I think I would like to hear CCP's prospective on this. Since they did remove the thread. CCP how do you feel offically about this situation? Why do you think they locked, and removed the thread Ruby?

I shall make this real simple: Do not mess with rookies in rookie systems in any way. They are still trying to figure out how to read the overview and how to right click; messing with them at that point in their career is something for bullies who have something to compensate for and only dare to pick on the smallest, weakest boy in kindergarten.

My point exactly, unless you happen to have s suggestions in regarding to how to word it.

My best attempt at wording it would be: Do not interact with Rookies in any deceitful, aggressive, or harmful manner inside Rookie systems, and do not specifically target Rookies outside said systems.

Works for me. I can here it now, O May Gawd, we just gotta have rookie defined, this just cant work if we don't get what a rookie is defined. LMFAO

Oh yea, I would change the wording to this.

Do not interact with anyone in any deceitful, aggressive, or harmful manner inside Rookie systems, and do not specifically target Rookies outside said systems.

Like they said it's impossible for us to know exactly what a Rookie is, which is why they have full protection only in Rookie systems and limited protection outside. That way it protects those who have a difficult time deciding between a rookie and not.

Damn Ruby, I ws following you on the everyone thing.

The way the rules are now, it is as if the law here in the US was "Don't have sex with minors" without defining what minors were.

We do not want you to mess with them, that does not mean we come down with the ban hammer if you do so outside the mentioned systems. Not everything is black and white. These points do not conflict; 4 and 7 simply mean that if the situation OUTSIDE those systems gets too bad we will take further action. Thus INSIDE the systems it isn't allowed period, OUTSIDE those systems it is allowed, but we may evaluate if things get out of hand.

So in EVE style lets take this to its EVE conclusion. If minors are defined to that extent then one second you are labeled a minor and the next second you are not labeled and then that very next second everybody pounces on you. It used to happen when people camped the rookie gates.
That is what will happen to EVE if the line is well marked. And no line in the sand can fit every case. People can play this game and still be rookies a year later if they took leave of the game after the first week only to return a year later. No line in the sand can cover every situation. I am not going to post every concievable possible situation as it is impossible to do. Nobody at CCP is going to paint themselves into a corner on this issue so you can all just accept it or not. In the end it does not even matter how you feel about it because it is not even open for debate.

Thus the current do not mess with rookies is a very good way to deal with this. It allows the GM a human to decide if the person is indeed a rookie and if they are being taken advantage of. Something no computer can do with any possible set of controls.
Further as I already explained the player that does this does it as a way of life in game. It is not a one time thing. The GM is going to get multiple complaints about the same guy griefing rookies. Banned! Just like that.

For everybody that wants to mess with rookies this was your warning from a GM. They also spelled out the systems in which rookies are protected. It makes it 100% fool proof to avoid having your account banned if you avoid those systems.
You run your own account. You the player control your own level of risk. You the player know what the risk is. Nobody else is making you pull the trigger on someone, you do so knowing full well the risk. This is not at all difficult to understand or follow.
I for one have no sympathy at all for anyones plight should they get banned. You all have been warned by the GM.

Just real quick, answer this. What is the goal of the rookie protection system? Is it
a) to stop rookies from having a bad experience when they're first learning
OR
b) get bad mean people banned

Neither of those two cases defines what the goal of the rookie protection systems is for.
They are both far too limiting in scope to cover it all. And an obvious attempt to paint someone into a corner.
And this is not open for debate. It is a mandate. I am sorry you are having an issue with it. Get over it.

Mainly to keep rookies from being griefed while learning. Though I'm sure they have no issue with removing people who simply want to grief rookies at the same time. Less problems in the end.

Ok, then write your own C.

I think it's doing its job well Ruby, since a lot of people in here can't judge within reason what a rookie is or define what it is to mess with one. Meaning more people are less likely to do anything that they have to "bet your account on". The unknown can be scarier than what is in front of your face.

CCP has exit data from the last 9 years of game play. Every player that quits is invited to explain why they quit.
If you want more players or less players is not your choice to make. You do not own the game.
CCP runs this game and they alone determine what their population goals are for the game.
CCP decides what C is not me and not you. And they do not owe you an explanation of C either.
What they need for a profit vs what the players want vs what really happens in game is all considered by CCP.
They have a huge data base of petitions over the last 9 years to work with.
The rules they set are determined by their data which none of us have.
It would be extremely idiotic for us to tell them how to run their game under these conditions.
You can suggest away which you have done. But in the end they decide.
And decide they did and they posted the mandate.
The time for debate has come and gone a long time ago.
And still you refuse to accept this.

They do have some limited protection outside. Extreme cases.

What accidents? I'm am honestly trying to help you get a grip on it but your making it difficult. Accidents are accidents deliberate is deliberate. They have the tools to distinguish the two. Chat logs, past petitions against you, kill logs.

So you want an unclear rule that means that a griefer can gank rookies until at least 2 petition him vs a rule where GMs can simply ban people who get on kms in rookie systems and refund the killed person?

And you want a cut and dry rule now they are a rookie and now they are not. All that will do is allow players to camp that spot/point when rookies become non rookies. Does not solve a thing. CCP still gets thousands of petitions about a stupid rule that puts up a known spot where they can all be camped. It just shifts the problem to a different point in the game.