EVE General Discussion

Heh, don't know what country the two of you live in but according to the 'Free' world country's, a person is innocent until proven guilty. In other words, the burden of proof falls on you to prove I am making false statements.

FYI - it's know as 'Argumentum ad hominem', an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it. Obviously this is something you do rather well.

Anyway, you definitely excel at posting a bunch of 'Nada' while beating your chests and stomping your feet.. so no more soup for you. Hope you choke on this since the two of you are incapable of doing a little bit of research.

http://community.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1469548

http://community.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=427556

You're not guilty of anything except deception. This is not a criminal case, merely a discussion. We asked you - repeatedly - to provide the proof of your statement as it is a broad one. I did so politely, but your attempts at turning it on me has pissed me off greatly. So let me refer you back to my original question, as you did not appear to read it well.




I'll repeat the words.

I've seen you claim a majority want it before.
I've seen others claim a majority don't want it.

I've not seen any proof from either camp.

I want to see your source, because I would like a definitive answer on the topic. It is not a personal attack, it is a request for information you dumb ****. (That is a personal attack) If I could prove the opposite; I would sadly have to link it. Sadly, because I support the concept of WiS. (Honestly, not dishonestly like you appear intent on doing)




Time for a bit of an education, DeMichael.

ma·jor·i·ty   [muh-jawr-i-tee, -jor-]

noun, plural -ties.
1. the greater part or number; the number larger than half the total ( opposed to minority): the majority of the population.
2. a number of voters or votes, jurors, or others in agreement, constituting more than half of the total number.
3. the amount by which the greater number, as of votes, surpasses the remainder ( distinguished from plurality).

Your quote provides the following:

A number of players have asked for something along these lines since launch

A number of.

A collection of persons or things; several. For example, A number of tours are available , or We've visited a number of times . This idiom often is modified by an adjective giving some idea of quantity, as in Only a small number are going.

This does not suggest a majority. Now, once again. You are making a claim. Do you have information that backs up your claim of a "majority"? I would really like to see this, if only for my own comfort.

Ladie Harlot - goons - and anti WIS propaganda... getting old and very very repetitive.

In truth, if the archives were easier to search, verifying his assertion would be pretty simple.

I agree 100%. CCP experienced a perfect storm of discontent (dissatisfaction was the word I used) for a myriad of reasons some of which had been building for a long time. I would argue however that "a handful of whiny forum alts" hardly contributed to the loss since supposedly only a fraction of the player base reads the forums. You may have overlooked the sarcasm in my prior post.

I always hesitate to dismiss the effect that the protests had on altering CCP's course, as I know many people actually had good and sincere intentions at heart.

However, I also understand that many that unsubbed did so because they were force fed a very bias view of ongoing events... the result of which was to urge them into taking steps that they might not have done if cooler heads had prevailed. You have to admit, that whole time period was like chum had been thrown in the waters and drove the local trolls into a feeding frenzy.

Those that did unsubscribe some or all of their accounts (and I firmly believe the actual number was far fewer than those that claimed they were going to) DID offset the number of new subscribers that CCP had expected... a subscription number increase that CCP was counting on to cover their impending payback of invested development funds (which they had over spent with).

Let me clarify a response I made above about verifying the interest that has always been expressed by the EVE community in Avatar based game play.

Simply put, while there were a fair number of threads created with a name that refers to Avatar based game play, MOST of the discussion concerning the desire to have this was buried in threads about a myriad of other topics.

Threads about docking games, agent interactions, NPC goods (exotic dancers, mercenaries, Marines, etc.), bounty hunting, station ping pong, SOV changing hands, etc. were full of players voicing the desire to actually be able to interact with them in some Avatar based form of game play.

This is a very difficult thing to search for and present as documented proof, but I think most of the old timers (if they honestly think back on all of those threads) will remember exactly what we are talking about.