even to the point of using throwaway toons to purposely draw concord ships to the belts simply for the

protection from gankers they gave.

i only see one? i suppose the first bannable offence is the one that matters, though

unless double-spacing is bannable which it really should be

Nah, going GCC

to move

CONCORD around
is fine

Throwaway alts, however,

is against
the rules

I really doubt it, considering spawning or moving CONCORD away from a gank is allowed. Have you heard that from an official source?

I'll believe you, then. It's nonsense, though. CONCORD isn't ~supposed~ to do anything except either spawn or warp around. If it's supposed to not sit on grid, CCP should change the mechanic instead of halfarseing a double-standard rule.

I found a CCP post from 5 years ago saying summoning concord to grid was perfectly fine, but that doing so with throwaway alts was bannable, as recycling pilots to regain sec status is generally disallowed. Obviously that's a super old post, but I couldn't find anything more recent, and that policy provides an alternate explanation for those banned ibis pilots. Does anyone have a more recent link where a dev outlines the policy clearly?

I don't understand. But CONCORD is stupid. And a 15-minute gank timer is stupid. And being able to move CONCORD around at all is stupid.

How come the boomeranging exploit got nerfed in days but this protection exploit is left as is until someone petitions it.

E: also the new rule isn't exactly broadcasted or easy to find out about is it

i'm getting emotional on the internet so imma leave and eat some chips

And I just call bullshit on the second one; if you can suicide to pull concord off grid, miners can suicide to pull concord on grid. CCP has never publicly said anything else and it's a downright dumb notion.

From what I saw, boomerang was declared an exploit and nerfed with the instant-web and 15-minute timer within days of CCP finding out about it?

I'm just a bit miffed that one exploit is ruled against, declared and mechanics implemented immediately to combat it, but another is ruled against, kept quiet and nothing happens

Also, I'm stil not entirely clear on this. Is pulling CONCORD onto grid for protection once an exploit?

What motivation could a suicide ganker possibly have to convince you that a suicide ganking defense is an exploit?

Oh come on baltec, don't say things like that... who would you turn your sociopathic affection (yea, that's a contradiction ) to, if all the "clueless miners" got banned!?

So telling people how to tank their barges and exhumers, how to use the standings mechanism to highlight people who would do them harm, how to use the overview and to not AFK is ridicule and misdirection?

How many people have you run into pre-spawning Concord but not tanking their ship?

ie baltec is full of **** and can't support his claim whereas comments from CCP employees indicate that the activity is fine provided you don't delete characters.

Nice generalization there...

Assuming you're not just being difficult: throwing a sentence or two of a passage into google with quotes will generally get you the source of a passage.

Which are both impossible to prove unless the violator admits them....

Hey genius its only a bannable offence if you delete the character due to a low sec status. Pulling concord off the belt doesnt count or all gankers would be banned for pulling them off also. Its okay we understand your special.

They obviously aren't very good bodyguards if you can pull them right back off the belt. I converse with Tippia on a regular basis (who btw thinks it's not an exploit) and your whining is still giving me a headache. Bravo I guess.

Lol, it's ******, ok? ******!