E-Uni cheerleading.

Big difference between making things difficult for others to war dec EvE-Uni and a view of wanting sensible consensual war dec mechanics.

As i understand it, EvE Uni have set up a large number of their own alliance corporation members to war dec the Uni on an ongoing basis to make it expensive for anyone external to do so.

This is due to the fact that the majority of new players who are interested in learning the game should be afforded a sensible umbrella and not be exploited by numerous other organisations. Or do others simply want to prey on easy targets less than a week old into their EvE experience? As given what EvE Uni represents it is the "recognised" sensible first step for new players, easpecially when alternative larger corps are mostly inaccesable due to SP requirements.

As such EvE Uni is paying significant sums to afford this umbrella, so hats off to them in doing so. But it is in no way preventative of anyone war deccing them if they really wanted to. Nor does it advocate a consensual PvP model as a result, its simply paying for a significant defence stratergy that seems helpfull for the Uni's purposes.

Its not like they are using a dec shield to simply shirk off wars, or droping members or corp hoping as others do to avoid conflict like most griefers. And personally I think its only griefers who want a lazy time in war deccing new players straight out of boot camp in large numbers that is the problem here. Perhaps this is the real agenda?

"that is the unspoken promise he makes to EVE University members" - or your consistant view of what you want to believe it more like and twist things around because you have a personal beef that a large alliance pays for protection to new players from lazy griefer types like yourself.

To be honest if CCP said to EvE - UNI do you want the status where you can neither start a war or be war decced in return, I'd personally be happy for them to have it as at least it affords a reasonable start for newer players to get used to things in a social environment and at least get some understanding and at least a few skill points under their belt before being exposed to certain harsh realities. The only stipulation would be that members who don't hold an offical office position would require to leave or be placed after a certain period of time, SP points or graduation. (This is "MY" personal take on things however and should not be manipulated as EvE Uni views, before you start)

So in short I think your manipulation of certain views here is reallu unjustified, as I believe them to be in conflict with your need for lazy kill board padding etc. (Moreso relevant when you look at your failure of a KB which unsuprisingly has a history of losses to EvE Uni players, maybe some personal motivation due to failure as a pilot here?).

Needless to say, your points are still speculative. You appear to potentially have an alteria personal motive that might be clouding judgement. I still have to call "straw man" simply based on the kinds of claims you are consistantly fabricating.

I certainly wouldn't call Poetic 'one of my people'. He was removed from the Uni back in August for being a huge attention 'seeker', and has publicly stated he is more interested in hyperbole rather than facts, so is now the official EVE University stalker.

E-Uni cheerleading.

Why should we believe you when you say your are for non consensual PVP and still use a 19 Corp strong dec-shield-ally to protect yourself from pesky people who want to noncon-pvp with you? arent you preaching one thing and doing another?


Also doesnt your proposal for a structure gind directly benefit one of the largest (memberwise) highsec alliances? Why do you want to introduce nullsec elements into highsec? Should a allianc who doesnt like to get wardeced just go into low/null and provide their own security?

I fully support Kelduum here.

My purpose is twofold. First, for everyone to see what terrible ideas Kelduum would bring with him to the CSM. Mittani has pointed one of them out in this thread. Kelduum has created a thread for his terrible ideas over on the Features forum.

Second, to point out that he doesn't represent EVERYBODY, but rather the interests of only EVE University. It's fine if he wants to represent the E-Uni, but he should be honest about it. Stop pretending that he represents anybody at all, except for his corporation.

He'll truly be a terrible CSM candidate.

The 0.0 reps weren't "marginalized" when they "realized" that WH's have A, B, C ores...

The 0.0 reps were going to marginalize themselves?

The Circle of Seven will marginalize Kelduum the moment he introduces his Capture the Flag idea to CCP.