Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Alexandra Delarge
The Korova
68
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 00:41:00 -
[91] - Quote
Wilma Lawson wrote:Alexandra Delarge wrote:Wilma Lawson wrote:Alexandra Delarge wrote: Only a hisec miner would think that.
Really? Then why do you defend your space if you aren't averse to losing assets, aka being risk averse?The phrase used was 'Irrationally risk adverse'. Read back. While your at it read what Ruby Porto said because he already answered your question with regard to NBSI and docking rights in null. You're still risk averse. I thought we were talking about large 0.0 alliances being 'Irrationally risk adverse'. Which you yourself said is a bad thing. Look. [quote=Wilma Lawson] Being risk averse is not a bad thing unless taken to extreme.
You seem to be confusing 'taking steps to minimise the chance of loss' with being an out and out coward.
|
Klandi
Consortium of stella Technologies
61
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 00:42:00 -
[92] - Quote
So instead of discussing subjective theory, let me express a scenario - as close to factual as possible.
I am an industrialist in game - I want to make money by making stuff and selling stuff. The "sandbox" allows this. To perform this I must have a way of making stuff and also making a profit so I can pay for plexes for my characters and purchase components to make into stuff. My preferred method of making stuff is by erecting a POS - a large one, a Minnie POS. I need to sell my stuff to the masses and the most cost effective location is Jita - so where is the best place to erect my POS? IN NULL_SEC OF COURSE. Sadly not oh gentle reader - because it would not be profitable - and the cost of PLEXes is high so I must maximize my profits. So I put up my POS in hi-sec - fairly close to this major hub. Now I need fuel to maintain this method of gameplay - where do I go to get this? IN NULL_SEC OF COURSE. Again - you are not on the same page - I need to get the ice in hi-sec because it is cost effective and I prefer to do it alone as I cannot afford to share it. So - a Metropolis ice bearing system gets the attention of my ice-miner. And I get ganked ....
Because the situation has been created that means several variables have been created (hi-sec, POS structures, fuel requirements, location of Jita, type of gameplay) I have no choice about where I go to optimize my profits.
So for the casual player, the one that does not like large groups or never feels the need to be hampered by sitting in or creating a super or station - why do I need null-sec? And why do I need to be ganked? I am aware of my own ignorance and have checked my emotional quotient - thanks for asking |
Wilma Lawson
Hedion University Amarr Empire
70
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 01:58:00 -
[93] - Quote
AllUrIskRBelongToMeToo wrote: Why bother with these fools? They cannot connect the idea that being loss averse is nothing but a specific level of risk averse. What is it to take a risk one must ask. To take a risk is to take a chance that something negative will happen due to the actions taken by the individual. The be "loss averse" is to want to reduce the risk that one is taking, also see "risk averse". .
Indeed, which is why I stopped responding to their posts. I forgot and fed the trolls. |
Wilma Lawson
Hedion University Amarr Empire
70
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 01:59:00 -
[94] - Quote
Alexandra Delarge wrote: You seem to be confusing 'taking steps to minimise the chance of loss' with being an out and out coward.
Being risk averse and being a coward are not the same thing. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1791
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 02:09:00 -
[95] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Miners are irrationally risk averse. Imagine if we EVER had one thread crying because cloakies AFK in 0.0 systems. Oh, well, they come up like fungus, showing two proofs: - Some 0.0 seccers are as risk averse, like some miners are risk averse. - They demand safety in the supposed end game harsh world. There are some miners who also demand the same. The difference being, the above 0.0 seccers demand the same things than some hi sec miners demand yet the former went to 0.0 to have major income yet no risk and the latter stayed in hi sec accepting dwarfed income.
I make fun of the AFK Cloaking whiners too.
As the math above that showed, Miners are, as a whole Irrationally risk averse.
Assuming there are 5000 Hulks mining at any given time, there's only a 20% chance of surviving 720 hours of mining. That's terrible until you consider that at even the most conservative rate, (10m/hr conservative enough?) that's 7.2 Billion Isk.
The math informs the comment. If miners were rationally Risk averse, we wouldn't have seen a 40% decline in mining.
I'm not saying that some ratters in 0.0 aren't also irrationally risk averse. I haven't figured out how to calculate the likelihood of getting ganked when you run anoms with a neut in system.
But again, only if you estimate that all the HAG kills are Hulks and there are only 500 Hulks mining in HS at any given time, will a 40% decrease in mining be anywhere close to a rational response from the mining community.
I have no problem with being risk averse. I have a problem with being irrationally so. It would be like not entering into the market because you *could* lose money without figuring out what the liklihood of that loss is compared to the likelihood of gain. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1791
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 02:12:00 -
[96] - Quote
Wilma Lawson wrote:Alexandra Delarge wrote:Wilma Lawson wrote:Alexandra Delarge wrote: Only a hisec miner would think that.
Really? Then why do you defend your space if you aren't averse to losing assets, aka being risk averse? Being risk averse is not a bad thing unless taken to extreme. The phrase used was 'Irrationally risk adverse'. Read back. While your at it read what Ruby Porto said because he already answered your question with regard to NBSI and docking rights in null. You're still risk averse.
Didn't say otherwise. Everybody is risk averse to some degree.
Miners are irrationally so. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1791
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 02:13:00 -
[97] - Quote
Spikeflach wrote:
I'm sorry, i haven't mined for months, i'm only confirming the tactic of not mining to not get ganked.
Why you have to go on, i don't know.
And yes, even super duper pvp types will turn tail and run if they have even the littlest bit of a chance they could lose.
You've never been in a welped fleet, have you? Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Alia Gon'die
Aliastra Gallente Federation
51
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 02:32:00 -
[98] - Quote
To not be loss-averse means to be pleased by the loss of your ship. To not be risk-averse means to not be scared of risking your ship. They seem to be pretty different concepts to me.
Though I suppose to someone who has a preformed opinion on these sorts of subjects, it could be difficult to see things a different way. |
Dimitryy
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
46
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 02:32:00 -
[99] - Quote
Klandi wrote:So instead of discussing subjective theory, let me express a scenario - as close to factual as possible.
I am an industrialist in game - I want to make money by making stuff and selling stuff. The "sandbox" allows this. To perform this I must have a way of making stuff and also making a profit so I can pay for plexes for my characters and purchase components to make into stuff. My preferred method of making stuff is by erecting a POS - a large one, a Minnie POS. I need to sell my stuff to the masses and the most cost effective location is Jita - so where is the best place to erect my POS? IN NULL_SEC OF COURSE. Sadly not oh gentle reader - because it would not be profitable - and the cost of PLEXes is high so I must maximize my profits. So I put up my POS in hi-sec - fairly close to this major hub. Now I need fuel to maintain this method of gameplay - where do I go to get this? IN NULL_SEC OF COURSE. Again - you are not on the same page - I need to get the ice in hi-sec because it is cost effective and I prefer to do it alone as I cannot afford to share it. So - a Metropolis ice bearing system gets the attention of my ice-miner. And I get ganked ....
Because the situation has been created that means several variables have been created (hi-sec, POS structures, fuel requirements, location of Jita, type of gameplay) I have no choice about where I go to optimize my profits.
So for the casual player, the one that does not like large groups or never feels the need to be hampered by sitting in or creating a super or station - why do I need null-sec? And why do I need to be ganked?
Let me answer the part i bolded first. You need to be ganked because ganking is part of the sandbox process just like your industry is. You don't HAVE to do anything you listed. You could set your POS and mining operation up somewhere NOT near a trade hub, and move your goods to market, which allows you to minimize loss by keeping your ships safe in less traveled space. You could mine with a cheaper ship or a very well tanked ship, trading slight profits for increased safety.
The idea that you should be guaranteed the absolute most efficient way to run your enterprise, with no modifications to ensure the safety and security of your assets, and not be interfered with at all is FALSE, that is not how the sandbox works, and not how eve should work, ever.
Remember, your enterprise is effecting the market, lowering prices, competing with others. YOU are effecting people, and it is only fair that others should effect you right back. |
Wilma Lawson
Hedion University Amarr Empire
70
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 02:37:00 -
[100] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Wilma Lawson wrote:Alexandra Delarge wrote:Wilma Lawson wrote:Alexandra Delarge wrote: Only a hisec miner would think that.
Really? Then why do you defend your space if you aren't averse to losing assets, aka being risk averse? Being risk averse is not a bad thing unless taken to extreme. The phrase used was 'Irrationally risk adverse'. Read back. While your at it read what Ruby Porto said because he already answered your question with regard to NBSI and docking rights in null. You're still risk averse. Didn't say otherwise. Everybody is risk averse to some degree. Miners are irrationally so. Never make generalizations. SOME miners are extremely risk averse and go to the forums and complain. SOME gankers respond to those posts trying to justify their ganking activities. Both of these groups feed each other. Rinse and repeat ad nauseum. |
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1792
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 02:40:00 -
[101] - Quote
Wilma Lawson wrote:RubyPorto wrote:
Didn't say otherwise. Everybody is risk averse to some degree.
Miners are irrationally so.
Never make generalizations. SOME miners are extremely risk averse and go to the forums and complain. SOME gankers respond to those posts trying to justify their ganking activities. Both of these groups feed each other. Rinse and repeat ad nauseum.
As a class, based on the 40% drop in minerals mined, Miners are irrationally risk averse.
If it makes you feel better, I can say the average miner is, but ultimately it means the same thing.
EDIT: When I'm talking about classes of people, unless I say "All x" then I assume that outliers may exist. Mainly because I don't like having to qualify my words when most people understand that classes generally have outliers and exceptions. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Cynthia Eldo
Yoyodyne Technologies
4
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 03:30:00 -
[102] - Quote
All the interesting my aversion is bigger than your aversion aside, I have not had any of the gankers try to gank me mining with my Rokh. Unlike they did when I was in an unarmed Covetor. I shouted out even saying "Look at me I'm mining in HiSec!". If the issue is HiSec mining then this says more of the gankers aversion to risk or anything else. Yoyodyne Technologies Bringing You Today's Technologies Tomorrow! |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
212
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 03:38:00 -
[103] - Quote
Lexmana wrote:I will eat my hat if this is not a goon alt.
What hat? The only hats in Eve are my loke my Tin Foil hat! EVE residents: 5% WH; 8% Lowsec; 15% Nullsec; 72% Highsec.CSM 7: 1 highsec resident out of 14.CSM demographics vs EVE demographics, nothing to worry about... |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1792
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 03:49:00 -
[104] - Quote
Cynthia Eldo wrote:All the interesting my aversion is bigger than your aversion aside, I have not had any of the gankers try to gank me mining with my Rokh. Unlike they did when I was in an unarmed Covetor. I shouted out even saying "Look at me I'm mining in HiSec!". If the issue is HiSec mining then this says more of the gankers aversion to risk or anything else.
You're using methods of minimizing risk and I applaud you for that. You reduced your yield a little and added a little clicking, but you're doing something that many people arguing against the whining miners (not all miners, just the whining ones) have been suggesting as a solution, and quite a number of people have been saying is, I dunno, evidence that the Hulk is broken for some reason.
You are rationally coping with an increase risk. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Malphilos
State War Academy Caldari State
77
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 03:49:00 -
[105] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Being loss-averse and being risk-averse are utterly unconnected things.
Weaselior wrote:being loss-averse is assumed in all discussions of risk aversion because without it the entire discussion makes no sense
Goon 101. Next comes the claim that he never intended to make sense.
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1792
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 03:53:00 -
[106] - Quote
Malphilos wrote:Weaselior wrote:Being loss-averse and being risk-averse are utterly unconnected things. Weaselior wrote:being loss-averse is assumed in all discussions of risk aversion because without it the entire discussion makes no sense Goon 101. Next comes the claim that he never intended to make sense.
You can be loss averse without being risk averse. Claiming that someone is necessarily risk averse because they are loss averse is wrong.
Context. It matters. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Malphilos
State War Academy Caldari State
77
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 03:59:00 -
[107] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Malphilos wrote:Weaselior wrote:Being loss-averse and being risk-averse are utterly unconnected things. Weaselior wrote:being loss-averse is assumed in all discussions of risk aversion because without it the entire discussion makes no sense Goon 101. Next comes the claim that he never intended to make sense. You can be loss averse without being risk averse.
No.
Re-read your compadre's blurb. You risk nothing but loss. It's like saying you can be purple without being a color.
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1792
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 04:04:00 -
[108] - Quote
Malphilos wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Malphilos wrote:Weaselior wrote:Being loss-averse and being risk-averse are utterly unconnected things. Weaselior wrote:being loss-averse is assumed in all discussions of risk aversion because without it the entire discussion makes no sense Goon 101. Next comes the claim that he never intended to make sense. You can be loss averse without being risk averse. No. Re-read your compadre's blurb. You risk nothing but loss. It's like saying you can be purple without being a color.
Until you see people self destructing uninsured ships for no reason, it's safe to assume Everybody's loss averse.
While I think he overstated by saying they're unconnected, it's like saying you can't be a [nationality] unless you're human. It's technically true, but it's silly to say in an argument. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1161
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 06:05:00 -
[109] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Miners are irrationally risk averse. Imagine if we EVER had one thread crying because cloakies AFK in 0.0 systems. As someone who quails at the thought of losing a ship and who gets clammy at the thought of leaving highsec, i am sure you have difficulty understanding the mind of someone willing to live in 0.0. What outrages a nullseccer, a man who can stand on his own two feet, about an AFK cloaker is not the thought he might lose a ship. It's that someone is in his space and he cannot murder them.
Sadly I am not some e-p33n mofo nor a self proclaimed universe ruler. Therefore I recorded just some tiny fragments. But anyway since these are enough to prove you wrong once again:
Here is me carrying a BPO thru Rancer less than 1 month ago.
Here is me in Tama when I joined FW, that is when I could not fit a T2 geared Rifter yet.
Here is me in FW again, when I joined DR. I could finally use a cruiser.
Shortly after I was small roaming in Geminate. You don't have the exclusivity of being in 0.0.
Shooting at red crosses. Yes but in 0.1 sec.
Gate camping.
Docked at one of the bases. Jita? No, Taff.
Docked at another home. Jita? No 5J-UEX
Then some very bad events in life happened and I could not commit any more to that EvE life, gameplay now is from 15 to 30 mins a day tops.
Edit:
About
Weaselior wrote: What outrages a nullseccer, a man who can stand on his own two feet, about an AFK cloaker is not the thought he might lose a ship. It's that someone is in his space and he cannot murder them.
Poor thing, I am all tears. Unlike hi seccers, he's there for the riches, so be ready to harden up counter that. For some reason we never had issues at killing AFK cloakers, since they had to do something sooner or later. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1161
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 06:10:00 -
[110] - Quote
Wilma Lawson wrote: Then why is the macho null seccer coming into high sec?
To show how little he knew about those he talks about.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1162
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 06:16:00 -
[111] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Wilma Lawson wrote:RubyPorto wrote:
Didn't say otherwise. Everybody is risk averse to some degree.
Miners are irrationally so.
Never make generalizations. SOME miners are extremely risk averse and go to the forums and complain. SOME gankers respond to those posts trying to justify their ganking activities. Both of these groups feed each other. Rinse and repeat ad nauseum. As a class, based on the 40% drop in minerals mined, Miners are irrationally risk averse. If it makes you feel better, I can say the average miner is, but ultimately it means the same thing.
All of this does not makes sense.
If you are a little ant RL worker you go to work to raise a family and have a bland and irrationally safe life and nobody comes to boss you. Why would the equivalent little ants in EvE be different? Don't come tell me it's the sandbox, because RL is way more hard core than EvE, beginning with the fact you can lose all including your non capsuled life. Since it's a realistic sandbox, people carry over their own life and experience, just in a sci-fi setting. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1162
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 06:32:00 -
[112] - Quote
Also, proving Weaselior wrong #2:
Weaselior wrote: As someone who quails at the thought of losing a ship and who gets clammy at the thought of leaving highsec, i am sure you have difficulty understanding the mind of someone willing to live in 0.0.
Here's my risk aversion: This is my RL trading platform in the middle of a trade started yesterday. It's one of the most money risking professions where more than 90% of the participants lose and they don't lose just some crappy bunch of pixels, they lose much real money.
Now, oh hard man, show me who is risking more? Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1794
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 06:46:00 -
[113] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Wilma Lawson wrote:RubyPorto wrote:
Didn't say otherwise. Everybody is risk averse to some degree.
Miners are irrationally so.
Never make generalizations. SOME miners are extremely risk averse and go to the forums and complain. SOME gankers respond to those posts trying to justify their ganking activities. Both of these groups feed each other. Rinse and repeat ad nauseum. As a class, based on the 40% drop in minerals mined, Miners are irrationally risk averse. If it makes you feel better, I can say the average miner is, but ultimately it means the same thing. All of this does not makes sense. If you are a little ant RL worker you go to work to raise a family and have a bland and irrationally safe life and nobody comes to boss you. Why would the equivalent little ants in EvE be different? Don't come tell me it's the sandbox, because RL is way more hard core than EvE, beginning with the fact you can lose all including your non capsuled life. Since it's a realistic sandbox, people carry over their own life and experience, just in a sci-fi setting.
Did I say YOU? No. I said Miners, as a Class. As in the market of miners reacted irrationally to a change in the risk profile. Anyway, the reason why they're irrationally risk averse isn't relevant either.
The fact is, the HS miner market has reacted in an irrational way to the perceived risk of ganking when the real risk is quite small. The bleating on the forums is simply a nice touch. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
DeliaPrescot
Balintol
20
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 06:53:00 -
[114] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:The fact of the matter is that highsec miners are driven solely by their risk-averse nature. Unwilling to accept any sort of risk, unwilling to factor risk into their business plans, they engage in an activity that cannot create a real loss of isk (merely an opportunity cost) without intervention from other players. As a result, one can herd them like sheep merely by demonstrating the potential for loss: hulkageddon works because as highsec miners a are risk-averse they are unable to process the likelihood of a risk, and we see that constantly. Trying to explain to a highsec miner how he can reduce his risk of being ganked is often like trying to teach a dog calculus: it simply won't process it. The highsec miner will be told he can buffer tank - but will respond it is still possible to gank him therefore the buffer tank offers no advantage.
We see forms of this argument constantly. It doesn't matter to a highsec miner if he can easily make it so it requires three catalysts (or more) to gank him: since it's possible, it's the same as only needing one catalyst to gank him. To the thinking man, of course, these are different: you may have, on any particular day, a 5% chance of a loss of 300m if you are untanked while a .5% chance of a similar loss if you are, meaning your daily loss to ganking is reduced from 15m to 1.5m - an absolutely huge increase. However, to the highsec miner, all that they see is "300m loss". They can't deal with this, and therefore bleat that it must be made impossible to gank them. Now, many have processed this is unacceptable in this game, but the thrust of their argument is clear: they should not be exposed to risk and anything that does expose them to anything more than "asteroid hitting earth tomorrow" levels of risk is unacceptable. If it's reduced to that, well, they're willing to compromise.
That is spot on, i will quote that from now on every time i feel the need. |
Galega Ori
ZERO HEAVY INDUSTRIES
24
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 07:11:00 -
[115] - Quote
Alexandra Delarge wrote:Ioci wrote:They solo High Sec because they have NO choice. The game has been nerfed for 9 years. It isn't an option anymore.
Rubbish. Nobody is forced into playing solo in this game. Also, 9 years of nerfs?
Your right, I haz me, myself, and I. Thats three accounts = orca, and two hulks \o/
I knew I was doing something wrong
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1794
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 08:19:00 -
[116] - Quote
Galega Ori wrote:Alexandra Delarge wrote:Ioci wrote:They solo High Sec because they have NO choice. The game has been nerfed for 9 years. It isn't an option anymore.
Rubbish. Nobody is forced into playing solo in this game. Also, 9 years of nerfs? Your right, I haz me, myself, and I. Thats three accounts = orca, and two hulks \o/ I knew I was doing something wrong
We are the 99%. Occupy Hulk Street. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
BoSau Hotim
56
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 09:15:00 -
[117] - Quote
Lady Ayeipsia wrote:My indy alt was able to mine in a hulk, unmolested for 6 hours yesterday afternoon and early evening. It was a .5 system.
Get over thus fear of ganking. It happens, but no where near as often as you think. If you gave ganking problems, move to a lesser known location.
Seriously, this isn't that hard to figure out, nor that difficult to deal with.
** I dont believe your answer had anything with the point OP was making... I'm not a carebear...-áI'm a SPACEBARBIE! |
BoSau Hotim
56
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 09:16:00 -
[118] - Quote
ummm accidental ditto (how do u delete a post???) blast! I'm not a carebear...-áI'm a SPACEBARBIE! |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1794
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 09:51:00 -
[119] - Quote
BoSau Hotim wrote:Lady Ayeipsia wrote:My indy alt was able to mine in a hulk, unmolested for 6 hours yesterday afternoon and early evening. It was a .5 system.
Get over thus fear of ganking. It happens, but no where near as often as you think. If you gave ganking problems, move to a lesser known location.
Seriously, this isn't that hard to figure out, nor that difficult to deal with. ** I dont believe your answer had anything with the point OP was making...
OP was bleating for the end of HAG. That post was pointing out that HAG's not actually all that dangerous. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Malphilos
State War Academy Caldari State
77
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 10:27:00 -
[120] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Malphilos wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Malphilos wrote:Goon 101. Next comes the claim that he never intended to make sense. You can be loss averse without being risk averse. No. Re-read your compadre's blurb. You risk nothing but loss. It's like saying you can be purple without being a color. Until you see people self destructing uninsured ships for no reason, it's safe to assume Everybody's loss averse. While I think he overstated by saying they're unconnected, it's like saying you can't be a [nationality] unless you're human. It's technically true, but it's silly to say in an argument. Or, to continue your metaphor, like saying you can't be purple if you're not a color when we're talking about the differences between red and blue. It's true, but not relevant.
In other words, you were mistaken.
I'll accept that. I wouldn't hold you accountable to the idiocy of the previous poster, only to the defense of it.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |