I don’t know what you are talking about? May I suggest you look into your grammar text book and learn what “intervene” means? A hint:
And next you should learn what “or” means in terms of grammar. This might also help. Now stop playing dumb and contribute something to the topic.
It doesnt mean “not”
Im guessing english isnt your first language.
Certainly given the instant tirade of personal attacks, manners certainly arent something you possess either.
“Or” neither means “and” as you seem to interpret it. The entire first post also contain lots more information that clearly highlights the “intervening” theme, which has a clearly defined meaning in the English language. Should you be a native (which I doubt since I needed to link word definitions for you), it would be all the more embarrassing for you to not know this, or deliberately ignoring the word’s definition to keep your argument alive. Maybe you should pull the plug on the life support, though, before you embarrass yourself even further. Just a well meant tip. And you still have nothing to contribute to the topic, or do you?
I shall add what I wish.
What you choose to ignore is that the topic in the OPs own words are
And
And thusly “What means do AG have to (either) intevene in or prevent ganks”
Is an invitation to provide suggestions to prevent ganks using means at AGs disposal, is it not?
And anyone is better placed to comment on how then to intervene in disrupting or stopping a gank in progress because we know what steps have been taken to prevent the gank and mitigate or reduce the risk and can make at least educated or informed decisions about viable means and resources at our disposal.
So if you think this topic means something else somehow, please, rather than being insulting and schoolyard about it, explain yourself so we can discuss things in an adult manner.
Look, it’s quite clear what Ramona is trying to point out.
The OP doesn’t specifically say ‘What game mechanics can we take advantage of…’, which I gather is what he’s looking for, since they will form the basis of any direct activity intended to up the effectiveness of the anti-gankers. I could be wrong; no doubt he’ll tell me, if I am.
The thread invitation could have been better put, probably. I can see, from the number of qualifying and conditional clauses which appeared there, and later, that the OP struggled to get it just right, in order to avoid the responses which he finds so disappointing.
It isn’t too late to edit the header and repeat the amended version down here. But he must be absolutely clear about what he wants to know (as opposed to what he doesn’t wish to know); half-hearted attempts won’t be good enough with the assembled wolves of this Forum prowling around.
Shall we begin again?
I don’t know how much clearer I can make it for you. By now it is clear that you ignore the words that you quote yourself all the time. Read what you quote. I bolded and italicized the things that are important and that you keep ignoring.
No where does it even hint an “invitation to provide suggestions to prevent ganks”. It clearly says “what should be means to intervene in preventing the gank success”. The gank is already underway in this scenario. Only someone who really does not want to understand can misinterpret this. If you want me to be less honest about your own inabilities, then please put more effort into hiding your deficiencies. It is not my job to care for your lack of prudence.
Simply posting back at me what I have just told you and telling me the opposite doesnt make it so.
You clearly havent even read my last response to you where I explain that the steps you take to prevent the gank itself (which, if successful, prevent the success of the gank effort, to use the words you are having trouble with) set up how you find the situation or ready for the situation where the gank is in progress.
You are simply arguing for the sake of it now with no point.
And again I see its impossible for you to discuss anything without resorting to rudeness.
Id very much like to but now the goalposts of the OP are being changed by someone who has a very weak grasp of semantics.
But likes to call people intellectually inferior. Seems to be a common strain of unpleasantness.
I am trying to make you see that your premise is wrong. And your last post does not change the premise at all. The OP is not asking how to prevent ganks, nor is he interested in way to prevent a gank. He has never done so because it is not pertinent to the question. You just want to see that. What the OP clearly asks for are opinions/tips/way on how to counter an ongoing gank. Which the quote from post 1 in this topic crystal clearly states.
You say that, but its right there in the OP. Its there twice and we have both quoted at each other.
I read the OP
I answered it honestly and without prejudice hoping for it to lead into a well grounded discussion about fleet tactics with a foundation of good standards of set up and fleet organisation, and got called “it” for it.
So no, when the OP includes the very specific lines about preventing a gank, I am going to answer honestly. And Ill not have you or he or anyone else tell me that black is white and that AG are better off forgetting about organisation and getting prepared and that prevention isnt better than cure, because that is just rubbish. As rubbish as you telling me that nowhere in the OP does it talk about preventing ganks. Sorry but thats how it is.
Group of people came to doctor.
Doctor:
He does not do that. At all. Anywhere. What he talks about is preventing the success of an ongoing gank, as my multiple quotes from post 1 show. 
You really make it very difficult for me to take you serious, let alone show courtesy.
You mean the quote that also includes the word prevent?
prevent :
verb ~ to stop something from happening or someone from doing something.
Prevention is often proactive, an example being the 5 P’s; prior planning prevents pisspoor performance. You can be virtually immune from the attentions of gankers if you plan for them. Knowing the what and how are where the one subject Salvos refuses to allow comes in.
Yeah troll on McDuff.
The sentence is there twice. Your constant denial of
The fact they are there
The value of preventing the gank
My point that you are better positioned to stop a gank in progress if youve prepared and done your best to prevent it
means you are just simply saying “no” over and over again like some sort of broken record.
Which means you are only seeking an emotional reaction, which your rudeness was not enough to generate.
Yes, he asks for ways to proactively prevent the success of an ongoing gank. You got that right. Jonah. Now, what’s the point of your post?
Too bad I can’t apply same scenario and became aka ‘Max Rokatansky’ who can kill those dirty bastards who decided to gank and loot my vehi… errr spaceship.
Forget it.
He’s either reaching for a reaction that hes not getting or hes really wanting AG to fail, which is ironic given the posters around here atm and who is trying to speak up for them.
Id really like an AG guy to show up and tell us all to mind our own busines tbqfh
The gank doesn’t start when the shooting does, it doesn’t even start when the scanning alt finds out you have no tank and carrying too much {r}isk.
Nope, it starts the moment Lady Luck frowns upon some unlucky soul who thought it a good idea to put eleventy billion isk in an untanked freighter, undock and hit autopilot; this is what is known as making a poor choice, and in Eve if you make a poor choice there’s a chance you’re going to regret it.
Telling people how to minimise their risk is intervening in the success of a gank, if people heed the advice, the chances are that the gank will never happen.
If what you are interested in is only the last 22 seconds of a gank effort, then really the opportunity for a third-party to intervene has already been lost.
That’s where Ramona and others are taking a broader view of what the gank effort includes and it starts before the gank fleet is on top of the freighter; and even before a Mach starts bumping.
From my perspective (naively probably as I’m not a ganker myself), the gank effort includes:
There is more involved than just the shooting and at each step, there are opportunities for 3rd parties to intervene.
The comments from Ramona and others have focused on 1 and 2 largely (don’t be a target in the first place - don’t be where the gankers are operating, or if you are, don’t be a great target selection). The 3rd party aspect to that comes in through education and intel that AGs can provide. They already do - antiganking and gank intel chat channels - are supposed to help inform decisions of haulers and provide fits for ships for AGs to use.
But there are other things that can be done by antigas at those stages of the gank effort:
For 3., this is much harder, but if the gank fleet is working out of a station, then I guess it might be possible to have combats ready to scan their undock down and then be there with a fleet for the following gank effort, to kill the gankers before they are ever on grid. More of a 1-off thing, so maybe not much use.
For 4 and 5:
For 6, stand by and appreciate the beauty of EVEs explosions. AG already failed at this point
For 7, stand by and appreciate the organisation and smarts of the gank fleets. Not much can be done here
So, there is a lot that can be done, but most of the opportunity for 3rd parties to get involved to prevent or cause a gank effort to fail, happen in the early part of the effort, not at the end. If it gets to the end stage, the opportunity to prevent it has already passed.
