EVE General Discussion

Calling me dear. Nice.

Followed by a splashings of vitriolic ad-hominem, accusations of autism (which constitutes libel, btw) and defending your persisting misapplication of Dunning-Kruger.

My conversation with Torin is still ongoing. He has not yet returned to respond on my explanation of the question.
My discussion with him has been largely ontopic and civil. Same cannot be said of you.

Oh, and some grammar policing at the end.
You are a real classy act. Mommy and Daddy must be so proud.

I'm requoting this refutation of your argument because you seem to have skipped over it.

Personally I don't mind these new NPC's getting added. Provides some new challenges and opportunities for people to use on both sides of the coin if they're smart about it.

However I do think you're right that CCP should be careful about the linked standings and how you can lose/attain them. Especially seeing as they have intentions to expand these mechanics for other corporations and factions. I do believe there are still a few NPC corporations with whom you can easily lose standings but unable to gain any at all or it's very difficult. Not to mention that some people, who may have bad standings they never bothered to fix because there was no need, could find their gameplay disrupted suddenly when all of a sudden there are meaningful consequences getting tied to our standings.

Nice misquoting.

And you have still ignored my ontopic post in favor of ranting.

I specifically said that I did not ask or solicit an answer from you. Answer it all you want. Its not your answer im interested in. Is it difficult for you to understand that if a question is directed at a specific person, it is to get an answer from them specifically? Its quite normal social interaction and convention.

And as I specifically said, I have posted an explanation of my question to him, to which he has not yet returned to respond. Why do you care or try to interfere in what Torin and I are discussing?

And more ad hominem. Good job.

One does not equal the other.

NPC corps emulate player corps, but are not player corps.

Nor is this a concern in LS, since there is no CONCORD reaction.
You dont need wardecc to aggress.

If you attack, or are attacked by a member of the NPC corp, it is rational that this corp is then antagonistic towards you.
You attack their members, that pisses them off.
Their members attack you, which means the NPC corp, by extension from the player, is antagonistic towards you.
This is represented by standing loss.

Repeating yourself does not an argument make. But since you think it does, I'll just repeat myself as well. NPC corps are not meant to emulate player corps. Underlined this point so you get it this time. If they are meant to emulate player corps, then we should be able to wardec them like player corps. And if you think wardecs aren't of any use in low sec, then you haven't spent enough time in lowsec. If I can get aggression on a player without taking gate or station sentry guns, that's a benefit. You also still lose sec status for attacking players in lowsec, unless they're a wartarget. That includes POCOs and other structures, btw. I suggest you learn how the game works before pretending to be expert enough to assert such silly things about lowsec and NPC corps.

1) Prove NPC corps are not meant to emulate player corps. Its quite clear that in this case, they do.
Oh, you just made that principle up?

2) Do you have a reading difficulty? I specifically said they emulate them, but are not them. You cant wardecc them. That is a fact. Deal with it.

3) Read what I said. You dont need a wardecc to agress in LS. That you lose sec does not change that. Go live in NS or J-space if you cant deal with that.

1) You haven't proven that they are meant to emulate player corps. Sorry, but just stating that 'it's quite clear' isn't proof. If it was 'quite clear', the proof would be easy to present.

2) I can read just fine. I know you can't wardec NPC corps. Players in them are the most heavily protected in the game, and now they get that extra protection in low sec as well by proxy of disincentivising attacks on them due to the standings you'll lose with NPC mining fleets and subsequently become KOS to them. You need to look up the definition of emulate, and then stop using big words you don't understand just because you think people won't understand them any better than you do.

3) Read what I said. Losing sec status, and as a result losing the ability to pass through high sec as well as becoming legally aggressable to everyone, everywhere, after -5, is the consequence of attacking someone in lowsec that isn't a wartarget or -5 themselves. "you don't need a wardec to aggro in lowsec" is not an argument against being able to wardec NPC corps if NPC corps are meant to emulate (the definition being to match or surpass by imitation) player corps.

4) in response to your new post, the difference between you and me is I actually understand what the dictionary and wikipedia say. Dunning-Kruger = one's inability to understand one's own incompetence and/or thinking more oneself more capable than one actually is. You've demonstrated this on many occasions. Ad hominem = an attack on the 'man' in lieu of an argument. If an argument is provided along with an attack, it's not an ad hom. I explained all this, but you're going to demonstrate that Dunning-Kruger again by pretending you know better, when you don't.

Salvos, for the last twenty years, I've handled debates with creationists, flat-earthers, chemtrailers, anti-vaxxers, and scientologists. So when I say you are no different, I mean that in the most banal way possible. At least you haven't sent lawyers to knock on my door at 6am like the scientologists did with a defamation lawsuit. They lost btw.

Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall. If everyone ignored everything you ever said again for the rest of your life, I doubt anyone would miss out on anything.

Iirc, you are in your mid-twenties.

Ive handled debates with all those and more for a full 20 years, and Im 35 atm.
I debate all the time as well as having professional training in it from my law years.

You don't know the first thing about debating.
All you do, is ad-hominem, logical fallacies, misrepresentation, repetition, insults.
There is no sophistication, depth or pursuit of truth in your arguments.
You are not interested in debate.
All you are interested in is being "right" and yelling at others that they are wrong.

Talking to you is like talking to a stinking open sewer. I dont think anyone IRL wants to be anywhere near you.

This, right here, is your DK on display again, along with your intellectual dishonesty. You don't remember correctly. You're making assumptions. And once again, you say nothing that matters.