These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Missions & Complexes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

High-sec Incursion Runners Community Agreement (HIRCA) - To Be Signed and Discussed (TVP, TDF, ISN)

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sean Whedon
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#81 - 2012-08-28 10:18:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Sean Whedon
Soundwave Plays Diablo wrote:
goldiiee wrote:
Soundwave Plays Diablo wrote:
TVP will never fly with ISN, because ISN are in fact griefers. I have no affiliation with the leadership of TVP, however all you have to do is stop by the in game channel and this will be confirmed repeatedly.


Of course your opinion should be noted since you post with an alt and give nothing more than fuel to a fire. Strange addiction you have.



It took you longer to write that post than it would to verify what was posted. Fuel to the fire indeed.

...soundwave, the person you are quoting is an ISN runner and does in fact have it right. The number of pilots they use has been determined to be the optimal fleet composition as far as isk/hour is concerned. They know what they are doing. And calling a COMMUNITY (how is a channel with 100+ pilots in it just a "fleet") griefers without acknowledging the same kinds of things are said in the other channels and even over comms both in and out of fleet, or even understanding that forcing THE ENTIRE eve online high-sec incursion community to run around daily due to a squabble with another channel is the biggest grief ever, tells me you are very biased in opinion.

I've edited the first post on this thread to answer some statements I've read so far.

I've also changed the number of pilots required to be offered a slot in MOM rotation and included non-MOM site rules as number 2.

Skill Guide - https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=139973

Incursion Agreement - https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1846944&#post1846944
Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
#82 - 2012-08-28 11:12:05 UTC


And how exactly do you enforce this?

If you wanted to role play most international treaties (pointless and unenforceable) you're doing pretty well.

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli
Sean Whedon
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#83 - 2012-08-28 11:14:59 UTC
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:


And how exactly do you enforce this?

If you wanted to role play most international treaties (pointless and unenforceable) you're doing pretty well.

the channel CEOs would enforce this. they already enforce something like this, but nothing is on paper or available for the public. and this is meant as a foundation, not the final article (which is why the title says signed and discussed).

Skill Guide - https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=139973

Incursion Agreement - https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1846944&#post1846944
Haqar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#84 - 2012-08-28 11:27:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Haqar
Easiest way to solve this clusterfuck is all highsec mom's should be going down at 'withdrawl' and everyone that can form a fleet should be able to sit at the gate, go in and contest for the mom sites if they so please. No rotation, no bs anymore

There is one thing im missing in this soap

You cant tell anyone how to play their game
Booby McBooby
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#85 - 2012-08-28 12:09:48 UTC
Ghazu wrote:
Soundwave Plays Diablo wrote:
Ghazu wrote:
No it's you scrub fleets thats griefing by slowing things down for everyone then crying about it.


Not by a longshot girlfriend. ISN runs with extra pilots so they are making less money. They slow down the ISK/hour for everyone including themselves. Open up your incursion journal and read it before you post about it kthxbye.



Explain to me how ISN's shorter minutes spent per site slows things down for everyone?



ISN run with 10 DPS and 2 logi and make around 8.8m per site, And because they run with mainly 1400's and Tach's they cannot complete the NCO's... So they do 2 sites out of the 3 in Vanguards.

So they either waste time by moving to another system for NMC's and OTA's or they waste time refiiting, Or waste time hanging around at the sun.

Now other communites who run "optimal" will run 8 DPS and 2 logi meaning they earn 10.4m per site.
And i know of 2-3 other VG communties that run around the same time as ISN and dont have to refit/more system because they run ALL sites.

ICU and SAQD for example run around 90 - 120m per hour depending how many OTA's they get in within that Hour.
ISN however despite what they tell you are on around 70 - 90m Per Hour.
Kodavor
Iz Doge Korp .
#86 - 2012-08-28 12:30:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Kodavor
Booby McBooby wrote:
Ghazu wrote:
Soundwave Plays Diablo wrote:
Ghazu wrote:
No it's you scrub fleets thats griefing by slowing things down for everyone then crying about it.


Not by a longshot girlfriend. ISN runs with extra pilots so they are making less money. They slow down the ISK/hour for everyone including themselves. Open up your incursion journal and read it before you post about it kthxbye.



Explain to me how ISN's shorter minutes spent per site slows things down for everyone?



ISN run with 10 DPS and 2 logi and make around 8.8m per site, And because they run with mainly 1400's and Tach's they cannot complete the NCO's... So they do 2 sites out of the 3 in Vanguards.

So they either waste time by moving to another system for NMC's and OTA's or they waste time refiiting, Or waste time hanging around at the sun.

Now other communites who run "optimal" will run 8 DPS and 2 logi meaning they earn 10.4m per site.
And i know of 2-3 other VG communties that run around the same time as ISN and dont have to refit/more system because they run ALL sites.

ICU and SAQD for example run around 90 - 120m per hour depending how many OTA's they get in within that Hour.
ISN however despite what they tell you are on around 70 - 90m Per Hour.




2x Loki ( 5x720 + 5x fed web ) + Vindi (Rails) + 2x mach ( 1400's) + 2xMare ( Tachs) + 3x Pulses / 800's = 4 min OTA's , 5 min NMC's , 6 min NCO's . No swaping and no nothing . Granted all are ISN doctrine fits .

OTA wall = 4min blink to blink = 8.8mil x 15 = 132 mil/h for non OTA/NMC specialized fleet .
OTA/NMC specialized fleet would perform better in respective sites but worse in the NCO's . WTB LEGION FLEETS BACK !!!

Results may vary depending on the FC's ability to compose the fleet . If any pilot feels that the FC is uderperforming he needs to mail his complain to ISN officers or management .
Kodavor
Iz Doge Korp .
#87 - 2012-08-28 12:31:40 UTC


Having said that, those of you who are not prive to what's been going on have written: 1. Too much politics, 2. Who are you to write this, 3. Incursions are unrealistic, 4. ISN are griefers, 5. TVP acts like they can run things. I will answer some of these now:

1. True. Why? The big name channels have enough of a pilot base to have free reign over almost every AS and HQ site, while also usually being the first group ready to "pop" the MOM. Initially, there was an agreement made out with rotations signed by most of the better-known communities. This agreement has since been broken and instead of trying to fix it, things were pushed further towards chaos. Everyday, high-sec incursion runner has been forced to pick up and move because it was decided that having only one high-sec incursion available at any given time would ensure certain communities would have little to no say. Supposedly, this would hurt the isk/hour ratio of the marked community. However, one of the last incursions had 6 of 9 top LP earners coming from that marked community, proving what is actually being accomplished is trolling and griefing every EVE Online incursion runner. This arguing and assumption needs to stop, as it now affects everyone.

2. Who I am to write this is a mature, non-biased pilot, with only the incursion public in mind. I have spoken directly to channel CEOs both involved and not involved to get an idea of the main issues they have witnessed.

3. Unrelated.

4 and 5. The few do not truly represent the whole.

------------------------------


HIGH-SEC INCURSION RUNNERS COMMUNITY AGREEMENT (HIRCA)


0. INTRODUCTION TO CHANNELS:
a. The Valhalla Project (TVP) - An Incursion Community focused on shield tanked ships. Accepts any and all pilots willing to listen and learn, with regards to ship fits and fleet mechanics. Intended for any shield focused pilot, without bias.

b. The Ditanian Fleet (TDF) - An Incursion Community focused on armor tanked ships. Also accepts any and all pilots willing to listen and learn, with regards to ship fits and fleet mechanics. Intended for any armor focused pilot, without bias.

c. Incursion Shiny Network (ISN) - An Incursion Community focused on shield tanked ships, with the addition of ISK Per Hour being the fundamental strategy. Accepts pilots capable of flying specific ships, fit in a specific way, for the sake of efficiency and speed. Must be willing to listen and learn, with regards to ship fits and fleet mechanics.

1. MOM ROTATION:
a. The Valhalla Project (TVP), The Ditanian Fleet (TDF), Incursion Shiny Network (ISN), followed by "Community X."
b. All MOM Rotation slots are subject to "Contest."

1a. COMMUNITY X:
aa. Community X defined as any other willing Incursion Community with sufficient pilot numbers able to field a full SCOUT, VANGUARD, ASSAULT, and HEADQUARTERS fleet at the same time (roughly 70 pilots minimum) during their respective Incursion Community's Peak Playtime Hours.

1b. CONTEST:
aa. If any Incursion Community is incapable of fielding a full MOM fleet (at least 60 pilots) by the designated "Courtesy Time Frame," a welcomed and acceptable Contest shall be allowed, which may include any and all EVE Online Communities capable of fielding a full MOM fleet, regardless of MOM Rotation.

1a. COURTESY TIME FRAME:
aa. A Courtesy Time Frame of 10 - 12 hours after the Incursion site has began Withdrawing. This Courtesy Time Frame is to allow all the Incursion Community to move themselves to the next high-sec Incursion site. If no new high-sec Incursion site is available upon reaching Courtesy Time Frame, then Courtesy Time Frame will be pushed back until an available high-sec Incursion site spawns.

2. NON-MOM SITES:
a. Non-Rotational free-for-all. Any EVE Online Incursion Community, despite Agreement signatory status. Contests are welcomed when done in Good Faith.

3. PROPAGANDA:
a. All Incursion Communities must agree to use no forms of Propaganda to belittle, harass, misinform, disrespect, falsely accuse, or otherwise deface or defame any other Incursion Community.

4. BAN LISTS:
a. Any and all Ban Lists must be updated to remove no longer necessary character names, corporations, and/or alliances; updated Ban Lists are to be made available as public domain.

5. NINJA LOOTERS AND GRIEFERS:
a. All Incursion Communities (labeled "Incursion Runners Community," here on IRC) must cease and desist Ninja Looting MOM Site Drops and the overall Griefing of Incursion sites.

1a. Incursion Runners Community (IRC):
aa. IRC is defined as all Incursion Communities willing and able to sign this Agreement, despite having the pilot numbers to gain a MOM Rotation slot.

ab. IRC should include a Panel of channel CEOs (labeled "Chief Executive Panel," here on CEP) which should also include Third Party "Civilian" members acting as their respective Community's Diplomat (labeled "Community 'Civilian' Diplomat," here on CCD).

1a. CCDs are to be chosen by either their respective Incursion Community as a whole or by IRC's CEP, in Good Faith.
1b. CCD's purpose is to help discuss and share view points which may be missed by IRCs CEP and be in no way biased toward any one community.

6. MOM SITE DROPS:
a. MOM Site Drops are the sole property of the victors of MOM Site, which will be internally decided upon by the victor's Incursion Community CEOs as to how to handle MOM Site Drops, or by agreement of IRCs CEP, in Good Faith.

7. DECISION MAKING:
a. No decisions can be made by any one Incursion Community, whether in Good Faith or not, without IRCs CEP being given the opportunity, with full Due-Diligence, to give opinion on the matter.[/quote]
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
#88 - 2012-08-28 12:52:21 UTC
So heres a recap:

TVP talks ****.

ISN calls their bluff.

TVP lashes out by taking down mom early.

ISN still rapes them on LP.

TVP wants a treaty.

Confirming TVP is terrible.

Not today spaghetti.
Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#89 - 2012-08-28 12:59:26 UTC
Hisec moms should be killed the moment they spawn

'non-incursion' pilots should form fleets regularly to do this just for the epic tears it generates

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#90 - 2012-08-28 13:43:27 UTC
I think you should keep in mind that if you intend on milking these Incursions, you are doing so at the expense of the rest of the community. Incursions are very disruptive to the people that live in those systems, and prolonging the event will not be received well.

I would suggest you focus on completing them quickly, otherwise the community make take these decisions out of your hands.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
#91 - 2012-08-28 14:24:31 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
I think you should keep in mind that if you intend on milking these Incursions, you are doing so at the expense of the rest of the community. Incursions are very disruptive to the people that live in those systems, and prolonging the event will not be received well.

I would suggest you focus on completing them quickly, otherwise the community make take these decisions out of your hands.




I was part of a 'Community' 500 members that attempted to take an incursion down so our alliance could get back to mining and mission running, it was the catalysts that got me into Incursion running. Most mission runners will know that an incursion site is nothing to be triffled with, and as far as miner or market toon, well, the community loves picking up their wrecks from failed attempts.



For local corps and alliances that are put out by the Incursion in their system I would suggest they try to fly with one of the groups to see how they are run. Then if they have the strength and numbers they should take out the MoM site. It makes sense as they are in the position to make the most from it. Just form up a fleet of 30 to 60 toons capable of tanking in excess of 2500-5000 dps and 14k volleys call your targets to remove the most dangerouse rats from the field first. focus firepower on the carrier and do a little over 1.5million points of damage on a ship with 90% resists across the board, do all this at once and 'Voila' the Incursion will be removed from your constelation.



The reason incursion communities fly such exspensive fleets is not so much that they can, but more that they should. and when thing go wrong the work of 12 players and near 100 billion isk worth of hard work becomes an unretrievable wreck.



So go find a beacon and activate the gate whats the worse that can happen?

Things that keep me up at night;  Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state, Once you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another.
IGNATIUS HOOD
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#92 - 2012-08-28 16:20:04 UTC
Andski wrote:
IGNATIUS HOOD wrote:
Why don't you?

Wait, wait, don't answer that. Its not easy farming while you're being shot at. No, its cool... I totally get it! Roll


believe it or not we used to run low/null incursions just fine until CCP decided to rework them around being run with ridiculous setups that nobody is going to fly outside of hisec

naturally they decided to do that instead of, you know, realizing that incursions in hisec are dumb as hell


This was more directed at Darth then you Andski. I could have made that clearer. Lol
"Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats."   --H.L. Mencken
Soundwave Plays Diablo
Doomheim
#93 - 2012-08-29 05:13:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Soundwave Plays Diablo
Quote:
...soundwave, the person you are quoting is an ISN runner and does in fact have it right. The number of pilots they use has been determined to be the optimal fleet composition as far as isk/hour is concerned. They know what they are doing


When my main gets unbanned I'll post some of the 14 people ISN grief fleets I have been in, and the chat logs.

EDIT:

It kind of reminds me of when "they" said the faction warfare exploit was not an exploit. The tears I got on twitter re-posting the Devs' decision on that were the best I have had yet.

If ISN is not currently griefing by intentionally running too many pilots, then so be it. They have a reputation for griefing and everybody knows it. I have not flown with every incursion group, but every group I have flown with thinks they are griefers.
Kodavor
Iz Doge Korp .
#94 - 2012-08-29 06:56:19 UTC
Sean Whedon wrote:
This was written by me and me alone with the intention of solidifying all Incursion Communities.

Having said that, those of you who are not prive to what's been going on have written: 1. Too much politics, 2. Who are you to write this, 3. Incursions are unrealistic, 4. ISN are griefers, 5. TVP acts like they can run things. I will answer some of these now:

1. True. Why? The big name channels have enough of a pilot base to have free reign over almost every AS and HQ site, while also usually being the first group ready to "pop" the MOM. Initially, there was an agreement made out with rotations signed by most of the better-known communities. This agreement has since been broken and instead of trying to fix it, things were pushed further towards chaos. Everyday, high-sec incursion runner has been forced to pick up and move because it was decided that having only one high-sec incursion available at any given time would ensure certain communities would have little to no say. Supposedly, this would hurt the isk/hour ratio of the marked community. However, one of the last incursions had 6 of 9 top LP earners coming from that marked community, proving what is actually being accomplished is trolling and griefing every EVE Online incursion runner. This arguing and assumption needs to stop, as it now affects everyone.

2. Who I am to write this is a mature, non-biased pilot, with only the incursion public in mind. I have spoken directly to channel CEOs both involved and not involved to get an idea of the main issues they have witnessed.
3. Unrelated.
4 and 5. The few do not truly represent the whole.

--------


HIGH-SEC INCURSION RUNNERS COMMUNITY AGREEMENT (HIRCA)


0. INTRODUCTION TO CHANNELS:
a. The Valhalla Project (TVP) - An Incursion Community focused on shield tanked ships. Accepts any and all pilots willing to listen and learn, with regards to ship fits and fleet mechanics. Intended for any shield focused pilot, without bias.

b. The Ditanian Fleet (TDF) - An Incursion Community focused on armor tanked ships. Also accepts any and all pilots willing to listen and learn, with regards to ship fits and fleet mechanics. Intended for any armor focused pilot, without bias.

c. Incursion Shiny Network (ISN) - An Incursion Community focused on shield tanked ships, with the addition of ISK Per Hour being the fundamental strategy. Accepts pilots capable of flying specific ships, fit in a specific way, for the sake of efficiency and speed. Must be willing to listen and learn, with regards to ship fits and fleet mechanics.

1. MOM ROTATION:
a. The Valhalla Project (TVP), The Ditanian Fleet (TDF), Incursion Shiny Network (ISN), followed by "Community X."
b. All MOM Rotation slots are subject to "Contest."

1a. COMMUNITY X:
aa. Community X defined as any other willing Incursion Community with sufficient pilot numbers able to field a full SCOUT, VANGUARD, ASSAULT, and HEADQUARTERS fleet at the same time (roughly 70 pilots minimum) during their respective Incursion Community's Peak Playtime Hours.

1b. CONTEST:
aa. If any Incursion Community is incapable of fielding a full MOM fleet (at least 60 pilots) by the designated "Courtesy Time Frame," a welcomed and acceptable Contest shall be allowed, which may include any and all EVE Online Communities capable of fielding a full MOM fleet, regardless of MOM Rotation.

1a. COURTESY TIME FRAME:
aa. A Courtesy Time Frame of 10 - 12 hours after the Incursion site has began Withdrawing. This Courtesy Time Frame is to allow all the Incursion Community to move themselves to the next high-sec Incursion site. If no new high-sec Incursion site is available upon reaching Courtesy Time Frame, then Courtesy Time Frame will be pushed back until an available high-sec Incursion site spawns.

2. NON-MOM SITES:
a. Non-Rotational free-for-all. Any EVE Online Incursion Community, despite Agreement signatory status. Contests are welcomed when done in Good Faith.

3. PROPAGANDA:
a. All Incursion Communities must agree to use no forms of Propaganda to belittle, harass, misinform, disrespect, falsely accuse, or otherwise deface or defame any other Incursion Community.

4. BAN LISTS:
a. Any and all Ban Lists must be updated to remove no longer necessary character names, corporations, and/or alliances; updated Ban Lists are to be made available as public domain.

5. NINJA LOOTERS AND GRIEFERS:
a. All Incursion Communities (labeled "Incursion Runners Community," here on IRC) must cease and desist Ninja Looting MOM Site Drops and the overall Griefing of Incursion sites.

1a. Incursion Runners Community (IRC):
aa. IRC is defined as all Incursion Communities willing and able to sign this Agreement, despite having the pilot numbers to gain a MOM Rotation slot.

ab. IRC should include a Panel of channel CEOs (labeled "Chief Executive Panel," here on CEP) which should also include Third Party "Civilian" members acting as their respective Community's Diplomat (labeled "Community 'Civilian' Diplomat," here on CCD).

1a. CCDs are to be chosen by either their respective Incursion Community as a whole or by IRC's CEP, in Good Faith.
1b. CCD's purpose is to help discuss and share view points which may be missed by IRCs CEP and be in no way biased toward any one community.

6. MOM SITE DROPS:
a. MOM Site Drops are the sole property of the victors of MOM Site, which will be internally decided upon by the victor's Incursion Community CEOs as to how to handle MOM Site Drops, or by agreement of IRCs CEP, in Good Faith.

7. DECISION MAKING:
a. No decisions can be made by any one Incursion Community, whether in Good Faith or not, without IRCs CEP being given the opportunity, with full Due-Diligence, to give opinion on the matter.
Ghazu
#95 - 2012-08-29 07:15:51 UTC
Soundwave Plays Diablo wrote:
Quote:
...soundwave, the person you are quoting is an ISN runner and does in fact have it right. The number of pilots they use has been determined to be the optimal fleet composition as far as isk/hour is concerned. They know what they are doing


When my main gets unbanned I'll post some of the 14 people ISN grief fleets I have been in, and the chat logs.

EDIT:

It kind of reminds me of when "they" said the faction warfare exploit was not an exploit. The tears I got on twitter re-posting the Devs' decision on that were the best I have had yet.

If ISN is not currently griefing by intentionally running too many pilots, then so be it. They have a reputation for griefing and everybody knows it. I have not flown with every incursion group, but every group I have flown with thinks they are griefers.


Don't they run with more pilots so they need less minutes per site completion which results in increased isk/hr?
How is that griefing?

http://www.minerbumping.com/ lol what the christ https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2299984#post2299984
Soundwave Plays Diablo
Doomheim
#96 - 2012-08-29 08:12:48 UTC
Ghazu wrote:


Don't they run with more pilots so they need less minutes per site completion which results in increased isk/hr?
How is that griefing?


Adding pilots dramatically reduces the payout. Completing the sites faster is irrelevant while contesting because you have to switch systems. I have had ISN follow the fleet I was in (to another system) half a dozen times in one hour.
Kodavor
Iz Doge Korp .
#97 - 2012-08-29 08:31:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Kodavor
Quote:
I have had ISN follow the fleet I was in (to another system) half a dozen times in one hour.


Half a dozen times = 6 times . There are 60 minutes in one hour . Assuming that you warped to a beacon after jumping systems it would take about 3 - 4 minutes for each gate jump . 4x 6 = 24 min . Are you saying that Two VG flees were randomly warping around 2 solar systems and jumping gates for a whole half an hour ? For me to believe this I would definately need a video that is 24 minutes long showing 2 VG fleets jumping gates for half an hour non stop .

You mister are " Misinforming " others .
Yeyra
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#98 - 2012-08-29 08:59:46 UTC
Soundwave Plays Diablo wrote:
Adding pilots dramatically reduces the payout.


And why is that griefing?

Quote:
Completing the sites faster is irrelevant while contesting because you have to switch systems.


No, you don't.
Ghazu
#99 - 2012-08-29 11:27:04 UTC
Soundwave Plays Diablo wrote:
Ghazu wrote:


Don't they run with more pilots so they need less minutes per site completion which results in increased isk/hr?
How is that griefing?


Adding pilots dramatically reduces the payout. Completing the sites faster is irrelevant while contesting because you have to switch systems. I have had ISN follow the fleet I was in (to another system) half a dozen times in one hour.


Why would they do that to grief you? I am sure they did the math, and whatever they were doing was for the most isk/hour. This may mean that their method requires more sites to be completed per hour to remain efficient, and it just happened that you guys were in the way?

http://www.minerbumping.com/ lol what the christ https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2299984#post2299984
Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
#100 - 2012-08-29 11:32:07 UTC
Sean Whedon wrote:
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:


And how exactly do you enforce this?

If you wanted to role play most international treaties (pointless and unenforceable) you're doing pretty well.

the channel CEOs would enforce this. they already enforce something like this, but nothing is on paper or available for the public. and this is meant as a foundation, not the final article (which is why the title says signed and discussed).



Ahhh so you ARE roleplaying an international treaty.

You know the ones that all the countries sign and then do nothing about the moment it inconveniences them because there's no-one who can possibly make them do it?

Yeah good plan mate because they work so well.

I like the cut of your jib, who doesn't love mounds of meaningless documents and paperwork for people to sign up

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli