Intergalactic Summit

Such information is usually available on a need to know basis.
If you don't have access to it, it means you don't need to know.

Considering the crew were all Caldari, whose to say they haven't already been informed and the matter settled internally? This was a matter of Caldari shooting Caldari. Quafe just supplied the ships that got destroyed.

So the Caldari military didn't shoot Quafe ships full of Caldari citizens? I must have misread somewhere then.

No, you can ask why, I just wouldn't owe you an answer.

Why's that?

I think you misunderstand taking advantage of their freedom to speak, question and raise concerns with thinking they're owed actual answers, although I'm sure some people do actually think that.

It's pretty simple. When unpalatable events occur and there's suspicion of foul play, some people don't blindly shut their brains off and go with whatever the powers that be blurf out publicly and instead ask questions or make statements of their own. Neither of these things are owed any kind of response, but it's very often telling what does get a response, what does not get a response and the nature of said response.

When I question something, it's rarely because I expect to get an actual answer. Most entities in New Eden are incurably dishonest and malicious so most responses aren't particularly trustworthy to begin with, but it's almost always useful to see where things get stonewalled and where there's endless deflection, hemming, hawing or inconsistencies. In some few cases, you may even get an honest answer, but even when you don't there's much to learn.

And sometimes, most importantly, it's simply a matter of getting the question out there. We have a massive audience on these boards, and if a few of them go "heeeey yeah! What about this or that and so on?!" the important objective has already been achieved.

When there's no explanations or answers to critical questioning, it's a tell-tale sign of misconduct.

You seem to think my statement is somehow 'inky black' or 'villanous'. They're strong words, sure, but gather together any random selection of human beings and start gauging their honesty, selfishness and so on. Are you willing to wager on what the majority will qualify as?

Now throw institutional selfishness and greed into the picture and you have pretty much any entity of relevance in New Eden.

Think they come out any better than the random selection?

People are just people indeed, and individually none of them are heroes, villains, truly righteous or truly evil. This doesn't change that as a species we're tribal, we're 'us vs them', we're hard-wired for self-preservation at the expense of others if necessary and equally hard-wired not to be able to truly empathize with any significant amount of other people. This isn't evil, this isn't villainous or any of the sort.

... but it does mean that entities in New Eden that aren't incurably dishonest and malicious are truly few and far between.

Nuance is all well and good, but that doesn't mean the big picture doesn't remain rather ugly.

I act this way because every time I assumed someone wasn't out to harm my people - intentionally or otherwise, it turns out they were.

Every.

Time.

This is not hyperbole. This isn't pessimism, misanthropy or paranoia. It's documented history. You can try to dismiss my views and stance on things with your shade, but this is just how it is. Trusting my people's safety to actual avowed enemies is probably the dumbest possible thing anyone can do, by both logic and proven history.

This may not play into your agenda or naivete, but that's just how it is.

Your powers of mind reading are impressive if you know who I've assumed are threats and who I haven't, which is the only way you could tell if I'm mistaken or not. Trust me, my experiences with SFRIM getting in the way of the well-being of my people are far too recent history to be part of what I've been talking about right here. It should have been readily apparent that I never had any trust in that regard, for good reason and rather vindicated on that as it turned out.

That you find issue with why I don't trust SFRIM at all anymore is equal parts tragic and funny, since I know you were once capable of seeing the perspective of others. It shouldn't be difficult to see why someone's leery about avowed enemies of my people repeatedly keeping innocents away from their kin, and once even away from proper medical aid for days when it could have been done in minutes. Out of spite.

I genuinely don't care if you trust my 'perceptions'. I am disappointed by you dismissing the objective facts in favor of your emotional attachment to your leash holder.

Your disappointment is, to me, in line with your other political opinions, Miz.

Warped. Unreliable. Worthless.

Dust.

It doesn't make you wrong, mind. It's more that your opinion is without weight.

That's actually a little remarkable. So, I maybe should apologize for coming back to it again; it's just that finding that I actually am totally disregarding someone's opinion, it's unusual enough that I kind of end up dwelling on why.

Because Arrendis is of course correct: it does mean devaluing your experience. I need to be careful.