Her real life campaign video for the Piratenpartij.

I do know she actually won a seat in that election. But I have no idea what she is actually saying in the video itself. ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sZXB8HtLBo

And her CSM Campaign video where she also won a seat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJI7bUtKMdg

She was rabidly anti PVP (Aside from Faction Warfare) and even more-so against pirates. She actually went as far as to say all pirates in EVE should be locked up in real life.

Then she won a CSM spot.. Go figure.... With the 2nd highest amount of votes between all candidates... Was quite strange. Then she ended up being crazy.

Aaaaaand /brain.

Her real life campaign video for the Piratenpartij.

I do know she actually won a seat in that election. But I have no idea what she is actually saying in the video itself. ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sZXB8HtLBo

And her CSM Campaign video where she also won a seat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJI7bUtKMdg

She was rabidly anti PVP (Aside from Faction Warfare) and even more-so against pirates. She actually went as far as to say all pirates in EVE should be locked up in real life.

Then she won a CSM spot.. Go figure.... With the 2nd highest amount of votes between all candidates... Was quite strange. Then she ended up being crazy with a side of spoons and topped with an NDA violation.

This was an interesting read.

So let me get this straight because I have the feeling that something is missing in this picture. Eva was a CSM member who, quote: "She actually went as far as to say all pirates in EVE should be locked up in real life.".

And then she run for a seat as a candidate from Piratenpartij which is the political arm of thepiratebay, the homeland of the internet pirates. And she also work at a game development company. I'm sober, so my brain hurts.. what's wrong in this picture, what I'm missing here?

Do you often PvP where there is a risk of you losing? And if not, can what you do really be called PvP if there is only one side to the engagement?

No, this new order does not pvp. They are spineless cowards picking on defenseless ships(drones don't count)

If we must, think back to the days of high piracy. Pirates and privateers didn't attack military ships. They went after lightly armed traders for the precise reason we do....they can't fight back.

Hi. I'd like to start this post by saying I'm a big fan of James 315's writing, the work he does, and the concepts he presents.
I don't know much about Erotica or if he writes well, so I'll reserve my judgement about him.

However, I have a question for Erotica, James 315 and hisec scammers/gankers in general:

Do you often PvP where there is a risk of you losing? And if not, can what you do really be called PvP if there is only one side to the engagement?

Allow me to elaborate. Two fleets meet in a situation where they can engage freely.
Battle commences, FCs make their plays, skill, strategy and other factors decide the winnerGÇö the fight is wrapped up.
Every time you engage, you're putting your own assets and time on the line, as are your opponents.
Who the enemy are is totally transparent. Finding their staging system is usually no problemGÇöyou can often attack said group at your leisure, or even follow them around if you hold a grudge.

Now enter the world of hisec ganking and scamming. There is no way to hold a grudge or retaliate against an alt that does not undock in ships that are significantly valuable, and the way most scammers behave, no way to scam them back.

Now, before you call me a supporter of risk free PvE or hisec, I'm not.
In fact, EVE might be a better game if they just removed hisec altogether v0v.
Risk free PvE income that can be used in PvP is imbalanced.

You'd probobly agree that when players do these kind of activities there is minimal risk of loss to them. There's no point in attacking their gank catalyst, and no way to find out their main.

Why should CCP work to preserve this kind of playstyle?
If you are not in a conflict where your enemy can retaliate, why do you find it fun?
Should you be allowed to perform any activity in EVE without repercussions/consequences?
Why should you be allowed to use any method for scamming if you are completely detached from your PvP main?

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

They went after them to disrupt trade and ruin their economies. How well armed they were was irrelevant.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

They went after them to disrupt trade and ruin their economies. How well armed they were was irrelevant.

As a side note, she gained the title Queen of Spoons because she threw a big metal spoon at another CSM member in anger across the table during the summit.

Yeah, because if I were a pirate on the high seas, I'd totally go pick on the well-armed convoys floating by, and ignore the minimally defended traders. I'd ~totally~ not use devious and underhanded tricks in order to win.

Common sense man, the "commerce raiders" of old, be it full-blown pirates or Marque'ed privateers, went after the easy targets. Their goal was making cash. Pretty sure Blackbeard and his ilk weren't in it for ~gudfites~.

Pretty sure Blackbeard and his ilk weren't in it for ~gudfites~.

Whooaaa.... so that's how a carebear actually do pvp! Do not hurt my pixels or I smack your face!!11!!
Hope she is doing this also as a politician because I totally love to see politicians fight and hurt each other.

Anyway, sad and weird story, thank's for sharing.

As stated before, there is no such thing as hi-sec pvp; there is only people who hide in hi-sec, pretending to pvp. They are also the one who like to post about it.

I like explosions, and I'm playing an economic game with my victims. Sure, buy that replacement retty here, instead of wasting time flying to a hub. It's only a 25% markup, no biggy.

The follow-on to your question is, why shouldn't I blow them up, if I can? I'm playing a PVP game, with others who have agreed to PVP. Not my fault they chose to fly a ship that can't respond to my actions.

If we must, think back to the days of high piracy. Pirates and privateers didn't attack military ships. They went after lightly armed traders for the precise reason we do....they can't fight back.

Do they shoot other people?

Player v player. I've underlined the important part to illustrate the flaw in your question. You should have asked "do other people shoot back?"

Hi. I'd like to start this post by saying I'm a big fan of James 315's writing, the work he does, and the concepts he presents.
I don't know much about Erotica or if he writes well, so I'll reserve my judgement about him.

However, I have a question for Erotica, James 315 and hisec scammers/gankers in general:

Do you often PvP where there is a risk of you losing? And if not, can what you do really be called PvP if there is only one side to the engagement?

Allow me to elaborate. Two fleets meet in a situation where they can engage freely.
Battle commences, FCs make their plays, skill, strategy and other factors decide the winnerGÇö the fight is wrapped up.
Every time you engage, you're putting your own assets and time on the line, as are your opponents.
Who the enemy are is totally transparent. Finding their staging system is usually no problemGÇöyou can often attack said group at your leisure, or even follow them around if you hold a grudge.

Now enter the world of hisec ganking and scamming. There is no way to hold a grudge or retaliate against an alt that does not undock in ships that are significantly valuable, and the way most scammers behave, no way to scam them back.

Now, before you call me a supporter of risk free PvE or hisec, I'm not.
In fact, EVE might be a better game if they just removed hisec altogether v0v.
Risk free PvE income that can be used in PvP is imbalanced.

You'd probobly agree that when players do these kind of activities there is minimal risk of loss to them. There's no point in attacking their gank catalyst, and no way to find out their main.

Why should CCP work to preserve this kind of playstyle?
If you are not in a conflict where your enemy can retaliate, why do you find it fun?
Should you be allowed to perform any activity in EVE without repercussions/consequences?
Why should you be allowed to use any method for scamming if you are completely detached from your PvP main?

[quote=Eduard Khil XD]
3. I did address my disdain for scammers or other spammers for rolling characters to evade blocks. I have done well by building a brand despite the thousands of blocks.

-Ero

The problem with this post is that it is extremely ignorant of the game and mechanics. There is literally nothing in this game and its current mechanics that puts the "victim" in a position in which they cannot fight back, and there is nothing that puts the "aggressor" in a position in which they are invulnerable and free from repercussions.

Thanks for pointing out you violated the EULA by re rolling characters after thousands of yours were blocked.

Either you're the ignorant one, or your definition of meaningful retaliation or meaningful repercussions is so broad as to make the words pointless. There's no counter to Zydrine Megacyte suiciding pods in Amarr, there's no way to retaliate against spaceship barbie's scams aside from knowing not to get scammed. Certainly there are ways to avoid being victimized, to mitigate risk, but there is absolutely no means of retaliation.

I can confirm that New Order gankers are too scared for "real" pvp. None of them fight in lowsec, whs, or null because they are all noobs who are terribad. Well ok there are a few brave newbies in NO but that's it....except... those guys in Space Monkies, goonswarm, that guy from TEST...and even those guys flying in the Syndicate Competitive League... but except for ...oh wait there are those guys in the wardec corps.... but yeah, totally spot on with the rest of your analysis though OP.

goon pvp isn't real pvp