Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Gervas Heidrich]

I'm sure I'm opening myself to a flame job here, but I agree with Graelyn on this. You've taken your brand new corp and applied to PIE (kudos for chutzpah here!), which would basically be the equivalent of an unknown and newly created character joining a wealthy and established corp as a director. A peer, as it were, to the other established corporations in the alliance. Four or five days pass. You then come to an outside forum to discuss this.

Many corporations take at least four or five days to talk to a prospective member and decide amongst themselves if that person would be a good fit. And this is to bring someone on as a recruit. Bringing a new corporation into an established alliance is much more intimate, as that corp will have much more of an impact on the reputation of the alliance than a mere recruit would.

In my opinion, you should have gone to resolve this with PIE first, instead of airing all of this laundry here. Were I a member of PIE, that would be reason enough to vote against you.

It's obvious you haven't been following this from the beginning.

[Katrina Oniseki]

The opposition to the idea, as presented in the relevant thread... seems to me to have been far out of line. It was trollish, offensive, and generally mean.

If that's been the case, then the post in question should just have been reported as such. All I can say is that I did mean to be neither trollish nor offensive and generally mean. As a German I might be oversensitive with the topic and might thus have overreacted, though. Still, I really didn't feel quite fairly treated in regard to my voiced concerns.

Your post was none of the above. I was referring to the original post of Laerise on the topic.

[Silas Vitalia]

Not likely a good fit considering the amount of emo going on this early over such a silly thing.

[Sepherim]

I'm sure I'm opening myself to a flame job here, but I agree with Graelyn on this. You've taken your brand new corp and applied to PIE (kudos for chutzpah here!), which would basically be the equivalent of an unknown and newly created character joining a wealthy and established corp as a director. A peer, as it were, to the other established corporations in the alliance. Four or five days pass. You then come to an outside forum to discuss this.

Many corporations take at least four or five days to talk to a prospective member and decide amongst themselves if that person would be a good fit. And this is to bring someone on as a recruit. Bringing a new corporation into an established alliance is much more intimate, as that corp will have much more of an impact on the reputation of the alliance than a mere recruit would.

In my opinion, you should have gone to resolve this with PIE first, instead of airing all of this laundry here. Were I a member of PIE, that would be reason enough to vote against you.

It's obvious you haven't been following this from the beginning.

Even if that were the case, that doesn't make her wrong, though. Her arguments, as those of Graelyn are indeed pretty accurate from my pov.

[Silas Vitalia]

First, I like a lot of the PIE players, and would like to think we are on good terms OOC (Graey, Seri, Aldrith, etc). So there's love there.

But this kind of reaction from you guys does give a bad impression, that H. didn't make the proper genuflections and bow down to the mighty PIE application sensibilities and was forever cast out of Valhalla for it.

How you say no to somebody matters sometimes more than saying no 

[Sepherim]

As far as I know or has been posted here, there wasn't any "no", only silence or delay in the answer. Probably it's still under debate. It took me more than a week to get my interview since I applied to PIE, and even after that half a week more for a confirmation. Processess take time, specially sensitive ones like adding a full new corporation to the alliance.

[Silas Vitalia]

As far as I know or has been posted here, there wasn't any "no", only silence or delay in the answer. Probably it's still under debate. It took me more than a week to get my interview since I applied to PIE, and even after that half a week more for a confirmation. Processess take time, specially sensitive ones like adding a full new corporation to the alliance.

That is a well written and perfectly reasonable reply.  I was more commenting on the 'we are PIE, we are super old and awesome and you'll have to treat us appropriately to get in because we don't need your kind' sort of thing.

Alll good Seri.

[Publius Valerius]

The opposition to the idea, as presented in the relevant thread... seems to me to have been far out of line. It was trollish, offensive, and generally mean.

If that's been the case, then the post in question should just have been reported as such. All I can say is that I did mean to be neither trollish nor offensive and generally mean. As a German I might be oversensitive with the topic and might thus have overreacted, though. Still, I really didn't feel quite fairly treated in regard to my voiced concerns.

now, you get why I was so pist on your racist morronic comment on the slavery debate.... it was for such a moronic bs..... and that you even had the balls to def your bs.... and call Poper outdated etc... just had piss me so off...

It was like... "Wait this racist little Hartz 4 f***, with to much time on hand, had said what? And he even badmouth now Poppers.... This f....."

[Aldrith Shutaq]

I feel I might have to apologize here, since I may have prematurely raised your hopes about your chances of getting into the PIE alliance with my off-the-cuff invitation. Like others have said, getting into PIE is hard and admission is not something that is controlled by any one person. There's a whole process and usually people need to know a bit about you before anything is done.

I'm sorry about the way this has been handled; it all seems to have become quite a mess and I'm not entirely sure what to make of it anymore.

[Sepherim]

Let me see if I don't miss anything, without the quotes something might get lost in the middle.

About: "Everything in society is "made up-stuff": rituals, relationships, bonds, currency, etc"
If you go a nihilistic way... Yes, everything is made up  .

Not nihilistic at all, it's the sociological approach. Society is built out of intersubjective negotiations between society members, plus the heritage they receive from the past. That's why societies can be so different in different places, because all is open to negotiation and made up by that social group along history (not saying all can be negotiated at every moment, that would depend on legitimacy).

About: "So, saying power structures are "made up-stuff" is like saying nothing at all."
Can you explain? I would clearly say, that NOT BEVELING IN EVE ONLINE POWER STRUCTURES doesnt equal  "is like saying nothing at all." Or in shorter terms: Power structures in EVE are "made up-stuff"≠ saying nothing at all. So I would reword it to: "So, saying power structures in EVE are "made up-stuff" is like saying ......" I hope I have made my "Can you explain?" a litlle more clear.

Yes, saying "power structures are made up-stuff" is like saying "white is white", adds nothing to the meaning of the argument. Reason is because everything is made up in society by social negotiations, be it gender differences, the treatment of aging, social practices, ideals, laws... everything is a product of social interaction within the structures that same social interaction creates (structures which, in turn, condition and modify those same interactions in a two-way direction process).

There's a lot of work on this in sociology and it's hard to explain in a short way enough for a forum post. I'm leaving dozens of things outside, and simplifying infinitely those I said, so take them with an extra grain of salt.

But back to the topic. I would like to think, that Im just a half ass nihilist. So I see a different between the "made up-stuff" in the Real world and the "made up-stuff" in EVE is huge. So huge, that I can say: I dont play along or "made up-stuff", and it isnt a threat to my life (Were you in the RL will hit one day a wall, or being a jail visitor or even dead).

Sure, that is right, but not because one things are more "made up" than the others. The difference lies in power: your boss has power over you, or a law, and you can't just say you don't believe in it because it's made up and ignore it. You can become an antisystem and fight/modify the system, but that indeed means you have to acknowledge it. EVE doesn't have power over you, you can always log off, ignore it, cancel the account, make an alt, etc. thus it can coerce you into accepting it in a much lower degree, only via reputation and social acceptance.

Do note that, when I say it's "made up stuff" I don't mean that they are not real. "Made up stuff" is very real in society because humans don't live in the "real world" but in their perception of this real world, and this perception includes those "made up things" as "real things".

As for our societies we have made those "power structures" along of necessity: To moderate conflicts. In EVE this conflicts exist only in a limited way. Example, you cant die. A lot of "made up-stuff" stuff in our real word is made around the idea, that we dont wanna die (we selfish people  ).  All moderation and conflict solving institutions are mostly around this notion (nicely show by D. North). This isnt the case for EVE (in EVE made up shit exist for the sake of having make up shit  ). So No, it wouldnt be like going to boss/president/police officer/fireman/teacher etc.... and saying Im not below of them.... next thingy... As this conflict solving institution are saving our lifes (could also take our life), we have a fail save in them: Check and balance, monitoring, competition, etc.... This makes me first "not bellow", it makes me a consumer/seeker. Which moderates HIS OWN CONFLICTS thru this institutions (As for me Im such a rent-seeker on this, that I even  dont fuck with people I dont like. It is the job of my lawer  . Im such a selfish person, which uses "made up" stuff for its own benefit. And their is next problem in EVE, I cant rent-seek my conflicts in EVE-online. Wouldnt be great to have PIE or someone else fight my fight against Eterne?  Or having a Public Prosecutor fighting for conflict problems (theft, murder); and that even for free  ).

Power structures are not made to moderate conflicts, in fact they often are the source of conflicts in themselves (take the class struggle Marx speaks of, for example, or the elite theory of Pareto or Veblen). Power structures exist because people want to dominate other people, get better ressources, have better women, etc. Structures and systems are created and offer social goods, such as protection, transparecy, monitoring, etc. as a method of legitimizing themselves and the rule of those and power.

But I go to far away... so lets get back to your: " is like going to your real world teacher/boss/president and saying you are not bellow them because it's "made up-stuff"." So first I would change some stuff: "is like going to your real world teacher/boss/president and saying you are NOT PART OF because it's "made up-stuff"." So first as you can see, I wouldnt work a below and above arrangement. And why would I? Even they - teacher/boss etc... - are consumers of safety, of this collective good. So NO ABOVE AND BELOW. Secondly, now that we have not this ABOVE and BELOW arrangement in the REAL WORLD. We can say, that the real choice is between being a part of the "made up" stuff or not. And this choice is easy for me, Im so selfish; that I of course choice to be part of the "made up" stuff (I will would even say, almost all of the made-up stuff is better as anarchy.).

That is a very anarcho-capitalist way of approaching things, but only masks the fact that there are inequalities in power. You are not your boss' client, on the contrary, you are a labor producer in his hand, he has power in his hand over you: he can fire you and replace you, thus leaving you with no income; if you can easily search for another job, his power over you will be small, but if there are difficulties in finding a job his power may be great. You can choose not to be a part of the social system, but only to a minor extent, and usually requires leaving the social system one way or another: moving to other country, going to live on your own in the wilderness, becoming a homeless or some other social minority, etc. If you want to remain with the social group, you have to be a part of it, accepting to some degree the norms and negotiations of that group as a whole, like it or not.

So, as long you, PIE, havent the level of conflict moderation (saving my life) and the same level of possible consumption (rent-seeking conflict moderation) I will and can say Im not a part of the made-up stuff  . And my selfish ass doesnt looses something; because those "power structures", aka Institutions in EVE, arent the same as in the real world.

Actually, as long as you play EVE, you'll be part of the made-up stuff one way or another, because it's ingrained inside of EVE. You can look for another corp, which will have other made up stuff, or you can go and build your own corp (the similair thing to leaving the country or going homeless). But you'll still have to accept lots of made up stuff if you interact with others who do accept it: you can't say your a space elf, you can't say I'm above Graelyn, you can't say the Empress is a man, etc. Social conventions, even if they are made up, become social facts (not sure how to translate Durkheim's term), and thus become a coercion over those that want to interact in that system.

I think I'm going to make a post with all this in my sociology blog.

[Mitara Newelle]

Just now seeing this...

You can all stop now.

What a fucking train wreck.

[Publius Valerius]

Let me see if I don't miss anything, without the quotes something might get lost in the middle.

About: "Everything in society is "made up-stuff": rituals, relationships, bonds, currency, etc"
If you go a nihilistic way... Yes, everything is made up  .

Not nihilistic at all, it's the sociological approach. Society is built out of intersubjective negotiations between society members, plus the heritage they receive from the past. That's why societies can be so different in different places, because all is open to negotiation and made up by that social group along history (not saying all can be negotiated at every moment, that would depend on legitimacy).

About: "So, saying power structures are "made up-stuff" is like saying nothing at all."
Can you explain? I would clearly say, that NOT BEVELING IN EVE ONLINE POWER STRUCTURES doesnt equal  "is like saying nothing at all." Or in shorter terms: Power structures in EVE are "made up-stuff"≠ saying nothing at all. So I would reword it to: "So, saying power structures in EVE are "made up-stuff" is like saying ......" I hope I have made my "Can you explain?" a litlle more clear.

Yes, saying "power structures are made up-stuff" is like saying "white is white", adds nothing to the meaning of the argument. Reason is because everything is made up in society by social negotiations, be it gender differences, the treatment of aging, social practices, ideals, laws... everything is a product of social interaction within the structures that same social interaction creates (structures which, in turn, condition and modify those same interactions in a two-way direction process).

There's a lot of work on this in sociology and it's hard to explain in a short way enough for a forum post. I'm leaving dozens of things outside, and simplifying infinitely those I said, so take them with an extra grain of salt.

I actually ask you... As I havent said: power structures as whole = Made up stuff. So I dont get: "Yes, saying "power structures are made up-stuff" is like saying "white is white", adds nothing to the meaning of the argument." By the way the word what you are searching for is tautology. And it would be tautological if I said: power structures = power structure or made up-stuff = made up stuff. Which wasnt my argument. I think we largly missread eachother. So, I would love to go back. http://backstage.eve-inspiracy.com/index.php?topic=4634.msg73430#msg73430 As I think we has missread eachother.

Actually, as long as you play EVE, you'll be part of the made-up stuff one way or another, because it's ingrained inside of EVE. You can look for another corp, which will have other made up stuff, or you can go and build your own corp (the similair thing to leaving the country or going homeless). But you'll still have to accept lots of made up stuff if you interact with others who do accept it: you can't say your a space elf, you can't say I'm above Graelyn, you can't say the Empress is a man, etc. Social conventions, even if they are made up, become social facts (not sure how to translate Durkheim's term), and thus become a coercion over those that want to interact in that system.

"But you'll still have to accept lots of made up stuff if you interact with others who do accept it: you can't say your a space elf, you can't say I'm above Graelyn, you can't say the Empress is a man, etc." And this was my point.... I only have to except this if I play with you or lets say in the larger RP-community. Lets make a stupid example: Lets say Im the average Goons troll, which is more or less in EVE, because his WOT friends are also in EVE. For me is the position of Graelyn not important. It may be for you and others a releasable thing, it has value etc.... to have this structure. In this "world"/"structure" is it important where Graelyn is... or for the larger RP-Commuinty: If Jamyl is a man or a woman. I get this. As said, in the earlier post, this is all nice. And you have the freedom in the sandbox to do so; but I also can just ignore PIE or RP as whole (I heared of cases that some players doesnt even know where Jamyl or PIE is; and they play just fine. Your structure as no influence on those people. And this was main point earlier). He, Heidrich, would have to except it; or not join at all.  http://backstage.eve-inspiracy.com/index.php?topic=4634.msg73430#msg73430

Thats is the reason for my half ass list:
"- Do you have a problem with the idea......" Etc....

See the list as small Q & A.... Which you could frame on Heidrich. If some of the answers are NO, dont let him join. AND FOR YOU HEIDRICH, if some of the answer are for you a no go: Dont join.

As you rightfully mention: "Sure, that is right, but not because one things are more "made up" than the others. The difference lies in power: your boss has power over you, or a law, and you can't just say you don't believe in it because it's made up and ignore it." If he joins, he has to understand that he has joined more a "realworld-ish structure"; in this he couldnt ingore Jamyl is a woman or who his boss his.... etc.... It could be another point on the list. Like: Can you imagine to work in a "realworld-ish structure", where you should/have to play that G., your boss, has power over you. It would be great point. I think most people wouldnt say the stuff to their realworld Boss/CEO what they say to their EVE CEOs or FCs.

[Ghost Hunter]

[mod=You've activated my trap card]Thread destroyed : Purpose completed / derailed, unrecoverable.[/mod]

The purpose of this thread was completed within the first 3 posts. The remainder is leading off the rails into nonconstructive argument territory - primarily he said they said style back and forth.

If you believe there is merit to arguing PIE's decision for your corporation joining on a public forum, please speak with me in Moderation Discussion on the topic.