Funny, when I played as a pirate I was frequently attacked flying trade ships by VPR and other anti pirate group within VO. I never objected or complained that it was unfair because I was in a moth because I was still a pirate in the game and oddly enough still able to use even a behemoth to do the deed. If I'd bitched and moaned and carried on about it I would have been told to stfu and deal with it. So Imp, once again Suck it up and take it like a man. The only difference in the attitude now is that it has become an opportunity for Impavid to once again scream out as a victim. Any other time we'd laugh about it and move on.

Oh and ....

Here he comes to save the day!
Ryan Reign Ryan Reign!
The Fluffy never hangs around
When he hears Ryans sound,
"Here I come to save the day!"
That means Ryan Reign is on his way!
Yes sir, when there is a wrong to right!
Ryan Reign will join the fight!

Wait, so your excuse is that all the other VPR's do it too?

My contention is that it has been an accepted part of gameplay for a long time, and now having set up the situation knowing that VPR would most likely continue to pursue him as a pirate, Impavid is using this to once again play his Victim card. Frankly I'm not buying it.

Wait, so Impavid purposefully lost the duel, forcing him to be a trader for a week, so that he could victimize the VPR's by being hunted by them, because he posed no threat?

Am I getting this correctly?

EDIT: I mean, if you want to be a pirate, be a pirate Fluffy. But seeing as Impavid posed no threat to the community and was engaged in lawful trade (as I'm sure the VPR's would like all pirates to do), I can't see that hunting him is in line with the VPR code of ethics.

I can't say if Impavid lost intentionally. I rather doubt that he would. What I am saying is that VPR's tradition of attacking any pirate regardless of what said pirate was doing at the time with the general exception of consenting pvp has been going on for years. He knew if he lost that the he would still be attacked. That is what I am saying.

So, no, your a bit off on what I'm trying to express.

And I was a pirate as Retractile. My god. I made my alts public months ago. As a pirate I was attacked as such whether I was in a combat ship or trade ship. Whether I was actively pirating or running procs to restore my standings. And rightly so in my opinion. In fact, I considered it great fun to have the tables turned now and again.

Edit: Essentially, Impavid and I are exactly alike. We both created a situation where regardless of the outcome, we win. Him vs VPR, myself vs CHRN.

This is all pretty silly. In the past, any pirate has been a target of anyone professing anti-pirate beliefs at any time. No matter what kind of ship they were in, no matter what they were doing (within certain codified boundaries involving in-game events and B8, etc). The anti-pirate role does not limit one to only defending people from active piracy, that would be very silly, because once an attack has begun on a trade ship, depending on the ship, it is quickly concluded, and very hard to defend against. Instead, the anti-pirate role attacks pirates. In combat ships, in trade ships, in any ships. I've seen pirates successfully use what others would call "trade ships" to pirate people, so simply being in a trade ship doesn't stop them from being a pirate.

It's also always been the case in the past (for as long as I've been playing) that targeting a pirate when he was actually trading was fair game. In fact, the pirates generally seemed to consider themselves MORE than fair game in these situations, having been caught out doing something against their professed credo (I'm not talking hauling loot, I'm talking actual trading). Kill a pirate trading, and you might find yourself targeted for awhile, but nobody but the silliest sods argued it was out of line.

So now we have Imp trading for a week, and everyone should be expected to let him go on his lally-dally way? Every credit that he makes trading is going to be put towards greater piracy! (I know this is not such a big deal with Imp because he already has considerable resources, but I'm talking about precedent here) So now whenever an anti-pirate sees a pirate trying to make a quick buck or two in a moth he should let them pass by? Pffft.

Seriously. This is a CNN post about the Vipers. All of you should know better. I expect it from Imp, but when the rest of you start lambasting VPR for doing their duty just because Imp cries wolf, that's just silly. I'm usually the first to give the benefit of the doubt to the pirate side, and this is just silly. Let Imp make his sensationalist headlines and try to get some sense back.

Ok... there have been a lot of valid points here, on both sides. Philosophical and professional differences will likely prevent a clear answer that any one is satisfied with. How ever, Im sure we can all at least agree on one thing...

Its about damn time my daring exploits were praised in verse!

diqrtype:

Oh, I don't think Impavid MINDS being hunted at all. He, as much as anyone, appreciates the chase.

He and the rest of us aren't ACTUALLY whining about VPR attacking traders.

VPR is welcome to do whatever it wants.

However, it IS funny to illuminate their actions in terms of what their stated goals are. I think most of us are just poking fun :) I know I am

I know you're just poking fun, Shape. I wasn't referring to you when I said people should know better, hell, you're SUPPOSED to be on his side! :P I was referring to the statements suggesting that people entirely unaffiliated with CHRN were starting to believe the slander and calumnies that routinely spout forth from this spigot. It was the ease with which Imp's revisionist history went down to which I was objecting.

Hell, my first post in this thread was poking fun on an extreme level, I just wasn't expecting anyone to take any of it seriously...