The entire purpose of scam contract hauling in a nutshell.
It doesnāt really matter with which character or corp you accept the contracts. The structure owner closes the structure for everyone once a contract to the structure was accepted. Itās also not about ganking, just docking rights removal. Ganking someone on the way to your structure was only done for a time by elite gankers like Hard Knocks Inc.
Then stop accepting contracts with a delivery point that is not 100% guaranteed to be open all the time.
1 Like
I usually charge people 300m to learn this lesson. Here you are giving it away for free
Well, yes, I would. But CCP is not interested what I or most other people would like to do, which means we have to accept contracts to citadels more and more in the future. Your answer has been discussed 3 times by now (one time even with the specific statement that a trusted contract issuer turned coat). Please stop posting redundant answers.
Where in eveās massive amount of code have you been forced to accept anything at all besides someone else shooting your ship.
If you want to haul something in an EVE that gets forced ever more into structures rather than stations, you have to accept contracts to structures.
Damn, why so defensive?
You just make yourself look like a teenager.
You are too full of yourself.
You should look at your own. I know, you canāt.
You are obsessed with this, and it makes you rant about citadel scam contracts, which you simply do not need to accept. I would instead start making a list of the reliable ones. I will have a look at this tomorrow. I am having a hard time believing that there is not an alternative.
The issue with your thread is that it is all based on the absolutely silly idea of needing to block everyone. What an insane waste of lifetime that is. I seriously question your priorities in life! You seem to be driven by anger and opposition ā¦ which is what you put onto display in almost every single post of yours.
:shakes head in disbelief:
1 Like
Again, what forces me to press that button to accept the contract? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.
This list already exists. If you would look above in Yemontoshiās post. And if you look above into my lengthy post where I included a picture of what the contract window looks like if included the issuers that I already ignored because of them issuing scam contracts, you would also notice what many peopleās problems are. If you had done that you would not just say āwhich you simply do not need to acceptā and you would also not say that this topic is based on āthe absolutely silly idea of needing to block everyoneā. Have I told you about competence already? Yes? Good. I can be full of myself in this regard because I, on contrast to you apparently, have to deal with this every single day and do not have to look it up just now to educate myself in this matter.
Again, look at the picture. I can give you more pictures of more contract pages if you want. Or you could just look in the list that Yemontoshi posted. Sifting through all these contracts would be a waste of time because there are hundreds littering the pages. There are so many in fact that I have nearly empty search results pages if I exclude ignored issues.
If you want to call it ādriven by anger and oppositionā if I do not want to spend more time than necessary sifting through this trash and then never see it again, be my guest. But my āanger and oppositionā is based on facts, not blissful ignorance. Personally, I would rather call it enthusiastic engagement with EVE to make it better for everyone involved (as I have outlined above in response to your post. if you had read that and not just spouted insults). Thanks again for posting, by the way, I really seem to be worth your time. 
Furthermore: You have not answered my question. Which completely unrelated reasons am I pursuing? Would you please be so kind and answer the question?
ā
In that case I wonāt be able to do hauling jobs. Which is going to be really hard once CCP follows through with their plans to increase broker fees and taxes in NPC stations even more and more people actually see themselves forced to trade in structures. But of course, you are right: I donāt have to accept contracts.I just stop doing the activity that I like.
The risk is always yours to decide to take or not. Get used to that fact.
I am used to this fact, as I have indicated above. And the risk is not the point at all. Please stop missing the point by a long shot. Please stop trying to divert the purpose of this topic to something else than what the original post says, If you want to talk about risk of taking contracts to citadels, create your own topic. This topic here is not about the risk. It is about removing contracts that are not worth my and other peopleās time to look at them.
The point is that I and many other haulers do not want to see these contracts once we have conclusively established that they are scams and in return only see contracts that are either to reliable structures or not yet proven to be scams. Is this really that hard to understand for you?
But it is fully about the risk. You even fully confirm this.
No, this topic is not about how risky it is to take contracts. That is your topic that you desperately want to push in my topic. Create your own topic if you want to discuss this matter.
This topic is about how the UI is not adequately able to filter contracts and how players can overwhelm the UI to exploit this inadequacy to push their trash down other peopleās throats once they cannot be blocked any longer.
And looking at any contract is a risk. Always has been since the day it was introduced. BUT filtering the stations you put on an avoidance list is not apparently something you know how to do.
You cannot put individual structures on an avoidance list. Such a list does not exist ingame. You also cannot block structures so that contracts to these structures do not appear in your search results any longer.
Unless of course you have found a way to illegally alter the UI. In which case: Kudoz to you.
On the off-chance that you are talking about the list that Yemontoshi linked before: Please look at my picture above. It is truly a great experience sifting through this mess by looking at an external list and checking every single contract. Truly marvelous, I tell you.
Hm. Hm hm hm.
I think I have covered everything.
You do well with this thread.
The āunrelated reasonsā thing I came up with, because you are touching courier scams. Your last reply was the best so far, much better than the others.
Really seems so ā¦
ā¦ therefore I agree with this, with the note that there is a significant difference between being enthusiastic and lashing out like a child, which you tend to do.
So ā¦
Increasing the amount of blockable people is futile. The amount of people will forever increase, which means the limit would need to be huge, for each and every player. Definitely not a solution.
I am not convinced of the P.O. box ā¦
ā¦ (oh boy, last time I used these words was when I was 6, at school, in english class 
) ā¦
ā¦ because such scams simply have a place in EVE. Always have, should not stop.
Of course, mass abuse by single or multiple individuals (CCP amkes no difference here, as one pilot is one pilot) always is a problem and usually CCP steps in when things can turn chaotic. There is indeed a problem here. When npc stations are being phased out eventually, these scams could be rather disruptive to the economy.
Yeah, No, this is not an option. No other player is directly stopping you from hauling, (like, compared to a wardec), therefore the ādo something elseā-option falls off the list.
Furthermore, what should not be a necessity is you having to block all these people. It really is a huge waste of time, and - as you say - the alternative is an even bigger waste of time, which turns this into a really interesting puzzle! So many parts!
Hm.
Pointless to increase the limit.
Stopping the scams, in regards to citadels, is a bad move.
Only accepting npc station contracts is a No-go, for economic reasons.
I did not have enough time to let it all sink in properly ā¦
ā¦ though I am wondering if a compromise would be suitable?*
You know your ā ā ā ā , so you can tell if this would work out at least moderately:
Assuming you do not care if a contract is a scam contract: At delivery you notice that the citadel is locked, meaning you can not deliver. In this case there should be the option to deliver the goods to the closest npc station (local, or constellationwideā¦ iirc every constellation in high and low has at least one station) ā¦
ā¦ which could render such scams useless, but on the other hand does it still allow for the possibility of ganking the target. The scammers would know that the hauler is required to reach the citadel first, and then they would know at which station the hauler would need to deliver. It should always be the closest one, which makes it more predictable, aka not influencing the ganking aspect to keep some amount of danger with it. Or they could gank the hauler at the locked down citadel.
What do you think? I just came up with it, sorry if it has a hole or two.
*(ewww compromises, i hate them with a passion. Usually they mean that the female gets what she wants :P)ā¦
1 Like
But every single contract has that little ! which will tell you if itās private property or not.
Which you can avoid by just using your eyeballs on the game screen.
Which you apparently have never noticed.
Also just for the record there are over 800 contracts for couriers in game which are pure high sec hauling and anything that takes you to null/low would be a considerable risk for people you donāt knowā¦ But why would I know anything about moving a freighter which Iāve trained for since lets seeā¦ How old is my character again?
I have already established above (would you please start reading responses?) that I agree that this is never going to happen because of the fact that scams need to be possible. This is now the 3rd time that I repeat this. 
Since the post box is not going to happen, being able to block people or structures is the only way to deal with this. Unless you think that contract search results like in the picture that I linked above are enjoyable?
Yes, this would also be a solution, but as you said it would also make the access denial scams unfeasible. This is essentially the same issue as with the post box. It is correct that being able to block more people will not solve the problem with creation of access denial scams, but this is not my intention at all. While I would welcome that these scams return to null sec where they came from, I am, as indicated multiple times, fully aware that this is not going to happen and therefore I do not intent to change this.
I also already posted about the ganking on the way. Hard Knocks Inc did this for a while and was very successful at that. Most access denial scammers, however, do not do this and have no interest in doing this. They just want someone to accept their contract so that they can close the citadel and get the collateral a day later. So, the ganking on the way is not really relevant to this discussion.
On the other hand, blocking these issuers or structures just hides these contracts from haulers who know what they are doing, while the scams remain available for everyone else so that the scams can continue.
Would you please look at the picture above and then tell me what you see there? The <!> is not relevant at all for this discussion because there are pages full of <!>. My eyeballs are being used and they see pages after pages of <!>. Maybe you have not noticed this fact yet?
I donāt think you use it often enough. Otherwise: The picture above is full of pure high sec contracts to scam citadels.
Funny, though, that you bring up null sec and low sec. You see, there are filter options to completely remove contracts to null sec and low sec. If I do not want to see contracts going to null sec and low sec, I can completely filter them out already. What was your point with bringing up filter options that already exist?