EVE General Discussion

Sorry, some days it still sucks. It only gets better if we're willing to hang in there thru the BS, ask any minority. And sometimes it takes a long time, and there's some casualties along the way. I've been at this for nearly 40 years, since that first baseball tryout, and it HAS gotten better. Segregation is never the answer. It didn't work before, and it won't work now.

I like to remind folks that are total asshats in chat channels that my chat is logged by default ;) I once was accused of blackmail lol, I pointed out that if r4pe was acceptable, then blackmail should be no problem

Don't tell me you believe the 1 in 4 myth. You should do some research before talking nonsense.

http://www.city-journal.org/2008/18_1_campus_rape.html
http://communityvoices.post-gazette.com/opinion/the-radical-middle/27667--one-in-one-thousand-eight-hundred-seventy-seven
http://www.iwf.org/news/2432517/One-in-Four-****-myths-do-injustice-too

In my country 20% of reported cases are false. That is not a small number.

That said I think this topic should be closed because it is obvious people here won't accept facts.

The time stamps on the conversation in question show that they, not even a minute later started to say "just kiddin mate" or something to that effect. At which point the time comes to say "alright, but I didn't think that was funny". Then the dialogue starts.

That's the point. Have the discussion.

As to specifics of how long, etc, etc. I don't know. That's more or less up to each individual as to how much they choose to tolerate. I can take a great deal, I honestly don't care what people on the internet say. But then, I can only speak for myself in that regard.

So, CCP can magick up the authority to police a third party voice chat service?

Furthermore, it's this kind of censorship nonsense that gets people so up in arms in the first place.

And even better, clogging the ticket service with hurt feelings is a good way to make sure legitimate issues, like bugs, exploits, and hacks, get lost in the mix. This is the issue that WoW has, in fact. They are so bloated with player created (and player solvable) issues that they couldn't find a game breaking bug if it bit them in the face until someone puts up a YouTube video about how it's been in the game for 8 months.

Have you ever spent any amount of time in chat channels that have 300+ people. There is enough sexist conversation going on to spark a feminist crusade against EVE-O. There is also means for CCP to read through tickets based on category. Don't use "it will bloat an organized complaint system" as an excuse for player harassment going unchecked. All the women I know in EVE have filed complaints with no action taken on multiple accounts. And most of them end up leaving the game. Why? Because once some one finds out they are a woman it is a never ending waterfall of every neckbeard within 30 jumps running over to have their chance to throw a stone.

So yes it is CCP's fault for not policing the game. And yes they need to do a better job. There is this thing called quality of service. Would you take your Girlfriend, wife, or partner, to an eatery where the staff makes fun of them in a sexual manner. Even worse forcing conversations about their sexual fantasies they want to fulfill with said person?

If you think feelings don't matter just because it is the internet. Than consider how things play out from my point of view. I take what I hear/see with a grain of salt, but I certainly don't stick around to see it turn into a salt mine. Do you join a fleet or corp so everyone can make 3rd grade jokes about you and talk about how they are going to perform or how you need to have sexual acts performed on you?

Yes, I have. I frequent 4Chan, have for years(which, btw, is far worse than anything in this game). I don't see how that is relevant however, whether I have or haven't.



What means would that be? And yes, it will bloat the system, this is historically and observably true. Blizzard is one of the largest gaming companies on Earth, and they have trouble, that alone is sufficient to extrapolate the result. Because you better believe "ganking should be an exploit!", or "XYZ called me a ****!" tickets would pile up like letters to Santa.



Because you, or anyone of us for that matter, have a concrete way of finding out what happens to someone? It's not like the GM appears in game to give you a virtual hug and tell you precisely how long someone was banned, or what kind of reprimand or warning they recieved.

Also, seriously? That is some hyperbole right there. I've personally never heard of a "Female hunter" chat channel, but I am pretty sure there aren't broadcasts the first time someone owns up to being female in chat.

Stop giving a damn. Set your CSPA charge to be as high as possible, it will stop pretty quick, even if it was true. That's literally what it's for.



CCP has the authority to enforce their rules on EVE's built in chat channels. Voice comms are third party services they have no control, authority, or culpability over. "They need to do a better job" applies soley to your TeamSpeak admin.

Also, examples of IRL behavior do not apply to the internet. No one is "forcing" a conversation to anyone in EVE Online. Last I recall, there was a "do you wish to accept?" chat prompt before opening a private chat. Pretty sure that is still there. Stop with the histrionics, it weakens your case.



Feelings don't matter. In EVE, on the internet, and in real life too. Stop feeling about everything, and take a page from Dora's book. "Let's stop and think!". Immediate reactions tend to be overblown, it's basic psychology.

Someone is more rude on the internet than they could be permitted to be in real life?! Good Lord! Call Scotland Yard! We must apprehend the brigands at once!

Er, no. The part about reality vs ideology? Applies pretty heavily here. It's the internet. The personal rules of discourse do not apply here, regardless of how much you want them to. Act in accordance with reality, not how you want reality to be.



Yes, and then ragequit. Thus accomplishing nothing. Had she stuck around, she'd have had a chance to improve things rather than sit and sulk about it. At what point is actually getting up and doing something such a problem?



Yes, because that part was nonsense. The entire exchange happened over the course of about 90 seconds. Idk about you, but at that point I'd be checking to see if I had enough ammo left, enough paste and what to apply it to, etc, rather than white knighting for another adult human being who should be perfectly capable of defending herself and making her position clear. I tend to err on the side of self sufficiency. [Edit: Also, assuming that a woman needs a man to stand up for her because she can't defend herself, is pretty sexist of you. That's equality for you.



Gleefully ignoring the parts (several of them), in which I maintain that someone should actually get up and say something, and engage in a dialogue. Did you even read what I said?



No, the crux of the problem remains that people insist on putting ideology above reality. People think they can just wave their hands and win by fiat, without making their case. You can't.

Who said I don't stand up for my corp mates? Chloroform jokes are hardly the targeted harrassment you make it out to be. Nothing was said toward or directed at her. If she has an objection to it, let her do so. Assuming that I can be offended on her behalf is patronizing her to the extreme.

Why are you crusading so hard over theoretical offense taken by theoretical people?

I "bitched her out"? Hardly. I gave my opinion, and I was pretty soft about it at that. If simple disagreement constitutes bitching someone out, then you've created a situation where I simply cannot win regardless of what I do. I reject that concept wholeheartedly.

I also doubt we are going to come to any sort of agreement. You are far too entrenched in an ideology contrary to reality and facts. Ideology like the "1 in 4" statement, which is almost slanderously false.

I love how that's from the utterly reliable and definitely doesn't have an agenda publication, the Huffington Post. Yeah, they're to be trusted, especially when the article literally sites one source, and not for any of the stats they put out. /sarcasm

Here's a real one, by an actual criminology publication.

http://www.theforensicexaminer.com/archive/spring09/15/



Granted, this is the United States in my article, but at least it's a bit more reliable than an op-ed piece in a far left wing E-magazine column. Note the sources cited in mine, just like a real study and such.

Way to disprove the "Everything is fine for me so stop complaining" assertion

But then, you don't even stand up your own corp members when they're in trouble, so I suppose there's no point expecting you to defend other people simply because they're people.