EVE Search - Eve Online, CSM and Ankhesentapemkah to be featured in TV documentary

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Eve Online, CSM and Ankhesentapemkah to be featured in TV documentary

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Hadoken 1	Posted - 2008.04.25 00:10:00 - [1] Edited by: Hadoken 1 on 25/04/2008 00:12:42 Originally by: Rufus Britton If on the otherhand you're a month old hauling 10mil which is your life savings, it should not be cost efficient for someone to suicide gank you. It's not. The sec status loss is more than you might imagine, no one is going to lose some sec status for MAYBE a 5mil profit unless it's just for fun. I think Esmenet brings up some good points with Ankh's postings. Ankh believes all gankers should be locked away? She doesn't have the good of the majority of Eve in mind. She should be more open to opposing opinions. edit: spelling
Hadoken 1 Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.04.25 00:35:00 - [2] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Edited by: Ankhesentapemkah on 25/04/2008 00:29:11 Edited by: Ankhesentapemkah on 25/04/2008 00:26:13 Originally by: Hadoken 1 Edited by: Hadoken 1 on 25/04/2008 00:12:42 Originally by: Rufus Britton If on the otherhand you're a month old hauling 10mil which is your life savings, it should not be cost efficient for someone to suicide gank you. It's not. The sec status loss is more than you might imagine, no one is going to lose some sec status for MAYBE a 5mil profit unless it's just for fun. I think Esmenet brings up some good points with Ankh's postings. Ankh believes all gankers should be locked away? She doesn't have the good of the majority of Eve in mind. She should be more open to opposing opinions. edit: spelling Sure, Hadoken 1. You're a fresh newbie with zero posting history history and just happen to stroll past this thread to criticize me. Suuuuuure. Obvious troll alt detected. That sets the count for today to 7. Well obviously I'm an alt, good detective work Sherlock . Not an alt of any of the people posting in this thread however . And I like how you do not address the content of my post and just say I'm an alt.
Hadoken 1 Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.04.25 00:39:00 - [3] Edited by: Hadoken 1 on 25/04/2008 00:39:21 Originally by: Rufus Britton Originally by: Hadoken 1 Edited by: Hadoken 1 on 25/04/2008 00:12:42 Originally by: Rufus Britton If on the otherhand you're a month old hauling 10mil which is your life savings, it should not be cost efficient for someone to suicide gank you. It's not. The sec status loss is more than you might imagine, no one is going to lose some sec status for MAYBE a 5mil profit unless it's just for fun. I think Esmenet brings up some good points with Ankh's postings. Ankh believes all gankers should be locked away? She doesn't have the good of the majority of Eve in mind. She should be more open to opposing opinions. edit: spelling Ankh does have the interests of the majority of people in Eve at heart. Most candidates are pandering to the whims of the old players ignoring the new players. Without new players Eve wouldn't be economically viable for CCP. Ankh is looking after the new players but her policies will have some positive effects on older pvpers too, which is always being glossed over by her opposition. Trade able kill rights will reinvigorate bounty hunting allowing newer players to get their revenge even if there is a huge Skill Point and Ship gulf between the players. It will benefit older players by letting them acquire the killrights from those unable to make any use out of them. She has said multiple times that she is against PvP. I like the ideas of tradeable kill rights a few other ideas, but a majority of her ideas will destroy the concept of highsec non-consensual PvP thus dumbing the game down. New players should not be attracted to this game because it's easier they should be attracted because of it's uniqueness. CCP on many occasions has said this is meant to be a cold and cruel universe, I want it to stay that way. edit: spelling, again
Hadoken 1 Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.04.25 00:49:00 - [4] Originally by: Rufus Britton Originally by: Hadoken 1 Edited by: Hadoken 1 on 25/04/2008 00:39:21 Originally by: Rufus Britton Originally by: Hadoken 1 Edited by: Hadoken 1 on 25/04/2008 00:12:42 Originally by: Rufus Britton If on the otherhand you're a month old hauling 10mil which is your life savings, it should not be cost efficient for someone to suicide gank you. It's not. The sec status loss is more than you might imagine, no one is going to lose some sec status for MAYBE a 5mil profit unless it's just for fun. I think Esmenet brings up some good points with Ankh's postings. Ankh believes all gankers should be locked away? She doesn't have the good of the majority of Eve in mind. She should be more open to opposing opinions. edit: spelling Ankh does have the interests of the majority of people in Eve at heart. Most candidates are pandering to the whims of the old players ignoring the new players. Without new players Eve wouldn't be economically viable for CCP. Ankh is looking after the new players but her policies will have some positive effects on older pvpers too, which is always being glossed over by her opposition. Trade able kill rights will reinvigorate bounty hunting allowing newer players to get their revenge even if there is a huge Skill Point and Ship gulf between the players. It will benefit older players by letting them acquire the killrights from those unable to make any use out of them. She has said multiple times that she is against PvP. I like the ideas of tradeable kill rights a few other ideas, but a majority of her ideas will destroy the concept of highsec non-consensual PvP thus dumbing the game down. New players should not be attracted to this game because it's easier they should be attracted because of it's uniqueness. CCP on many occasions has said this is meant to be a cold and cruel universe, I want it to stay that way. edit: spelling, again She is against participating in pvp herself and does not like non consensual pvp in hisec and wants to lower the amount that goes on there whilst boosting pvp in lowsec with tradeable killrights. She is not against other people engaging in consensual pvp, if you venture into lowsec, you are consenting to pvp. When you UNDOCK you are consenting to PvP, I believe there is a Crumplecorn signature for this situation... And why would we elect someone that helps dictate the way CCP changes the game if she has said herself that she has no experience as the attacking side in PvP? This game is mostly PvP and someone we elect to represent us has no experience in a major part of Eve?
Hadoken 1 Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.04.25 01:13:00 - [5] All candidates will discuss all issues. A candidate that does not have some experience with all major game play types should frankly not be elected. This also goes with any pure PvPers that are attempting to run for CSM.
Hadoken 1 Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.04.25 01:16:00 - [6] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Originally by: Hadoken 1 All candidates will discuss all issues. A candidate that does not have some experience with all major game play types should frankly not be elected. This also goes with any pure PvPers that are attempting to run for CSM. I do have SOME experience as stated earlier in the thread. Not going to repeat myself. In this thread: http://eve-search.com/thread/728922/page/2#41 you say you have no experience in PvP. Being on the receiving end while doing PvE doesn't count.
Hadoken 1 Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.04.25 01:22:00 - [7] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Originally by: Hadoken 1 Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Originally by: Hadoken 1 All candidates will discuss all issues. A candidate that does not have some experience with all major game play types should frankly not be elected. This also goes with any pure PvPers that are attempting to run for CSM. I do have SOME experience as stated earlier in the thread. Not going to repeat myself. In this thread: http://eve-search.com/thread/728922/page/2#41 you say you have no experience in PvP. Being on the receiving end while doing PvE doesn't count. That thread is outdated. And I wasn't doing PVE, if only you would spend some time reading this thread. Could you link me to this post? I seem to have missed it.
Hadoken 1 Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.04.25 01:53:00 - [8] Edited by: Hadoken 1 on 25/04/2008 01:55:49 Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Edited by: Ankhesentapemkah on 25/04/2008 01:35:42 Originally by: Hadoken 1 Then no, it doesn't count. You have no real experience attacking. You will not represent the majority of Eve. How much of the population remains in high-sec exactly? 80%? Put a sock in it. By the way, your character is not even old enough to vote. Who are you to lecture me? At least I have the decency of not hiding behind alts, even if my opinions are unpopular with some people. I am willing to bet that at least 29% (Assuming lowsec and nullsec residents have PvPed, would put the total over 50%) of those highsec dwellers have PvPed before in their life, but however since those numbers have not come out I will stay silent on that point. However, we can both agree that a vast amount have PvPed and thus you will not represent a big portion of Eve, whether above 50% or below. Again with the personal attacks I have yet to attack you with something which is unrelated to the argument, such as character age or being an alt. edit: typos
Hadoken 1 Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.04.25 02:38:00 - [9] Originally by: Rufus Britton Originally by: Hadoken 1 Edited by: Hadoken 1 on 25/04/2008 01:55:49 Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Edited by: Ankhesentapemkah on 25/04/2008 01:35:42 Originally by: Hadoken 1 Then no, it doesn't count. You have no real experience attacking. You will not represent the majority of Eve. How much of the population remains in high-sec exactly? 80%? Put a sock in it. By the way, your character is not even old enough to vote. Who are you to lecture me? At least I have the decency of not hiding behind alts, even if my opinions are unpopular with some people. I am willing to bet that at least 29% (Assuming lowsec and nullsec residents have PvPed, would put the total over 50%) of those highsec dwellers have PvPed before in their life, but however since those numbers have not come out I will stay silent on that point. However, we can both agree that a vast amount have PvPed and thus you will not represent a big portion of Eve, whether above 50% or below. Again with the personal attacks I have yet to attack you with something which is unrelated to the argument, such as character age or being an alt. edit: typos Again pvp is just one part of eve, by your logic a * politician shouldn't be allowed because he would not be representative of straight people. The logic is stupid, pvp is one part of eve, there will be enough candidates elected with a deep enough knowledge of it. Ankh has other knowledge that would serve her well on the council that others probably don't have. Your argument has no water, being * and being a carebear are nothing alike. Seeing the PvPers point of view and trying out some PvP to see the other side should be a candidates main concern. I don't mind that she is a carebear by lifestyle choice, but I do mind when she calls the PvPers 'evil psychopaths' and pretends that she should represent Eve.
Hadoken 1 Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.04.25 05:07:00 - [10] Edited by: Hadoken 1 on 25/04/2008 05:07:40 Originally by: Rufus Britton Again pvp is just one part of eve, by your logic a * politician shouldn't be allowed because he would not be representative of straight people. The logic is stupid, pvp is one part of eve, there will be enough candidates elected with a deep enough knowledge of it. Ankh has other knowledge that would serve her well on the council that others probably don't have. However, a * politician knows the straight peoples point of views and can stay objective. Ankh, however, proves that she cannot stay objective in the light of opposing views as evidenced by the personal attacks and calling PvPers certain names that have been stated multiple times in this thread. Being a carebear that can see the side of PvPers is one thing, hating the guts and doing everything in her power to stop 'unfair' highsec PvP is another.
Hadoken 1 Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.04.25 15:02:00 - [11] Edited by: Hadoken 1 on 25/04/2008 15:03:55 Originally by: Dkorg Originally by: Hadoken 1 I am willing to bet that at least 29% (Assuming lowsec and nullsec residents have PvPed, would put the total over 50%) of those highsec dwellers have PvPed before in their life, but however since those numbers have not come out I will stay silent on that point. Please document this claim. http://ccp.vo.llnwd.net/o2/pdf/QEN_Q4-2007.pdf This document says t hat 76% of the population lives in highsec. Of course, this is counting alts so we have no idea the actual number of unique players. But I am willing to bet that 29% of them have PvPed on that character or an alt. That, added to the lowsec and nullsec numbers makes 51%.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.