I’ve never yet come upon an honest argument with such a title. It is always by someone who does not give a stuff about ‘the’ actual definition of anything but simply wants to play word salad semantics to make the definition be something else. That way they can impose some other argument and argue that something is ‘wrong’. It’s always utterly dishonest and devious.
excatly. He simply wants affirmation that the people that destroyed his stuff are bad persons and he is in the right and should get some pity for being killed.
I don’t see anything wrong with this, since it’s the likely outcome of many encounters in EVE. Someone is bound to be disappointed; let’s just make sure it’s them rather than us.
As for its being the primary motive, I must disagree. For me, and for all those with whom I retain contact in the world of Suddenly-Gankers, the primary motives are Gain and Conquest. The disappointment of the target is of no importance and may, in any case, be mitigated by the studied cultivation of poise, patience and perspicacity.
The renowned Dr Gabor Maté has a video somewhere on YouTube where he explains ‘triggers’. In sum, no one has to be triggered. It happens when you engage with the person whose finger is on that trigger. Or something like that…
The terms are often conflated. Some folks believe that suicide-ganking is griefing since, they posit, griefing is the primary motive of the ganker. I take your point though, Done25, and I apologise if I’ve misrepresented your comments.
Mmm, suicide ganking definitely can be done for the sake of grief. Since doing so results in a guaranteed loss of ship and sec status that warrants a fairly valuable/large loot drop to offset.