These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Burn Jita haz a date!!

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dave Stark
#261 - 2014-04-27 00:17:03 UTC
Qmamoto Kansuke wrote:
Whats the point of killing freighters carrying crap like this

https://zkillboard.com/kill/38453830/

I don't get itUgh


because why not?
Dave Stark
#262 - 2014-04-27 00:18:05 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:

actually, the very fact that you can't ensure success as we've proven several times negates it.


No, because your "proof" rests in an absolute which is impossible, while my suggestions are based in reality.

Your demanding absolutes cripples your argument, because there are no absolutes, and since there are no absolutes, addressing them as a method of proof pertaining to reality is a fallacious demand because it's impossible.

By your logic, you should not be pressing the keys on your keyboard, or using your computer because it may get angry and attack you, zapping you with electricity and smashing you over your head with the keyboard and mouse. You demand absolute proof? Absolutely prove that your computer will not do that. You can't absolutely prove it, but you can, within the realm of reality, accept that the likely hood of it happening is so negligible, that you do not consider it as a determining factor regarding your choice to use it.



no, my proof is basic mathematics. which you seem to have an issue grasping.

also your absurd and ******** hypothetical doesn't follow my logic at all.


O no, my hypothetical fits quite well. You've constantly demanded an absolute 0% risk suggestion, which is impossible, just like you can't prove that your computer attacking you is 0%.

It may be highly unlikely, yes. So unlikely that you shouldn't waste time considering that it's a real possibility, definitely. Yet you will hypocritically demand an absolute from someone else.


no, i haven't demanded an absolute 0% risk.

i've spent 3 or so pages proving that there isn't such a thing, because you claimed there was. the very fact it's impossible was the point, the point being; you were wrong.
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#263 - 2014-04-27 00:21:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Divine Entervention
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:

actually, the very fact that you can't ensure success as we've proven several times negates it.


No, because your "proof" rests in an absolute which is impossible, while my suggestions are based in reality.

Your demanding absolutes cripples your argument, because there are no absolutes, and since there are no absolutes, addressing them as a method of proof pertaining to reality is a fallacious demand because it's impossible.

By your logic, you should not be pressing the keys on your keyboard, or using your computer because it may get angry and attack you, zapping you with electricity and smashing you over your head with the keyboard and mouse. You demand absolute proof? Absolutely prove that your computer will not do that. You can't absolutely prove it, but you can, within the realm of reality, accept that the likely hood of it happening is so negligible, that you do not consider it as a determining factor regarding your choice to use it.



no, my proof is basic mathematics. which you seem to have an issue grasping.

also your absurd and ******** hypothetical doesn't follow my logic at all.


O no, my hypothetical fits quite well. You've constantly demanded an absolute 0% risk suggestion, which is impossible, just like you can't prove that your computer attacking you is 0%.

It may be highly unlikely, yes. So unlikely that you shouldn't waste time considering that it's a real possibility, definitely. Yet you will hypocritically demand an absolute from someone else.


no, i haven't demanded an absolute 0% risk.

i've spent 3 or so pages proving that there isn't such a thing, because you claimed there was. the very fact it's impossible was the point, the point being; you were wrong.


So you waste time trying to get proof of an absolute. You just sat here and spent like 3 pages or so worth of posting demanding I provide you with an absolute, which means an absolute is important to you.

I never brought up absolutes, you assigned the attribute of an absolute to my post of your own accord, showing a propensity to demand absolute proof.

You'll see I suggested multiple times that the risk was so negligible, that it wasn't worth considering as a determining factor you should use to influence your decisions. Yet even after my stating that repeatedly, you continued to demand an absolute.

ALSO, you stated that your own definition of "risk" as an absolute.
Dave Stark
#264 - 2014-04-27 00:23:55 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
So you waste time trying to get proof of an absolute. You just sat here and spent like 3 pages or so worth of posting demanding I provide you with an absolute, which means an absolute is important to you.

I never brought up absolutes, you assigned the attribute of an absolute to my post of your own accord, showing a propensity to demand absolute proof.

You'll see I suggested multiple times that the risk was so negligible, that it wasn't worth considering as a determining factor you should use to influence your decisions. Yet even after my stating that repeatedly, you continued to demand an absolute.

ALSO, you stated that your own definition of "risk" as an absolute.


i didn't demand anything, i just pointed out that the chance of a sucessful gank wasn't 1, and you were wrong. you've just spent 3 pages not accepting that simple fact.

you were wrong, ganking isn't risk free. we've been over this like 6 times now. is french your first language? i speak french but you're having a lot of trouble with english at the moment it would seem.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#265 - 2014-04-27 00:24:12 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:


So you waste time trying to get proof of an absolute. You just sat here and spent like 3 pages or so worth of posting demanding I provide you with an absolute, which means an absolute is important to you.


Considering you kept reposting a false dichotomy for several pages earlier today? I find this incomparably amusing.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Qmamoto Kansuke
Killing with pink power
Penguins with lasorz
#266 - 2014-04-27 00:24:57 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Qmamoto Kansuke wrote:
Whats the point of killing freighters carrying crap like this

https://zkillboard.com/kill/38453830/

I don't get itUgh


because why not?


I can understand killing it if it was carrying say 150m+
But kills like this are just pure griefing.

How long before this kind of gameplay backfires and eve starts bleeding subs?See Darkfall for example bit more hardcore than eve and does it have large playerbase nope.The more hardcore eve becomes less people will play it.What's the point of holding these kinds of events if in the end your alliance is left to play with itself.
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#267 - 2014-04-27 00:26:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Divine Entervention
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
So you waste time trying to get proof of an absolute. You just sat here and spent like 3 pages or so worth of posting demanding I provide you with an absolute, which means an absolute is important to you.

I never brought up absolutes, you assigned the attribute of an absolute to my post of your own accord, showing a propensity to demand absolute proof.

You'll see I suggested multiple times that the risk was so negligible, that it wasn't worth considering as a determining factor you should use to influence your decisions. Yet even after my stating that repeatedly, you continued to demand an absolute.

ALSO, you stated that your own definition of "risk" as an absolute.


i didn't demand anything, i just pointed out that the chance of a sucessful gank wasn't 1, and you were wrong. you've just spent 3 pages not accepting that simple fact.

you were wrong, ganking isn't risk free. we've been over this like 6 times now. is french your first language? i speak french but you're having a lot of trouble with english at the moment it would seem.


Yes you did.
Right here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4517025#post4517025
And ganking can be risk-free (if your desire isn't profit but instead the gank itself) if you account for all of the REALISTIC possibilities that could prevent your gank from being successful. If you plan accordingly, you can eliminate risk.
Zeko Rena
ENCOM Industries
#268 - 2014-04-27 00:27:17 UTC
Qmamoto Kansuke wrote:
Whats the point of killing freighters carrying crap like this

https://zkillboard.com/kill/38453830/

I don't get itUgh



The real question is what is the point of using a Freighter to carry that?
Dave Stark
#269 - 2014-04-27 00:28:10 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Yes you did.

And ganking can be risk-free (if your desire isn't profit but instead the gank itself) if you account for all of the REALISTIC possibilities that could prevent your gank from being successful. If you plan accordingly, you can eliminate risk.


no, i didn't.

no, it can't. we've just spent like 3 pages going over that. ganking is not risk free, you've even admitted it in several posts.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#270 - 2014-04-27 00:28:28 UTC
Qmamoto Kansuke wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Qmamoto Kansuke wrote:
Whats the point of killing freighters carrying crap like this

https://zkillboard.com/kill/38453830/

I don't get itUgh


because why not?


I can understand killing it if it was carrying say 150m+
But kills like this are just pure griefing.

How long before this kind of gameplay backfires and eve starts bleeding subs?See Darkfall for example bit more hardcore than eve and does it have large playerbase nope.The more hardcore eve becomes less people will play it.What's the point of holding these kinds of events if in the end your alliance is left to play with itself.

can we get more of these posts and less of divine intervention's boring garbage tia
Dave Stark
#271 - 2014-04-27 00:29:06 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Yes you did.
Right here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4517025#post4517025

That quote doesn't illustrate your point, are you honestly unable to read english?
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#272 - 2014-04-27 00:30:54 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Yes you did.

And ganking can be risk-free (if your desire isn't profit but instead the gank itself) if you account for all of the REALISTIC possibilities that could prevent your gank from being successful. If you plan accordingly, you can eliminate risk.


no, i didn't.

no, it can't. we've just spent like 3 pages going over that. ganking is not risk free, you've even admitted it in several posts.


Right here is when you begin using an absolute as an attempt to prove me wrong:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4517025#post4517025

so

yes you did.
Solecist Project
#273 - 2014-04-27 00:31:16 UTC
HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE

I find it disturbing that freighter pilots just...

HELL, THEY JUST KEEP COMING!

They even undock from Jita 4-4!

And who gets the blame?


Btw, disco thrashers are awesome,
but I can't fit a combat probe launcher onto it ...

Now I'm -9,
40+ KillRights on my ass
and all I need is a Probe,
two small smartbombs and said launcher.


I love this game! :D

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Dave Stark
#274 - 2014-04-27 00:33:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
Divine Entervention wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Yes you did.

And ganking can be risk-free (if your desire isn't profit but instead the gank itself) if you account for all of the REALISTIC possibilities that could prevent your gank from being successful. If you plan accordingly, you can eliminate risk.


no, i didn't.

no, it can't. we've just spent like 3 pages going over that. ganking is not risk free, you've even admitted it in several posts.


Right here is when you begin using an absolute as an attempt to prove me wrong:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4517025#post4517025

so

yes you did.


no, that isn't an absolute. seriously, est-ce que parlez-vous anglais?
Chopper Rollins
hahahlolspycorp
#275 - 2014-04-27 01:29:30 UTC
Came to thread expecting morality discussion and a laughing fit

BUT OH GHAD MAKE IT STAHHP JUST STAHHP IT


Goggles. Making me look good. Making you look good.
Solecist Project
#276 - 2014-04-27 01:31:23 UTC
Chopper Rollins wrote:
Came to thread expecting morality discussion and a laughing fit

BUT OH GHAD MAKE IT STAHHP JUST STAHHP IT

This guy keeps ruining every thread,
because his sick ego makes others respond to it,
slowly turning them into him.



Seriously, wtf is wrong with people?


He keeps ruining so many threads and STILL people keep talking to him!

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Chopper Rollins
hahahlolspycorp
#277 - 2014-04-27 01:51:14 UTC
Please refrain from personal attacks on the ffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
oh god i can't do it

go kill a freighter and release that frustration.


Goggles. Making me look good. Making you look good.
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#278 - 2014-04-27 01:59:36 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
Chopper Rollins wrote:
Came to thread expecting morality discussion and a laughing fit

BUT OH GHAD MAKE IT STAHHP JUST STAHHP IT

This guy keeps ruining every thread,
because his sick ego makes others respond to it,
slowly turning them into him.



Seriously, wtf is wrong with people?


He keeps ruining so many threads and STILL people keep talking to him!



Some snowflakes are more precious than others.

☼

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.
Solecist Project
#279 - 2014-04-27 01:59:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Solecist Project
Chopper Rollins wrote:
Please refrain from personal attacks on the ffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
oh god i can't do it

go kill a freighter and release that frustration.


Does whoring on killmails in disco thrashers count?


Doc Fury wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:
Chopper Rollins wrote:
Came to thread expecting morality discussion and a laughing fit

BUT OH GHAD MAKE IT STAHHP JUST STAHHP IT

This guy keeps ruining every thread,
because his sick ego makes others respond to it,
slowly turning them into him.



Seriously, wtf is wrong with people?


He keeps ruining so many threads and STILL people keep talking to him!



Some snowflakes are more precious than others.

You seem to be on a roll today.

I really enjoyed your posts on Page 13.

Spot on and hilarious!

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
ISD Tyrozan
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#280 - 2014-04-27 03:23:13 UTC
Personal attack post deleted.

ISD Tyrozan

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

@ISDTyrozan | @ISD_CCL