Thursday, January 31, 2013

Fleet this Sunday to Celebrate Bumping Victory

By now, many of you are aware of CCP's recent decision regarding the legality of miner bumping. As EVE's premiere miner bumping blog, MinerBumping takes a special interest in such things. Ever since I began bumping miners out of the Halaima ice field last June, hundreds--likely thousands, by now--of miners have petitioned CCP to ban miner bumping. A lot of miners and space lawyers assumed miner bumping was already against the EULA. Others begged CCP to change the EULA to explicitly prohibit miner bumping. Last November, the "controversy" reached critical mass when CCP Falcon created a thread on EVE-O to request community feedback on the issue.

Though no one can read Falcon's mind, intelligent observers concluded that this request for feedback was the prelude to a ban on miner bumping. If so, the thread was put in the wrong subforum. EVE General Discussion, a carebear stronghold and by far the most active subforum on EVE-O, was not chosen as the location for the feedback. Instead, the thread was posted in Crime & Punishment, where emergent-friendly EVE players frequent.

To shield the larger part of the community from being exposed to miner bumping, threads about the subject were frequently shipped off to the frozen wastes of less-populated subforums. My original thread about my takeover of Halaima, for example, was packed away to the Sell Orders subforum, despite the subforum's rules that only in-game items may be sold in it--and I'm pretty sure mining permits don't qualify. When I drew up a new version of the thread, it was removed to the Intergalactic Summit subforum. But the few residents of Intergalactic Summit were displeased, because it's a roleplaying subforum with its own strict rules. Since my Halaima thread made references to EVE being a video game, it was petitioned by concerned RP'ers. Thus, the thread was moved yet again, to Crime & Punishment. This set the precedent that led to the community feedback thread being placed exactly where it would receive the most pro-bumping feedback possible.

In accordance with the thread's pre-arranged timetable, Falcon locked it in mid-December so the senior GMs could make a final determination on the legality of miner bumping. All miner bumping-related conversation was temporarily declared off-limits for some reason while the GMs conferred on this grave matter. And then, just when it seemed like the day of reckoning would never come, "senior game master" GM Karidor issued the long-awaited announcement in this thread.

The decision? Long story short, miner bumping is alive and well, and here to stay.

There are a few caveats, but they're essentially meaningless because they don't change any of the preexisting rules regarding harassment and/or bumping. Here are the relevant bits:
"CCP considers the act of bumping a normal game mechanic, and does not class the bumping of another player’s ship as an exploit."
This gives us free reign to bump. Now, regarding the possibility of bumping as a tool for harassment, from the OP and an additional reply made by Karidor downthread:
"However, persistent targeting of a player with bumping by following them around after they have made an effort to move on to another location can be classified as harassment, and this will be judged on a case by case basis...

"If you are reported and we find you actively following around a target without a war to continue bumping a specific player, it will still (at some point) considered harassment, even if you divert your 'attention' a little while doing so...

"While it will involve inconvenience, we will have to see that one actively tried evasion before we consider someone being followed around and harassed. Merely changing belts in the same system or moving a few thousand meters to another asteroid would not qualify in this regard. Ideally you would move to other systems and more than just one or two jumps to avoid being found again quickly, requiring some effort to locate you again (i.e. through locator agents)...

"If the victim just moved next door, that could still be interpreted as 'general area of operation', if the miner starts changing regions and is still being followed around by the same person that keeps bumping in a regular manner then the intent is pretty clear."
This simply means that if you follow the same person from system to system, region to region, and continue to target that one person for bumping, it may considered harassment. CCP doesn't want you to camp an individual for his or her entire EVE career, in other words. This has always been the rule, and has no applicability to the New Order, since we don't do such things and never have.

So after all the sound and fury, there's no change to the rules on bumping. Yet it's a significant development. The whining carebears of highsec have spent year after year demanding and receiving all kinds of nerfs to highsec aggression. When the barge buff of '12 brought miner ganking to "historic lows", the miners turned their complaints toward miner bumping. Hundreds, thousands of petitions have been filed. The carebears made all the same moves against bumping as they did against everything else. They filled EVE-O with their complaints. An official inquiry was launched.

This time, however, we had a new experience. CCP said "no".

The carebears were outmatched and outfought on the forums. They were finally rebuffed by CCP, the tool with which the carebears have beaten down so many good and proper game mechanics. The carebears received that measure of disappointment which they have so often meted out to others.

Now, this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.

So let's celebrate with a bumper fleet!

WHEN: Sunday, February 3rd at 21:00 EVEtime (4:00pm Eastern)
WHERE: Brapelille ice field

Everyone who can fly a ship is invited. We shall assemble our Stabbers, our SFIs, our Machariels and Fleet Typhoons and comedy ships of all kinds. We'll meet at the historic Brapelille ice field, birthplace of Agent BillMurray and the site of the ruins of Gallente highsec's former ice mining capital. And from there, we'll tour some other notable spots. Enjoy the celebration. You've earned it.

More Inspiring Visions

Today we've got a double feature for you, as two different Agents submitted artwork to help communicate their feelings about what the New Order means to them. First up, a piece by Collin Dow, who's done art for us in the past:

Click here for the full-size version.

All true, the New Order does need those things. The more we've got, the more people in highsec benefit. Next, we've got a helpful flowchart from Galaxy Pig, who has also contributed art to us in the past. So many miners ask us how they can avoid dying. Let Galaxy's paintbrush explain:

Click here for the full-size version.

As you can see, a mining permit cures all ills. If you're a miner, how comforting would it be to know that you're in compliance with the Code and not at risk of gank? Pretty comforting, I'd imagine.

Permanent links to all supporter artwork may be found on the Links page.

Forty-Nine Billion in Shares Sold

Tom Fortross earns today's Supreme Protector's Tip of the Hat™. His upgrade from 6 shares to 156 shares put us over the 49,000 share mark, for a total of more than 49 billion in shares sold! This is truly a great beacon of hope for everyone who wants to improve highsec.

Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Revisiting Gallente Highsec South

I've written about how the Deninard system swelled with refugees as a result of our campaigns through Gallente highsec. The miners vowed to make a last stand in Deninard, but they, too, crumbled.

Tolle and the other ice field systems of Gallente North have dried up. Many of the remaining miners have purchased permits. The ice fields are not dead, but they host only a fraction of the Code violators that they did before. Time to move on!

What's this? Yes, we're taking a mini-vacation to revisit Gallente South, the Brapelille-Chelien-Jaschercis axis. Above is an improved map of the surrounding systems. It will be interesting to revisit this area, as we'll see how the area has fared in our absence. Did all the miners immediately move back in after we left, as the skeptics predicted?

Actually, initial reconnaissance suggests that these areas have not recovered. The New Order's love and attention have had longer-term effects on these systems. Chelien, in particular, is only a shadow of its former self. Ardallabier may be the exception, as it benefited somewhat from the ruin of Brapelille.

We'll be using the same three HQ stations as before:

You might wonder why we would bother revisiting this area, even if only for a shorter period than our normal campaigns. The answer is pretty simple. I want to send a message to the miners who get chased away by our activities. They may think that if we hit an area and leave, it will be safe from then on. But if we demonstrate, even on a single occasion, that lightning can strike twice in the same place, then our enemies aren't safe anywhere.

Since Gallente North and Gallente South are close, the transition shouldn't be too difficult, as our gank fleets can hit targets in either area, depending on where our supplies are still located. In addition, I've added insta-undocks for New Order Logistics for stations in each of the non-HQ ice field systems. There's been some discussion about seeding certain non-HQ systems with limited numbers of Catalysts only (modules are small and can be carried by an alt for the whole gang). With some improvisation, non-HQs can be used as staging areas to further frustrate gate-campers. For example, if Ardallabier is active, modules can be moved by an alt one jump from Brapelille; if Catalysts are in Ardallabier, the system's ice field and belts can be attacked from within.

If suppliers put Catalysts into these non-HQ ice field systems, the following stations should be used:

For the sake of completeness, I also provided New Order Logistics with insta-undocks for the non-HQ ice field systems of Gallente North:

Happy hunting! The next time we move, it will be to a brand new area. If you have any ideas about popular clusters of mining systems, let me know.

Tuesday, January 29, 2013

The New Order Saves Another Miner

Convo requests from people with "Miner" in their name are like a box of chocolates. You never know what you're gonna get. Was this gentleman going to notify me about 10 million isk inbound for my wallet? Or would he have some baseless complaint about the way I do business?

Ah. Miner Daveed was curious about the reason for his death. I kill a lot of people, but I remembered this guy's name from earlier in the day. Seems he finally returned to his keyboard.

Daveed pleaded ignorance. Protip for miners: If you want to get on my good side, don't pretend you weren't violating the Code. Instead, confess and apologize. I like people who are truthful with me, and if you're a highsec miner, that means starting the conversation by admitting your shortcomings.

Despite the fact that MinerBumping is among the top two or three EVE blogs in terms of daily traffic, Daveed claimed he had never heard of the New Order before. Then the situation got sticky: He also suggested he was a brand new player, and that he simply never had the opportunity to hear about us.

Was this the realization of everyone's greatest fear? Was Miner Daveed the mythical "innocent noobie gank victim" come to life?

Daveed was heartbroken. He had only been playing EVE for two days, and now he was going to have to quit because of mistreatment by the New Order. At long last, all those anti-PvP carebears who say we need to make highsec safer for the noobies had their poster child.

I invited Daveed to put aside his career and join the New Order. But he said something suspicious. He was flying a Hulk? And he put in time to save up for it? How does a noobie save up for a Hulk in two days, let alone fly it?

I invited some of my gank fleet members to join the private convo and help me convince Daveed to stay. Maybe if he experienced the New Order family firsthand, he would see there's more to EVE than solo mining.

It was an uphill battle. Daveed repeated his supposed ignorance of the Code, despite the fact that everyone who mines in my space (0.5+ security) is deemed to be fully aware of its contents, and to have agreed to it. Just like if you go to a country, you must follow their laws.

The other shoe dropped, as it always does. Miner Daveed was, in fact, a 2007 character. He has been playing for more than five years, though he's taken long breaks during that period. Funny, but it happens this way every time. The "innocent noobies" who get ganked are never actually new to the game.

The fleet shared their stories and encouraged Daveed to have some fun in the game. But doing anything other than AFK mining by himself in a Hulk was "too serious". Only AFK mining is fun.

Daveed was struck by how much highsec had changed since he last mined. I often promise that if the people of highsec just give the New Order a few years, they won't even recognize highsec anymore.

Daveed departed. Yet it was a victory to the New Order, for we saved him--from his ignorance. He now knows more about EVE and the new regime controlling highsec than he did before. And a day in which you learn something important is a day that didn't go to waste. AFK mining by yourself for five years is wasteful. You'll get far more out of a five-minute encounter with the New Order family.

Monday, January 28, 2013

Jester's Dreck: Why You Shouldn't Vote for Ripard Teg for CSM

I suspect many of you are at least somewhat familiar with Ripard Teg, author of the long-running EVE blog "Jester's Trek". Ripard recently announced his intention to run for CSM. Since Jester's Trek is one of the most widely-read EVE blogs, it's quite likely that he will gather enough votes to win a seat. And while this post will not prevent him from getting onto the CSM, I think it's important to raise awareness about the CSM candidates' beliefs concerning the nature of EVE, and how they would like to change it. Even if Ripard's blog guarantees him a spot on the CSM, I would still urge as many people who read this not to vote for Ripard Teg, and to tell every potential voter they know, not to vote for him.

The fundamental decision facing CCP is whether or not they should try to boost subscription revenues by transforming EVE into a carebear-friendly theme park MMO. Some people think there's too much non-consensual PvP in EVE. They think it's unfair that powerful players and alliances can attack weaker ones. They think this is "griefing", and that it drives people to cancel subscriptions. The answer to this "problem", they say, is to reduce non-consensual PvP in EVE, and to shift the game toward mutual PvP.

I have occasionally read posts on Jester's Trek. Some of them are even good. That's why I find it disappointing to be in a position where I must inform you that Ripard Teg is one of the people I described in the preceding paragraph. He is firmly in the carebear camp, and not just a little bit.

Earlier this month, I wrote about the CSM minutes, and called your attention to the CSM members who openly opposed the existence of non-mutual wardecs. Despite the fact that wardecs have been repeatedly nerfed to make highsec safer, CSM member Trebor Daehdoow (and others) called for the elimination of wardecs as we know them. You should only be able to declare war on people if they give you permission, they said, because it's fair, and prevents alliances from attacking enemies they can easily defeat.

Ripard Teg is a strong supporter of Trebor's. He hopes Trebor will run, and plans to save one of his own votes to cast for Trebor (the remaining votes being cast in favor of himself). Ripard's support for Trebor is a big red flag, but that's not the reason you shouldn't vote for him. Instead, I'd like to direct your attention to one of Ripard's most recent blog posts.

In a post entitled "Ganking isn't PvP and never was", Ripard explains why he thinks it's not such a good thing that people can shoot at someone's spaceships without their consent. Everyone in EVE has probably heard the old saying that when you undock in a ship, you consent to PvP. Ripard disagrees:
I'm currently rereading Alex Haley's Roots and was struck by several passages written from the perspective of white slave-holders whose characters argue slavery is both good for the slaves and a moral good in and of itself. The slaves have cause to disagree. The argument being made about "undocking equals consent" is rather similar...
I applaud Ripard for his effort to re-broaden his horizons by rereading Roots, but I think he has the wrong idea. The fact that there is no perfectly safe space in EVE, and the fact that PvP is good for EVE, really has little to do with slavery. But Ripard goes on to make a more pointed analogy about the "victims" of suicide ganking:
At the time, there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth, plus much proselytizing on how the victims could have prevented this fate (wearing a longer skirt, a higher neck line, and not so much perfume, perhaps?).
Ripard's hyperbole shouldn't shock the readers of MinerBumping, who are accustomed to seeing things like miners who compare ganking to the Holocaust. Yes, Ripard is a more articulate, well-known version of the carebears who call you Hitler when you shoot their Retrievers.

But it's not the hyperbolic analogy that I want to call your attention to, but rather its logic. The substance of Ripard's argument is that in the same way women shouldn't need to alter their clothing to avoid sexual assault, a miner shouldn't need to fit a tank to avoid being ganked. Miners shouldn't need to scan, watch local, mine in safer systems, or mine in groups with defense ships. They shouldn't need to do these things, because regardless, decent EVE players won't gank a miner, in the same way that decent human beings won't rape a woman regardless of her clothing.

Ripard's position is more extreme than that of the "moderate miners" who claim they only want to limit ganking, not eliminate it. Moderate miners always argue for "one more nerf" because they think it's too easy to gank. (Of course, they always think it's too easy, no matter how often it's been nerfed, so they effectively argue for its elimination.) Yet moderate miners will admit that miners should at least try to fit a tank, and that going AFK in a 200 million isk ship with nothing but a Civilian Shield Booster is probably not a good idea. By contrast, Ripard thinks it's blaming the victim to suggest such a thing. He's on the extreme end of the carebear camp, though better at hiding it than most of his fellow travelers.

Now let's take a closer look at the root of Ripard's problem--what he perceives as the unfairness of EVE:
To me, the interesting thing about the argument that un-docking serves as consent to PvP is that the people who make this argument invariably make it from a position of enormous strength. They have all the power in the relationship: all the knowledge, all the power, all the training, all the money... everything! They are quite literally level 80 players preying on level 1 players and seeing nothing wrong with the relationship at all.
You can see from Ripard's comment that he fundamentally does not understand the nature of power in EVE. To understand where Ripard goes wrong, I'd like to share a brief story from my earliest days in EVE, all the way back in January 2006. On my first day in the game, I did what most people do: I went through the tutorial and tried to figure out at least enough about the game to maneuver my ship around and complete the basic missions. On my second day in EVE, I went to lowsec.

Going into the game, it was my understanding that there was no isk to be made in highsec, and that nullsec was too well-guarded for a new player to enter. I was wrong on both counts, but I had no way of knowing that, so I got into a Bantam mining frigate to ninja-mine in lowsec asteroid belts. I quickly decided that killing the rats would be more fun than mining the ore. Within a week I was throwing missiles around in a Caracal cruiser. I knew to keep an eye on local, since anyone could kill me. Most of the time, people who appeared in local were just passing through. And at the moment I became complacent, assuming I could warp away if pirates appeared, I got ganked. My Caracal went boom.

The Ripards of the world would say the incident proved their point. I had no chance, because the pirates had the knowledge, the skillpoints, the money, the ships. But the story doesn't end there, because I didn't unsub from the game, cursing its unfairness. It never occurred to me that the game was unfair, or that I should quit. Instead, using almost every last isk in my wallet, I purchased another Caracal. I was determined to take passersby in local more seriously, and I replaced my damage mods with Warp Core Stabilizers.

My second Caracal didn't die. I went through lowsec belts ninja-ratting at will. And when pirates got too fresh on the gates, they discovered--much to their chagrin--that I was fitting Warp Core Stabilizers. As I escaped, it was they who howled about the unfairness of it all. According to Ripard, the pirates had "everything", but did they? I was willing to sacrifice damage mods (to a ratter, this is essentially yield) to protect myself from pirates. Pirates, on the other hand, were not willing to sacrifice an extra midslot for another scrambler. So even though I had nothing in Ripard's view, I won, and the people who had everything lost.

Miners are not defenseless. A mining barge is unlikely to defeat a combat ship in a 1v1 battle, true. A pigeon is unlikely to beat a cat in a 1v1, and a gazelle won't fare well against a lion in a 1v1. So why do pigeons and gazelles still exist, and for that matter, why do mining barges blanket highsec? Because their defense is to avoid getting into a situation where they're trapped in single combat against those who can beat them at it.

Now let's set the record straight about non-consensual PvP. Not only is it PvP, not only is it fair and legitimate, it's 100% essential to the game. If you're in a money-making ship, you're prey. You can succeed at evading your predators, or you can fail at it. When you fail, your ship needs to blow up. We can't have a game where the pirates need permission to attack you, because you'll never give them permission. Likewise, the pirates won't give permission to be attacked when they get ambushed by a more powerful force.

It goes back to the idea of the PvP food chain. You need something to form the base of the chain, ships that don't stand much chance against an attacker. It's not always a mining ship or hauler. It can even be a titan. According to the official reports about the big supercap brawl from the other day, the whole thing started when a Goon FC accidentally jumped his titan to a cyno rather than sending his fleet to it. The titan found itself ambushed by Pandemic Legion. At this point, the titan was just as defenseless against his attackers as a mining ship. He stood no chance; it was classic non-consensual PvP.

Then the Goons sent in a much larger force to back up the titan and kill the Pandemic Legion ambush party. Again, non-consensual PvP. If they didn't have reinforcements, PL might have said, in a Ripard version of EVE, "We decline to engage in mutual PvP, because you brought too many ships. See you tomorrow, or not." But because we're not in a theme park MMO (yet), PL instead sent out a call to everyone with a ship and a desire to kill Goons. Now the Goons were heavily outnumbered. Once more, non-consensual PvP took place, and several hundred billion isk evaporated.

Consider that it all took place because some people in PL decided to take advantage of a poor, defenseless titan who pressed the wrong button and stood no chance against them. The titan wasn't "defenseless", of course. The defense was to not push the wrong button in the first place. Great battles are built on mistakes, though. You don't need to be defenseless to be caught.

The PvP food chain requires that someone has the potential to be caught some of the time, from the miner to the pirate to the defense gang to the pirate ambush to the defense fleet. Each is trying to gain an overwhelming advantage against its prey, while avoiding being caught by its own predators. This is not a flaw in the game; it's the whole point of the game.

I know that some carebears will say that they would prefer not to take part in the multiplayer, PvP aspect of the game. Their opinion is no more valid than the guy who plays a multiplayer FPS to take a stroll through the battlefield without getting shot at.

Yes, it's a sandbox, and no, your AFK Mackinaw doesn't get to be invincible.

Ripard claims to be concerned about poor, defenseless noobies (like my week-old Caracal) being preyed upon by powerful, experienced pilots:
Am I exaggerating to make a point? Maybe just a little. But... just maybe I'm not exaggerating at all. This sort of thing happens every single day in EVE and most of us have just come to accept it -- and the cost it wreaks in player unsubs -- as part of the game. The question that started the philosophical debate: should we? I still don't know.
The reality, of course, is that people with hundreds of millions of isk to spend on a mining ship, and often hundreds of millions more on implants, are not noobies. They frequently have plenty of money and skillpoints. But do they defend themselves? Some do. Others choose not to. And that's why Ripard's rape analogy is so important: In Ripard's mind, the miners shouldn't need to defend themselves. Rather, it's the "griefers" who need to stop picking on weaker players.

Ripard's premise about ganking not really being PvP is silly. Conceptually, it's as absurd as saying ratting and mission-running aren't really PvE because the player always wins. You overpower the rats, which is unfair. Maybe PvE should be nerfed, so the NPCs have a fighting chance.

So what's the point of taking such a ridiculous position? There's only one reason for Ripard's effort to undermine the legitimacy of ganking: If ganking isn't PvP, then there's nothing wrong with removing it from the game. If it's not valid to attack the poor, defenseless miners, then why not nerf it into oblivion, or even ban it?

One thing that jumped out at me from the CSM minutes that I didn't mention in my earlier post was a statistic listed on page 104:
"For reasons that are left as an exercise to the reader, Exhumers are now blowing up at historically low rates."
Aggression is drying up across highsec. It's been nerfed over and over. Yet many on the CSM were busy arguing for the elimination of wardecs and other sources of "unfairness". This is what I warned you all about from the beginning. It wasn't just the impending nerfs of 2011 and 2012 that I opposed, it was all of the nerfs that would continue to be imposed in the future. If you share Ripard's view that it's unfair and illegitimate for the strong to attack the weak, then such attacks shouldn't be nerfed once, but nerfed until they no longer occur at all. If it's horribly unjust and griefing to shoot a miner, why stop when you reach "historically low levels"?

On occasion, Ripard attempts to soften his position by saying he hasn't fully made up his mind on the "philosophical debate" about whether non-consensual PvP should occur. Going by what he's written, his mind looks to be pretty well made up. After all, why would he run for the CSM if he didn't know which side of the debate he was on? Either he's against aggression, or he's running for the CSM without knowing what he stands for. In either case, he doesn't deserve your vote.

CCP may or may not listen to the CSM's suggestions about new features for the game. But I think they do pay some attention to the vote results. When people like Ripard get votes, it sends the message that EVE players don't want "unfair" PvP in the game. The more Ripard Tegs that get elected to the CSM, the more support it gives to those in CCP who would make mutual combat the only combat in EVE.

If EVE is doomed to a theme park future, let's not do anything to speed up the process. Cast not one vote for the carebears.

The Hammer of Justice

This interesting piece was passed along to me; the artist is Dubious King, a fixture in Deninard:

Click here for the full-size version.

There's no question that people need someone to stand up against the beastly miners of highsec. I am proud to see more and more taking up this noble calling.

Permanent links to all supporter artwork may be found on the Links page.

Sunday, January 27, 2013

Mad Moon Rising, Part 1

Brapelille ice field, December 31, 2012. The new year is about to dawn. What does 2013 hold for the miners of highsec?

Moonsong Miner urges a temporary truce in celebration of the holiday, but her cries go unheeded. Brapelille is in the midst of a storm brought by the New Order. The winds of change are blowing.

Miners vow they will resist, but their will to fight crumbles. The miners flee to Chelien system, hoping they can find respite and undisturbed AFK mining. Among the refugees evacuating Brapelille is Moonsong Miner.

Chelien, too, is brought to heel by the New Order. Within days, the miners are on the run once again. They move north, to Deninard.

Moonsong is tired of running, and is determined to make her last stand in Deninard. For the first time, she fits a tank and begins to pay attention to the environment around her.

At times, she is willing to speak peaceably with the New Order. She occasionally offers a truce, but she's quick to change her mind.

Moonsong experiences a rollercoaster of emotions. She is baffled by our Agents' ability to be polite and friendly in local, but at the same time to commit what she considers atrocities.

In Moonsong's eyes, the New Order are a terrifying vision, a savage warrior race that bathes in the blood of innocent miners.

When the New Order's Agents leave the system to strike somewhere else, Moonsong assumes they have been killed by the rebels who promise to protect the system. But even then, Moonsong has mixed feelings. She doesn't want anyone to die in highsec.

The miners gathered in Deninard have been traumatized by being forced from one place to the next. Deninard becomes a garrison system, its miners hopelessly paranoid. At the slightest provocation, they accuse each other of being Agents of the New Order.

Complicating matters is a cultural barrier: English isn't Moonsong's first language. Then again, sanity isn't her first mental state.

Anyone could be a spy for the New Order. For Moonsong, anyone who appears too friendly or too hostile is suspicious.

She doesn't own an Orca of her own, so she needs to ask around for bonuses. But when no one will respond to her, she gets an inkling of the true nature of the carebears who surround her.

To be continued...

Highsec Miner Grab Bag #20

Okay folks, once we're on the twentieth edition of something, we should all know the drill. Let us waste time no further!

Our gank squad was not terribly worried about Pruorer's promise of vengeance. I was confused about one thing, though: If Pruorer has nothing to do all day, why will it take more than six months for him to retaliate?

GodLord was very concerned after witnessing a miner blow up in an ice field. I'm not sure whether he was saying New Order Agents are going to become mass murderers, or if he thinks the "bullied" miners will become mass murderers. If the latter, so much for the myth of the peaceful highsec miner!

Perennial rebel Inspektor Cluseau, like many faux "moderate" miners, claims to be in favor of some ganking in highsec. Just not every day. Sorry, no deal. For the sake of victory, we will slaughter every miner in highsec if need be.

Inspektor's attitude is nothing new. But it's interesting that he acts as if suicide ganking hasn't been nerfed before.

Chilly83 Tissant gives us all hope. Thanks to the New Order, mining in wormsec is more attractive to him than mining in highsec. We're all about waking up the carebears and broadening their horizons.

castle2 keep openly aspires to bothood. Yeah, I'd say he probably qualifies as a bot-aspirant.

Mako5 isn't a big fan of the New Order, but he does like his clich├ęs.

As usual, the rebel has the whole idea of "rights" backward. We've spoken about this before. Everyone in highsec has the right to have highsec saved. Until that happens, democracy is impossible. Therefore the New Order is for freedom, and everyone who opposes us is against freedom.

Mako5 is very confident of victory, despite early losses into the hundreds of billions of isk for the rebel miners. Is he the next Winston Churchill?

...He's still working on it. Somehow his insult backfired, and I get to add another title to my already healthy-sized list of them.

Agent John E Normus proves what many have already concluded: The New Order Agent is always the sanest-sounding person in local.

I've heard Lissiri's complaint before. Bad miners think that by requiring them to stay at their keyboards, we're invading their home space in real life. Nonsense. You can do whatever you want in your home, but if you're mining in my highsec, you obey my Agents.

Shufly and others may not like it, but I have a forecast for highsec's future: More Agents, more ganking, more Code discussion, more permits being sold, more miner tears, and a lot more Order. Isn't it great?