There is nothing to refute when your claim is stupid.
Try to make an argument, like how you reach that conclusion. Otherwise it’s a stupid claim, by definition.
If I were to say “the cat is black, so you are wrong”, that would be a stupid claim. Yours is exactly as stupid. There is nothing to refute on mine ; there is nothing to refute on yours.
Who cares ? This is not fact that I was answering to, but your morale.
“I presented fact 10 days ago, so you can’t argue with me”. Again, that’s stupid.
When you say that “Hauling for profit is best undertaken as a combined effort” this is a morale : a judgement of value that you claim people should agree with. Just because it fits in your propaganda, does not mean people must agree with it. Claiming that people should consider your morale is another discussion, and completely off-topic. You are one-sidedly trying to present your morale as something universal, which is stupid.
No.
You asked for personal information, which is off-topic and the start of personal attacks.
Basically you were trolling with those questions.
Again, that’s your interpretation. You’re free to believe it, but you’re not free to pretend it’s a valid one without a rigorous demonstration. Just because you can interpret something in a way that fits your already made propaganda, does not mean that interpretation is the sole one. You need to prove, that your interpretation is mandatory, for it to make sense as an argument. Until then it’s plain stupid claims.
Not the least. On the opposite, it’s be proven correct by better commentators than I and you.
The topic is about the discrepancy in ante that is fielded by a player using a freighter to move stuff, compared the ante suicide gankers field to gank that freighter.
The ante being, what he can lose when undocking.
- The ante of the hauler is is ship, the freight he is hauling, or the collateral of that freight, whichever is higher. The time he took to travel already is a recuring cost, it happens wether or not he encouters gankers. His gain from the encouter is nothing.
- The ante of the ganker is nothing. Their ship is supposed to blow up, so it’s only a recuring cost. Their gain is a part (say 33%) of the hauler’s freight minus the recuring cost of their ship. (edit : the part varries a lot, depending on how they sell it)
The idea is that, if you accept that “more risk=more reward”, then the ratio risk/reward is vastly skewed in favor of the gankers, for several reasons including the low cost of their ships, the ease of multiboxing, the requirement for haulers to move by chokepoints, and of course the absence of gain for the hauler from the encounter.
A joke proposal I made was to force increase the gankers ante by requiring an artificial ante (cores) depending on the damage the gankers wanted to apply. This way, gankers would also need to field more value and anti gankers could have a higher benefit than bragging right on their channel.
This is a joke proposal because I did not give it much thoughts, only using the already existing structure core mechanism that CCP implemented to artificially reduce the usage of low-cost structures.