Speed is squared, mass is not. Hence bumping is effective.

.... is this a legitimate use of the game mechanics

So, I just spoke to the GM Team regarding this to get some clarification:

Firstly, people who are bumped always have the right to petition. It is the right of any player who feels that they want to petition an issue to do so.

However, with regards to the rules in EVE Online our current view is:


Bumping is not considered harassment.
Bumping is not considered griefing.
Bumping is not against the rules.



It's actually been used for a long time to prevent warping as a rudimentary form of tackling when you don't have a point, or don't have sufficient disruption strength to keep someone pinned.

Along with that, the people that are doing this for the best part are in player corporations. If you don't like what they're doing, declare war on them so that you can punish them, or pay a merc corp to do so on your behalf if you don't want to fight.

There are plenty of options to counter this, if you use your imagination. Smile

We're leaving physics out of it since Eve is not a simulation. But... you couldn't divert a Jumbo Jet by flying a Cessna close to it. That's the point.

We're leaving physics out of it since Eve is not a simulation. But... you couldn't divert a Jumbo Jet by flying a Cessna close to it. That's the point.

I beg to differ. I have a feeling I could divert a Jumbo Jet quite effectively by flying into it with a Cessna. I can even predict the direction said Jet will go after the "bump".

the important words from CCP Falcon there in the quote that is always used are "current view"

In other words that view can change. That's why it is a legitimate discussion topic.

the important words from CCP Falcon there in the quote that is always used are "current view"

In other words that view can change. That's why it is a legitimate discussion topic.

a rudimentary form of tackling

The simple truth is, it's allowed. Deal with it.

We're leaving physics out of it since Eve is not a simulation. But... you couldn't divert a Jumbo Jet by flying a Cessna close to it. That's the point.

Many carriers and supercaps even titans would be alive today if not for bumping. To be against bumping is to be for supercap proliferation.

Many carriers and supercaps even titans would be alive today if not for bumping. To be against bumping is to be for supercap proliferation.

With real collision, your blob would destroy half of your Titans in the first fleet fight.

I am dealing with it... by questioning it :) I'm sure there are many good reasons why this works as intended but surely there is another side aswell? That's why it's a debate.

It is a bit ridiculous for a freighter to be bumped significantly by another smaller ship. Can you give an example of a situation for us to comment on, OP?

No, there isn't another side. The only reason to remove the ability to bump freighters would be to make highsec safer. However, the idea that highsec should be safer has been debunked and is only a fringe viewpoint now. Serious observers agree that highsec risk:reward is out of balance because there's too much reward for too little risk in highsec.

Nooooooope, gonna continue bumping. To answer your question, though, it is a legitimate tactic. Feel free to make these threads and continue flying freighters the way you do.

I am advocating making freighters more able to do the job that they are in the game for. That is to transport high volumes of goods in relative safety (not total safety).

They shouldnt be able to be bumped and killed by a few throwaway alts that are a few days old.

No I'm not advocating making hi sec safer. I am advocating making freighters more able to do the job that they are in the game for. That is to transport high volumes of goods in relative safety (not total safety). They take a lot of skill points and a lot of capital to buy one of these things.

They shouldnt be able to be bumped and killed by a few throwaway alts that are a few days old. That is quite simply a game mechanic not working as intended and I am sure CCPs "current view" will change on this subject

That would entail giving them more cargo space, which can't happen because then they'd be able to bring cap ships into highsec. They are already as good at doing their job as they'll ever be.

No, why do they need more cargo space?

Yes they should. Everything should. The day something cannot be bumped and killed by a few day-old characters, that thing needs to be removed form the game because it has just broken one of the core balancing principles. Neither SP nor capital cost is even remotely relevant to that consideration.

There are ppl who see another side to the game rather than pew pew. Its what makes Eve so attractive, you can play how you like and no way is 'right' even though people keep insisting that their way is.

Sorry, your ideas were already debunked more than a month ago.

No I'm not advocating making hi sec safer. I am advocating making freighters more able to do the job that they are in the game for. That is to transport high volumes of goods in relative safety (not total safety). They take a lot of skill points and a lot of capital to buy one of these things.

They shouldnt be able to be bumped and killed by a few throwaway alts that are a few days old. That is quite simply a game mechanic not working as intended and I am sure CCPs "current view" will change on this subject

Because the Mittani is the absolute authority on Eve

They are losing too many casual players over it

CCP will change it eventually, I promise you that. They are losing too many casual players over it

CCP will change it eventually, I promise you that. They are losing too many casual players over it If you guys wanna shoot stuff then go shoot each other ratrher than fish in a barrel. Oh no... that means someone fights back!

Been seeing this same argument since 2004, hasn't happened yet.

They are losing too many casual players over it If you guys wanna shoot stuff then go shoot each other ratrher than fish in a barrel. Oh no... that means someone fights back!

CCP will change it eventually, I promise you that. They are losing too many casual players over it

Why don't you go haul your stuff in nullsec, where your stuff has a fighting chance to be released from confinement in your boring freighter?

the important words from CCP Falcon there in the quote that is always used are "current view"

In other words that view can change. That's why it is a legitimate discussion topic.

Don't lecture me on how I play the game and I will do you the same courtesy okay?

Bumping is a broken mechanic. The ability to disable key functionality of another person's ship without triggering aggression or even forfeiting police protection is so obviously contrary to a choice-and-consequences based design that it hardly needs to be mentioned.

I think it would be awesome if people could actually take damage when they are bumped.... i mean, crashed into.

If a little bullet bumping into you can strip half your shield, then a frieghter/dred/SC should bloody well erase it.

Well, it would certainly make ganking easier and would cull the (super)cap numbers right down.

After all, a 68 GJ projectile does ~10k HP damage. So logically, a 50 TJ Cruiser should do just under 10M HP damage.

Ganking is a value faucet not an ISK sink
Each item destroyed requires replacement material, it does not remove the ISK - It in fact increases it through insurance payouts.

Show me your math and when I'm done LOLing I'll respond.

Ok. So why is bumping broken?

I believe that's so self-evident that you must be engaging in propaganda.

I don't believe you genuinely require an explanation.

I believe that's so self-evident that you must be engaging in propaganda. Good for you: that's one of the things the pro-bumping crowd do entertainingly well. Please continue, but I don't believe you genuinely require an explanation.

.... is this a legitimate use of the game mechanics or is it utilising a game mechanic in a way that it was never designed to be utilised?

Is it concievable that something as big as a freighter can be bumped by a much much smaller ship. Yes I know real life physics don't apply to Eve but still..... Would it not make more sense that in order to bump a ship... any ship... you have to have a bigger mass than it or you simply bump off yourself and your target is unaffected? Would that be so hard to implement?

I'm trying to make this a serious discussion thread about an important game mechanic. Please keep it on topic so that it isn't locked.

Thanks

It all depends on how fast you think an L-size projectile moves. I handwaved it at 125km/s because it was a handy figure.

I am advocating making freighters more able to do the job that they are in the game for. That is to transport high volumes of goods in relative safety

I don't believe you genuinely require an explanation.

That is some pretty elegant mathematical proof you have. Seems you have reduced the variables down to nearly none. Pretty high level stuff.

I provided both an explanation and a comparative example in my first post. You did, in fact, quote part of that explanation when asking me to explain (hence why I know your request wasn't genuine: that, and I respect your intelligence).

[

And that's why I asked why bumping was broken: because you're talking about two different things. On the one hand, bumping, which just shifts the velocity vector of the ships involved, and on the other hand, something that disables key functions (pretty much completely unlike what bumping does).

Bumping is working as intended. It doesn't trigger any flagging because you're not doing anything harmful to the target.

Right, and as we both know, shifting the velocity of the target can be utterly debilitating in certain situations and therefore immensely harmful.

I don't disagree that it's working as intended, but that intention does create certain possibilities, such as tackling as part of a gank without triggering concord, or disabling a target's mining vessel to the point where he's willing to pay you millions of ISK to stop, that are clearly broken in context.

Nothing is disabled; no-one is harmed. So no.

Not particularly. The only thing broken about it is that ganking has been so incredibly nerfed over the years that this is the only remaining means of reasonably creating a continuous disruption of those activities. At this point, bumping is pretty much a must for the environment that has been created in highsec.

This mechanic is also used to bump supers, dreads, carriers, BSes etc out of POSes, I don't hear anyone bitching about that.

Bumping has already been confirmed to be 'Working as intended'. As for the mass argument the use of a MWD increases the mass of the ship being used to bump.

Judging on what I know, you guys don't bump to prevent a warp though. You bump to evade concord and that's a TOS violation.

You scramble with a neutral, it breaks auto pilot, you then bump them beyond sentry range and lengthen Concord reaction times allowing you to reduce the losses you take in killing the freighter.

I'm sure it wouldn't take anyone much effort to dig up some wonderful 'bitching' about this too. Those bumped out of course.

This is not the case.


This is not "evading concord".

You claimed it was a TOS violation, which is a serious accusation, you can't just brush it off with "it's neither here nor there".

Because the Mittani is the absolute authority on Eve

As for what you do with the bumping to outside sentry. I said it, I meant it. It's Concord evasion. You are doing it to Evade Concord even if only for a few seconds. You might want to look up the definition of evade.

Actually, you should read up on what the definition of "evading concord" is. What is happening is that concord is delayed, evading concord is preventing concord from killing your ship. This is not what's happening, regardless of how you try to wordsmith your way out of this.

Evade is Evade. CCP can decide what it means. I don't have any say on that.

I don't know.

If real physics applied then the frigs would just bounce off the larger ships

But the whole 747 and Cessna thing doesn't apply because we are talking about objects in space. I mean the Earth doesn't move everytime its hit by an asteroid does it?

but the point of the matter is we are talking about the use of the game mechanic to do abuse in hi sec.

I don't know. I think i'd rather have the group griefs cry more because they have tastier tears when the tables are turned on them so lets remove bumping.

Nooooooope, gonna continue bumping. To answer your question, though, it is a legitimate tactic. Feel free to make these threads and continue flying freighters the way you do.

Of course it does: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum#Conservation


No we aren't, since CCP has explicitely stated bumping is not an exploit, it's not against the rules, and it's not considered harassment or griefing.


Bumping is not griefing.

Evading is evading, yes, and it would be against the TOS. What is happening here is not evading, so I suggest you refrain from howling about how what's being done is "against the TOS" in future when you've no basis for said allegation.

Judging on what I know, you guys don't bump to prevent a warp though. You bump to evade concord and that's a TOS violation.

No we actually do bump to prevent a warp & are happy to aggress if the target logs off to keep them in system for another 15 minutes. Makes me wonder where you people get such hilariously wrong information. Do you make it up?

Anyway, in the previous thread I noticed somebody mentioned their freighter getting bumped for two hours. Seriously, why not just log off?

Test server made it up.

I couldn't bump a freighter on Buckingham. I used a Condor, I used a Phoon. Thhey bounced off and the providence freighter was not impacted by bumps.

You used the wrong type of ships. The Condor is just too small & unable to fit the sort of MWD that makes it effective at bumping a freighter. The Typhoon is large, but can't gather the neccesary speed for the job.

I beg to differ. I have a feeling I could divert a Jumbo Jet quite effectively by flying into it with a Cessna. I can even predict the direction said Jet will go after the "bump".

Speed is squared, mass is not. Hence bumping is effective.

CCP, Remove Auto Pilot.

Goons dual Box an AFK pilot in Uedama to stop an AFK pilot from flying through Uedama. While they run Anoms in Deklein, the single account player is supposed to ATK jump his freighter through 18 systems. Rather than get in to the whole AFK war, force ATK for both of them. If they want to ATK camp freighters in Uedama, they can. ATK. On the gate.

Adding insult to injury I can picture an AFK Fleet bonus Alt sitting in Deklein while his alt monitors for Auto Pilot freighters in Uedama.

I'd also like a rare Implant to add resist to Hull. Give it to Null sec only Incursion runners. One per Incursion, 50% drop rate. Anyone in HS crazy enough to buy it, go for it.

If only freighters allowed for fun and compelling conflicts, for both the aggressors and defenders. Unfortunately any conflict that centers around a freighter is it dying it a couple seconds, hardly any time to actually defend it, or the freighter simply logging/avoiding the danger completely.

If this was a tactic actually used in RL, then the Jumbo Jets would be armed with missiles to pop their aggressor with. CCP - despite the freighters being 10 city blocks in size - fails to provide them with any chance of defending themselves.

CCP only has good thoughts for massive alliances - the little guy gets to sit under the pipe.

Watched the Goons gank a Charon freighter today. They bumped it 500Km to get it out of range of gate gun protection. Sounds like an exploit to me.

Had the phoon at 2000 M/S

It was down last check. Only other ship I can try is a 100MWD fit cruiser to get overdrive thrust but that still doesn't explain why a 2K phoon had no effect on the freighter.

I don't know.

If real physics applied then the frigs would just bounce off the larger ships

No. If real physics applied, then the frigs would slam into the larger ships, releasing enough energy to rival a nuclear strike and blow a very large hole straight through that ship, killing everyone on-board as it blows up in turn.

You keep quoting out the part about removing Auto Pilot.
Why is that?

You also quoted out the part about bumping to 200 km to get clear of the gate guns.

This would be more fun if you looked like Kimberly Guilfoyle but with your ugly mug it's just you squirming and not very pretty.

always the same no-life morons trying to drive the discussion into their black and white scenarios.]

and yes it IS stupid that you can bump freighters with much smaller ships and part of why this game is considered to be such a joke with all the people defending dumb mechanics like this in a futile attempt to preserve the endangered douchebag lifestyle that has become so popular in EVE due to the fact that no skill or risk is required.

That's one I use all the time when I talk about EVE Online. I tell people how I lost this 2 billion ISK ship and how you can make 12 mill/hr in High sec as long as you have all Level 5 skills.

When they ask how I lost it, I tell them I got bumped.

I don't understand why they aren't playing yet. I sent them an invite...

The only one squirming here is you, as you completely misinterpret the whole situation, and incorrectly invoke "hurr TOS violation BAN THESE PEOPLE!!!".

That's one I use all the time when I talk about EVE Online. I tell people how I lost this 2 billion ISK ship and how you can make 12 mill/hr in High sec as long as you have all Level 5 skills.

When they ask how I lost it, I tell them I got bumped.

I don't understand why they aren't playing yet. I sent them an invite...

Oh so you lost a freighter?

Sounds to me like you're just telling them a part of the truth, since your ship can't go kersplode just because you get bumped.

And if you're just making 12 mill/hour in hisec, then you're really, really bad at choosing whatever it is you're doing, you should get that fixed.

Was wondering how long it would take before the superbears tried to get another nerf gankers thread going after the last one was locked.

How did you lose a 2 bil ship to bumping?

You can't gank in Null?

12 mill is average for end game High Sec.
You should try it for yourself.

No dual boxing, no pimped out ships. Just a generic T2 fit, run level 4's. Don't believe your own hype. It's pretty low end.

You can't gank in Null?

Was wondering how long it would take before the superbears tried to get another nerf gankers thread going after the last one was locked.

it takes as many as it takes.

Then you will be here forever because this has been with us for the last decade and used as a tactic for just as long.

This has nothing to do with null. This is the very same people who 10 months ago started to whine that thier untanked hulks were too easy to kill.

It has everything to do with Null.

You want Null PvP in all of EVE. It isn't that there is no PvP in High Sec. There are war dec's, there is RvB PvP. There is lots of PvP. You just can;t PvP without overkill ganking and you cry like a baby when CCP take your candy away.

HTFU,
Go back to Deklein.

It has everything to do with Null.

You want Null PvP in all of EVE.

You just can;t PvP without overkill ganking and you cry like a baby when CCP take your candy away.

Not really, no. CCP Falcon answer the topic fully and completely: yes it is a legitimate use of game mechanics; no it is not utilising that mechanic in a way it wasn't designed for.

What you're looking for is a completely different topic: should the rules or mechanics change, to which the answer is GÇ£no, there's no reason toGÇ¥.

In your opinion.... others may differ ..

Tal

i.e. you're pretty terrible.

Only the ones after an utterly safe highsec which goes against everything EVE stands for.

No not really.


Tal

It does not.


Wrong.


Wrong.

You really do like to misrepresent other people's viewpoints, don't you?

Tell us more about how you're not after an utterly safe hisec when you're going "YOU SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO THAT WITH 10 PEOPLE AGAINST ONE!".

Tell us more about how you're not after an utterly safe hisec when you're going "YOU SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO THAT WITH 10 PEOPLE AGAINST ONE!".

Don't be a c*nt and miss quote me, I made one comment on someone else as they seemed to think their thoughts are gospel and only truth.

[

It was 8 vs 8 last one I saw but 7 couldn't do anything until after you killed their freighter and by then it was too late.

Please provide the KM so we can delve into this one closer.

Get it yourself. I'm not your maid.

Get it yourself. I'm not your maid.

We have 90 kills this month alone so I do need you to provide the one in question otherwise I will just have to assume it doesnt exist. We have already had several people say things that you just did that turned out to be lies.

How did you lose a 2 bil ship to bumping?

Well if bumping is used in combat, i dont have a problem with that. But if it is used just for lulz, i think it is pure griefing (in case of Freighter bumping, as they are superslow to stop and realign).

And what's happening here is not "pure griefing", the bumps are in preparation of combat.

You are welcome to visit Jita. There are a lot of trolls that bumps freighters just for lulz, with no intention for combat. Pure griefing...

You are welcome to visit Jita. There are a lot of trolls that bumps freighters just for lulz, with no intention for combat. Pure griefing...

Make an instaundock, and you'll avoid bumping into other ships and the station. I think you'll find a lot of the "bumps" are actually you bumping into someone else or the station because you're so slow you break the bump invulnerability timer, or whatever it's called.

I'm sure you bumping up against the station because your ship is a tub of lard is CCP griefing you.

The Typhoon is still fairly small. Try a Machariel. It's twice the size, has more mass & moves faster by default. A 100MN SFI is also great.

Right so its the freighter bumping into other ships.

I am dealing with it... by questioning it :) I'm sure there are many good reasons why this works as intended but surely there is another side aswell? That's why it's a debate.

If you think trapping a freighter and getting it stuck thanks to the bump mechanic is that game feature working as intended then nobody is going to change your mind. It's still a legitimate topic for discussion though as some may disagree.

Yes. It's trivially easy to undock (and warp away) from Jita 4-4 without being bumped, even in a freighter.

Speed is squared, mass is not. Hence bumping is effective.

oooh its little miss last word...

Tal

I just don't like it when its used for ****'s and giggles, don't really mind if there is a valid reason behind it... IMHO

Make an instaundock, and you'll avoid bumping into other ships and the station. I think you'll find a lot of the "bumps" are actually you bumping into someone else or the station because you're so slow you break the bump invulnerability timer, or whatever it's called.

Jita bumps: flying tubs of lards which can't reach warp speed before bumping into the station, or being on the undock long enough to start interacting with other ships

You know everyone talks about emergent game play until it effects them. I donGÇÖt consider exploiting flawed or lack of programming to be emergent game play. Bumping is nothing more than taking advantage of poor programming to allow miner griefing and freighter ganking.

Force=massxacceleration f=ma simple physics

wasn't there another one of this exact same thread with the same topic header? And didn't it get locked? Man, all these threads are really starting to blur together... or multiplying like rabbits.

No same thread just cleaned up a lot. Took the ISD at least an hour.

I did have an unfortunate loss upon leaving Jita 4-4 once. While in hindsight I could have done things differently, upon undocking during an early (American time) Sunday afternoon, by the time the game loaded the content outside the station, during my whole black screen event, I heard explosions to find myself idling in a pod once everything loaded. And the pod was sitting within a freighter just sitting outside the station.

So sometimes bad luck will strike, even when taking precautions.

If you didn't fit your freighter to align and warp faster or whatever, then it's your problem.

No, there isn't another side. The only reason to remove the ability to bump freighters would be to make highsec safer. However, the idea that highsec should be safer has been debunked and is only a fringe viewpoint now. Serious observers agree that highsec risk:reward is out of balance because there's too much reward for too little risk in highsec.

And your in no way biased at all... The mechanic is rubish its that simple.

Try bumping this > Big Mofo
With this > tiny mofo

Anybody with half a brain can figure out what would happen. Hell I dont even fly freighters and I think the whole thing is ridiculous

And your in no way biased at all... The mechanic is rubish its that simple.

Try bumping this > Big Mofo
With this > tiny mofo

Anybody with half a brain can figure out what would happen. Hell I dont even fly freighters and I think the whole thing is ridiculous

And your in no way biased at all... The mechanic is rubish its that simple.

Try bumping this > Big Mofo
With this > tiny mofo

Anybody with half a brain can figure out what would happen.
Hell I dont even fly freighters and I think the whole thing is ridiculous.

PSST: freighters can't be fit in any way.

I'm no astrophysicist, but I believe vessels in WATER behave slightly different than vessels in SPACE.

Keep comparing real life logistics to game mechanics in an internet spaceship flight simulator though, this can only end well.

Apart from the fact that an oil tanker or large cargo ship that you linked is sitting in water, which I'm not sure if you're aware, is actually quite heavy in large quantities which is what you'd need to displace in order to move the ship.

Plus the size comparison is nowhere near right. I'd say a frigate would be close to, oh I don't know, a tug boat? You know those things that are used to steer the big ships you linked into the harbour?

Thirdly if you actually got a military frigate and crashed it into the side of a civilian cargo transport going not just full speed for a naval frigate but full speed for a speed boat I'm pretty sure what would actually happen is this:

What actually happens

So if you'd prefer that to happen instead thats cool, I'll back that change.

Considering you said it takes only half a brain to figure all this out I do wonder how much brain you must have to ignore all these facts.

On November 13, 2002, while the Prestige was carrying a 77,000 metric tons cargo of two different grades of heavy fuel oil, one of its twelve tanks burst during a storm off Galicia, in northwestern Spain. Fearing that the ship would sink, the captain called for help from Spanish rescue workers, with the expectation that the vessel would be brought into harbour. However, pressure from local authorities forced the captain to steer the embattled ship away from the coast and head northwest. Reportedly after pressure from the French government, the vessel was once again forced to change its course and head southwards into Portuguese waters in order to avoid endangering France's southern coast. Fearing for its own shore, the Portuguese authorities promptly ordered its navy to intercept the ailing vessel and prevent it from approaching further.

Make an instaundock, and you'll avoid bumping into other ships and the station. I think you'll find a lot of the "bumps" are actually you bumping into someone else or the station because you're so slow you break the bump invulnerability timer, or whatever it's called.

GǪexcept, of course, that there is no exploitation or griefing involved, and that ganking is allowed regardless. It's usibf the tools at your disposal GÇö emergent sandbox behaviour at its finest.


GǪexcept he's takling about energy. Also, force isn't a good perspective to use. You want impulse and momentum instead.

GǪand anyway, bumping happens because both ships automatically panic-fire a burst of attitude-adjustment engine output to avoid the afore-mentioned nuclear fusion of the ships. If you turn that part of the pilot software off, you get the Malkalen incident.

I thought the Malkalen incident was, according to the book, a hack executed on the station's shield system while the Nyx simultaneously disengaged it's own shield safety over rides, thus allowing it to face plant into the station?

Even if you turned that software off, the shields still prevent the collision from happening.

Momentum is related to force.

Also because they cant call it for what it is doesnt change what it is.

Even if you turned that software off, the shields still prevent the collision from happening.

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15258262

Yep.. that happened

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15258262

Yep.. that happened

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15258262

Yep.. that happened

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15258262

Yep.. that happened

It was pregnant with 8 kids you monsters.

That one keeled over because it came to close to shore and hit the rocks... Try harder.

Nah, the shields would just absorb the energy released by the collision GÇö upwards of 15 TJ. Not even a third as much as the damage a Stabber would do, granted, but still enough to punch a sizeable hole in pretty much anything.

I dunno man, I've bounced a carrier or two off a station plenty of times, and they never punched a hole in anything. They just bounced off.

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15258262

Yep.. that happened

No, there isn't another side. The only reason to remove the ability to bump freighters would be to make highsec safer. However, the idea that highsec should be safer has been debunked and is only a fringe viewpoint now. Serious observers agree that highsec risk:reward is out of balance because there's too much reward for too little risk in highsec.

what's sad is all these freighter pilots will continue to *****, whine, and moan until CCP makes it so they cant be bumped. but the real problem is they are a bunch of ******* idiots who shouldnt be transporting that much **** in the first place. /facepalm

freighter holding at place and then landing suicidegankers on it for a kill is not something that should be doable in hisec. time for a change. yes we can.

So which ISD is silently deleting posts?

maybe next time have the sense to make a edit or couldnt you find the button?

Please, dont lump together all freighter pilots in one basket. Some of them are dumb (constantly ganked in Uedema or Nijara like this one ) but some of them are just againist random lulz freighter bumping.