EVE General Discussion

The mass assault of jita until they run out of funds forget to pay their alliance dues and then cascade from their, or until someone tries to relaunch their attack into that territory. Honestly I hope they do attack jita, divide up the hubs, it's a pit of decay anyhow it's practically a favor.

i can only think that sony has having second thoughts about dust with ccp.

I'm a goddam psychic.

For 500m I will tell you your future as well.

Mr Epeen

i agree, but that is CCP's stand ...

as much i agree for a life BAN on all accounts ...

just like how patches are buggged everytime .... CCP doesnt seem to be getting a hold of things very well ...

too bad i like space ships ...

Your lack of tact notwithstanding, I will begin by stating we probably agree more than you realize. If Eve players wish to use these forums and other media to request Alex to resign, I have no problem with that. It's fine by me if he chooses to resign. He should not be forced by CCP to resign, in my assessment, and I am looking at all the relevant facts rather than simply the one offending line in making that assessment. I didn't vote for Alex this time, and I won't vote for him next time. It's okay with me if he quits -- but allowing a select group to force him out by noise in the system is unacceptable to me given all the other factors I mention above (not a CCP employee, elected when his game persona is known, violated no known requirements to stay, etc.).

Now, let's explore a few differences, where I choose to consider all the events and not just a single, unplanned remark.

First, I am not blaming any victim. This is a typical tactic where you realize I am not blaming a victim, but you cannot resist adding that comment anyway in the form of, "this almost makes out the victim is to blame." You do not refute any argument I make with such a lame, flawed association.

Second, the reality is no one believes Alex's offensive comment was intended to encourage other Eve players to pursue a path that could lead to a player harming himself. It was a very poor attempt at humor, jabbing at a crybaby miner trying to lay a guilt trip on someone else. We all know "The Wis" (hint -- not his real name) has 21 other accounts, so there is no practical way having us be encouraged to attack that toon even limits that player's game options all that much. There's certainly no way any reasonable person would consider this a potential catalyst for suicide. The Mittani knows this; The Wis knows this; you know this. Because The Mittani, the in-game character, is a notorious shyster, some people are eager to believe his real-life personality wishes the same type of harm on people. I don't know the man named Alex, but I simply do not accept that he is that way based on this single incident.

These assertions about Alex buying a "cyber-bully" rely on a lot of facts not established or that are simply overstated. For example, if Alex had stated something like, "The guy's real life name is Joe Schmoe from Kokomo, and he is an infantile baby who wets the bed. I want all of you to call and harass him in real life about [whatever]." That is encouraging others to be bullies. Now, check out this generic definition of bullying and put it in the context of this situation:

http://definitions.uslegal.com/b/bullying/

Note these particular criteria used for a school (below). What The Mattani said was mean and stupid, to be sure, but it doesn't meet these criteria at all. Unlike my fake example above, The Mattani was not asking any of us to physically harm someone or even encourage him to harm himself. It just didn't happen that way. For these reasons, we should not kick out someone who was elected because some people don't like him now (or my guess is the harshest critics didn't like him before). We should honor the process and rules by which he was elected. That's my position.

No. 38 20, April 2011

Media Law

Section I, Aims and Definitions

Article 1, Aims

The aim of this Act is to promote freedom of expression, freedom of information, media literacy, diversity and pluralism in media and to enhance consumer protection in this area. The Act also aims at establishing a coordinated regulatory framework for media services irrespective of the type of media employed.


Article 2, Definitions

13. Medium: any medium which regularly provides the public with content which is subject to editorial control. Media include, amongst other things, newspapers and periodicals, together with their supplements, internet media, audiovisual media and other comparable media.

40. Receiver: any device that receives and relays media content, e.g. a television, radio, computer, palm-top computer or mobile telephone.

42. Broadcast signal: a transmission wave, carried over a wire or by radio, which conveys audiovisual content to receivers and/or decoders, either in digital or analogue form.


Section II, Scope and Jurisdiction

Article 3, Scope

This Act covers all media which make content available to the public in Iceland, taking the provisions of Article 4 into account. It therefore applies to all audio and audiovisual content, whether in paid access or open access, linear or on demand, and all text-based content, whether this is presented in printed, or other comparable form, or electronically.

Article 4, Jurisdiction over audiovisual media service providers.

Iceland shall have jurisdiction over media service providers that transmit audiovisual content and are established in Iceland. Such entities shall be regarded as being established in Iceland in the following instances.

a. When they have their headquarters in Iceland and decisions on programming and other matters covered by editorial responsibility are taken in Iceland.

b. When they have their headquarters in Iceland and decisions on programming and other matters covered by editorial responsibility are taken in another state, or vice versa, providing that a substantial part of the workforce involved in the pursuit of audiovisual media service activity is employed in Iceland.

Section IX, Liability, sanctions, enforcement, etc.

Article 50, Liability for audiovisual content

If audio or audiovisual content contravenes the law, criminal and compensatory liability shall apply as follows.

a. An individual who makes a statement in his own name, presents or conveys content that he has composed himself and/or conveys content composed by another party in accordance with his decision, shall be liable for it if he is domiciled in Iceland or is subject to Icelandic jurisdiction on other grounds.

c. In other cases, the content manager in question and/or the person liable for the media service provider shall be liable for the content made available.

Media service providers shall be liable for the payment of fines and compensation payments that their employees may be ordered to pay under this Article.

Media service providers shall be obliged to provide any persons who consider they are the victims of a violation as a result of the transmission of audiovisual content with information indicating who is liable for the content.

Article 54, Executive fines

*The Media Commission shall impose executive fines on legal persons in the event of violations of the following provisions:

f. Article 27, on criminal conduct.

(g. The first, second and third paragraphs of Article 28, on the protection of minors against harmful content.)

Fines under the first...paragraph of this Article may amount to up to ISK 10 million.*

Article 56, Sanctions

The person liable for a media service provider, its employees or its directors, who commit, or cause others to commit, violations of the following provisions of this Act, shall be fined or imprisoned for up to six months if there is a high degree of culpability.

g. Article 27, on criminal conduct.

h. The first, second and third paragraphs of Article 28, on the protection of minors against harmful content.

Article 57, Lodging of complaints with the police

Violations of this Act shall only be investigated by the police following the lodging of a complaint by the Media Commission or, as appropriate, the Post and Telecom Administration.

If a violation of this Act involves criminal liability for both a natural and a legal person, the Media Commission or, as appropriate, the Post and Telecom Administration, shall decide whether, in view of the seriousness of the violation and law-enforcement considerations, the case is to be made the subject of a complaint to the police in part or in its entirety. If violations are serious, the Commission in question shall be obliged to refer them to the police. Consistency shall be observed in the handling of comparable cases.

Article 65, Amendments to Other Legislation

4. The Act on the Monitoring of Access by Minors to Films and Computer Games, No. 62/2006.

a. The second sentence of Article 4 of the Act shall read as follows: Assessment of the suitability for showing of television programme content other than that covered by item 2 of Article 1 shall be subject to the Media Act.

Done at Bessastaðir, 20 April 2011
Ólafur Ragnar Grímsson (L. S.)

Seems fair TBH. I love the sandbox, and it just shows that the whole concept works. Anyone can for the most part do or say anything, and anyone can do something about it. We govern ourselves through what we are willing to accept and thats about it.

I think its cool that this is the actual mechanics of the game we play. People can rise to the top creating drama, and can also take themselves out by doing so. No other game offers this kind of freedom of interaction.

I'm sure Mittens will be back and adding to the game in his own unique way for a long while to come.

Lol, it really hit 151 pages within 3 days? greatest success in eve i think. myself after 3 years just left eve 'cos of "nobackbone" and "bigface" guys like this mit-something who cares. I've tried their ways, scammed billions but i haven't felt it fun to do so and simply got bored with it. definitely who can do it and still enjoy, have a defect. i just cant enjoy the honest side as it is ruined by their numbers and cant enjoy the other side as for that i need surgery to take off my backbone

anyway when some cant feel at least sorry about ppl just even have a bad day (not to thinking about to be suicide) have to be handled with the same attitude

Just to make it clear if u cause an other being suicide is not ur liability but to say (and feel) "who cares", it makes a difference. That is what makes our world as it is and makes eve a totally destructive and absolutely not creative thing, thats why mit-**** and his kind is good in it as they can live there as in their real life. without creative mind focus on numbers and power and saying how great they are, cos they were able to collect a 1000 of idiot geek (10 alts/geek i think realistic) and they try to destroy the game of others cos they got bored with the honest way /there is plenty of chance for pvp/. saying noob on all who dont go to be their target in 0.0, scamming ppl to go there as recruits, cos goon havent got the balls to fight a real enemy... (if they try they seem to fail

really guys, you, who are complaining about this Mit guy, forget this game, you will never win, leave, buy a jaguar, get a pretty girl and enjoy your life...

Thats a funny way of saying stripped of his position by CCP.