These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

NULL whiners mantra is getting tedious... and CSM lacks HI SEC representation

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Yeep
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#881 - 2012-09-05 12:47:04 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
DarthNefarius wrote:
Many look at the CSM & just see space rich NULL Alliance heads controlling 70%+ of the CSM when 70% of Eve is part of the poor unwashed have nots.

You mean the 70% which is 75% nullsec alts?


If that was the case that would make Null sec the most Apathetic lot out there.


Ignoring the obvious logical flaw in this argument that has pushed my estimate of your IQ well into the negative.

I'm incredibly lazy which is why the CSM allows me to vote in somebody I trust to represent my interests, or at least listen to me when I care. Otherwise I'd have to go about petitioning CCP directly which is far too much effort.
Frying Doom
#882 - 2012-09-05 12:53:49 UTC
Yeep wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
DarthNefarius wrote:
Many look at the CSM & just see space rich NULL Alliance heads controlling 70%+ of the CSM when 70% of Eve is part of the poor unwashed have nots.

You mean the 70% which is 75% nullsec alts?


If that was the case that would make Null sec the most Apathetic lot out there.


Ignoring the obvious logical flaw in this argument that has pushed my estimate of your IQ well into the negative.

I'm incredibly lazy which is why the CSM allows me to vote in somebody I trust to represent my interests, or at least listen to me when I care. Otherwise I'd have to go about petitioning CCP directly which is far too much effort.

You really don't understand mathematics do youLolLolLolLolLolLol

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#883 - 2012-09-05 12:54:03 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Source?
Very difficult to find

Quote:
Again you asked and it has still been answered.
No, I didn't ask you for a count. I asked you to prove it. You didn't. So I'm asking you again: prove it.
Yeep
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#884 - 2012-09-05 12:56:51 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Yeep wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
DarthNefarius wrote:
Many look at the CSM & just see space rich NULL Alliance heads controlling 70%+ of the CSM when 70% of Eve is part of the poor unwashed have nots.

You mean the 70% which is 75% nullsec alts?


If that was the case that would make Null sec the most Apathetic lot out there.


Ignoring the obvious logical flaw in this argument that has pushed my estimate of your IQ well into the negative.

I'm incredibly lazy which is why the CSM allows me to vote in somebody I trust to represent my interests, or at least listen to me when I care. Otherwise I'd have to go about petitioning CCP directly which is far too much effort.

You really don't understand mathematics do youLolLolLolLolLolLol


No, but I have pretty uncontestable proof I understand it better than you
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#885 - 2012-09-05 12:59:10 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
DarthNefarius wrote:
Many look at the CSM & just see space rich NULL Alliance heads controlling 70%+ of the CSM when 70% of Eve is part of the poor unwashed have nots.

You mean the 70% which is 75% nullsec alts?


PROVE IT
An' then Chicken@little.com, he come scramblin outta the    Terminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system's    crashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children'
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#886 - 2012-09-05 13:00:59 UTC
DarthNefarius wrote:
The ones where you claim HI SEC is well represented by a bunch of NUL/LO/WH CSMs that populate CSM7, or the group of CSM6ers, etc to the original CSM1

Yes?

Chances are they'll understand hisec better than your average tunnelvisioned spreadsheet nerd, since they're more liable to have experienced all which hisec has to offer and more. Some of them might even have an idea what might be best for the game, instead of best for "me". Case in point, hisec weirdoes such as ankh, or people who put up threads whining about how PI taxes are sucking out their profits, completely ignoring the fact that reducing taxes would not increase their profits one whit.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#887 - 2012-09-05 13:02:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
DarthNefarius wrote:
The ones where you claim HI SEC is well represented by a bunch of NUL/LO/WH CSMs that populate CSM7, or the group of CSM6ers, etc to the original CSM1
…and I made that claim, where, exactly? My claim is that highsec doesn't particularly need special representation (and I've yet to see a good case being made for an issue where such representation is required).

As for actual representation on the CSM, highsec is represented in CSM7; CSM5 was shock-full of them (leading to the backlash of CSM6 when their limited perspective and poor ability to represent the player base caused the nullseccers to step up); and then, of course, there's Ankh… in fact, the only CSM without any obvious “hisec rep” is CSM6, but then we arrive at that other standard question: what issues were missed by this constellation? Was highsec actually left out of the debate?
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#888 - 2012-09-05 13:04:02 UTC
DarthNefarius wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
DarthNefarius wrote:
Many look at the CSM & just see space rich NULL Alliance heads controlling 70%+ of the CSM when 70% of Eve is part of the poor unwashed have nots.

You mean the 70% which is 75% nullsec alts?

PROVE IT

I have 2 chars in nullsec and 7 chars in hisec, and I'm not extreme for a lot of nullsec.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Frying Doom
#889 - 2012-09-05 13:08:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Yeep wrote:

No, but I have pretty uncontestable proof I understand it better than you

God you really are dumb.

so we will make this simple there are about 350,000 accounts in this game, ok with me so far?
now if 75% of the remaining 70% is Null sec alts that would be about 183,750 hopefully still with me but I doubt it.
Now as there were 59,109 votes that would mean a massive amount of Null sec alts did not vote.

I doubt you got that but I can expect no better from a member of *retracted

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#890 - 2012-09-05 13:08:49 UTC
Tippia wrote:
and then, of course, there's Ankh…


Just to remind people what apparently passes for hisec logic:

"CCP would look into more permanent consequences for criminals, so far this hasn't happened. Probably because everyone with a few destroyer alts can do it, and punishing too harshly will only result in character recycling. I must admit I am very fond of Ultima Online's justice system, where murderers could lose 20% of their stats and skills, and criminals tossed in jail for several hours or days. There are even games, where PK characters are deleted if they are caught within a certain time after the crime. Now that is consequence. If you destroyed someone's hulk, setting him back 15 hours, then you shouldn't get off the hook by whacking rats for an hour. Now as I said I don't see it practical to implement an UO-style system into EVE, but things should be brought more into balance, and there should be more long-term consequence to crime."

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#891 - 2012-09-05 13:10:09 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
I doubt you got that but I can expect no better from a member of Test "We are Bankrupt" Alliiance.

Pray tell, where does it say that he's part of the alliance called "test alliance please ignore"?

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#892 - 2012-09-05 13:10:44 UTC  |  Edited by: DarthNefarius
Lord Zim wrote:
DarthNefarius wrote:
The ones where you claim HI SEC is well represented by a bunch of NUL/LO/WH CSMs that populate CSM7, or the group of CSM6ers, etc to the original CSM1

Yes?

Chances are they'll understand hisec better than your average tunnelvisioned spreadsheet nerd,


They may understand it better but they do not represent it better without representation of some peers CSM7's just a bunch of space rich NULL SECers I wouldn't trust any farther then I could throw a nerfed Titan.
An' then Chicken@little.com, he come scramblin outta the    Terminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system's    crashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children'
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#893 - 2012-09-05 13:10:52 UTC
See if you can dig up a few of her better "PvPers are sociopathic bullies" quotes. There were some real peaches.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Frying Doom
#894 - 2012-09-05 13:11:16 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Source?
Very difficult to find

Quote:
Again you asked and it has still been answered.
No, I didn't ask you for a count. I asked you to prove it. You didn't. So I'm asking you again: prove it.

Quote:
The 1% rule states that the number of people who create content on the Internet represents approximately 1% (or less) of the people actually viewing that content (for example, for every person who posts on a forum, generally about 99 other people are viewing that forum but not posting). The term was coined by authors and bloggers Ben McConnell and Jackie Huba,[2] although earlier references to the same concept[3] did not use this name. For example, a large 2005 study of radical Jihadist forums by Akil N Awan found 87% of users had never posted on the forums, 13% had posted at least once, 5% had posted 50 or more times, and only 1% had posted 500 or more times.


So a hypothesis tested on a radical Jihadist forums, sounds like a real fact...Not.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#895 - 2012-09-05 13:12:05 UTC
DarthNefarius wrote:
They may understand it better but they do not represent it better without representation of some peers they're just a bunch of space rich NULL SECersI wouldn't trust any farther then I could throw.

You can't represent something you don't understand.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#896 - 2012-09-05 13:13:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Frying Doom wrote:
so we will make this simple there are about 350,000 accounts in this game, ok with me so far?
now if 75% of the remaining 70% is Null sec alts that would be about 183,750 hopefully still with me but I doubt it.
…just one problem: the 70% figure has nothing to do with accounts.

Frying Doom wrote:
So a hypothesis tested on a radical Jihadist forums, sounds like a real fact...Not.
If you don't like the fact, write your own peer-reviewed research article to disprove it. Until you do, note the tiny passage “as an example” and the context of the same result being found without using the terminology in question.

Now, about that answer you can't prove that you've provided…
Frying Doom
#897 - 2012-09-05 13:14:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Lord Zim wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
I doubt you got that but I can expect no better from a *retracted

Pray tell, where does it say that he's part of the alliance called "test alliance please ignore"?

No idea why I thought he was test, So I will adjust those posts
Apparently he is a Member of Goonswarm.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#898 - 2012-09-05 13:15:08 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
so we will make this simple there are about 350,000 accounts in this game, ok with me so far?
now if 75% of the remaining 70% is Null sec alts that would be about 183,750 hopefully still with me but I doubt it.
…just one problem: the 70% figure has nothing to do with accounts.

Yes Tippia alts exist without accounts...

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#899 - 2012-09-05 13:16:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Frying Doom wrote:
Yes Tippia alts exist without accounts...
No, but that doesn't make the 70% figure have any relation to accounts.

If you want to use the 70% figure, the number you want to apply it to is somewhere in the region of 800,000–1,000,000.
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#900 - 2012-09-05 13:18:46 UTC
Tippia wrote:
DarthNefarius wrote:
The ones where you claim HI SEC is well represented by a bunch of NUL/LO/WH CSMs that populate CSM7, or the group of CSM6ers, etc to the original CSM1
…and I made that claim, where, exactly? My claim is that highsec doesn't particularly need special representation (and I've yet to see a good case being made for an issue where such representation is required).

As for actual representation on the CSM, highsec is represented in CSM7; CSM5 was shock-full of them


Sounds like we need some of those good old days back then for some more balanced representation. Past year of CSM dominated NULL SEC CSMs in my eyes appeared to be punctuated by a scandle & a riotAttention
An' then Chicken@little.com, he come scramblin outta the    Terminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system's    crashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children'