Whenever I venture forth unto the ice fields and asteroid belts of highsec to enforce the New Halaima Code of Conduct, there are always miners who vociferously object to the Code. Partly that's because they don't like the idea of being placed under someone else's authority. But some of the highsec miners genuinely disagree with the Code--often without having read it.
On occasion, I'll ask the miners what about the Code they actually disagree with, and what they would to improve it. I know they won't have any good ideas, but I ask the question out of respect. In fact, the highsec miners have to concede that they agree with nearly every provision in the Code; they oppose botting, for instance. And miners have different ideas about whether AFK mining is desirable.
When making their complaints, the one provision that the miners turn to again and again is the provision that calls for a 10 million isk mining fee to be paid to the Supreme Protector once every 365 days. It's amazing how parsimonious some miners can be: Their activity (ideally) nets them tens of millions of isk per hour, and my mining fee only requires them to contribute an average of about 28,000 isk per day. A pittance. Yet they would rather refuse to pay this amount than enjoy 365 days of blissful, bump-free mining. Their refusal makes no sense in economic terms, as many miners lose more than 10 million isk from lost mining time due to the bumps. Some will dock up for hours or log off much earlier than they planned. Some even dock up every time I enter the system. As I like to remind them, when they lose isk, they're still "paying." They just don't get credit for such payments. If you're going to lose 10 million isk anyway, it's better to have the mining permit to show for it.
How to explain their irrational behavior? When the logic is pointed out to them, they say their refusal comes from "principle" and that they refuse to be "extorted," even if payment is in their best interest. Their mackinaws may have ore bays full of frozen water, but their stated reasons for violating the Code hold no water: After all, we're talking about ice miners in highsec who "play" EVE AFK at a mouse-click per hour. They have no principles or dignity left to abandon.
Since the miners cannot offer any rational explanation for their behavior, we must therefore conclude that their behavior is based on irrational impulses. Being harmful to themselves and society, these impulses would be categorized as the byproduct of a "psychological disorder" by mental health professionals.
Having degraded themselves through a career of minimal, repetitive activity for "fun," the miners slowly transform themselves into bots. Most highsec miners claim to hate the bots, but their actions suggest they aspire to become bots, or as close as they can get. Sadly, CCP has enabled them by providing them with the tools of their addiction. Miners are now just one mouse-click per hour from becoming bots.
When a mere 28,000 isk per day is required of them by their Supreme Protector, the miners don't know how to respond. The mining fee shocks them out of their routine. It's not in the program, as they've never encountered the New Order before. The Code makes them question what they're doing. Just like bots, they experience total system failure, and they cannot respond in a rational manner.
It's a sad state of affairs, but the only cure seems to be continued bumping until they wake up. I do not claim to be a doctor, but basically I'm like a doctor for the miners, curing them of their sickness. When they pay the 10 million isk, that's the sign that they are well again. But payment is also a cure of sorts. In a future post, I will explain why payment of the mining fee is enormously beneficial to the miners.
You may be dethroning Fancy the Bard as best in-game protagonist ever. Keep up the great work!ReplyDelete
No people give you good reasons, reasons you will never post because they're against your propaganda. If you were ever to show these reasons (all of them, not the one you pick and choose, because I'm sure you're right on some people, but not all as you claim) your ruse would fall apart, people would lose faith in you.ReplyDelete
Here is one, most importantly that Ba'Ba pointed out to you several times the only day you have shown yourself in OUR system. "electing MYSELF supreme protector" doesn't work like that. Deal with it.
Are you role-playing?Delete
If so, well done.
Ah yes, paying to not be killed. I applaud your small efforts despite being half a decade behind on innovation. Aren't there easier and less silly ways to start a cult? Judging by your code, you spent your summer vacation watching Deathnote.ReplyDelete
"- avoid even the appearance of botting" You didn't define what "the appearance of botting" is or looks like, so no one can actually accept this. Mining lacks interaction, so unless you have a clear definition of what "botting" actually is, it's subjective. Who will have authoritative say on reported claims of "appearance of botting" because everyone and their mother false-report "bots".
"- No AFK mining allowed. All miners are expected to remain at their keyboards at all times" This is entirely unreasonable to expect a person to never leave their computer for any reason. If someone needs to AFK for any amount of time, they will. Docking up for a 2-3 minute bio break is bureaucratic thinking and unrealistic.
"- New Order territory is a safe space for suicide gankers. Miners are required to put aside their prejudices and treat gankers with respect." I don't have to respect my enemies. High sec is already "safe space" for suicide gankers, unless you again imply some different and/or undefined term.
"- No excessive mining. Miners should not fall into a routine of mining all day. I want well-rounded people in my system, not ice-mining machines." I'll play how I want to for as long as I want to. If you put forth this rule, the corollaries must also be enacted: No excessive suicide ganking, mission running, exploring and construction. That is, unless you are just trying to keep mining down.......
"- Keep local clean. Miners should be courteous in local and should refrain from the use of profanity." I have to ask, are you a responsible member of society choosing to play a game in their free time? If so, seeing me say the word "fuck" shouldn't generate tears from your eyes.
"- Prejudice toward minorities is not permitted. For the sake of clarity, this cannot apply to all groups claiming minority status, but only discrete and insular minorities, which are defined as suicide gankers, Goons, and others who oppose highsec mining." This is literally Creationist "Teach the Controversy" translated into EvE. You're not trying to "protect minorities", you're trying to "protect certain minorities that I want protected, but forget the rest." You would do better to just list out the groups you want protected instead of saying "minorities" and then being prejudice yourself against certain minority groups.
"- To minimize the workload of our GMs, miners shall not file petitions against the Supreme Protector or his Agents." Dictator 101: I am the judge, jury and executioner and you're not allowed to appeal anywhere else or to anyone else.
"- Mining indulgences may be purchased for 10 million isk per character, and are good for one year, subject to forfeiture." Again, you haven't defined the range of activity that would fall under a proposed label. The label here being subject to forfeiting membership. I'll go ahead and skip ahead to where you will end up at and just say whatever list you come up with will not be exhaustive, leaving a "subject to change without notice" clause in there so you're once again dictator of your Soviet Russia.
I don't expect this post to remain here long as I'm sure you'll take it down. You've built up a popular yet poorly designed sandcastle here and you can't let some anon come point out how retarded it is.
Last I checked bumping was not getting killed.Delete
Some of your points are fair, some are plain wrong, but still : if you want to improve the code, I'm sure the Savior of hisec will be glad to hear what you have to say. That is, if you understand the values this code is trying to promote and genuinely want to make the code more solid. So, do you ?Delete