# The CSM 13 Winter Summit Minutes are out **URL:** \ **Category:** Dev Blogs\ **Tags:** csm\ **Created:** [October 2, 2018, 8:37pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-csm-13-winter-summit-minutes-are-out/110726 "2018-10-02T20:37:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 3278
**Author:** ![Arrendis](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arrendis/32/432594_2.png) [@Arrendis](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arrendis)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2018, 1:03pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-csm-13-winter-summit-minutes-are-out/110726/3278 "2018-10-17T13:03:43Z")
Ok! Good! You answered! Thank you. Now, back to substantive discussion, because **that was the whole point** : Q1: How is this gained by restricting Social Corps to HS, but not gained if they’re _not_ restricted to HS? You answered: > [@Proteus\_Onzo](#): > > The issue is players logging off while under wardec and never returning. > Wardecs do not relevantly apply in LS/NS/WH, only in HS. > > Thus nothing is gained by allowing Social Corps into or in LS/NS/WH. > > Its for small groups or solo HS players to continue PvE without wardecs, with their own Tag/identity, in HS. This tells us that there’s no specific gain to _not_ restricting people, but it doesn’t tell us what we gain if we _do_ restrict them, which is what I asked. As we established days ago, restrictions are only justified when there is something to gain _from the restriction_. So while I appreciate you attempting to answer, this answer doesn’t actually address the question. Maybe that’s my fault. Maybe I’m not being clear. What I’m trying to find out is… what specific benefit is there to this specific restriction? You said: > [@](#): > > So small friend groups or solo HS PvErs can do their thing in a Social Corp without wardecs. > This to prevent them leaving during wardecs and never returning. > That was the idea and point all along. > That, and only that. Ok. Let’s assume for a moment that social corps will do that. None of the things that make social corps different from regular corps under your proposal have any effect in LS/NS/WHs. Wardecs, as you point out, are meaningless there. So, if social corps will achieve those goals, then social corps will do that _regardless_ of whether or not their members can go into LS/NW/WHs, right? Do you see some reason social corps would _not_ achieve their goals if they’re allowed into LS/NS/WHs? Because see, one bit of what you said is _very_ important: > [@Proteus\_Onzo](#): > > Its for small groups or solo HS players to continue PvE without wardecs, with their own Tag/identity, in HS. It’s about being social. It’s about being able to do things with your friends. Right? But our friends aren’t always on when we’re on. Our friends don’t always want to try out the same things we do, at the same times. So let me set you an example: You’ve got a social corp. There’s 10 players in it. They’re in HS. They enjoy doing stuff together. One of them decides he wants to see what wormholes are like. He’s not looking to move into j-space and join up with HK or anyone, he just wants to check them out, poke around, get an idea on whether or not he should try to get his friends to give them a try. He _doesn’t_ want to leave his friends. After all, he’s there to play _with_ his friends. Why should he be forced to quit his corp just to see if wormholes are a thing he might enjoy? Why should he be forced to quit his corp if he’s running L4 missions, and one of them sends him into lowsec (because they do, if you’re near LS)? Because I see that—forcing people to choose between their friends, the very social interaction that keeps them playing, and just _trying_ new things—as a major problem. I see that as something that will make the idea crash and burn. So: what _specific benefit_, over and above achieving the goals of Social Corps, do you see being gained by restricting them to HS? That’s a legitimate concern, and I’ve outlined why. Now, on to Question 2: What benefit is _gained_ by restricting gankers from doing everything they can do in an undeccable NPC corp, in a social corp? > [@Proteus\_Onzo](#): > > Its not about adding benefit. Its about preventing abuse. > > In the restrictions I posted, Suicide Gankers can form Social Corps, but they cannot turn off Green Safety, they cannot have members with \<0.1 Sec status, and they cannot venture into \<0.5 space. > > If they want to commit criminal or suspect acts, they can still do so in a Player or NPC Corp. > > The purpose of Social Corps is so small groups or solo HS players can PvE without wardecs, with their own Tag/identity, not to allow Suicide Gankers and pirates to use a Social Corps for their criminal and suspect flag causing activities, whilst wardec immune. Ok, so… and tell me if I’m getting this right… the benefit you see is that it will prevent gankers from joining social corps. That’s fair, I can see that as something you’d consider a benefit. I’m not sure I agree, but I’m not sure I’d disagree either. But at the same time… I can’t help but think of our friend who wanted to investigate wormholes, but can’t without leaving all of his friends. What if someone in one of these social corps, which, again, exist so small groups can maintain their own identity without worrying about the systemic, organized PvP of a wardec being dropped on them (they can still _get_ ganked, after all)… what if someone in a social corp wants to _try_ ganking for the first time? They’ve never done it. They don’t know what the big deal is, but they’re curious. Again, you’re forcing them to choose between ‘investigate more of the game’ and ‘stay with my friends’. Why? People progress through things at different rates. They get interested in different things at different speeds. But that doesn’t mean they want to ditch their friends. That doesn’t mean they want to abandon the group identity they’ve built up with those friends. Forcing them to do that seems unnecessarily restrictive. I’ve mentioned that when I first started, I was one of those HS miners who didn’t want to PvP. I’ve even mentioned that our corp eventually moved into wormholes. We didn’t all decide ‘let’s try this’ at once. Our CEO got curious first, and he started poking around in j-space on his own. He saw the much, much better ore in there, and started thinking maybe we should consider day-tripping into wormholes when there was one around. It was another three months before the whole corp went mining in a wormhole. Hell, it was six weeks before his _wife_ went in. Why should he have been told ‘if you want to try something new in EVE, you have to leave your wife’? Why should HS groups that want to do the ‘social corp’ thing have to be _stuck_ in HS, and stuck doing PvE, without being able to try new things unless they abandon their friends? ‘You’re in a social corp, you’ve never ganked anyone… and you’ll never be able to unless you leave your buddies’. It just seems like they’re trapped. It feels like… _not_ EVE. Like opportunities being taken _away_, instead of offered. That’s what I don’t get here. That’s why I’m trying to find some upside to that _specific_ restriction. --- _[View the full topic](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-csm-13-winter-summit-minutes-are-out/110726)._