EVE General Discussion

I read it and regret reading it damn you good sir!!!

Thank you for the suggestions.

The attributions made about an entire class of people do not represent observations of something either categorically true or self evident, though I understand how they could seem that way. Granted analysis was a generous term for the opinions expressed.

I do log into EVE as I am able. I would usually like to log in more, but alas, I cannot always. Thank you for the encouragement though. It is that sort of thing that fosters community and participation. I am forwarding plans, (or really narrative) including writing this. I don't multibox and have decided to develop other assets as well. Though you might have assessments about the assumed pace of my 'plans,' play style, etc. I don't really see the relevance. I am in fact enjoying myself even if the quality of my plans do not meet the criteria for success held by anyone else in the EVErse. I am interacting with people about those in a variety of ways, which I also enjoy.

Perhaps you could be more specific about your objections to my play style, in so far as you understand it? Is it the number of hours per day logged in on any particular character? It occurs to me that such a criteria might well lead to things like AFK mining, but I cannot say of course.

Please keep in mind that I have played less than a month and of course continue to suck at the overt aspects of the game. Many people might not like that experience. I enjoy it in fact as I take it to be intimate to the learning process. EVE is particularly delightful to me because that learning process is practically vertical. I do not care if that takes a long time. In fact I am counting on it and am in no particular hurry this way or that. That approach isn't for everyone. People learn in a lot of different ways. I am not trying to 'win at EVE' or attain anything in particular. I will enjoy the game as long as it has intrinsic value for me and not a second longer.

You strike me as having a very limited view of what might actually have to do with with a sandbox environment. No offense intended, that is just how your post occurred for me. It is remarkable to me that someone might think simple references having to do with change, revolution and non-violent revolution have nothing to with EVE. I probably do not understand the game well enough to understand how that distinction should be made. I have already seen many references to Machiavelli, Von Clausewitz, Sun Tzu etc. Out of curiosity, is it your opinion that those have nothing to do with EVE?

Additionally, as noted, regardless of interpretations, I was simply responding to a request for citations. My conversant at that time also brought up physics and implied the notion of objectivism. However I would easily include evolutionary theory, certainly economic theory and therefore also the underpinnings of those things which are vast. Is math in? Langauge or the study of linguistics? Do those have to do with EVE? How about psychology? Game theory? You can understand my confusion I am sure since my references were apparently so offensive to both you and the previous poster representing the NO. It was in no way my intent to offend. I am very surprised that listing a few book names and page numbers when requested has produced such a reaction. Perhaps though you can help me and lay out a bit about how you determine what does or does not have 'to do' with a EVE and sandbox environment. That would be helpful.

The question I asked was "what does it mean to be free in the EVErse?' I doubt there is a single answer to the question. An answer was offered. I offered a counter example that ironically supported the views seemingly held by the provider of the initial answer. He never really engaged that. I think he may have wanted to argue. I am not sure. Do you see the relevance of the question to this thread about NO and 'miners'?

I know of a very good organizational model of team dynamics that might help you understand what I am or am not doing. I hesitate to introduce it since it seems possible that doing so would be offensive and occur as having nothing to do with EVE. If you are interested perhaps you could let me know.

Failed. :-)

Shao Huang, however, is a brilliant master at it!

I thought that the 'logging in' tip was pretty relevant there.

If you have something to say about the New Order, I'd be glad to discuss it. If you want to discuss temporal schema, I'd suggest a philosophy forum. I don't want to risk a forum ban by violating forum rule 26.

What are the two areas you're referring to? I assume one of them is awoxing?

James 315 started this whole shebang about June last year. He had just himself and the stabber that he still flies today. He encouraged and helped out those who wanted to join in on his cause and in turn received capital from others. He found like minded people, banded them together and today you have a group of people not only dedicated to ganking their targets but salvaging wrecks, reimbursing losses, rebuilding stockpiles and getting those out to the front line so they in turn can lose their ships in a ball of fire.

This isn't even a secret, you can go on minerbumping.com and see what stations they are using, how to make a gank character, what channels to join to take part, how to become an agent, et cetera, et cetera. James has basically gift wrapped the entire New Order and not one entity has taken them on. The people who preach are ignored more than a sermon on tithing.

You are most certainly the most verbose on the subject but lack the substance to back it up. That is, that you are in fact, all style and no substance.

You write like a second year philosophy student trying to use big words to impress the prof.

Some of the snobby sounding people in my trailer park are not intellectuals. I'm guessing the same may hold true in other places.

I couldn't think of a witty response for "actual human words". That's pretty hard to top.

I think this would be true if I had style. As you can see it is not generally considered to be the case, but I thank you for saying so.

Thank you for the concise history. I tend to agree that it's not secret, since at less than a month into the EVErse I know about it in some greater detail than you have so elegantly related. Your description is concise though.

As to substance, I feel that relates to the question at hand, for me at least. What is your criteria for substance? How would you tell? Do you feel that it is a universal criteria or are other models of substance than the one you hold also possible from your point of view? Should everyone conform to your criteria? For me it is manifestly clear that I lack substance in the context of EVE in a variety of ways according to my own models of these things. Perhaps that will change over time, perhaps not. I am not overly concerned about this or other people's attributions in the matter. It's a character flaw I am sure.

I find it interesting to reflect on the assertion that the NO is 'the most real thing in EVE'. I would not venture to say whether it is or not. I am more interested in the basis for saying that and the implications. What makes one thing real and another unreal in the EVErse or a sandbox? How are such assertions authorized? I find the NO process of self authorization both fascinating and wonderful and I wonder about implications... things like I unintended consequences in such cases.

Can you see how this sort of question and a reflection on the NO might then lead to the question 'what does it mean to be free in the EVErse?' Who can be considered free and not? What are the qualities of that freedom or lack thereof? Is there a view about pedagogy with respect to that? I feel that there are many, many assertions about pedagogy made and acted upon. Some seem Darwinian to me, others more like Nietzsche. I think three of the most notable (visible) narratives, Goons and goon like models, the Belligerent Undesirables and the NO offer variations or alternatives to many of the more socialized models, for better or worse. I wonder about those models of pedagogy because they are of great interest to me in a wide variety of ways. Apparently the connection isn't entirely clear since no one has really engaged that question of freedom yet.

I will say for the sake of transparency that in several of my journeys in other 'game' environments, at least one of which was at a scale similar to EVE and more of a sandbox, that my entire game play was organized around the removal and deterrence of third part profiteering, which occurred for me as outside the context of the game as I understood it. I find that dynamic to be parasitic, destructive to community and the player experience. It is often the case that developers cannot or will not effectively address the question, for a variety of reasons. This means that the only way to effectively address it is through player generated community and active cultural intervention. In cases where the game scale and complexity was bounded I would view myself as very successful. In other cases, not so much. This has very large implications depending on how you understand the boundaries of a game. First world attachment to pixels has more market value in some places than the local economy can provide. Running your machine in a way that meets many peoples criteria for being a 'serious player of substance' requires more energy than is available to an entire favella.

I love to play games. I love pvp. I love learning. And i think about and act on these other things as well. i feel there are ways they might be brought into some sort of condition of integrity and I work to do that. I have ongoing questions about the means and consequences of both failure and success in such endeavors. I have found that in either case the means can also destroy community and deteriorate player experience. You might see from this why I might be interested in the things I am asking about. I have also not decided whether or not I wish my journey in the EVErse to be about this and as of yet have neither the resources, substance, experience, etc. to make such a determination. I do know that I would do it quite differently than I have in the past, if I am capable of doing it at all.

I am learning the game and that means many things to me. I am using all my available resources to do so in so far as that seems appropriate to me, including but not limited to this delightful exchange with you. It is only natural, it seems to me, that people might wish to stipulate something about learning process and participation based on their own models of these things. I mostly find that to be generous and well intentioned even when expressed as scathing criticism. However, people learn in many, many different ways. Some people actually thrive on very explicit structure, extrinsic motivation and such as an environment for learning, for a time at least. The dominant pedagogy in education that most EVE players are likely to have encountered reinforces this. Remove such structures, external criteria and whatnot (as EVE does to some extent) and people in this condition are faced with a crisis? How do you navigate or participate in the navigation of that crisis? The NO is one example of an approach to that question.

I hope it is not too great a leap to then understand why I might ask these questions about the NO and other such undertakings.

Thank you again for your thoughtful reply.

I see a ship in the harbour,
I can and shall obey,
But if it wasn't for your misfortune I'd be a heavenly person today.