EVE General Discussion

I just wrote a research report on cognitive dissonance in the American public and how it thinks that, according to surveys, television news is better quality and more trustworthy than print news, even though print news is, according to the data, far better quality than television. I'm not sure you know what cognitive dissonance is. I wasn't making a strawman, and I'm not sure you know what that is either. I was specifically referring to bumping, actually, which is currently done without any consequence. And no, using up your time is not a consequence. You choose to bump when you could be choosing to spend your time being productive (that part is directed at whoever made the argument that bumping wastes their time therefore it is enough of a consequence).

So basically, you don't do any research and just pull stuff out of your backside because it's easier that way and because you don't see fallacies as a problem for making a good point…

Actually, you weren't. Let's quote that bit again, but with a different emphasis this time:

“Hence why you get concorded by ganking someone in high sec. This [getting concorded] is called a consequence. Nobody is stopping you from ganking the miners, but why should you be allowed to do it [only possible referent: ganking] without consequence?”

So yes, that's a nice bit of cognitive dissonance. In one breath you explain that ganking has consequences and in another, you are questioning why it doesn't. This is why I'm asking you if anyone is really saying this or if it's just a demand you've made up — you know, a strawman? By the way, your example of believing TV over print even though data says print is more reliable than TV is not cognitive dissonance. Without one crucial puzzle piece, it's just ignorance. Do you know that that missing piece is?

This is a good post, as it is very easy to then point out what I think is wrong with your way of thinking Remiel Pollard.




2 things.

#. You consent to non-consensual pvp by downloading EVE, logging in, and undocking a space ship, period.

#2. Why, after almost 10 years people keep claiming that something they don't like will "drive off players" is beyond me. People say they will leave, with few exceptions like monoclegate they never do. in fact, this is why ccp got so arrogant as to say "we'll watch what players DO" back then, because people ALWAYS grumble about leaving but most never ever do.

It's like that at my job, people claiming up and down they'll elave is so-and-so gets promoted to a commander job or if this provision doesn't make it into the union contract ect, but they never do, EVER.



You're 1st MMO? That explains a lot, and I'm being serious here.



A "reasonable tactic" is one that the game allows and that works for the player using it. No other opinion matters.



This is really where you run off the rails. every subscriber is entitled to play the way they want within the bounds of the EULA. Some people prefer to play in a way that causes tears. You can find many a CCP developer video where they lead of with something like "this will allow our player to harvest more tears" (paraphrasing).

Every player should KNOW THIS before choosing to play this game, peopel will screw with you for any reason they can in eve, or no reason at all, and if you don't like it, you shouldn't play it.

But rather than take responsibility for their choices (and leave for game more favorable to what they like, such as Star Trek Online), some people try to run to mommy (CCP) begging them to "fix it" which ccp sometimes does in direct opposition to the establish nature and founding vision of this game, and to the detriment of we who LIKE EVE for what it is.

This is what I'm opposed to, the Trammelizing WOWification (lol) of one of the few hardcore games that exist, because most games are "make em feel good" themeparks that people like me can't enjoy. Let EVE be EVE.

...err... okay, don't know where you got that from, but the HD I got for the report says otherwise. Quick to jump to conclusions, slow to get the point, I see.





I see what went wrong here - yes, you're right, in that segment I was referring to ganking, but your assumption that I was questioning why it doesn't have consequences, when what I was asking was "but why should you be allowed to do it without consequences?" In other words, and I know this has been a hard one for you to get so I'll be as clear as possible, I was actually questioning anyone that might think that they are entitled to get away with it without consequences, and not as specifically referring to bumpers as well. This was a miscommunication on my part, and I apologise.

But I do strongly suggest you look up what cognitive dissonance actually is - the American public generally find it easier to just watch TV than actually take the time to buy a newspaper, find somewhere to spread it out, and read it, hence why making the leap from "TV is better" to "newspaper is better", even though it's true, is generally avoided with the general dissonant reasoning that TV is reliable enough.

"Cognitive dissonance is the term used in modern psychology to describe the state of holding two or more conflicting cognitions (e.g., ideas, beliefs, values, emotional reactions) simultaneously. In a state of dissonance, people may sometimes feel surprise, dread, guilt, anger, or embarrassment."

In other words, someone who's of the opinion that vaccines are harmful might have lived their life not vaccinating their children, and then encounter evidence that they are wrong, will usually result in cognitive dissonance - the discomfort they feel at having been so wrong usually results in the "backfire effect", in which they cling to their beliefs even stronger when evidence to the contrary is presented. Cognitive dissonance and the backfire effect usually work very well together.

But nothing here is demonstrable cognitive dissonance. Not even close. I'm not defending, I'm just trying to tell you that you might want to find another label for... well, whatever it is you think I'm doing. Because the one you've used is wrong.

FYI, for a really good example, here's a reference I used in my report:

Claussen, Dane S 2004, ‘Cognitive Dissonance, Media Illiteracy, and Public Opinion on News Media’, American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 212-218.

If you can get this paper, it will explain to you in no uncertain terms why cognitive dissonance in the American public, in general, is causing them to rely more on less-reliable television news than newspaper news. It also explains why this phenomena seems to be trending out with the youth of America, who grew up with television and are exploring alternative sources of media information.

Not really, no. It's a general description of A:s and B:s being mutually exclusive. It applies to all games, EVE included.

…which again raises the question: does that actually happen or is it just a strawman? I see a lot of people going after miners because they are such a vocal group for removing legitimate gameplay from the game; people going after miners because they produce good loot; people going after miners because of botting (real or otherwise)… but I have yet to see anyone going after miners because they mine.

From your jumping to conclusions and asserting things without the slightest shred of a basis. Oh, and your use of fallacies as (attempted) arguments.

But that still isn't cognitive dissonance. It's just laziness. There is no conflict between the two — just degrees of convenience. Cognitive dissonance would be knowing and saying that print news is more trustworthy while trusting TV news more; when seeing two opposing claims made by the two parties and choosing to believe the TV version only to be really confused when (as they full well know and reasonably should expect) it turns out the print version was the correct one.

Is this a joke? I've seen plenty of quotes saying "They deserve it for playing the game wrong and doing the most boring thing!"
Or has that just been a recent bit of propaganda from the bumpgeois?

I don't know, is it happening? I'm only saying that I won't support it, not that it's happening.

Are you understanding the distinction yet?

I also don't support nuclear war.

I also distinctly remember someone telling me that their problem with miners is that they log on....

If I am, then you're asking an irrelevant question, aren't you?

Indeed. That Jenna character, whose posts I've blocked for the fact that she fell foul of the fallacy that just because I'm new to MMOs "explains" something without considering the fact that I'm an extremely fast learner, told me back on page five or six of this thread that miners are harassed because they log on. So it is, indeed, relevant, and not a strawman.

From page six of this thread, I think:

Tippia is entitled to an opinion, like all of us are.

I agree with her you have this misplaced malcontent-ed people who come to eve and expect burger king ("have it your way") rather than asking themselves "is this what i like, is this where I want to be?".

I've known people like that in games and real life. I work with people/fellow officers who try to change the situation around them (regardless of what works, regardless of what other people like or want) rather than saying"you know what, I'm not happy here, I'm going to move on". They make me totally sick. Then I see the same personality type in games (not just this one, i saw them in X-Wing and Mechwarrior and LoL and Halo and CS ect ect).

It's almost this crazy masochistic tendency they have to be unhappy. Or maybe it's some deep-seated psychological need to have a "cause" or something. Whatever it is, it's highly annoying to us "conform or move on to greener pastures" type people.