The misunderstood aspects of Highsec PVP

I've been reading a lot on CSM candidates platforms on highsec war decs lately and have noticed a common theme, in fact its what has inspired me to finally start my blog.  The things I've been noticing basically fall within the two following categories:

They have no idea what highsec war decs are about and think the core issues are neutral RR and station games.

AND

They don't really understand how the CSM works, at all.

Neutral RR and Station Games

Regarding neutral RR, in reality, the only place that this can be frustrating is on station games against groups like Nova Ardour (one of the few groups that plays station games right), while everyone else is usually just can flippers that should feel bad about themselves anyways.  Even then, neutral RR at the top or on the back of a station is insanely easy to counter.  In fact, most of the time you can neutralize a single logistics ship with a single module, ie: the sensor damp.  Why more people don't do this is beyond me other than it probably takes less effort to go write an angry post on the forum than it does to become better at the game.  But what about neutral logi on a gate?  Just shoot it and force it through, not hard.  

Have problems with station campers?  Introduce them to a sniper gang.  Moar Tears decimated the 0rphanage on the Jita-4-4 undock with sniper HACs.  The sad thing is, I know of only a handful of organizations who have thought to do this.  In fact sniper gangs are such a hard counter to station campers, you could liken them to being rock against scissors.  If you're going to complain about scissors being overpowered and a shitty game mechanic, then try to play something other than paper when you're up against scissors.  I hate to use nullsec comparisons to justify a point, but if you can't figure out that you shouldn't try to warp off when there are flashies on a station then whats the difference if you lose your ship in highsec versus nullsec when you try to do the same thing?  At any rate, station games have actually received a hard nerf already in the form of the reduced 10 second session change timer.  Unless you get alpha'd, you try to undock and by the time you get warp scrammed you should be able to redock since your session timer is up.  Though, the fact still remains, unless you're also willing to nerf neutral bumps, and nerf kickout stations, and change docking radiuses, there will always be someone sitting on an undock playing a station game.

Remember, you didn't lose because of the fact the logi was neutral, you lost because there was logi period.  Even if the logi was in corp, there really wouldn't be much of a difference in the outcome.  Sure you might not have engaged our gang if you had seen how much logi we had, but the truth is thats the only way we can force fights in highsec and disguise our fleet composition.  In nullsec AND lowsec, "good fights" are ruined by titan bridges and triage hotdrops, ironically, neutral logi is the least maddening of the three and the easiest to spot.  Its a lot easier to spot a Guardian sitting on a gate than it is to spot a blob sitting on a titan a whole region away.  Thats why out of all the options to nerf neutral logi, I think Widders was the most elegant, just give them a 60 second aggression timer like combat ships.  Problem solved.  People wanting neutral logi to be flagged for entire wars, really don't just get it since we would just use non-flagged alts instead of flagged ones to scout.  In fact, you can "flag" alts already using the watch list.  People seem to assume that if they change game mechanics they'll be able to beat us because we'll keep flying the same way we did pre-change.  When in reality, this couldn't be further from the truth.

The truth is, people don't want to adapt their tactics.  Nullsec people want to bring nullsec tactics to highsec and then lose when half their gang goes GCC because they shot at a logi before it repped anyone.  (Yes, this happens all the freaking time when people come to fight us)  Case in point, people complained for so long that 0rphanage was just a bunch of station campers that weren't worth fighting because of neutral logi, yet we absolutely decimated them despite them using "cheesy highsec tactics". In highsec, you have locator agents everywhere, you know exactly what tactics they'll use, you don't have to worry about hotdrops or titan bridges.  Its a very fightable battle, people are too used to nullsec blob tactics where they don't have to think or use their brain to go after targets.

The CSM

Onto the second rant, the more I read CSM proposals, primarily Kelduum, the most i'm convinced  people don't really understand what the CSM is about.  Candidates as well as voters, still seem to be under the impression that a CSM chair gives you the equivalent power of a lead developer at CCP, when in reality you're more there to provide feedback on the changes they propose.  Its sad, but not surprising, that many people still seem to think that a candidate can actually deliver on their elaborate and development heavy proposals.  I'm serious, the more I read some candidates platforms, the more I feel like they think they're running for Hilmar's position.

tl dr; Its easier to whine on the forums about how things are too hard, than to get better and fight back.