Crime & Punishment

Is it another dodgy correlation analysis? those are truely terrible... Or maybe it'll be data misinterpreted through ignorance of possible confounding factors. I don't know about the CFC but I find those terrifying.

oh god , evac to Jita nao !

Hey Goblin! Looks like that money to Mordus is being well-spent!

And goonies are still too scared of your bounty to use titans!

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=23976390

I've heard from RvB leadership that a massive number of lemmings have joined RvB. Ultimate failure of Gevlon's only social pursuit in eve - after a slow collapse, there was an exodus of pilots to goons (because rvb=goons as gevlon says).

Don't worry, Gevlon will find some statistics which will apparently change the fact that the grr project is a hilarious failure

clearly goon's can only afford one titan since not everyone was using one there! Because we all know that a carrier is worth risking a titan fleet for!

And the point as yes still remains undiscovered... I suspect that he doesn't understand that wars in eve are fought for strategic objectives. Not vanity metrics. Anyway there are two major flaws in his "oh look war stats" blog.

The first is what the data represents. Declared wars are just one form of organised violence. There is player driven null sec violence that does not rely on game mechanics and the same again for low sec and wormholes. There are suicide actions in high sec organised around the game mechanics like miner bumping/James. There is also other out of game groups like belligerent undesirables who loosely organise their actions too. War declarations and formal wars only represent one subset of organise violence, and there for is not representative of organised and strategic violence in eve. It's pure convenience sampling.

The second is what the metrics actually represent relative to what the outcome is supposed to be. for the objective of ruining those evil goons, is Isk lost in high sec relevant, and does the cost of inflicting is damage matter? It kind of does not. For the purpose do forcing change on another group, the cost of doing so is only important in how it relates to your own ability to continue the activity. For example, if I kill your only missioning purple clad ship you can't afford to replace, it does not matter if you lost it to a frigate or a fleet of tempests. your ability to mission is still impaired regardless. The second is if this activity is actually stopping the goons from doing their thing and furthering gevlon's original objectives. It doesn't seem to be.

Anyway TL;DR, gevlon has not gotten any better at constructing an argument.

Those titan fits and ideas about 0.0 are incredible.

If this were to be the "surprising statistics" then, well, business as usual. Another bunch of numbers which don't mean ****. Much anticlimatic, but we're quite used to that already. Although I really like:



It reminds me of something about "Lemmings linear growth and defeating Goons by the end of the year".

so, im not reading 26 pages , did any goon titans died!?

I'm a little new to gevlon-logic but what's his end goal? Is he just a dog chasing a car because it's there or does he really think that if he is actually successful at dismantling an entire coalition by flushing isk that his game will change in any meaningful way? How is the station-trading, PI, multi-boxing mission life affected by goons?

Gevlon, I seriously want you to answer this. What do you care about null sec organizations? I can't believe that you're doing this just because goons sometimes act like they're menacing. They're a bunch of players having fun and operating successfully in a competitive area of space. That's no different than N3. Goons have burn jita and a recruitment scam but, in the context of eve, that's not a big deal and it only affects "morons and slackers". Is it just that uninformed carebears hate goons so you decided that you could be more uninformed and carebear-y than anyone else?

In fact, can someone please explain all the ridiculous goon hate in general?