These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Who Gets All The Freighter Ganking Loot?

Author
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#181 - 2014-10-19 19:04:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Princess Bride wrote:
I understand the point you are making. Everyone involved is happy, so why question it. Allow me to use a real-world analogy to explain what I am saying here.

Say for example a popular charity is soliciting funds to "do good" by saving children from starvation in Africa. You listen to their shpeel on TV and decide to send them $5/month on a subscription basis. In the ad, it is clearly implied that your donation would be used to help children, not to make some CEO rich. Later, an investigation is launched and it turns out that 70% of donations actually go to buy the charity's CEO private jets, mansions, etc. etc. even though all of the donors assumed that most of their donation would go toward helping children. Charges are issued against the CEO, claiming he engaged in fraud. During the trial, the CEO makes the following arguments:

1) His charity did, in fact, help many many children in Africa.
2) Until the charges were filed, no one knew about his diversion of funds, and all donors were happy with the arrangement.
3) Donors never expected to get their money back, so nothing was actually stolen.
4) Many donors are still quite happy, because children were helped, and they state loudly their support of the charity and CEO despite the "fraud" being alleged.
5) He never said he wasn't keeping a lot of the money for himself, only that he would help children in Africa, which he did.
6) He never "packed it all up and ran", and instead kept his operation going until interrupted by his arrest.

Of course, he would still be convicted of fraud in such a case, because despite all of his points, the fact that remains that donors were mislead, and his ignoble goal was clearly to make money, not to help people.
Welcome to pretty much every major charity in the world today, "administration" soaks up a far greater percentage of donations than the people the charity professes to help ever see.
Quote:
So really this boils down to the difference between right and wrong, moral and immoral, legitimate business and scam. The situation is analogous to CODE because most supporters of CODE assume that their donations are used to buy ships used to gank.
By all accounts this is what currently happens, until you can prove otherwise, James gets the benefit of the doubt.
Quote:
If it turned out this was not true, it would constitute fraud, and I think most donors indeed would feel cheated, and rightfully so.
TBH given the nature of CODES. donors and the game itself, most would probably congratulate him on a well executed scam.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Princess Bride
SharkNado
#182 - 2014-10-19 19:05:54 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:

I know the individual pilots - I happen to be something of an expert on this. Whoever grabs the loot gets it, some people choose to invest back in CODE, but that is at their discretion.


So you are contradicting all of the following.... and more. I just got tired of collecting quotes:

Amyclas Amatin wrote:
The loot goes towards more ships. We're usually doing this on gank alts or pvp alts.
If you want to gank for profit, belligerent undesirables still does it that way.

Dmitri Dracov wrote:
I heard that a week or two ago one freighter dropped 20 bill in High sec and the loot was split 50/50 between Loyalanon and one other guy who rounded up alot of F1 monkeys willing to make the co-ordinators plenty of isk with their game time. I wish I had the charisma to put together my own army of 'bots' to make myself isk like that!

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:
Freighter revenue is rolled into new ships for freighter ganking, and currently profits are being funneled into share purchases.

412nv Yaken wrote:
All isk goes back into the code, either replacement ships, shares in the new order.

http://eveprincessbride.wordpress.com/

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#183 - 2014-10-19 19:09:06 UTC
Princess Bride wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:

I know the individual pilots - I happen to be something of an expert on this. Whoever grabs the loot gets it, some people choose to invest back in CODE, but that is at their discretion.


So you are contradicting all of the following.... and more. I just got tired of collecting quotes:



Depends on the pilots. Some are rich and are in it for lolz and happy to reinvest loot. Others are poor and want to make isk from the whole adventure, so they keep the loot.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#184 - 2014-10-19 19:10:07 UTC
Princess Bride wrote:

I understand the point you are making. Everyone involved is happy, so why question it. Allow me to use a real-world analogy to explain what I am saying here.

Say for example a popular charity is soliciting funds to "do good" by saving children from starvation in Africa. You listen to their shpeel on TV and decide to send them $5/month on a subscription basis. In the ad, it is clearly implied that your donation would be used to help children, not to make some CEO rich. Later, an investigation is launched and it turns out that 70% of donations actually go to buy the charity's CEO private jets, mansions, etc. etc. even though all of the donors assumed that most of their donation would go toward helping children. Charges are issued against the CEO, claiming he engaged in fraud. During the trial, the CEO makes the following arguments:

1) His charity did, in fact, help many many children in Africa.
2) Until the charges were filed, no one knew about his diversion of funds, and all donors were happy with the arrangement.
3) Donors never expected to get their money back, so nothing was actually stolen.
4) Many donors are still quite happy, because children were helped, and they state loudly their support of the charity and CEO despite the "fraud" being alleged.
5) He never said he wasn't keeping a lot of the money for himself, only that he would help children in Africa, which he did.
6) He never "packed it all up and ran", and instead kept his operation going until interrupted by his arrest.

Of course, he would still be convicted of fraud in such a case, because despite all of his points, the fact that remains that donors were mislead, and his ignoble goal was clearly to make money, not to help people.

So really this boils down to the difference between right and wrong, moral and immoral, legitimate business and scam. The situation is analogous to CODE because most supporters of CODE assume that their donations are used to buy ships used to gank. If it turned out this was not true, it would constitute fraud, and I think most donors indeed would feel cheated, and rightfully so.


Perhaps in the real world, but I don't think you are correct in this case. People supporting the New Order are either true believers who are fully on board with the cause and will overlook at least a modest amount of corruption/mismanagement as long as they are having fun, or are, to paraphrase CCP Falcon, the type who "just want to watch the world burn".

If you hire an arsonist to burn down your neighbour's farmhouse, you probably aren't going to ask for receipts for the gasoline as long as the job gets done. And James 315 seems to be getting the job done.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#185 - 2014-10-19 19:13:41 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:


Perhaps in the real world, but I don't think you are correct in this case. People supporting the New Order are either true believers who are fully on board with the cause and will overlook at least a modest amount of corruption/mismanagement as long as they are having fun, or are, to paraphrase CCP Falcon, the type who "just want to watch the world burn".

If you hire an arsonist to burn down your neighbour's farmhouse, you probably aren't going to ask for receipts for the gasoline as long as the job gets done. And James 315 seems to be getting the job done.


He is? I've never seen so much highsec mining, so much deflation, so much AFK and botting, and so much wasted isk by CODE. If James was a CEO of a real company, he would be lining up for unemployment benefits and be unemployable forever.
Princess Bride
SharkNado
#186 - 2014-10-19 19:14:10 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Welcome to pretty much every major charity in the world today, "administration" soaks up a far greater percentage of donations than the people the charity professes to help ever see.


Sorry, but that's simply not correct. I understand that many jaded folk believe this, but you really should check facts. Take, for example, The American Red Cross, whose Charity Navigator page I already quoted in this thread. Most people would call this a "major charity in the world today."

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=3277#.VEQMYxbabzO

90.5% for the program
3.9% for administration
5.6% for fundraising

Non-profits that operate in the manner you believe "every major charity in the world today" operates have a really bad rating, get bad press, and generally don't stay in business very long.

http://eveprincessbride.wordpress.com/

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#187 - 2014-10-19 19:17:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Veers Belvar wrote:
.... I happen to be something of an expert on this ....
Calling yourself an expert does not make you one. Expert implies that you have some expertise or experience in the field you claim to be an expert in, historically you have shown no expertise at anything other than posting bollocks on the forums.

FYI the dictionary definition of expert is as follows
Expert
noun
1.
a person who is very knowledgeable about or skilful in a particular area.

1.
having or involving a great deal of knowledge or skill in a particular area.


You fit neither category.

Princess Bride wrote:
Sorry, but that's simply not correct. I understand that many jaded folk believe this, but you really should check facts. Take, for example, The American Red Cross, whose Charity Navigator page I already quoted in this thread. Most people would call this a "major charity in the world today."

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=3277#.VEQMYxbabzO

90.5% for the program
3.9% for administration
5.6% for fundraising

Non-profits that operate in the manner you believe "every major charity in the world today" operates have a really bad rating, get bad press, and generally don't stay in business very long.
Out of the 90.5 % that "goes" into the program, how much is then removed from the pot by local "administration costs" and bribes, theft of aid, protection details for the people on the ground in war zones etc.? The official figures only ever tell part of the story.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#188 - 2014-10-19 19:21:54 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
.... I happen to be something of an expert on this ....
Calling yourself an expert does not make you one. Expert implies that you have some expertise or experience in the field you claim to be an expert in, historically you have shown no expertise at anything other than posting bollocks on the forums.

FYI the dictionary definition of expert is as follows
Expert
noun
1.
a person who is very knowledgeable about or skilful in a particular area.

1.
having or involving a great deal of knowledge or skill in a particular area.


You fit neither category.


I fit both definitions....and I happen to know that the pilots get to keep the loot. I did research, talked to people, etc.... It's painfully obvious that, like always, I am unerringly accurate.
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#189 - 2014-10-19 19:25:36 UTC
Princess Bride wrote:
Allow me to use a real-world analogy to explain what I am saying here.

Say for example a popular charity is soliciting funds to "do good" by saving children from starvation in Africa. ...

I really like how you use a charity for saving children from starvation in Africa as an analogy to the New Order of Highsec (which is btw the correct name for our organisation, CODE. is just one alliance among many in the New Order).

Usually people compare us to some other very famous but less humanitarian regimes.
Leto Thule
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#190 - 2014-10-19 19:36:52 UTC
Princess Bride wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Leto Thule wrote:
I can't take it anymore.

Q: Who gets the loot from ganking freighters?

A: The pilots who ganked it.

9 motherfucking pages for that?


I agree with you for once, buddy. The money goes to the individual pilots, not to CODE, etc....


Um, wow, no.

Quite the opposite in fact. The pilots who gank the freighters do NOT share in the loot. The loot, is NOT shared with the gank pilots but instead, allegedly, goes to make up the deficit between donations and ISK expended reimbursing gank catalysts.

Can you quote even a single person in this thread alleging that CODE gank pilots get a share of the loot? I mean, not counting getting a replacement ~1m gank cat?


Yes. Me.

After Ganking a freighter with fellow ducks a while back, we split the loot. Not all ganks are done under the auspices of the new order.

Thunderdome ringmaster, Community Leader and Lord Inquisitor to the Court of Crime and Punishment

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#191 - 2014-10-19 19:38:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Veers Belvar wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
.... I happen to be something of an expert on this ....
Calling yourself an expert does not make you one. Expert implies that you have some expertise or experience in the field you claim to be an expert in, historically you have shown no expertise at anything other than posting bollocks on the forums.

FYI the dictionary definition of expert is as follows
Expert
noun
1.
a person who is very knowledgeable about or skilful in a particular area.

1.
having or involving a great deal of knowledge or skill in a particular area.


You fit neither category.


I fit both definitions
Really? How?

Please explain what makes you an expert on the New Order, their finances and how they operate.

Quote:
and I happen to know that the pilots get to keep the loot. I did research, talked to people, etc....
Would that be the same level of research you've applied to everything else you claim to be an expert at, i.e none or very little?

Quote:
It's painfully obvious that, like always, I am unerringly accurate.
It's painfully obvious that you're suffering from a cranial-rectal inversion and that your ego is intent on cementing your reputation as a complete clown.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Princess Bride
SharkNado
#192 - 2014-10-19 19:46:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Princess Bride
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Out of the 90.5 % that "goes" into the program, how much is then removed from the pot by local "administration costs" and bribes, theft of aid, protection details for the people on the ground in war zones etc.? The official figures only ever tell part of the story.


Watch Fox News much? While corruption certainly exists, you have absolutely nothing to back your assertion that "most of" that 90.5% is soaked up by bribes, corruption, and security details (which, by the way, are a legitimate cost of operating in a war zone, or do you want them to use 'harsh language' in such circumstances to keep the numbers simple for you while getting kidnapped and beheaded?)

You are, I hope, aware that major charities in the US are subject to a massive amount of scrutiny by independent auditors and the IRS and fudging the numbers to the extent you are implying would lead to a swath of federal indictments. Actually, I bet you aren't aware of that at all, nevermind.

http://eveprincessbride.wordpress.com/

Princess Bride
SharkNado
#193 - 2014-10-19 19:51:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Princess Bride
Quote:

Can you quote even a single person in this thread alleging that CODE gank pilots get a share of the loot? I mean, not counting getting a replacement ~1m gank cat?


Leto Thule wrote:

Yes. Me.

After Ganking a freighter with fellow ducks a while back, we split the loot. Not all ganks are done under the auspices of the new order.


Which would mean it was not CODE gank pilots getting a share of the loot.

Reading comprehension please.

http://eveprincessbride.wordpress.com/

Leto Thule
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#194 - 2014-10-19 20:03:11 UTC
Princess Bride wrote:
Quote:

Can you quote even a single person in this thread alleging that CODE gank pilots get a share of the loot? I mean, not counting getting a replacement ~1m gank cat?


Leto Thule wrote:

Yes. Me.

After Ganking a freighter with fellow ducks a while back, we split the loot. Not all ganks are done under the auspices of the new order.


Which would mean it was not CODE gank pilots getting a share of the loot.

Reading comprehension please.


I enforce the CODE.

"Reading comprehension please"..

****.

Thunderdome ringmaster, Community Leader and Lord Inquisitor to the Court of Crime and Punishment

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#195 - 2014-10-19 20:08:09 UTC
Princess Bride wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Out of the 90.5 % that "goes" into the program, how much is then removed from the pot by local "administration costs" and bribes, theft of aid, protection details for the people on the ground in war zones etc.? The official figures only ever tell part of the story.


Watch Fox News much?
Nope, I don't own a TV, and the BBC whilst biased is nowhere near as bad as Fox.

Quote:
While corruption certainly exists, you have absolutely nothing to back your assertion that "most of" that 90.5% is soaked up by bribes, corruption, and security details (which, by the way, are a legitimate cost of operating in a war zone, or do you want them to use 'harsh language' in such circumstances to keep the numbers simple for you while getting kidnapped and beheaded?)
And you have no facts or figures that say otherwise, it's what is known as a speculative discussion.

Quote:
You are, I hope, aware that major charities in the US are subject to a massive amount of scrutiny by independent auditors and the IRS and fudging the numbers to the extent you are implying would lead to a swath of federal indictments. Actually, I bet you aren't aware of that at all, nevermind.
As a non US resident I don't particularly care about the amount of scrutiny US charities have to go through, and if the IRS is on a par with HMRC the auditors and accountants are getting bungs to look the other way anyway.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Princess Bride
SharkNado
#196 - 2014-10-19 20:10:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Princess Bride
Leto Thule wrote:
Princess Bride wrote:
Quote:

Can you quote even a single person in this thread alleging that CODE gank pilots get a share of the loot? I mean, not counting getting a replacement ~1m gank cat?


Leto Thule wrote:

Yes. Me.

After Ganking a freighter with fellow ducks a while back, we split the loot. Not all ganks are done under the auspices of the new order.


Which would mean it was not CODE gank pilots getting a share of the loot.

Reading comprehension please.


I enforce the CODE.

"Reading comprehension please"..

****.


I think everyone except you understood exactly what that sentence meant. If your one trick is to intentionally misinterpret something to make a point then congratulations on being a fabulous one-trick-pony.

If you expect me to have a serious conversation with you about the differences between CODE. the corp, the "new order", and "those not affiliated with CODE., not operating under the auspices of the 'new order', but still RPing that they nevertheless consider themselves 'CODE' because they 'enforce the CODE'" in this context then..........get used to disappointment. I'm simply not interested.

http://eveprincessbride.wordpress.com/

Princess Bride
SharkNado
#197 - 2014-10-19 20:13:09 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Princess Bride wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Out of the 90.5 % that "goes" into the program, how much is then removed from the pot by local "administration costs" and bribes, theft of aid, protection details for the people on the ground in war zones etc.? The official figures only ever tell part of the story.


Watch Fox News much?
Nope, I don't own a TV, and the BBC whilst biased is nowhere near as bad as Fox.

Quote:
While corruption certainly exists, you have absolutely nothing to back your assertion that "most of" that 90.5% is soaked up by bribes, corruption, and security details (which, by the way, are a legitimate cost of operating in a war zone, or do you want them to use 'harsh language' in such circumstances to keep the numbers simple for you while getting kidnapped and beheaded?)
And you have no facts or figures that say otherwise, it's what is known as a speculative discussion.

Quote:
You are, I hope, aware that major charities in the US are subject to a massive amount of scrutiny by independent auditors and the IRS and fudging the numbers to the extent you are implying would lead to a swath of federal indictments. Actually, I bet you aren't aware of that at all, nevermind.
As a non US resident I don't particularly care about the amount of scrutiny US charities have to go through, and if the IRS is on a par with HMRC the auditors and accountants are getting bungs to look the other way anyway.


So you have no evidence to back your allegation. And since you are the one making it, the onus is on you to back up your "speculative discussion". So this is me, dismissing your unsubstantiated tin-foil-lined allegations.

http://eveprincessbride.wordpress.com/

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#198 - 2014-10-19 20:24:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Princess Bride wrote:
So you have no evidence to back your allegation.
Which I've openly admitted Roll
Quote:
And since you are the one making it, the onus is on you to back up your "speculative discussion". So this is me, dismissing your unsubstantiated tin-foil-lined allegations.
I speculated that there are hidden expenses that don't show up on the official figures, and have provided reasonable and relatively well known examples of such hidden expenses.

You, on the other hand, have alleged that James is using the New Order, who are not a charity, treasury to enrich himself and likewise have provided no evidence.

You should try holding yourself to the same standards that you hold others to, lest you be hoisted by your own petard.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Princess Bride
SharkNado
#199 - 2014-10-19 21:07:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Princess Bride
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Princess Bride wrote:
So you have no evidence to back your allegation.
Which I've openly admitted Roll
Quote:
And since you are the one making it, the onus is on you to back up your "speculative discussion". So this is me, dismissing your unsubstantiated tin-foil-lined allegations.
I speculated that there are hidden expenses that don't show up on the official figures, and have provided reasonable and relatively well known examples of such hidden expenses.

You, on the other hand, have alleged that James is using the New Order, who are not a charity, treasury to enrich himself and likewise have provided no evidence.

You should try holding yourself to the same standards that you hold others to, lest you be hoisted by your own petard.


Do you truly not see the difference, or is this just obstinate insistence?

The American Red Cross is a respected non-profit corporation providing humanitarian aid world-wide. Despite your professed ignorance of the scrutiny endured by, and transparency of, said organization, it is public record. I have provided a good starting place from which anyone can delve deeply into the details of exactly how this organization is scrutinized as well as the US Federal laws in place detailing exactly how much crap will get dumped on the heads of those in charge of the organization if they're ever caught engaging in any sort of fraud. Including bribery, embezzlement, misappropriation, or mischaracterizing any part of their annual, required, legally sworn, publicly available IRS Form 990. And yet no. For you, no proof is enough to convince you that you are simply wrong when you assert that almost no donations go to the cause stated and instead are likely funneled into various forms of chicanery. In this case. In ANY case for ALL non-profits...in the world.

On the other hand, CODE., run by a guy known for past large-scale scamming, on a game with no mechanics outside of the API key to determine "truth" when it comes to the financial details of an organization, is, apparently, in your opinion, beyond reproach. Despite not providing an API. Despite making absolutely no claims to transparency.

Why are you so willing to trust James 315 and CODE. management, with no evidence, but dismiss all non-profits as corrupt?

I think that indicates a pretty clear bias on your part. Maybe even a fair touch of paranoia combined with zealous faith.

And why is it no one can believe that I can appreciate this as a good scam in C&P, yet they insist the victims of the scam will thus appreciate it? Please consider me a fan of James 315 and those few lucky ducks with whom he is sharing the proceeds. But don't expect me not to call it as I see it.

http://eveprincessbride.wordpress.com/

voetius
Grundrisse
#200 - 2014-10-19 21:19:19 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Princess Bride wrote:

I understand the point you are making. Everyone involved is happy, so why question it. Allow me to use a real-world analogy to explain what I am saying here.

Say for example a popular charity is soliciting funds to "do good" by saving children from starvation in Africa. You listen to their shpeel on TV and decide to send them $5/month on a subscription basis. In the ad, it is clearly implied that your donation would be used to help children, not to make some CEO rich. Later, an investigation is launched and it turns out that 70% of donations actually go to buy the charity's CEO private jets, mansions, etc. etc. even though all of the donors assumed that most of their donation would go toward helping children. Charges are issued against the CEO, claiming he engaged in fraud. During the trial, the CEO makes the following arguments:

1) His charity did, in fact, help many many children in Africa.
2) Until the charges were filed, no one knew about his diversion of funds, and all donors were happy with the arrangement.
3) Donors never expected to get their money back, so nothing was actually stolen.
4) Many donors are still quite happy, because children were helped, and they state loudly their support of the charity and CEO despite the "fraud" being alleged.
5) He never said he wasn't keeping a lot of the money for himself, only that he would help children in Africa, which he did.
6) He never "packed it all up and ran", and instead kept his operation going until interrupted by his arrest.

Of course, he would still be convicted of fraud in such a case, because despite all of his points, the fact that remains that donors were mislead, and his ignoble goal was clearly to make money, not to help people.

So really this boils down to the difference between right and wrong, moral and immoral, legitimate business and scam. The situation is analogous to CODE because most supporters of CODE assume that their donations are used to buy ships used to gank. If it turned out this was not true, it would constitute fraud, and I think most donors indeed would feel cheated, and rightfully so.


Perhaps in the real world, but I don't think you are correct in this case. People supporting the New Order are either true believers who are fully on board with the cause and will overlook at least a modest amount of corruption/mismanagement as long as they are having fun, or are, to paraphrase CCP Falcon, the type who "just want to watch the world burn".

If you hire an arsonist to burn down your neighbour's farmhouse, you probably aren't going to ask for receipts for the gasoline as long as the job gets done. And James 315 seems to be getting the job done.


Is he really? I keep reading on the forums that ganking is an all time low. That would seem to contradict what you are asserting.