Jita Park Speakers Corner

Sorry, you won't be getting my vote.
Our conversations have lead me to believe that you are the trying to play the "moderate" in the war of null sec against high sec.

Rest of the world, excuse the u.s.- centric analogy, but If the goons and their ilk are the Tea Party, you are Romney.
The fact that you posted on the goons' version of Pravda DOES mean you are affiliated with them, or have like-minded views.

And their views on the game are well-documented, which is the destruction of all space that they cannot control in game.
Putting you on the CSM would be no better, nor no worse, than most of the existing null sec mouthpieces.

I simply don't believe we need more null sec mouthpieces who espouse "balancing the game" at the expense of high sec.
If we went with representation by demographics, fully half of the CSM would be high sec.

Instead, we are faced with likely 9-12 of the 14 being null sec zealots or so-called null sec "moderates", which although you have never called yourself one, you have certainly done the dance of one, until you are of course elected.

Malcanis needs to broaden his appeal to the blatantly mentally ill.

Blah blah, blah, another goon propagandist.
How many "official" goons will be on this CSM, and how many "unofficial" ones, like Malcanis?

Goooooons goony goon goons.

Goons?

GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONS.

You were another victim of the insidious HTC censorship campaign

In short: I am OK with what you describe.

Players joining up with existing corps to get an 'in' to lo-sec sounds perfectly fine to me if they don't have the chops to make it on their own without assistance. I am very much against the idea of reducing difficulty to that of the lowest denominator of solo "didnt read" type play, and the changes needed to accomodate such playstyles would inevitably be highly exploitatable by more skilled, experienced players. By law.

I like you, we seem to share similar ideas on what Hi-sec should be as well as low-sec and nullsec. We see so many extremes regarding this topic. It feels like half the people are trying to outright destroy hi-sec, where as the other half want to make hi-sec like a completely separate game from the rest of EVE.

It's clear that hi-sec has a place in EVE, however it should be more towards helping people get on their feet and eventually move to null or low. I like your idea for L5s, I feel that this will allow players to gradually take a dip into low and null. Going from hi-sec to null or low is like jumping directly into a very cold pool, it can be a less desirable thing to do for people who aren't as confident in their ability to survive out of hi-sec. The transition should be more like getting your feet wet or rather there should be an option to slowly move down the proverbial stairs in the pool that is low/null rather than just a diving board.

Giving players a little bit of low/null as well as PVP combat at a time will help them make the transition and truly understand which sec they like more rather than just living in hi-sec.

Low and Null should be merciless and brutal, hi-sec should be a place that will slowly but surely, make people acceptable of this brutality.

I'm afraid we may not be quite as in synch as you think. Providing a nursery pool for new players who are prospective 0.0 players is certainly one of hi-sec's functions, but I don't think that it's hi-sec primary function. I'm 100% alongside helping new players who want to transition into 0.0, and many of the ideas I suggested would indeed help them gain confidence in their abilities by allowing them to 'dabble' in the lifestyle. But. By definition, pre-nullseccers using hi-sec as a lillypad to make the jump are always going to be a small part of the hi-sec demographic.

Indeed the manifesto that I wrote had as its core thesis that we should stop crippling hi-sec by thinking of it as a noob/starter area, and start unleashing its potential by thinking of it as an area for convenience play. I have more faith in EVE players than many seem to, and I think that we can add experiences to hi-sec that were limited to the "hard-core" areas that the "convenience" players have been excluded from until now, and that many of the "convenience" players actually do quite like the idea of being able to occasionally take big risks for big rewards, participate in large scale combat, and so on, providing that they can do so in the limited game time they have available.

Firstly my apologies if you have already covered this, I haven't read every page of this thread.

I was wondering as to your view regarding the balance between high, low and null.

It my my *perception* (and I use that word advisedly) that null and low have almost swapped places. Back in the "good old days" we used to have a clear path for training new pilots, start them in highsec, then move them to low to harden them up and then to null once they had proved their worth.

It does seem now that the path is more high -> null -> low as it certainly appears that null is a better environment to train rookies in the next stages rather than low.

Do you have a view on how the balance would be corrected, or the perception changed if this is incorrect, or if it even needs changing?

Voter apathy. Don't complain about nullsec residents voting for who they want on the CSM, blame everyone else that doesn't bother voting at all.

Ah, crud...I'm in agreement... Must you make sense, Mallak? I wouldn't want anybody to lose any slightest internetspacecred when a "pubbie" agrees with them.

Dinsdale, Malcanis' past statements or something lead you to believe that?