High Sec Candidate

[Knowledgeminer]

@Dracvlad

That is my opinion in a specific area, but as you don’t partake in that area you would only know if you got involved in it. I am not going to tell you as it is better that you found out yourself.

What a bunch of nonsense. You’re not going to say because whatever it is that you might have to say in this regard would be irrelevant…

And you appear to be forgetting you said I have some “blind spot” as if that might invalidate anything I said, but now you’re unable/unwilling to substantiate your claim…

@Dracvlad

I just found that part funny because when you start talking about people sitting AFK in hisec and making a point that someone would not do that in lowsec and I saw someone sit AFK in lowsec for the sixty minutes I was there and not die.

What? The term “AFK” does not even appear in any of my previous posts in this thread at all. WTF are you talking about? Can you not even read the posts you decide to express your “opinion” about?

@Dracvlad

As for your PS, what you wrote above that made sense to me, but on the other hand you went into a feeling about what Lorelei meant by that statement

What are you talking about now? What PS? What feeling did I go into about which Lorelei’s statement?

@Dracvlad

You need to read this

LOL. The link you posted is the very Lorelei’s post I replied to and which of course, unlike you, I had carefully and thoroughly read before replying to her…

@Dracvlad

@Knowledgeminer

not chance based (other than the chance based way in which weapons work already).

How on earth you extrapolated that she meant having a chance based mechanic is beyond me.

ROFLMAO. At this point, that this is beyond you doesn’t surprise me at all, but for those that do actually care to read the posts they talk about, let me quote here what Lorelei said in the OP, and which I quoted (but you omitted in your reply), right above the statement from me that you say is an “extrapolation” I made:

@Lorelei_Ierendi

I would like at least a 50% chance of walking away from a gank.

I emphasised the terms “at least” and “chance” there to make it easier for you. Can you see it now?

It was she who said that, not me. What did I extrapolate? How may someone pretend suicide ganking should have a minimum 50% chance of failure without it having some chance based mechanism that guarantees that regardless of what the players do?

@Dracvlad

@Knowledgeminer

What does this have to do with pretending suicide ganking should have a guaranteed failure rate higher than 50%?

Lorelei did not suggest that, seriously?

ROFLMAO. This is unbelievable. Are you on drugs or what? That’s exactly what she, not me, said she wants. It was there for you to see. I quoted it in my reply to her, right above the statement you say is an extrapolation I made…

@Dracvlad

If you are going to attack someone for what they say makes sure it is what they say and not what you think they said.

Exactly. But just so you know, if you ever want to be able to do that, you need to read what the other person said first…

@Dracvlad

I took from what Lorelei said is that she felt that it was too certain and the victim really has little chance to survive and that was a feeling.

What you took from what she said is utterly irrelevant if you ignore what she actually said, and which is what I was replying to, no more, no less. That you prefer to believe she said something else, despite all evidence, simply because you believe she meant something else, is a problem you have, not me…

@Dracvlad

And chanting back that she wanted a chance based system was stupid and like a ganker troll.

YOU are the one chanting and making stupid comments here that don’t have a leg to stand upon…