Please present some evidence of this, since every single sentence WE say must be back up by peer reviewed evidence.

This is why you people are dishonest, you allow yourselves to belive things you can't prove, but hold us to a higher standard. I've been in null sec for 7 years and have witnessed very little post pvp salvaging.

The part about making an income from dropped loot "which is better quality than anything dropped by an NPC" is just pure ignorance, this demonstates a person who hasn't spent a single second in sov null fleet warfare OR real null pve (Stain is not real null sec).

grr goons.

How dare we not engage people in pve ships.

They are taking as much risk as the high secs. Local enables you to function in null with the same level of risk.

Nope. There isn't. You watch local and in null you can comfortably operate under the protocol of "if a non allied member is in local chat, dock up philosphy."

In hisec to do so would mean never undocking.

It's why afk cloaking is such a complaint for null sec alliances while in hgh sec its non existent. Wars would be the only exception. But i'm the lead voice in removing local chats compulsory use from all of EVE. Not just null and low.

Concords deterrent factor is directly related to the value of the ship your flying. And in high sec where your alliance doesn't control space as many as 2000 non allied people can be in your system. 0-1999 could theoretically be planning your demise. You either stay docked up or play with the risk.

In nullsec avoiding the danger is as simple as checking local. If a target is there that isn't allied you can dock/safe up and avoid the risk. Awoxing doesn't need be considered as that can happen in highsec as well.

I've already elaborated the difference, if you want to reduce to absurdity what i've stated do so. It's the interwebs.

Is sitting in a 20 million isk cruiser in null sec more risky than sitting in a 5 billion isk battleship through high sec? IDK, you tell me.

Risk is not an absolute.