Well, we can use the definition that OP used.
Stopping ganks is defined as preventing the gank from succeeding, i.e. the target survives.
1 Like
Too narrow and therefore meaningless.
Please explain. How is it too narrow, and therefore meaningless?
1 Like
An example is my blowing up of Aaaaargh’s alt, he was merely jumping a gate to find someone to gank, he did not have an active target at that point in time, but because I blew up his ship someone perhaps did not get ganked. In your context of saving someone I have to have someone there about to be shot to save someone?
How do you know he didnt have an active target at that time?
1 Like
There was no one in a pod or a frigate on the gate slow boating when he jumped through. And if there had been he would have tried to shoot it, he is a very good and active ganker by the way, unlike you. (Emphasis on active.)
So youre saying it is impossible that he was on his way to gank another target on another gate or anomaly?
I never said I ganked, and this isnt even the account Id do it on if i were. Wink wink.
1 Like
I am saying that in the narrow definition you are pushing, my blowing up of his thrasher would not be seen as saving someone. You have to be clear on what you are saying before I can answer it. Do you think I saved someone?
I am referring to the fact that he ganks and is very active and you are not active at all.
So why didnt you mention this to the OP?
Im active on the forums. We all have our own battlefield. Thankfully, Im as good on these forums as Aaargh is in space.
2 Likes
He defined my blowing up of Aaaarghs alt as saving someone and thus worthy of his additional bounty.
No where close. I have a lot of respect for Aaaaaargh, he is by far my favourite ganker, he is utterly relentless and very good at what he does.
So theres your answer. You saved someone.
Im sure there are people in AG who would disagree with you.
1 Like
So loot denial is saving someone then.
You suppose, just like you suppose that AG’s job is to save a victim. In truth I speak for myself in that I do not see AG’s job as saving people but to oppose the gankers in the most efficient way they can. And I suppose there are people in and outside of AG who would disagree with me. So I do not see it as my role to directly save people.
Not unless that Loot is going to gank another player.
I dont suppose, I know for a fact. Im actively in the AG channel.
So when you said:
You were being incorrect, as there might possibly be AGers who think that it is their job to stop ganks and save the victims?
1 Like
Big if…
No you don’t know for a fact, and so what that you are in the channel.
So some people have a different view, so perhaps your statement should be that some people think that AG’s role is to save the victim, you were pretty definite that it was all by the way you said it. Which was correctly pointed out by me as being:
I never used the word “If”.
Yes, I do. If someone who says they are AG, in the AG channel, and says that one of their jobs is to prevent ganks from happening, then it is a fact.
I never said All. I guess ill reply with a quotation from yourself.
I guess youre just as guilty for “supposing”, as you accused me of.
1 Like
I did.
For that person yes.
If you had said some you could get away with that, but you said AG as a whole.
You suppose…
So youre saying that you were using a big If?
Well, thats good for you, but what does it have to do with my comment, then?
So its a fact.
When did i say AG as a whole?
So did you.
1 Like
Ok, and I already regret putting my hand in this blender…
If AG arent wanting to stop ganks, but deny loot for funs and tears, does that mean that Venture ganking and other actions similar against new players are not a problem as often posted by those who feel strongly about ganking? Or that its not something that AG (if they are in fact a group and not just a label) care about?
2 Likes
Ventures don’t have any loot so of course they’re beneath notice.
In terms of your statement. It means it was a conditional.
For that person perhaps.
You did not say some AG.
You suppose.
Why are you suggesting that AG don’t want to stop ganks. Read this which started my interaction with Solonius:
Solonius here is confusing saving the target and preventing ganks, the issue is here. My reply was that AG oppose ganking, for example the AG intel channel saves people.
AG try to prevent ganks, but the thing is that it does not mean that we save the immediate victim, something that Solonius seems to find confusing, and you too by your reaction. Preventing them from looting is not for fun and tears though that is obviously part of it, but if you prevent them from getting the loot then they wasted a Tornado, even better if you can kill their loot scooper too then they lost the loot, the tornado and the loot scooper. It is a big blow and we have caused several gankers to give up. That is preventing ganks, the thing is that very few people notice.
Gankers like Kusion and the Aussie loud mouth have so much ISK that they don’t care, it just annoys them, it would have to be a round the clock effort by many people and there are not enough AG to even do that. Hence my attitude of only going after those that I can impact.
As for Ventures there are some AG that hunt miner gankers, but not that many. Have you ever tried to do this, it sounds easy but is not. Wrack a mole comes to mind…
1 Like