually around the time of expansions.
2. Press releases and news items are often extremely formal and irrelevant.
3. Live developer blogs are EXTREMELY rare.
4. Fanfest only takes place once a year.
5. Developer sightings on the forum are rare .

What most of these have in common is that their frequency is either predictable or they rarely take place.

To me, the most interesting items are number 3 through 5. First of all, developers postings on the forums are EXTREMELY valuable. God knows that every time a developer posts, god revives a kitten.

Fanfest is an extremely awesome venue and I believe that players and developers alike take a lot with them from fanfest, be it experience, feedback and a sense that CCP is really a very sound bunch of guys. However the major argument against this, would be that only the “elite”/old-school actually attends fanfest(Even if I know that not always to be the case).

Live dev-blogs were a fantastic tool. The barrier to entry is fairly low,  they were posted after they took place, there was two-way communication and it gave people a sense that there was actual people behind the facade(Dare I say marketing?) of CCP. I can’t stress enough how important a medium the live developer blogs are.

In the developer blog section, we have the written kind. These has some benefits compared to the live kind. The fact that they are easily consumable and are accessible to a larger audience. However it often lacks the “personal” touch to it. A technique to make up for this a lot, is for the author to engage in conversation with the readers in the associated thread. However, I find that this is often not the case, and that if it does take place. This gives a very “stiff” touch to it, which I personally find to be sub-optimal.

So what’s the conclusion? Well, with the few paths of communication that CCP has, are irregular in terms of frequency, yet fairly predictable. Some of the more effective means of communication(Live dev-blogs, developers posting on the forum) are slightly more time-intensive. However, the perceived value by the players of EVE is more than enough to warrant it.

Based on this conclusion, I think it’s fair to say that CCP ought to be more active in some sort of communication with their customers. Soon, I’ll be writing finally about how the CSM might be a tool for that.