More dodging from a CSM candidate who is too afraid to be challenged on his views.
I am glad you are running, and anything that is going to get non-null block to vote is good. There is no chance that I will get elected… it has been that way for years… especially since they reduced CSM size (just in time for me to get to be #14).
I just wanted to get that out there so that the gankers don’t start claiming that my anti-ganking tendencies are what got me less votes this time
More senseless posts from someone that can’t be bothered to do his research…
Why would I waste time answering questions I spent the last 5 years answering. Did you listen to the interview?
Take a look at the thread of @Mike_Azariah too.
Voting has not yet taken place… there is a dev blog about it if you look!
Once I have recovered from work I will take a look at the threads that you linked!
Remember… voting is the most important thing. Whoever you vote for.
Well, despite certain players constantly trolling in an attempt to disrupt your candidacy for CSM, you’ve demonstrated great self-control and have maintained a very civil demeanor. I commend you for that.
Since you’re a High Sec candidate, you definitely have my vote.
Look, in mission pockets a runner “creates” wrecks which he(she) might consider his(her) own (just like you creating a belt) but in comes a ninja and salvages everything (your ninja miner). As long as ninja doesn’t touch loot (canflips you), his(her) actions are not considered a crime. But in order to get to a pocket a ninja has to scan it down with combat probes (find your Athanor, calculate arrival) and actually salvage every wreck (mine).
Combat explorer finds a site, many of them require clearing several rooms in order to get to an overseer, by room 2-3 or half an hour in of clearing the site he(she) considers it his(her) site, but in comes a competitor, they jump in the last room together and competitor manages to kill and loot overseer first, which is totally fine and is not considered a crime, doesn’t flag suspect, unless the first guy killed overseer and the second guy stole his loot.
In my opinion, all 3 examples are exactly equal. An activity where one party contributes to creation of a certain resource, and has certain advantages. Another party still needs to participate in order to get the resource. Stealing is punishable in all 3 examples.
So why is your case an exception? Or should the other two also be policed by CONCORD? Why? Why not?
Its your campaign, and now I as a voter suddenly need to search through 5 years of your posting and a blog in order to find your opinion on a topic?
BTW as I said, I’m solo player, single account, one-man corp. There isnt 500 man alliance behind me. And it’s not me I’m asking to convince.
In Jester’s AMA he mentioned how devs ask certain questions to assess CSM members expertise in an area. Unless you’ve proven to be an expert, have strongly defended your position, they will not take you seriously. So even if you get elected you might not be able to influence anything and that would be a waste for everyone, devs, CSM, players.
In past years CSM summit minutes out of 10 or 14 members there are usually 2-3 people talking. What do the rest of them do? Waste opportunity?
I would support you as highsec candidate. I remember you from previous campaigns and forum posts. I think I agree with most of what you say. But this moonmining thing looks selfish double standard whim.
I doubt there is someone who is exclusively sniping your moonchunks. They most likely have relatively large number to chose from in an area at any time.
You can move to a less heavy populated location. There are remote systems in Kador for example with 70+ moons without or with a single Athanor. Moving nomad ninja mining operation because of a single belt there would be unprofitable.
Here, some time ago I have tried to think upon sandbox/themepark gameplay. Not necessarily relevant to mining.
I think sandbox is about tools and professions they help create. Certain restrictions make some tools unusable or obsolete.
Oh, by the way, @Scoots_Choco Whitehound - its you, aren’t you?
No. It’s only your athanor as long as you can defend it.
No one’s forcing you. If you are unwilling to make cheap gank chars to defend your stuff, then you simply don’t deserve your stuff. There is no problem outside of that your brain keeps creating. Seriously.
This is just like the bounty hunting “problem” that is none. Bounty hunting is absolutely fine the way it is, what’s wrong are people who believe they should be entitled not to do what’s necessary to hunt for bounty: suicide ganking.
People not doing everything they can isn’t a problem of the game, it’s a problem of the people.
You’re anti-ganker, anti-sandbox, anti self-responsible behaviour and pro victim-declaring.
Plus, apparently, you’re pro AFK gameplay too.
(wo)Man, you’re not getting anywhere with this.
Because typically you and several other participants in this forum post stupid questions which do nothing but clutter this campaign thread.
~as you all do repeatedly on hundreds of other threads that I have seen (merely for the sake of dissention).
Ask sensible questions and be content with a single answer.
Thanks. Although i’m a supporter of Mike too, I think my vote is likely to be between another candidate and yourself.
You do know you are encouraged to vote for all of us, if you choose to do so. STV works that way, a prioritised list so to speak./
It’s tied up with the Player Corporation thing and the wardec thing.
That’s one I haven’t heard before.
Ha! You’re right!
Your response got me curious if I misread something and indeed, I did!
I misunderstood the paragraph about you sitting in a Mackinaw pounding away at asteroids.
Okay, so …
Greetings! I am Sol!
Saved you doing your necessary homework and I really like that you actually looked up Scoots. Homework is important, always. What’s missing here is that I’ve spent my first two years in EVE in Deltole, formerly a glorious social hub for new and old players, before farmers destroyed it.
I enjoy challanges and the more challenging something is, the better it is. I don’t mind losing, at all, and I actually hate winning all the time. This puts me into stark contrast to pretty much everyone around, who have so fragile and weak egos that winning is a necessity to them.
Your idea of having a 50% chance of getting away is pretty bad.
It’s also pretty insulting, too. Especially intellectually.
Docked you’re safe.
Your chances of getting ganked are literally zero.
From here on out it’s literally all your fault.
People unintentionally, all the time, raise their chances of getting ganked. They autopilot, they just sit around in space, they don’t pay attention to what they’re doing, they don’t tank their ships while on trips.
This pushes the odds into the gankers’ favour.
Who’s fault is it?
It’s the fault of the person who doesn’t take care of himself.
Then there’s people who actually do tank their ships, who do not fly on autopilot, who do not overtank their freighters, who do stay aligned (use a higgs rig, seriously) and who do pay attention to their surroundings while doing something. The chances of them getting ganked are slim to none, because …
.) They act vigilant.
.) They’re intentionally unattractive targets.
.) They understand that this is how the game works and how the people in it behave.
Now you come and declare you want a 50% chance of survival. Are you absolutely sure you spent enough time and brain matter into thinking this through? Can you actually write at least two A4 pages of text explaining in detail the whys, hows, short/medium/long term consequences?
Wait … unreasonable?
Nope! Absolutley not!
I’ll cut this shorter.
.) You insult everyone who likes the dangers in this game despite not even being a part of the active side of these dangers. People know it’s a game where you can get shot down everywhere and there is zero reason to assume people don’t actually also joined because of exactly that.
.) You insult everyone who actually puts effort into tanking his ship and staying vigilant. With a 50% chance of surviving, you diminish the efforts people put into getting “maximum survivability” out of their ships.
.) You insult gankers, too, because you basically, literally, ■■■■ onto their game and income source and you think it’s okay, which kind of makes you a huge asshole. The only people who truly deserve their game to be shat on are renter trash, afk cloaky whiners and AFK farmers. Hell, all farmers. ■■■■ those guys in particular.
Right now I’m sitting here, reading through your initial post again. It’s intellectually insulting, honestly, and I don’t know what to say. Note, that’s not actually about just you. I’m in general not a fan of people with low standards, including people who only get voted in because they’re famous youtubers.
Gotta say, most of the CSM are at best average, definitely not intellectual and should definitely not sit there, but as voters are dumb, the people they vote in aren’t generally smart either. Exceptions exist, of course. (■■■■ The Judge, this worthless piece of ■■■■, in particular, btw.)
Too often that means they’re either assholes who abuse simple minds, or simple minds themselves.
Anyhow … example?
“At the moment this is not the case.” Well, wow! No ■■■■, sherlock! It will never be the case, but thanks for implying the possibility that it might some day be. It won’t, because it’s dumb.
What people like you, specifically, often ignore is that gankers are in a serious minority. You ignore that, without the few of us left, highsec would be the single most boring place to be. You ignore that those, who do get ganked, are at fault themselves.
You ignore, or are completely oblivious to the fact that, anyone active in an hostile environment is required to act self responsibly, otherwise he gets killed.
So, in favour of dumb assholes who do not give a flying ■■■■ about playing this game in a way that doesn’t get them killed you’d want CCP to literally ■■■■ on the gameplay of people who actually know what the ■■■■ they’re doing.
There really is zero reason to read the rest. The person where this is coming from can not, in any way or form, be fit for the CSM and I’m definitely NOT saying that anyone of the current CSM actually are.
You’re not getting anywhere.
Have a nice day.
edit: sorry for edits. sended by accident, had a mess in the post.
You are the majority of people posting in my thread.
And your concerns are hard for me to… follow… seems like you are throwing a lot of words at something… that would be a waste of your time.
Where are the rest of high sec? If all of high sec cared as much about the game as the ganker/outlaw faction seems to do… then there would also be more non-null representation on the CSM.
That was 70 pages of… not much. But it was important to have done it.
I want a self destruct mod that absolutely guarantees that all my loot and my pod are destroyed. In the past I called it the “caldari navy self destruct”.
Dude, stop meta-gaming this thread with your alts doing a bunch of troll posting.
Gawd, give it a rest already. I can’t believe the lengths some of you will go to in an attempt to derail a thread.
Mind your own business, mate and don’t accuse others of what you’ve been doing yourself.
I don’t hide behind alts, unlike you.
People who have no reason to complain rarely say anything at all. The reason why there aren’t billions upon billions of threads of hundreds of thousands of people (per game) continuously thanking the devs, is because people, who have nothing to complain, just enjoy the product.
They mind their own business. They don’t want, or need any of this, otherwise we’d be hearing nothing else but that. They also don’t need assholes changing the game for them when they never asked for such changes. The silly amount of people complaining does not, in any way or form, justify changes.
Or, in other words: They don’t actually give a ■■■■.
As you probably notice: The vast majority of people does not complain about gankers, because there’s no actual reason to complain about gankers, or to destroy their game play.
Once again making yourself look like an asshole.
Two of your ideas are deliberately aimed at making people, a tiny minority of players, stop ganking because you want to deny them their income, yet you somehow try to pretend you have no problem with ganking.
You’re not a good person.
There’s nothing more to add.
@Nicolai_Serkanner, please do me the honour.
No, go away.
Yes I am.
Several responders have challenged your various statements in this thread, as they should. Not a single one of their concerns has been entirely invalid. I’d voice many of them myself if they hadn’t been voiced before me, they all have some degree of merit. Yet, your replies so far have only been various flavours of the following:
- “I have answered this question many times in my previous campaign threads” (If people keep asking you the same question over and over, it could be that your answers in the past weren’t adequate. Even if they were, it wouldn’t hurt to spend just a modicum of your time and provide a quote or a link. It’s your readers who’re giving you a favour by voting for you, not the other way around, so do them a solid and spare them some legwork)
- “It’s up to CCP how to run their game” (Ultimately, it is, but, if you doubt your ability to influence the devs’ decisions by providing your input, at least hypothetically, that puts your value as a potential CSM member into question)
- “You’re a ganker, so you must be biased” (In case you haven’t noticed, @Knowledgeminer is one of the most prominent anti-ganker these days, and one that actually manages to disrupt ganks. He raised the same questions. You dismissed him like the rest)
What little reasoning you provide usually revolves around your personal vision or experience with no regard to any outside visions or data, e.g. “If I ganked 3 miners with a 100% success, then all ganks are a 100% success”, which is obviously either disingenuous or based on assumptions that go against common rules of logic.
This leads us to several possibilities:
- You genuinely believe that highsec should be safe for farmers and everyone else can just ■■■■ off;
- You are a troll candidate running for CSM for fun and/or attention;
According to Steve Ronuken’s exact quote on Reddit, going to a CSM summit is a “free trip, which you mostly spend in a meeting room. the only ‘Iceland’ thing about it, really, is the physical location”, so I have removed the “free flight to Iceland” part from the list for honesty’s sake. Still, neither of the remaining options above sound too reassuring to me.