I’m quite flatered to be called a ganker though. But I’m afraid it is totally undeserved.
I have lost a lot to gankers though, as you can check out. I even had paranoia at some point recently when I thought I was actively hunted, went for 3 month break.
Biggest loss was Ascendacy implanted capsule. Can you imagine, I was mining 2 jumps from Jita during an event and I was AFK.
No he did not, he said something different. You should go back and read it, for someone telling me that I did not read what you wrote that is rather amusing.
Again you have failed to understand what Lorelei was talking about.
You are now talking about escalations rather than missions, you want to sell a narrative so hard you are confusing yourself.
You just came over as completely unaware of multiple things.
As for another issue you missed the word and when I detailed the names of gankers, and I then mentioned you specifically on what you said, the and was there for a reason. If you are unable to understand that and then tell me that I think you are a ganker, well more fool you.
What you said above has no relationship to what Lorelei said, go back and read it.
Man, not long ago it was only miner gankers that I was good at hunting, now it’s only Tornado and Vexor gankers, but miner gankers are no longer in the list… Don’t you think providing the list of things I’m not effective at would be easier? If anything, the list would surely be shorter, or wouldn’t it?
And what blind spot would that be? Be more precise please, say what it is exactly that I don’t know about AG or wouldn’t know how to do right if I had the opportunity to.
Because even though this thread isn’t about me and I definitely expect it doesn’t become about me, your blanket statement makes it look as if I could be missing something about this suicide ganking / anti-ganking thing that might invalidate anything I said in some other post…
Could it be that you didn’t really read what I said to begin with?
EDIT: I have to say I find it funny that you consider yourself qualified to say I have some “blind spot” about this whole issue, but I’m always willing to learn and open to criticism, so I’ll leave it at that for now, if for no other reason because I’m curious what you come up with that has anything to do with what’s being discussed here…
Tornado, Vexor, gankers and of course those that gank miners. You are relentless and very very good at it.
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.
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. I just found it rather amusing to say that. Dark humour I know, but…,
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, you took it literally and extrapolated something that she did not say.
You need to read this
How on earth you extrapolated that she meant having a chance based mechanic is beyond me.
Lorelei did not suggest that, seriously?
Again, WTF. 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.
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. And chanting back that she wanted a chance based system was stupid and like a ganker troll.
lmao @Dracvlad did he pay you to do this or is this just some highsec carebear justice boner raging?
Honestly, though, let’s just wait and see what the CSM results are because I’m pretty sure I’m right, the community won’t support an individual whose ideals are so opposed to the core values of what EVE Online is supposed to be, a dangerous, harsh, and hostile universe where carebears such as yourselves must live in fear. 
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…
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?
What are you talking about now? What PS? What feeling did I go into about which Lorelei’s statement?
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…
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:
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?
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…
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…
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…
YOU are the one chanting and making stupid comments here that don’t have a leg to stand upon…
That still doesn’t really explain this
That is really the only issue I would like further explained. On all my characters, I’ve been the target of a hi-sec gank once (and walked away with 50% shields (I was careless in how much I stuffed in a badger)). I’ve also been involved in ganks (mostly on another character), not always successfully.
I guess my point is that there are some players who seem to be serial gankees through their choices while others make different choices and are rarely ganked. Why should the careless bears be given the chances the careful bears make for themselves?
Actually, that’s not what she said she wants. What she said (or rather implied, since she made absolutely no distinction) is all should be given at least a 50% chance to survive.
I guess she wants or expects the careful ones would have a higher rate of survival than the stated 50% minimum, but the completely careless ones would still get the 50% minimum survival rate regardless.
Okay, I may have oversimplified a little. She doesn’t want ‘thieves’ go suspect.
She wants her moon, her Athanor, her belt neighborhood turn lowsec for no reason. Which is not a great of a difference to what I said earlier but IMO is even worse. Why not just move to lowsec to be able to defend ‘her’ ore? She didn’t answer that one too.
Mission runner creates wrecks, ninja salvager steals wrecks using salvager. Not a crime. Stealing loot is a crime turning him suspect.
Escalation runner summons overseer. Ninja scanner steals kill and loot. Not a crime. Stealing loot without kill is, turning him suspect.
DED runner clears rats to get to overseer. Competitor steals kill and loot. Not a crime. Stealing loot without a kill is, turning him suspect.
Athanor creates asteroid field. Ninja miner mines asteroids. Not a crime. Stealing cans is, turning him suspect.
What did you find confusing in those examples? I may try to lay it out for you in even simpler terms. If you don’t agree, you may present your arguments. Stating I’m unaware of things, I’m a fool, etc. is cheap smack talk. You’re free to do so, but OP using that kind of tactics in her campaign presents herself baseless and weak.
As I stated earlier I don’t care much about moon mining, but she wants her case to be an exception from highsec rules and doesn’t explain or clarify why. When confronted, accuses people being trolls and gankers and dismisses any further questions.
Is that what a CSM member should be like? She just wants to present her own vision to CCP? I thought they were going to represent players. I see lack of communication so far. Baseless ultra-carebear position.
I am whatever your fears and projections are, in your own mind of course. As for getting into the CSM most hisec players don’t vote, so chances are fairly remote though this candidate almost did it last time, but that scares you?
For @Knowledgeminer
How can you and others turn this into the OP asking for a chance based formula to be applied into the game engine. And that you lot did this is truly dishonest and pathetic.
That is a totally reasonable suggestion that a number of people have come out with and bears no relation to what you started to go on about. Which you then realise:
It is different, it is creating a limited engagement between the people mining and the owner of the Athanor. If you are going to criticise their ideas understand them first.
The OP’s suggestion was not to make them criminal, you went off on a rant about missions and escalations missing the point that the OP did not say anything about making them criminal or suspect.
As for making the candidate weak the OP is asking to create a situation where they can defend their ore and are you telling me that a candidate that is opening the door to more PvP in hisec is weak? Seriously mate.
She wants a specific limited engagement for people mining ore without permission, which means that the owner has still got to go blow them up, so you calling that an ultra carebear position is laughable.
I have my opinion about the areas of play that you do not and have not engaged in.
I was referring to the guy sitting AFK in lowsec that I came across, read it above.
The OP never suggested a chance based mechanic and stating that she did is dishonest and wrong, and typical of ganker and ganker aligned players.
Pathetic, what the OP is suggesting is adjusting the balance of the game in some why to make it less certain.
She never asked for a chance based mechanic, stop being dumb.
She admits ganking is an option. But still wants more power and local exception from highsec rules. All I was asking to explain why, and would the same apply to other similar situations I presented. A valid question, is it not?
CODE claims miners require permission to mine highsec belts, should they be given limited engagement. They woudnt have to suicide gank too. Is it what OP wants for herself?
No it does not, they are different. That of course is an opinion, I think putting down an Athanor to pull in the ore from a moon is a higher level of play than instanced play from missions even if others can warp to them. Having an Athanor exposes them to war decs. So when you start going through it then you start to expose the underlying higher risk, so if people can come along and take the ore without exposing them to risk why do it. I am on the fence with this in a number of ways, I see both sides, but the OP wanted the ability to defend the ore that was pulled by their structure, a structure that exposes them to war.
One benefit would be of course that more people would be in the holding corp of the Athanor so as to be able to go after the people ninja mining.
They could put an Athanor down and leave it as a honey trap in the situation the OP has suggested. Would be amusing…, think about the emergent play possible with such a setup.
@Lorelei_Ierendi I am sorry to jump into your thread like this, but you were being attacked unfairly. Good luck.
It’s really cute seeing highseccers try and talk big. You should stop jerking yourself off so much, it might chafe. 
This guy is unqualified in so many forms to be on the CSM, and that’s just that. But I guess we’ll see once the election comes through.
Again, dodging questions, refusing to elaborate on his positions, endorsing ideas that are straight up counter to the core concept of EVE (like being able to survive 50% of ganks? ha!), and so on. All of these just point to signs of someone who doesn’t know enough about the game and only seeks to make the game safer for their own limited playstyle at the expense of everyone else.
But again, we’ll see.
I know nothing about moon mining, I only did some warping around Athanors to assess if ninja mining would be a viable thing to persue. Mining is boring, but ninja part in any activity always fascinates me.
The link says you only need 2.5 hours to strip mine your belt with 4 toons, and if I understand correctly you have full control over when you explode your chunk. WTF are we talking about then?
You do not understand the role of the CSM, it is to give the point of view of the player base more than anything else, the OP is qualified to give the viewpoint of many dedicated solo and small group hisec players.
You are the one trying to talk big and polluting this thread.
I was ninja mining ice in lowsec, rather fun and amusing.
There are a number of variables in terms of how often you set the moon mining to fracture the moon, is that the most rapid cycle you are detailing here? But even then if I have two accounts that is 5 hours mining and one account is 10 hours. Do you see the issue now?
Actually, tell me what you believe the CSM does. I’m curious.
I thought it says somewhere in industry tutorial that if you’re going to mine you’ll need a dozen of alts, doesnt it? 
Expecting to solo mine a belt of ABC in highsec for 10 hours, hoping to keep it all for yourself… Self entitlement and greed is commendable. 
Do you honestly think they ought to, and its good for the game?
They calculate 3 moons, 6 day cycles. Mining for 2.5 hours with an orca+3hulks every other day. Expecting 12-15 bil ISK/month. Minus 8-9 bil to plex 4 accounts its 3-6 bil monthly profit.