I'd argue it's very constructive.Yet another whataboutism, nothing constructive to get out of there.
I suggest discussing the topic of the thread, instead of trying to derail into who is (not) responsible for 5C. People already know that, despite what's being posted here.
A short statement from FDev about their intentions of touching powerplay ever again could make these tedious struggles to keep the discussion on topic end quickly and easily.
It's important to see who is making the complaints and when. My point, which you dismissed very intriguingly as whataboutism, is that the Feds have been accused of far worse. See. Whataboutism, historically has been largely about false equivalences. I'm not trying to make false equivalences. No. I am pointing out that what your side was accused of was actually degrees worse.
It would be easy for a casual observer, who only PP's to cause general chaos, rather than haul and expand (yep, me). To see thus:
Feds, when attacked, complain about foul play by the Imps. In this case. 5C.
Imps, when expansions against them go through, complain of Fed Botting.
The Alliance: My side, as far as I support power play, has observed less than fair play due to what can be described as exploiting a bug by again, the Feds.
No-one here really believes that FDEV will change PP. At least I don't think so, correct me if I am wrong?
In discussing one method of play which is deemed by the community as unfair, should it not also be worth discussing others?
Is it not unsporting to take benefit of bugs, or of known foul play (in botters who are absolutely not affiliated with anyone here)?