So you agree all is PvP 
Thankee.
Sigh. This has been explained multiple times to you in a ton of different ways. I get youâre arguing in bad faith. I get that you wonât even try to admit youâre wrong. But no matter what you do, you are dead wrong to rights on this.
They arenât fighting CONCORD. CONCORD is the consequence.
Any question as to whether its PvP or moral is utterly irrelevent to the OP.
That is utter nonsense, as my point is identical to that which Etch madeâŚand to which I was responding.
âBad faithâ is where people use one argument for miners but donât apply the same reasoning for gankers. How is it there is âmore to the fight than the fightâ when it is aimed at minersâŚyet when I point our there is âmore to the fightâ for gankers, and that that includes their very ships and ammo etc being DECIDED by the response time of a PvE force and that that makes the entire endeavour over-ridden by PvE ( which it does )âŚyou guys dont like your twisted logic hurled right back at you.
âBad faithâ is when you totally ignore that the âmore to the fightâ for gankers includes their entire planning and combat being over-arched within the PvE context of Concord response.
THAT is âbad faithâ.
In a place with no ethicsâŚthere is no victory ! That is the ultimate irony of Eve.
So I skipped the last 84 post did I miss anything relevant
Hmmmm I actually donât have a clue what point you are trying to make here. I donât think I have said anything inconsistent.
Gankers are aware that the consequence of the gank is certain death. And that death comes after 6 seconds in a 1.0 system and 19 seconds in a 0.5 system. This is an external factor that influences the fight or engagement. For example a ganker will behave differently in a 1.0 security system than the will in a 0.5 system.
Do you mine differently in a 0.5 system than a 1.0 system? What addition measures do you take for your safety mining in a 0.5 system? Because honestly most miners donât. They treat all high sec space the same and are often punished for it.
This external factor influences gankers in several ways. Firstly whether they even attempt the gank. Secondly fit. As you keep pointing out they fly in glass canons for overwhelming force and burst. They know what their dps is and no doubt they will be on zkill checking if you have lost a procurer before and what your fit was to allow them to assess what your EHP will be and whether they can burst you in the time they have.
Further examples of work the gankers are doing as part of the fight before they even land on grid. What work are you putting in before they land on grid?
I stand by all my comments in this thread. The fight starts way before the gankers land on grid. You can disagree all you want but you are just pointing at a yellow wall and screaming that itâs red.
Nothing you wonât have read many times before in all the other ganking threads
To be fair you were in low sec and only 3 of the ships actually hit you 
Low sec in many ways is more dangerous than null. And the locals donât care what you are flying. They will just want you gone by any means necessary
I take every conceivable measure, and am never AFK. I mine mainly in a 0.8 area, and sometimes in 0.5. However the 0.5 area is almost empty of people most of the time so I can easily spot if half a dozen people show up. My Procurer has 60K of EHP, enough to protect against all but the most concerted ganks.
Iâm not disagreeing that the fight starts way before the gankers show up. In fact that was my whole point. Precisely because the fight starts even at the planning and ship fit stage, and that ship and fit are largely determined by Concord and their response time, that was the entire basis on which I argued above that there was sufficient overarching PvE to make the whole endeavour â not real PvPâ.
So gankers cannot have it both ways. They cannot on the one hand be totally constrained from the start by a PvE forceâŚeven being destroyed by that force in the endâŚand then claim its all PvP just because for 8 seconds out of an hour in which they were constrained by PvE they blew up another playerâs ship.
so we are reduced to semantics and alterntive definitions.
Just because there are external factors influencing the fight and both sides know that ultimately those external factors will result in the destriuction of the agressors ship doesnt mean it isnt PVP. A lot can happen in those 19 seconds in a 0.5 system.
This is making me think of that scene in Batman Begins where liam Neeson and Christian Bale are fighting on the ice. And bale thinks he has won and neeson taps the ice and it cracks and bale falls through.
I get you dont like it. Label it however you like. Whether its PVP or PVE in disguise it doesnt change the mecahnics. It doesnt change its counterplays. It doesnt change its impact on the economy. It doesnt change that it introdoces risk to space where there be otherwise none. And it doesnt change that it is good for the game
I guess nobody wanted to put their heroic victory against a 2.5m ISK ship on zKillboard. In a curious way I almost felt like the victor after such overkill. And as you say, 3 of them missed. Tut tutâŚAFK gankers 
This is the only true thing you have written in weeks
Also morality =/= ethics
They are two entirely different things
Whether its 19 seconds, or 24 hour TiDi, when you attack another player itâs pvp. Regardless if a pve mechanic destroys the aggressors ship, it was due to aggressiveness against another player, ie pvp
In chess, if you run out of time, you lose the game. However, itâs obviously a PvP game. You wouldnât call it PvE and try to claim the clock is your opponent.
CONCORD is nothing more than a countdown timer.
Iâm still a little confused about what you think should have happened flying a frigate into a lowsec gate camp? Those ships werenât sitting there waiting for you, they were waiting for anyone. Thatâs how gate camps work. Do you think they should have seen you were in a Tristan, and stood down all the other ships and brought out maybe a Condor for a little honorable 1v1? When PAPI was trying to camp the 1DQ gate they had billions of isk worth of ships sitting there to blap the occasional shuttle or mis-clicked interceptor. Thatâs how the game works.
About what ? I flew a ship that cost me absolutely nothing ( it was entirely fitted out with loot from ratting )âŚI hate the Tristan anyway. I deliberately ignored the âdangerâ warning at the gate.
Of course I am amused ( rather than salty ) that two Gnosis, a Hurricane, a Zealot, a Tornado, and a Ashimmu gave me such a warm welcome ! Given that this is on par with using a grenade to kill a waspâŚthe pathetic level of overkill actually negates any sense of loss.
As for âhonorableââŚif there was no sense of honour anywhere in the game then gankers would not proudly display their kills, would they.
I claim the moral victory. Of course I do. Just to be annoying. That is also âhow the game worksâ. Itâs how my game worksâŚand like gankers I donât care about anyone elseâs. If that annoys gankersâŚthen all the better !
Mm no. You are arguing in bad faith as other posters have pointed out. Also:
You lost any kind of moral victory with the salt you just gave out. I can smell the sodium from here LOL. Use F10 get gud. Egg has been a danger zone since time immemorial.
OKâŚwell as your level of discussion doesnât seem to have gotten beyond a kindergarten ânananananaââŚI donât see the point in engaging.
Not really. It isnât my fault you simply will not accept reality.
Youâve been rroffed several times in this thread by several different people.
Youâve already admitted that you can avoid high sec ganking by employing standard operating procedures.
Youâve already admitted that you donât know the difference between ganking and PvP, or that ganking is also PvP.
You may not like the ganker playstyle, however it is one fully supported by the TOS and in game mechanics.
You are well aware that myself and otherâs cognition are well above a 5 year olds. You are also well aware you have no ground to stand on and are arguing in bad faith.
In short, cry more and learn to EVE 
It was right there: