Originally by: Tarminic

---

You do realize that in order to do that they would either have to completely thow out the whole secure container expiration idea or do a bunch of coding to exempt those specific cans from deletion. And then do it again every month. Forever.

I really like the cemetery and it sucks that it will mostly likely be removed, but there's no good way to get around it.

---

Originally by: Elles D

---

I was about to protest that it would be so simple to keep it, but i'll go with your view Tarminic as tbh i know bugger all about coding.

It's a shame, but if there is no easy way round it then it has to go unfortunately

---

Originally by: Qanael Radlari

---

Maybe they could code it so cans have a GM-settable "permanent" flag, that could be applied given a proper petition and a good cause. That shouldn't be all that complicated. They could restrict it only to worthy causes, like RL memorial cans and the cemetery.

---

Originally by: Tarminic

---

Edited by: Tarminic on 15/02/2008 22:08:12

Originally by: Elles D

---

I was about to protest that it would be so simple to keep it, but i'll go with your view Tarminic as tbh i know bugger all about coding.

It's a shame, but if there is no easy way round it then it has to go unfortunately

---

I can explain it a bit more thoroughly.

Adding a timer to containers is a relatively simple process. Basically you add to a single block of code that defines the behavior of all objects of that time.

To make an exception for the cemetery, you would have to do one of the following:
1. Have every single container check what system it's in at each downtime - this puts extra strain on the database for no good reason and is a bad coding practice (I can explain if you want, but it's complicated and technical).
2. Create a routine that checks all containers to see if they're in that system and increment their expiration date during downtime. This is also lag-intensive

Then of course, you have people that will continually spam that particular system with cans because they won't be deleted.

You could limit it to that particular planet but then people could spam the graveyard with unrelated cans. This would be popular because the graveyard would become a popular tourist location (just look at the cans at the EVE Gate!).

I really don't see any way around it. You could even check the text of the can's name for something like "RIP ", but then people would spam with cans that would say "Contact djfslkjf for all your farming needs! RIP "

There's really no good way around it.

Originally by: Qanael Radlari

---

Maybe they could code it so cans have a GM-settable "permanent" flag, that could be applied given a proper petition and a good cause. That shouldn't be all that complicated. They could restrict it only to worthy causes, like RL memorial cans and the cemetery.

---

That is the most realistic solution, though it's still time-intensive on the part of the GMs...

---

Originally by: Mr RIP

---

I don't know how they could do it, but the people at CCP are pretty crafty. If we show enough support behind this, they can find a way. There's no doubt they like the cemetery too.

---

Originally by: Winterblink

---

Or they could create a memorial item that can only be deployed around a particular spot. Say for instance... where the current cemetery is. *shrug*

---

Originally by: Kredan Rasok

---

Originally by: Winterblink

---

Or they could create a memorial item that can only be deployed around a particular spot. Say for instance... where the current cemetery is. *shrug*

---

Why not just issue Ariz a special 'Casket' BPO that is quick and easy to build but the resultant casket item is not classed as a can.

---

Originally by: Rachel Vend

---

... with 100% reliability in most cases ...

---

Originally by: Matalino

---

Originally by: Mr RIP

---

I don't know how they could do it, but the people at CCP are pretty crafty. If we show enough support behind this, they can find a way. There's no doubt they like the cemetery too.

---

There is a simple way to keep the GY. If all the people who are signing this petition took one day of the month to tend their own little patch, it will remain forever.

If people don't care enough to help maintain it, then it is fitting that it should fade into the past.

So if you want to keep it, put in a little effort.

---

Originally by: Tarminic

---

I can explain it a bit more thoroughly.

Adding a timer to containers is a relatively simple process. Basically you add to a single block of code that defines the behavior of all objects of that time.

To make an exception for the cemetery, you would have to do one of the following:
1. Have every single container check what system it's in at each downtime - this puts extra strain on the database for no good reason and is a bad coding practice (I can explain if you want, but it's complicated and technical).
2. Create a routine that checks all containers to see if they're in that system and increment their expiration date during downtime. This is also lag-intensive

*SNIP*

There's really no good way around it.

That is the most realistic solution, though it's still time-intensive on the part of the GMs...

---

1. Every object in Eve is a placeholder, programmed with characteristics and attributes, that are then abstracted and re-used in other objects.


2. Object attributes can be queried, filtered by attribute, quantity, and so forth, using simple or complex SQL calls.
   
3. Object characteristics as perceived by the playerbase can be modified through programming laid elsewhere in the game.

Originally by: CCP Prism X

---

...we decided to give Starbases a protective field from all Fedos, Dustmen and other factors which might remove your stuff. This means that both generic junk as well as the anchorable containers will not be removed if left in close proximity to Starbases.

---

Originally by: Vek NaVek

---

na.. game performance is more important

---

Originally by: Matalino

---

There is a simple way to keep the GY. If all the people who are signing this petition took one day of the month to tend their own little patch, it will remain forever.

If people don't care enough to help maintain it, then it is fitting that it should fade into the past.

So if you want to keep it, put in a little effort.

---

Originally by: Victor Valka

---

What the skull-chick said.

---

Originally by: Tarminic

---

Edited by: Tarminic on 15/02/2008 22:08:12

Originally by: Elles D

---

I was about to protest that it would be so simple to keep it, but i'll go with your view Tarminic as tbh i know bugger all about coding.

It's a shame, but if there is no easy way round it then it has to go unfortunately

---

I can explain it a bit more thoroughly.

Adding a timer to containers is a relatively simple process. Basically you add to a single block of code that defines the behavior of all objects of that time.

To make an exception for the cemetery, you would have to do one of the following:
1. Have every single container check what system it's in at each downtime - this puts extra strain on the database for no good reason and is a bad coding practice (I can explain if you want, but it's complicated and technical).
2. Create a routine that checks all containers to see if they're in that system and increment their expiration date during downtime. This is also lag-intensive

Then of course, you have people that will continually spam that particular system with cans because they won't be deleted.

You could limit it to that particular planet but then people could spam the graveyard with unrelated cans. This would be popular because the graveyard would become a popular tourist location (just look at the cans at the EVE Gate!).

I really don't see any way around it. You could even check the text of the can's name for something like "RIP ", but then people would spam with cans that would say "Contact djfslkjf for all your farming needs! RIP "

There's really no good way around it.

Originally by: Qanael Radlari

---

Maybe they could code it so cans have a GM-settable "permanent" flag, that could be applied given a proper petition and a good cause. That shouldn't be all that complicated. They could restrict it only to worthy causes, like RL memorial cans and the cemetery.

---

That is the most realistic solution, though it's still time-intensive on the part of the GMs...

---

Originally by: Cecil Montague

---

They should change that warning on entering low sec to:

"Go read Crime and Punishment for a few days then come back."

---

Originally by: Ashley Dinova

---

Its would be a damn shame to lose something like the GY

If they really want to remove cans to reduce lag, why don't they go take a look at most Empire Roid Belts.
Lots of yellow cans to remove there.

Don't remove the graveyard and the hard work of Azia Burgi, which is btw, awsome
Instead, remove all unused cans from the belts. That itself must reduce quite a bit of lag already.

Just my 2ISK

---

Originally by: Jmanis Catharg

---

These things can be scanned out and destroyed, so if it's an inconvenience to the locals they are more than capable of forcefully removing them.

---

Originally by: Diciamin

---

Originally by: Jmanis Catharg

---

These things can be scanned out and destroyed, so if it's an inconvenience to the locals they are more than capable of forcefully removing them.

---

Not for the past several months. Try it.

---

Originally by: Zensu Kai

---

Seriously, lets try to shed some light on the subject...

Objective:
To reduce clutter in the Eve universe by deleting unused/unwated Containers, Drones, Fighters, Shuttles and other objects as deemed necessary by the developers. Precise and full extent of eradication to be determined on a case-by-case basis, mood and mindset succumbing to the desires of said developers, naturally.


Posit:

1. Every object in Eve is a placeholder, programmed with characteristics and attributes, that are then abstracted and re-used in other objects.


2. Object attributes can be queried, filtered by attribute, quantity, and so forth, using simple or complex SQL calls.
   
3. Object characteristics as perceived by the playerbase can be modified through programming laid elsewhere in the game.

Solution:
1.) For each object type we want to cull from the database, define list of objects to be deleted and process them:

_PSUEDO_CODE-LOOP_START_

tableObjectType = objectType[i];

sqlStatement = DELETE FROM tableObjectType
WHERE expiryDays > days AND exemptFlag != TRUE

sqlProcessQuery();

i++;

_PSUEDO_CODE-LOOP_START_


2.) Update any related tables or transaction indexes as necessary

3.) Optimize database during downtime and/or during cull period. (First of month)

It's really that easy. Sure, it is merely psuedo code here, but the idea is to use the power of SQL to find objects matching the expiration period, and that are exempt from culling. It's a simple select with a flag on those objects. Nothing magical.

---

Originally by: Taedrin

---

The problem here becomes, where do you assign "exemptFlag = TRUE", and what conditions need to be met to warrant the setting of this flag? The very fact that GSCs anchored near a POS will be preserved indicates that it isn't hard to exempt a GSC for destruction. The problem here is determining which cans can stay, and which ones can't. How do you allow the GY to stay without allowing can art/spamming/other things CCP DOESN'T want?

---

Originally by: Azker Khamarr

---

There was a news item about it not too long ago, I doubt it's going anywhere.

---

Originally by: Matalino

---

There is a simple way to keep the GY. If all the people who are signing this petition took one day of the month to tend their own little patch, it will remain forever.

If people don't care enough to help maintain it, then it is fitting that it should fade into the past.

So if you want to keep it, put in a little effort.

---

Originally by: Revan Halendon

---

Originally by: Matalino

---

There is a simple way to keep the GY. If all the people who are signing this petition took one day of the month to tend their own little patch, it will remain forever.

If people don't care enough to help maintain it, then it is fitting that it should fade into the past.

So if you want to keep it, put in a little effort.

---

Well said.

---

Originally by: Mashie Saldana

---

Originally by: Ashley Dinova

---

Its would be a damn shame to lose something like the GY

If they really want to remove cans to reduce lag, why don't they go take a look at most Empire Roid Belts.
Lots of yellow cans to remove there.

Don't remove the graveyard and the hard work of Azia Burgi, which is btw, awsome
Instead, remove all unused cans from the belts. That itself must reduce quite a bit of lag already.

Just my 2ISK

---

WTS clue.


Can't wait to see all the can spam/art/whatever removed from game.

---

Originally by: Astria Tiphareth

---

An excellent example of player generated content, and it should be preserved in some way.

/signed

---

Originally by: CCP Prism X

---

Out of curiosity:

What is it, exactly, in my dev blog that makes people think that we're removing the graveyard?
We provide ways to maintain it. It just requires a community effort now and/or ISK.

---

Originally by: Andrue

---

Originally by: Astria Tiphareth

---

An excellent example of player generated content, and it should be preserved in some way.

/signed

---

If the players want to keep it they should work for it. This may be a strange concept to some of you but as you get older you'll begin to realise that it's a very common principal.

---

Originally by: CCP Prism X

---

Summary: This benefits everyone equally!

---

Originally by: CCP Prism X

---

Summary: This benefits everyone equally!

---

Originally by: Gaven Blands

---

Removing so called "junk" will make mission probing a lot harder, since probers use that "junk" to gain warpable locations to find mission runners.

So your idea will gain (immeasurable) speed improvements 'for all' at a significant cost to Empire griefsters, YET AGAIN.

So your summary was true, it benefits everybody equally. But it stuffs certain groups tremendously, while having no effect on other groups, and massive benefits for others.

Empire griefsters are getting boned yet again, and there appears to be no realistic end to it.

---

Originally by: Sixtina KL

---

irrelevant stuff

---

Originally by: Sixtina KL

---

If you can't answer with reasoning and actual data, then I'll suggest you seek a new game as well.

---

Originally by: Gaven Blands

---

A post that I can't understand

---

Originally by: Allisie

---

In a recent interview, a dev mentioned that ships and skills cause lag and will be removed in EVE 2.

---

Originally by: Nova Fox

---

Didnt the grave keeper specifically stated he wanted to maintian this graveyard alone?

With these new rules, well that aint going to happen so i dont see any possible community effort if hes the only one being stingey.

---

Originally by: CCP Wrangler

---

Second, a gentile is a non jewish person

---

Originally by: Sixtina KL

---

Edited by: Sixtina KL on 18/02/2008 15:23:37
Re: Jowen Datloran

In practice, however, the chances of a mission runner leaving junk at a safespot are slim to none. That sort of thing is more likely to end up near planets, where one will find the bulk of a foreign ratter's secure cans. If junk there is, it might be some abandoned drones because the guy had to warp out, and even then, these drones get popped within a few minutes by the mission rats.

Your best bet when it comes to doing that sort of work is create bookmarks midway through a warp between two planets or other points of interests, so coming back to it lands you in a relatively empty zone that's propice to mission plexes. If, for some reason, there's an unmanned shuttle sitting at a safespot, then you probe the shuttle instead of doing the bookmark trick, but in the end, the problematic is the same.

---

Originally by: Jowen Datloran

---

Disclaimer: I have never scanned any mission runner down. But I have done a good deal of exploration and have been reading about scanning in general.

---

Originally by: CCP Prism X

---

Out of curiosity:

What is it, exactly, in my dev blog that makes people think that we're removing the graveyard?
We provide ways to maintain it. It just requires a community effort now and/or ISK.

I understand this is player generated content that *could* vanish with this feature. But it *could* also be a way to bring the community closer together around it. In my opinion, player made lore should not be maintained by the hand of go that is CCP but rather by the players themselves.

Think about it. Why don't you guys group together and help Azia with being undertakers rather than expect exceptions from us? You know we can't grant them as it will look as Dev favouritism to someone, and we just can't have that.

---

Originally by: An Anarchyyt

---

Move it to a moon, plop a POS down, problem solved. So it is possible.

---

Originally by: Azia Burgi

---

The flaming of Prism X also has to stop because at the end of the day he is just doing his job. If it continues I will remove my support from this petition.Azia

---

Originally by: CCP Prism X

---

They don't mind if that means ruining your work or it's credibility.

---

Originally by: CCP Prism X

---

Originally by: Azia Burgi

---

The flaming of Prism X also has to stop because at the end of the day he is just doing his job. If it continues I will remove my support from this petition.Azia

---

I really appriciate the gesture. I really do. But I wont hold you to this. There are people who post on the forums just to flame, and devs are tasty treats. They don't mind if that means ruining your work or it's credibility.

NOT pointing any fingers. Just stating the obvious.

---

Originally by: CCP Prism X

---

~ Prism X
EvE Database Developer
Relocating your character to a cozy, secure container since 2006

---

Originally by: CCP Prism X

---

omgomgomgomg....gag me with a SPOON!

---

Originally by: CCP Prism X

---

devs are tasty treats

---

Originally by: Azia Burgi

---

The flaming of Prism X also has to stop because at the end of the day he is just doing his job. If it continues I will remove my support from this petition.Azia

---

Originally by: Ephemeron

---

Either you get accused of hurting people, or you get accused of helping too much. Which is better? It's a no brainer.

---

Originally by: 000Hunter000

---

On the other hand, this might be a good incentive to make a yearly pilgrimage.

---

Originally by: 000Hunter000

---

the only pitty is that all the cans at the eve gate will dissapear also.

---

Originally by: CCP Prism X

---

Out of curiosity:

What is it, exactly, in my dev blog that makes people think that we're removing the graveyard?
We provide ways to maintain it. It just requires a community effort now and/or ISK.

I understand this is player generated content that *could* vanish with this feature. But it *could* also be a way to bring the community closer together around it. In my opinion, player made lore should not be maintained by the hand of go that is CCP but rather by the players themselves.

Think about it. Why don't you guys group together and help Azia with being undertakers rather than expect exceptions from us? You know we can't grant them as it will look as Dev favouritism to someone, and we just can't have that.

---

Originally by: Elite Qin

---

Just a little rant here: The whole thing about "Teh spammzored canz R annoying!" is getting old -_-. Now this is coming from my experience, and while I haven't been here as long as some of you folks, I know what I'm talking about. It's really not that big of a deal. I load up asteroid fields that are spammed with secure containers here on my computer (at a military school with a horrible wireless internet connection & bandwidth that's eaten up by a bunch of teenagers playing WoW and downloading ****) just fine. Sure, it might take twice as long as a clear field, but what's wrong with twice as long as loading something that takes 30 seconds at the most? 200 cubic meters of ore? 300? 400? So what? get over it!

---

Originally by: Tsanse Kinske

---

Hint: Apparently there's PvP in this game, and some people find it harder, more expensive, and less fun when they can't see anything on screen. :P

---

Originally by: Elite Qin

---

Originally by: Tsanse Kinske

---

Hint: Apparently there's PvP in this game, and some people find it harder, more expensive, and less fun when they can't see anything on screen. :P

---

The sarcasm is muchly appreciated (seriously (which wasn't sarcastic)),

---

Quote:

---

but I've never really seen that much PVP in asteroid belts except for in lowsec, and I've never seen asteroid belts in lowsec where there were so many containers that it couldn't load in a reasonable amount of time.

---

Quote:

---

Sure, it's a problem, but there are things that should be higher on the list.

---

Originally by: RIP T'orn

---

I think it's clear that CCP isn't going to change anything to keep the Molea graveyard around, so we need to think of a way to keep it. Azia, what do you propose we do? Would you be opposed to having a few more people help you maintain it?

---

Originally by: Gaven Blands

---

YEah, you would have thought CCP Navigator would have suppressed it by now, I wonder if there is some other reason he hasn't.

Maybe because it shifts emphasis away from what's really going on... but no, they wouldn't do that. Five fanboiz are about to lay testament to that, so it must be true.

---

Originally by: Gaven Blands

---

Edited by: Gaven Blands on 18/02/2008 19:39:37
EDIT:

Woah hang, I temporarily gave a ****. Somebody ban me from these forums.

---

Originally by: Daan Sai

---

Hey, here's a radical idea - give the caretaker a skill to remote access anchored cans in that system (like remote industry skills). Then they can access each one rapidly enough to keep them alive, without the flying logistics problem.

---

Originally by: CCP Prism X

---

Unofficial POS safe-radius is 100km. Official is 75km.
Atropos just quoted me some +400Kms as the graveyards earlier today.. I'd honestly say it's less of a problem to run the line and open each and every one of them once a month than move them all into that little bubble.

I'm not very helpful, am I.

---

Originally by: Azia Burgi

---

I can then reduce the number of cans to 27 (A-Z and one for names starting with numbers) by grouping the corpses together by name. its not ideal but its better than nothing.

---

Originally by: RIP T'orn

---

Edited by: RIP T''orn on 19/02/2008 16:30:29
I'm glad we finally got back on topic and making progress again. Now that the idea of a POS is out, we're left with only two.

-We might be able to reduce the can number to 27, A-Z and have the bodies in there as Azia said.


-We can run the can gauntlet once a month and manually open them all.

I personally think we should do option two. If Azia had 10 other people help her, it could get done in a day.

Please discuss which option you would like to see used and why.

---

Originally by: Gedhir

---

Thanks for creating the poll! By the way, I chose the option to set up an alt corp.

See, I really like the graveyard and would like to see it someday. However, I think it's also important that this kind of thing gets solved by the players and not CCP. This isn't because I don't think CCP should be bothered with it or anything like that, but rather because of the nature of the graveyard itself.

This was something that a player started, using her own creativity to make something in this sandbox which none of the developers had imagined. If we get CCP to make some sort of exception for the graveyard, then it becomes just one of those things sanctioned by CCP. I think that there's a danger of creativity being stifled if "official" support or sanction becomes a priority. If players work on their own to create and preserve interesting things they come up with, interesting and creative things will arise more.

---

Originally by: Azia Burgi

---

back to the drawing board folks. any other ideas?

---

Originally by: CCP Prism X

---

In my opinion, player made lore should not be maintained by the hand of go that is CCP but rather by the players themselves.

---

Originally by: CCP Prism X

---

You know we can't grant them as it will look as Dev favouritism to someone, and we just can't have that.

---

Originally by: Kale Kold

---

The cemetary is just spam, it should be destroyed.

---

Originally by: CCP Prism X

---

Out of curiosity:

What is it, exactly, in my dev blog that makes people think that we're removing the graveyard?
We provide ways to maintain it. It just requires a community effort now and/or ISK.

I understand this is player generated content that *could* vanish with this feature. But it *could* also be a way to bring the community closer together around it. In my opinion, player made lore should not be maintained by the hand of go that is CCP but rather by the players themselves.

Think about it. Why don't you guys group together and help Azia with being undertakers rather than expect exceptions from us? You know we can't grant them as it will look as Dev favouritism to someone, and we just can't have that.

---

Originally by: CCP Garthagk

---

While these forums may not give you everything that you want, they will usually let you post.

---

Originally by: CCP Prism X

---

Unofficial POS safe-radius is 100km. Official is 75km.
Atropos just quoted me some +400Kms as the graveyards earlier today.. I'd honestly say it's less of a problem to run the line and open each and every one of them once a month than move them all into that little bubble.

I'm not very helpful, am I.

---

Originally by: Ambo

---

speaking as software developer

---

Originally by: P'uck

---

errrr.... 400km lol Laughing thats the gridsize.

if you LEAVE the grid, (bottom of canline, heading towards planet) it goes on and on for ever... i cant remember exactly... i think its over 3000km.

OVER THREE THOUSAND Shocked im not even kidding.

i DO understand how cool it would be if the problem would be solved by players ...
but to be honest i think it would be a nice gesture if CCP moved the cans to a pos.
maybe a special scenery pos that cant be killed. and doesnt need maintenance.

maybe you guys should pick up the whole idea entirely and setup a structure where players can put corpses in. you know... like a big... cemetary maybe. so we dont have to resort to lagging cans.

its an idea, it made eve better. we helped you in juicing up the game, now help us in keeping it that way.

---

Originally by: Gedhir

---

By the way, if the voting option to lobby CCP wins the poll, and it ends up not working, will you fall back to the 2nd option?

---

Originally by: Azia Burgi

---

gaven, i'm not sure what your issue is

---

Originally by: Kyra Felann

---

Originally by: Knoetje

---

I've taken screenshots before CCP remove the graveyard from the game.

CCP want the players to immerse themselves in role play yet will not condone any non-CCP created things. Oh how I wait with anticipation for the games due out this year, maybe they will be ran by companies with half the sense of CCP.

CCP should either replace the cemetery with a monument like the one in Jita or assist by rearranging the cans so they're all neat and tidy.

---

If you think can spam is role-playing, then you have no idea what role-playing is.

---

Originally by: Gaven Blands

---

[
I have failed.

---

Originally by: KISOGOKU

---

You are much worse than johnny Jojo ,idk are you just trolling Eve-O forum for trolling posting crap or are you jojo wannabee?looking for fame on Eve-O forum?
You are repeating some thing over and over over ,i did not take it and i will not take it so stop .Btw why is all this negativity at last you could show some respect to azia's effort

Originally by: Gaven Blands

---

[
I have failed.

---

---

Originally by: konkord

---

And don't know exactly whats going on, but arent corpses really, really small in terms of volume? Can't CCP create a corpse canister exactly equal to 1 corpse? or to fit no more than 10 corpses? assuming they're 1m volume, no-one is gunna need 10m canisters for anything else if they're unsecure - else they could just shuttles.

---

Originally by: Havlentia Castigatrix

---

CCP are talking about removing extraneous 'stuff'
And there's this one guy who thinks corpses are spam.

---

Originally by: Gaven Blands

---

I can't make it easy enough for you to understand.

---

Originally by: Kathryn Dougans

---

Would a diagram help?

---

Originally by: Gaven Blands

---

\o/

So, that's 3 other people I know who recognise this problem. We only need to find the one guy at CCP who can see it and we might be in business here....

---

Originally by: Gaven Blands

---

Originally by: Azia Burgi

---

gaven, i'm not sure what your issue is

---

I have failed. There are no words I know that can clearly express what is so unfeasibly wrong with what is happening.

They. are. removing. content. from. the. game. to. make. it. faster.

That's about as simple as I can make it.

While we're losing valuable game content cleverly described as "junk", we're keeping a cemetary that serves no function.


The cemetary has become. A non issue. Being used to cloud the issue.

Perhaps. If. They. Decided. To. Remove. Tech2. And. All. Associated. Game. Features. In. The. Name. Of. NEEDFORSPEED. And. Called. Tech2. "Junk". You. Might. Understand. But. Somehow. I. Doubt. it. Although. Some. Additional. People. Would.

---

Originally by: Ikserak tai

---

Is there way to install an implant that emits a beacon when you get podded? Then you could track where your corpse ends up, and maybe put some flowers by it occasionally to commemorate/rue your demise. I suggest any container with a corpse beacon would be exempt from the trash cleanup.

---

Originally by: Azia Burgi

---

the point is you are trying to hijack this thread for you own ends. please take your grievances and put them in their own thread.

---

Originally by: CCP Oveur

---

...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed

---

Originally by: Haradgrim

---

/signed, add a "casket" bpo to the game to replace cans if thats what it takes, just make it so the casket has to be "sealed" with a corpse inside it before it can be anchored.

---

Originally by: Gaven Blands

---

Originally by: Azia Burgi

---

the point is you are trying to hijack this thread for you own ends. please take your grievances and put them in their own thread.

---

whiney voicewords

---

Originally by: Kyra Felann

---

There's nothing to commemorate. Capsuleers are practically immortal. Why would they care about previous bodies that are now dead? They're just dead biomass. Their owners are still alive and well in new, fresh bodies.

Do you mourn your fingernail clippings after cutting them off? How about scabs? If so, get help.

---

Originally by: RIP T'orn

---

Gaven, this thread I made stayed open because it has good intentions to help save a great piece of player-created content. We've tried to keep it as "on topic" as possible, but people like you keep coming in here and ranting to benefit you. Your thread got locked for a reason, so let it go. Keep to your own threads.

Anyway, thanks for the poll Azia. I hope we make the right decision and keep the cemetery around for a long, long time.

---

Originally by: konkord

---

You talk about being selfish but let's spin it another way
As for the topic, I mentioned a couple of pages ago the casket idea is great.

---

Originally by: Gaven Blands

---

Originally by: konkord

---

You talk about being selfish but let's spin it another way
As for the topic, I mentioned a couple of pages ago the casket idea is great.

---

stuff

---

Originally by: Meridius Dex

---

I could actually fit a Thorax WITH LASERS and get better DPS, better speed, better tank and - wait for it - better cap stability

---

Originally by: Narcil Starwind

---

I don't know if anyone else has mentioned this before

...

If this has already been mentioned, or if there is some obvious flaw that I'm missing then disregard this reply. It's been a long day and I might not be thinking as clearly as I would like to.

---

Originally by: Kathryn Dougans

---

Originally by: Gaven Blands

---

I can't make it easy enough for you to understand.

---

In the diagram, all the planets and gates are on the same plane. The ships are not on the same plane, neither is any of the "junk"

Currently, someone could find the two ships, by first finding some of the junk.
In the future, after a cleanup, it is much harder, if not impossible to find the two ships, because they are out of range of probes, and there are no objects that you can find in order to get into range of the ships.

---

Originally by: Havlentia Castigatrix

---

I'm obviously missing some fundamental point about the range at which it's needed to scan. Observator's not starey enough? Ferret's not got enough 'oomph'?

---

Originally by: CCP Wrangler

---

Second, a gentile is a non jewish person

---

Originally by: Brisco Smiley

---

I voted for POS. If it wins, I will donate 20M. It's not much--maybe a week or two of fuel? Surely there are many people more generous and affluent than I.

---

Originally by: OwlManAtt

---

We're arguing the merits of keeping landmarks like the cemetery vs. getting rid of it to increase performance without having any statistics at all to consider. And, as we all know, deciding on what to optimize without knowing for sure what is slow is a Bad Thing.

---