These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Intergalactic Summit

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Quafe Convoy Destroyed By Caldari Forces On Caldari-Gallente Border

Author
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#441 - 2017-05-25 21:56:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Arrendis
Pieter Tuulinen wrote:
Ayallah wrote:
The State proves again to its citizens that their lives are worth nothing more than the lost revenue to replace them.


As opposed to the citizens of other organisations, of course.


I'm just gonna take a moment here, Pieter, and tell you that you're wrong. I have an organization that I belong to, for example. It's got other people in it, and they each have very specific roles and positions.

And you should not, under any circumstances, believe that I would ever come close to assigning a revenue stream value to my mother.

And I somehow down the members of the small social organizations called 'families' that each of those 4,691 people belonged to feel differently.

You're normally a smart guy, Pieter, but I think you're a little off-base with that one.
Ashlar Vellum
Esquire Armaments
Jayai Syndicate
#442 - 2017-05-25 22:11:07 UTC
Ayallah wrote:
The State proves again to its citizens that their lives are worth nothing more than the lost revenue to replace them.

Shouldn't defending the rights of the employees while they are doing their job rest on the shoulders of the employer? Quafe just cancelled all litigation and according to the Scope experts chose a check without drawing any substantial criticism at all, that's kinda bizarre.
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#443 - 2017-05-25 22:25:47 UTC
Ashlar Vellum wrote:
Shouldn't defending the rights of the employees while they are doing their job rest on the shoulders of the employer? Quafe just cancelled all litigation and according to the Scope experts chose a check without drawing any substantial criticism at all, that's kinda bizarre.


We don't know just how big that check really was. I mean, the 'educated estimates' are what? 500bn? But is that really even close to likely? Foment an international incident during a time of crisis, and you get a slap on the wrist? C'mon. If Quafe really settled for chump change like that, they need to cut their prices in half.
Pieter Tuulinen
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#444 - 2017-05-26 01:23:57 UTC
Arrendis wrote:
Pieter Tuulinen wrote:
Ayallah wrote:
The State proves again to its citizens that their lives are worth nothing more than the lost revenue to replace them.


As opposed to the citizens of other organisations, of course.


I'm just gonna take a moment here, Pieter, and tell you that you're wrong. I have an organization that I belong to, for example. It's got other people in it, and they each have very specific roles and positions.

And you should not, under any circumstances, believe that I would ever come close to assigning a revenue stream value to my mother.

And I somehow down the members of the small social organizations called 'families' that each of those 4,691 people belonged to feel differently.

You're normally a smart guy, Pieter, but I think you're a little off-base with that one.


I imagine the Quafe board of directors feels different about THEIR mothers, too. When I lose a crewmember, though, I ship their bodies home and I pay an honorarium based on their service and the manner of their passing. I don't know the mothers of all of my crews. I don't even know MY mother.

I do have sympathy with the families of the lost - but I'm aware that my sympathies and an empty sack are basically worth the price of the sack. Anyone who loses crews and claims to treat them all like family is lying or deluded - the grief would break you. Sometimes it breaks you anyway.

For the first time since I started the conversation, he looks me dead in the eye. In his gaze are steel jackhammers, quiet vengeance, a hundred thousand orbital bombs frozen in still life.

Ayallah
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#445 - 2017-05-26 03:27:19 UTC
Veikitamo Gesakaarin wrote:
Never explain. Never apologize -- and if you are forced to say sorry, make it clear in no uncertain terms you are not sorry.
Did you get this off a 'red pill' article on the galnet about how to be an alpha personality and stop letting people walk all over you?

Because it reads like what a teenage boy would write.

Goddess of the IGS

As strength goes.

Pieter Tuulinen
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#446 - 2017-05-26 05:23:01 UTC
Ayallah wrote:
Veikitamo Gesakaarin wrote:
Never explain. Never apologize -- and if you are forced to say sorry, make it clear in no uncertain terms you are not sorry.
Did you get this off a 'red pill' article on the galnet about how to be an alpha personality and stop letting people walk all over you?

Because it reads like what a teenage boy would write.

It's standard corporate lawyerese, I am afraid.

Explaining makes it sound like you were justifying yourself.
Apologizing suggests you're admitting culpability.
Saying that you're sorry suggests that you've got something to be sorry for.

Veiki is simply displaying her experience in corporatist protocols.

For the first time since I started the conversation, he looks me dead in the eye. In his gaze are steel jackhammers, quiet vengeance, a hundred thousand orbital bombs frozen in still life.

ValentinaDLM
SoE Roughriders
Electus Matari
#447 - 2017-05-26 05:38:17 UTC  |  Edited by: ValentinaDLM
I am pleased this is resolved, the State didn't apologize, but they took responsibility for their actions in their own way and that is a better move than an insincere apology. All the state needs to do, is look after itself, be responsible, and not try to export their culture or government and that will make me happy. The loss of life is regrettable, but to be fair capsuleers kill numbers like that on a daily basis.

I would like to know if the chain of command was broken to have this situation happen, but I suppose it doesn't really matter too much, I am sure if it was those responsible will be punished appropriately.
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#448 - 2017-05-26 05:49:03 UTC
ValentinaDLM wrote:
I am pleased this is resolved, the State didn't apologize, but they took responsibility for their actions


No... no, they in fact specifically did not:

Admiral Erinen wrote:
in conclusion, the SAF accepts no liability or responsibility for the loss of the 4,691 Quafe Company personnel who were killed in the incident.

“We do however acknowledge that at the time of the incident, the vessels and personnel involved were within Caldari borders, under the jurisdiction of the SAF, and were under instruction from Caldari Customs. The agreement of a settlement with the Quafe Company is neither admission nor confirmation of either liability or responsibility for the incident.


They paid Quafe off, and then went out of their way to not take responsibility for their actions.
Veikitamo Gesakaarin
Black Advent
#449 - 2017-05-26 06:16:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Veikitamo Gesakaarin
Ayallah wrote:
Veikitamo Gesakaarin wrote:
Never explain. Never apologize -- and if you are forced to say sorry, make it clear in no uncertain terms you are not sorry.
Did you get this off a 'red pill' article on the galnet about how to be an alpha personality and stop letting people walk all over you?

Because it reads like what a teenage boy would write.


It goes like this: If there is no conviction of a crime, then by the letter of the law and the legal record no crime was committed.

As such, while I may be many things, I am no critic of the SAF and the brave women and men in uniform who comprise it and whose service I thank. Especially not when I feel there is nothing at all to criticize. The organizations involved have settled a dispute to their own satisfaction and no malfeasance was proven in a court of law.

As far as I'm concerned if there is nothing to justify, then there is little more that need be said.

Kurilaivonen|Concern

Ayallah
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#450 - 2017-05-26 06:45:00 UTC
The deaths is what there is to justify. The 'brave' people who destroyed unarmed freighters in warships I am sure are comforted that they committed no legal crime.

I am not surprised that the Caldari have taken this to mean that no wrongdoing took place. A Caldari cannot see something is wrong unless a corporate memo informs them they should open their eyes.

Goddess of the IGS

As strength goes.

Veikitamo Gesakaarin
Black Advent
#451 - 2017-05-26 07:19:06 UTC
Ayallah wrote:
A Caldari cannot see something is wrong unless a corporate memo informs them they should open their eyes.


The State, in her relations with foreign nations may she always be in the right; but right, or wrong, our State.

Kurilaivonen|Concern

Jev North
Doomheim
#452 - 2017-05-26 08:24:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Jev North
Ayallah wrote:
A Caldari cannot see something is wrong unless a corporate memo informs them they should open their eyes.

I'd take that over a bunch of Summit heckling from the usual suspects, to be sure.

Even though our love is cruel; even though our stars are crossed.

ValentinaDLM
SoE Roughriders
Electus Matari
#453 - 2017-05-26 08:39:49 UTC
Arrendis, I don't care what the statement said, they paid. That is being responsible. If the State wants to save face that is fine, so long as compensation happens, I don't care what they call it, actions matter more. Sounds to me like you just want to see the state lose face in the scenario and I don't see how that benefits anyone.

Mizhara Del'thul
Kyn'aldrnari
#454 - 2017-05-26 09:02:20 UTC
Throwing money at a screw-up to make a problem go away is not 'being responsible'. That is being irresponsibly delinquent in their duty to expose the failure points in the system that allowed the event to occur in the first place, and ensuring that they are rectified in order to avoid such failure in the future.

Taking responsibility is being responsible. Refuting it and undoubtedly lying through their teeth is most certainly not.

If you can't see what the benefit is in acknowledging failure in order to rectify it, you're seriously short-sighted.
Jev North
Doomheim
#455 - 2017-05-26 10:30:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Jev North
Arguably a sizeable fine or settlement will be more effective in promoting real change in a corporate structure. More so than any amount of fake tear-stained statements of regret, or token political firings. I know the sov-shufflers like to throw supercapitals into the woodchipper for fun and profit, but still - if your underlings or procedures just cost you 500 billion ISK because of some (allegedly) stupid circumstances, wouldn't you make some real and rational changes?

Even though our love is cruel; even though our stars are crossed.

Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#456 - 2017-05-26 12:24:48 UTC
Jev North wrote:
Arguably a sizeable fine or settlement will be more effective in promoting real change in a corporate structure. More so than any amount of fake tear-stained statements of regret, or token political firings. I know the sov-shufflers like to throw supercapitals into the woodchipper for fun and profit, but still - if your underlings or procedures just cost you 500 billion ISK because of some (allegedly) stupid circumstances, wouldn't you make some real and rational changes?


The fact that the hypothetical 500bn—because the only number offered is specifically said to be pure speculation—is the less onerous option for the SAF should tell you something. Do I believe they're going to make changes? No, I do not. Not when they can get away with paying a pocket-change level fine.
Jev North
Doomheim
#457 - 2017-05-26 12:42:28 UTC
So. Either Quafe is cynical enough to accept "hypothetical pocket change" to ignore this alleged crass mass murder, or maybe things are somehow different from what you're claiming.

Even though our love is cruel; even though our stars are crossed.

Ashlar Vellum
Esquire Armaments
Jayai Syndicate
#458 - 2017-05-26 14:39:54 UTC
Arrendis wrote:
Ashlar Vellum wrote:
Shouldn't defending the rights of the employees while they are doing their job rest on the shoulders of the employer? Quafe just cancelled all litigation and according to the Scope experts chose a check without drawing any substantial criticism at all, that's kinda bizarre.


We don't know just how big that check really was. I mean, the 'educated estimates' are what? 500bn? But is that really even close to likely? Foment an international incident during a time of crisis, and you get a slap on the wrist? C'mon. If Quafe really settled for chump change like that, they need to cut their prices in half.

The amount is beyond the point so I have no idea why are you focusing on it.

Employer chose to drop all litigation instead of pursuing the case in which his employees were the injured party, doing so employer didn't get any substantial criticism from the press or the public that's what I find bizarre.
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#459 - 2017-05-26 15:03:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Arrendis
Well, here's the thing: Quafe is more or less at the mercy of the State as far as compensation and remuneration goes. Are they being a bunch of spineless little crapstains for taking whatever settlement is being offered, instead of demanding accountability?

Yup.

Did I even for one moment ever expect a Gallente soft drink corporation to be anything more than spineless crapstains?

Nope.

I did, however, have some hope that the CCS/SAF would opt for a full accounting of an incident that led to the deaths of State citizens. Not a lot, mind you, but some.

And just to address this:

Ashlar Vellum wrote:
The amount is beyond the point so I have no idea why are you focusing on it.


When the statement being responded to cites a 'sizable' fine as being an effective penalty, the amount is actually relevant, as is whether or not the amount is either reliably accurate or actually sizable.
Ashlar Vellum
Esquire Armaments
Jayai Syndicate
#460 - 2017-05-26 17:56:22 UTC
Is there a reason to have different standards for the involved parties if the argument that's being made is moralistic in it's core? If argument is being made on a moral basis about "assigning a revenue stream value to a human life" then why amount even enters the picture?

Let me reiterate.
If "assigning a revenue stream value to a life" - is bad in it's core, then amount is irrelevant. On the other hand if "assigning a revenue stream value to a life" - is an effective penalty in certain circumstances, then amount is indeed relevant but there is no more moral argument (ergo moral outcry is nothing more than a farce).

Also it should be noted, saying that Quafe is just a "Gallente soft drink corporation" is a huge misconception. Their political weight for a corp should not be underestimated.