Policy on 1.0 'Ganking'

[Oggdo Bogdo]

This idea of a larger fleet pirating a smaller fleet being considered a valid RP situation that the admin team allows, is frankly, poorly thought out. On an OORP level, it's not better for the small fleet to pay the larger fleet to avoid a gank; they're there to have a fight, all you are doing is incentivising the side that's larger to pirate the other side in hopes of getting a gank because it's better for the other side to just be ganked than to have to avoid the fight. If the smaller fleet was going to pay, they wouldn't have logged in.

This also isn't some hypothetical that won't happen, this HAS happened, and it's the reason the Pirate ID is no longer allowed to pirate combat ships in house space. People showed up in NY with Pirate Ascos among all variety of ships, pirating the Navy fleet to hell and starting comically oorp fights that they shouldn't have been able to. There is also no in-RP justification for the bigger fleet to issue a "reasonable demand" to an outgunned fleet, if it does, it's because it realises it has an advantage here from the rules simply by being bigger and getting a spelt-out right to gank the opponent.

It's also interesting to see that the admin team says it doesn't trust the community not to issue the maximum possible reasonable demand all the time, (if it's reasonable, then why are you so afraid of it? There's also people that comply with unreasonable demands that don't report it because they have no idea what it is and just naively accept it.), but expects the community to give it maximum trust while it is operating on a vague ruleset, banning people frivolously, processing sanctions with insufficient evidence and overturning them, flip-flopping on issues, and displaying obvious bias toward certain factions and loud-mouthed groups, which it erroneously thinks the community can't see. It's becoming clear that what matters is not the evidence or context in a report but who the person being reported is, and who the person issuing the report is, and staff is starting to dangerously adopt the idea that some people are angels that do no wrong, while some are demons that are never right about anything and who are hellbent on destroying the community. These kinds of rule changes come off as nothing more than ad-hoc adjustments to justify decisions to use or not to use the catch-all 1.0.

The rules are what the community agrees to play by, so that people don't rely on their own judgment to determine what is acceptable. Sanctioning players who are deemed to be not following the rules, not because of a wilful rejection of them, but because of a difference in judgment is plainly ridiculous. Ironically, it's an enforcement of an unreasonable demand by the admin team on the community.

---