These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Request for clarification on harassment policy

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
elenasa
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#121 - 2012-03-29 13:05:03 UTC  |  Edited by: elenasa
Townsend Harris wrote:

See and this is a problem, wheres the line now? Do I have to back off if a victim of a suicide gank says "I'll IRL kill myself if you blow up my ship!!"



I agree...and what if a person states it in a language you don't understand?


But in all seriousness, this very serious issue is made more complex than it appears due to the very nature of language itself, as we see indicated in this thread: how do we interprete the meaning of what is iterated, and guarantee that it is an entirely accurate one?

Most linguists, philosophers of language, psychologists who study language, will claim that language and meaning is very slippery. It's like a wet bar of soap: as soon as you think you've grasped it, it slips away from you. Many will argue that context determines meaning, but Derrida states that there are no dictionaries for context, so how do we ever interprete the full meaning of a statement if we have no full grasp on that which governs the generation of meaning. So, where does that leave us? Are we left struggling to get an anchor in an infinitely solipsitic quagmire of ambiguities and semantic loopholes where people can freely play around with interpretations and logical contradictions? Of course not, yet I'm pretty sure that whatever gets stated by a GM or a lawyer or a Dev, will never be encapsulated in a statement that is entierly free of potential ambiguity and falibility due to the very nature of language itself. We just need to hope/expect that those who have the power to judge and prosecute do so to their best ability, and that those who play the game have developed an awareness of any potential ramifications their actons may have.
elenasa
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#122 - 2012-03-29 13:05:16 UTC  |  Edited by: elenasa
double post :(
Townsend Harris
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#123 - 2012-03-29 13:07:56 UTC
Alexandra Alt wrote:
The amount of people still subverting things and manipulating text and/or statements to their point of view is astonishing.

.

This would be relevant if the thread was about the Mittani. Since its NOT about him but is in fact about a policy your post is not relevant.
Tei Lin
Bit Ninjas
#124 - 2012-03-29 13:09:04 UTC
Alexandra Alt wrote:
Tei Lin wrote:
flapie 2 wrote:
7 pages later, all i read was bla bla bla.

This whole post could have been avoided using common sence, i know its rare these days but really people should learn to use it, it makes things so much easyer.


Hi. Get back to me next time people are clamoring for you to get banned because you did something deemed ~evil~.

Also, telling people to use common "sence" normally goes over better when you use an iota of care in presenting your statements. Such as not misspelling the word "sense" in "common sense".


Also normally goes over better counter when you do a counter argumentation over the subject at and, and not attacking the person over a completely unrelated subject trying to divert attention to the main point which is your lack of common sense clearly shown on your OP.


Yes Yes. I lack common sense. Thank you both for pointing this out.

However, there is no argument when you tell someone they lack common sense. Common sense depends on context, experience, and knowledge of the situation. I asked for clarification in the most pointed way I knew how yet am chastised for it by people who seem to think I'm trying to make amends for mittens. I attempted to blow the guy up for money, and was told by a few people I might get banned because The Wiz was "protected" under special pretenses. My only motive was clarifying those statements.

So tell me, how is asking for clarification of the rules affect you in any way such that you must berate me by saying I lack common sense?
Elsebeth Rhiannon
Gradient
Electus Matari
#125 - 2012-03-29 13:14:23 UTC
Tei Lin wrote:
Townsend Harris wrote:
Shar Tegral
You may think that you are clever and can talk yourself/your point into pretzels but the truth is [b wrote:
you are powerless in this situation.[/b] All the talking in the world won't change the fact that if you step over the "perceived" line, you'll be banned. Once you are banned you are no longer a player or a problem. You are just some jerk pleading to be let back in.


See and this is a problem, wheres the line now? Do I have to back off if a victim of a suicide gank says "I'll IRL kill myself if you blow up my ship!!"
CanI a whole titian blob be stopped because some one on the other side declares "I'll kill myself if you take my sov!".

The recent kerfluffle was about words but it was words encouraging in game action, that had a implied out of game consequence. Same with the two above situations. Seeing as how people invest time, effort and money into playing the game, knowing what will and will not get you banned is pretty important ESPECIALLY since players are powerless with regards to the GM/Player relationship.

I will also say that despite some confusing answers I really do appreciate GM Homonoia's continued answers here.


I know you were being facetious but just to clarify, I think the correct course of action would be to report the suicidal statement to CCP (in case it's real) and continue playing the game as normal. A statement of RL bodily harm to yourself is as concerning to CCP as harassment to others.

Yes, this. Report the statement (via petition), keep on playing normally (blow the ship up), and do not mention the suicide threat to anyone else. The Mittani was not banned for blowing up a miner, he was banned for what he said about it.
Alexandra Alt
Doomheim
#126 - 2012-03-29 13:16:54 UTC
Tei Lin wrote:
Alexandra Alt wrote:
Tei Lin wrote:
flapie 2 wrote:
7 pages later, all i read was bla bla bla.

This whole post could have been avoided using common sence, i know its rare these days but really people should learn to use it, it makes things so much easyer.


Hi. Get back to me next time people are clamoring for you to get banned because you did something deemed ~evil~.

Also, telling people to use common "sence" normally goes over better when you use an iota of care in presenting your statements. Such as not misspelling the word "sense" in "common sense".


Also normally goes over better counter when you do a counter argumentation over the subject at and, and not attacking the person over a completely unrelated subject trying to divert attention to the main point which is your lack of common sense clearly shown on your OP.


Yes Yes. I lack common sense. Thank you both for pointing this out.

However, there is no argument when you tell someone they lack common sense. Common sense depends on context, experience, and knowledge of the situation. I asked for clarification in the most pointed way I knew how yet am chastised for it by people who seem to think I'm trying to make amends for mittens. I attempted to blow the guy up for money, and was told by a few people I might get banned because The Wiz was "protected" under special pretenses. My only motive was clarifying those statements.

So tell me, how is asking for clarification of the rules affect you in any way such that you must berate me by saying I lack common sense?


Honestly you should probably be aware that your background will have implication as to how people judge your post (and/or second intentions) therefore if you want to try and be 'honest' (holy hell, a goon honest) you should probably have a better disclaimer, and careful your own friends don't derail the thread to something you don't intent to.

Then, I'm pretty sure if you had any dip of common sense you would understand your situation is not a bannable offense, thus my comment regarding your common sense. About the other post regarding the manipulative intentions are not directly related to you, but you could get something out of it too for future reference.
Killer Gandry
The Concilium Enterprises
#127 - 2012-03-29 13:24:01 UTC
Khanh'rhh wrote:
GM Homonoia wrote:
or when you incite others to do so


It's a real good job you refuse to comment, because you absolutely cannot prove that, or logically demonstrate it in any way.

Mittens never asked or told anyone to do that. He never incited it in any way.

The definition of "to incite" is to "encourage, urge or persuade [an action]"

His words were "if you want to" - which is no different to me saying "if you wanted to kill the president, I would shoot him in the head. That's H-E-A-D"

That says nothing about whether I actually want it to happen or not, and does not in any way encourage, urge or persuade someone to do so.

Usually when you refuse to discuss / comment it is largely accepted because we, as players, cannot see all the pertinent evidence. We accept your decision and must do so.

Here, we are clearly able to see the evidence (because you, as a company, chose to broadcast that material onto the internet) and the time does not fit the crime.

I still want to know: are the GMs investigating other behaviour that violated the TOS at fanfest, or do I need to first create 1162 NPC alts and create a media circus for your "rules" to apply?


(incidentally, The Wiz is, on the back of this, receiving constant ingame harassment. No, not just from goons. How do you feel that applying rules to "protect players" is actually harming them?)


Yes ofcourse. Being The Mittani and knowing how Goonswarm and wannabe GSF people play this will have absolutely no effect of him actually being hunted down over and over.

Just look at how he already has people after him, even though The Mittani called upon the Goons to remain calm and start thinking instead of purely lashing out.

Nah, when a leader "suggests" to single out a target then nobody will respond.

If you believe that then I also know how to triple your ISK, just send me 1 trillion and I will triple it.
Doddy
Excidium.
#128 - 2012-03-29 13:27:00 UTC
Townsend Harris wrote:
Tei Lin wrote:


I'm PRETTY sure your reaching here. Fanfest attendees, especially panelists, would need to present some form of ID along the way.

I'm pretty sure I am too actually, but its this line of in/out of game but it was a CCP sponsored event using CCP systems and they can confirm that the man is the character thats making the line fuzzy.
Even then though other than providing CC information (which you don't HAVE to provide if your account uses PLEX I think) most people who play aren't required to turn over personal information to CCP.
Also keep in mind that it was the Mittanni (the in game character) who was punished by the ban, not the real life person who logs in as the Mittani.
Unless CCP is passing out secret pass phrases (the Narwhal Bacons at Midnight??) to panel attendees then there's no way to know if the actual dude speaking is the toon in the game.
Just like there would be no way to know if the person in a youtube video is in fact the toon they claim to be.


There is no way to be sure for definate, but how would one go about making a presentation on an alliance panel when not being the person they say they are, Surely their alliance would notice? I do not know how the ticketing was done for fanfest but i was under the impression it was done through the eve database? If ccp are really letting anyone turn up to fanfest and anyone do an alliance presentation with no id confirmation then yeah the other members of the panel could get away with it. CSM members definately cant though as they do have to confirm their identity.
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#129 - 2012-03-29 13:35:10 UTC
Kara Roideater wrote:
If you really want to engage in pathetic attempts at re-reading a crystal clear text


It's not clear. It's not clear at ALL how a flippant remark is being treated as black and white incitement.

Quote:
he 'actively and deliberately sought to facilitate'


He actively and deliberately left the name OUT of his presentation. He flippantly added it as an addendum some 10minutes later when a member of the audience re-raised the subject.

Besides, facilitation, whether deliberate or otherwise, is not against the EULA/TOS. Sorry.

Quote:
If an Aryan Nations type fool stood up in front of a large rally and said: "if you wanted to kill the president, I would shoot him in the head.' and then proceeded to add information about the President's movements in the next few days as well as the best type of ammunition for penetrating the armour on his vehicle I'm pretty sure that no reasonable person would think that the 'If you want' phrase at the start of the sentence would clear him of incitement.


POTUS is a special case ... I shouldn't have used it. However, releasing that information *is legal* (I can point you to many documentaries on presidential motorcades, for instance) if you broke no law to obtain it. See also: Wikileaks. You have stated this with flagrant disregard for your real world example. For instance, there are many 'clerics' and other anti-American dissenters who largely avoid any legal action taken against them because free speech laws allow it unless they are directly inciting; which they are cleared of because they mention no specific action to take.

Besides this, you're arguing minutiae of laws you do not understand, and do not apply; we are talking specifically about the legal contract "Eve Online's EULA" which mentions incitement as a cause for infringement. Since he did not perform any action under any definition of "incite" it simply cannot be applied.

Quote:
stop and listen to yourself. Really. Hang your head and slink away


I'm perfectly happy to make my comments here, thanks. Keep calling people out, though, brave anonymous alt #56721423474

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Elsebeth Rhiannon
Gradient
Electus Matari
#130 - 2012-03-29 13:44:57 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
So does this mean you guys will actually start doing something about the people who give out death threats after being scammed?

CCP never does anything about stuff like that unless you report it. They do not actually (surprise!) read through all local chats etc to find out if anyone said anything unnecessary. But if you petition guys who make (RL) death threats, I am fairly certain they will react and have always reacted.

For the record, when you petition someone for harassment or other bad conduct in the game, you will pretty much never know what the result was, as for obvious reasons CCP does not publish their communications with someone they warn etc, and the person him/herself is also forbidden to discuss such actions in detail. You get a standard "thanks for bringing this to our attention" etc response, and that's that.

I know because homophobic/sexist slurs are my pet peeve. Blink
Ris Dnalor
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#131 - 2012-03-29 13:51:27 UTC
[quote=malaire][quote=Tei Lin]Where do these fall under the potentially new interpretation of harassment?[/quote
What "new" interpretation

Banning Mittani was not about possibly suicidal state of (redacted)

It was about Mittani telling others to harrass him to make him commit suicide

Don't confuse these two
[/quote

CCP has made some bold statements and taken some bold actions, and the EULA/TOS is rather vague. In light of recent events, I think the OP deserves and answer, and I'd like to see things spelled out more specifically as well

As far as the Mitanni goes? There are other threads for that discussion, it's not appropriate here.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=118961

EvE = Everybody Vs. Everybody

  • Qolde
flapie 2
Malevelon Roe Industries
Convocation of Empyreans
#132 - 2012-03-29 14:09:02 UTC  |  Edited by: flapie 2
Tei Lin wrote:
Alexandra Alt wrote:
Tei Lin wrote:
flapie 2 wrote:
7 pages later, all i read was bla bla bla.

This whole post could have been avoided using common sence, i know its rare these days but really people should learn to use it, it makes things so much easyer.


Hi. Get back to me next time people are clamoring for you to get banned because you did something deemed ~evil~.

Also, telling people to use common "sence" normally goes over better when you use an iota of care in presenting your statements. Such as not misspelling the word "sense" in "common sense".


Also normally goes over better counter when you do a counter argumentation over the subject at and, and not attacking the person over a completely unrelated subject trying to divert attention to the main point which is your lack of common sense clearly shown on your OP.


Yes Yes. I lack common sense. Thank you both for pointing this out.

However, there is no argument when you tell someone they lack common sense. Common sense depends on context, experience, and knowledge of the situation. I asked for clarification in the most pointed way I knew how yet am chastised for it by people who seem to think I'm trying to make amends for mittens. I attempted to blow the guy up for money, and was told by a few people I might get banned because The Wiz was "protected" under special pretenses. My only motive was clarifying those statements.

So tell me, how is asking for clarification of the rules affect you in any way such that you must berate me by saying I lack common sense?


Whole post just screwed over cause it timed out on draft saving as i was handling a RL call that popped up half way typing it.

Just to finish this in a proper way, common sense is something you learn at a very young age and has nothing todo with "context, experience, and knowledge of the situation." but everything to do with moral and values (i think moral and values is a proper translation for it could not find any better once). How ever "context" can be a big part in how a statement is taken, "experience" can help you see the moments where you need to adjust you "context", and "knowledge of the situation" is what can prevent it from happening again.

I never said that you dint have any common sense, i only stated this post could have been avoided using it.
Never the less i wont mind taking credits for pointing out you have non (according to yourself), as i always like free credits Cool

Asking stuff is never wrong, but in eve you never know what or who may answer it, so you never sure if the answer is relative to the question or just a plain an simple troll. Pirate
Elsebeth Rhiannon
Gradient
Electus Matari
#133 - 2012-03-29 14:10:54 UTC
Ris Dnalor wrote:
CCP has made some bold statements and taken some bold actions, and the EULA/TOS is rather vague. In light of recent events, I think the OP deserves and answer, and I'd like to see things spelled out more specifically as well

The OP got an answer? Maybe if you tried to clearly rephrase the questions you think are still open, a GM could better answer them.
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#134 - 2012-03-29 14:10:55 UTC
It's useful, when discussing "incitement" to remember the case of Fon Revenhart, who was seeking votes for his own CSM7 campaign.

I mention it, of course, because he posted onto the *game forums* a sequence of messages that contained a pro-neoNazi sentiment, advocating racism towards non-whites.

This was reported and petitioned to death, with the only result being his posts were redacted by CCP, several hours afterwards (please, make use of eve-search if you don't believe me). Never once did I see his eligibility questioned.

But of course, no one cares because it didn't get whipped up in the gutter-media.

Though "CCP gamer running for in game election: makes pro-Nazi stance in his campaign thread" would have done just that, wouldn't it?

Thanks, CCP. Next time I have any issue with someone I'll just go and cry to eurogamer / massively (who will publish anything) using whatever inflammatory language will force action.

It's the new petition!

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Ris Dnalor
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#135 - 2012-03-29 14:21:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Ris Dnalor
Elsebeth Rhiannon wrote:
Ris Dnalor wrote:
CCP has made some bold statements and taken some bold actions, and the EULA/TOS is rather vague. In light of recent events, I think the OP deserves and answer, and I'd like to see things spelled out more specifically as well

The OP got an answer? Maybe if you tried to clearly rephrase the questions you think are still open, a GM could better answer them.


CCP EULA wrote:
You may encounter and converse with people who are rude, offensive, belligerent, and who may use indecent, obscene, and/or threatening or harassing language while playing the Game. You may report any instances of such behavior to CCP. CCP will investigate and take such measures as CCP, in its sole judgment, determines are reasonable under the circumstances. CCP does not guarantee that you will not encounter behavior of others that you may view as insulting, demeaning, offensive, threatening or harassing. You assume all risk associated with playing the Game, and CCP assumes no responsibility for the conduct of any other players, and shall not be liable to you or any other person for their conduct.


take measures as CCP, in its sole judgment, determines are reasonable under the circumstances.


that's about as clear as the water in a truck-stop toilet that's had the flushie-thingy broken for a week. Gimme a break. So anywho, that's what's open, and I realize that could benefit folks as well as hurt them, but considering the OP concerns are shared by many, I don't think it's asking too much for them to clear that up a bit.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=118961

EvE = Everybody Vs. Everybody

  • Qolde
Elsebeth Rhiannon
Gradient
Electus Matari
#136 - 2012-03-29 14:24:51 UTC
Just in case the GM is as daft as me, for your information, I still don't think I understand what your exact question is. Do you want to know what action CCP will take in every possible future case of anything remotely resembling harassment? I don't think that's answerable, really.
Townsend Harris
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#137 - 2012-03-29 14:32:59 UTC
I am pretty sure its clarification of what constitutes " rude, offensive, belligerent,[people] and who may use indecent, obscene, and/or threatening or harassing language while playing the Game." and where the break point is for a ban/warning etc.
IF the answer is 'it depends on what the GM says/decides' then that's a policy (of sorts) but its clearer than the semi-non answer that we have now.
Crazy MF
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#138 - 2012-03-29 14:33:50 UTC
Recently, I was told to die in a fire. I believe that comment was outside the "magic circle" , where do I send a petition to?
Aethlyn
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#139 - 2012-03-29 14:42:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Aethlyn
Townsend Harris wrote:
So wait if ANYONE else on that panel had made a similar/the same statement as Mittanni CCP couldn't ban them cause they would have no way to confirm that the person doing it was the character in game?

As unfair as it might sound: Yes, they can't ban any account or character just because someone does something bad outside the game without any clear indication/proof of belonging to some specific character.

If you want to say so, yes, Mittani got caught/banned due to being on the CSM and Alliance Panel and being "known" to them. I've moderated on MMO fan forums in the past (not EVE related), and if someone has been really an idiot; probably flaming or defaming staff members/game masters or even trying to sell their accounts (i.e. breaching the TOS/EULA), there's been nothing the game masters could do, because they simply couldn't verify someone being associated to an account (just matching names or e-mail addresses won't be enough).

There are often flames of people who say they got banned without proof or just because someone claimed they violate any terms; but let's be honest: no sane MMO publisher will do that. They ban people, but only if there's sufficient proof. Even then, the evidence might include mistakes or whatever; but that's a different story.

Crazy MF wrote:
Recently, I was told to die in a fire. I believe that comment was outside the "magic circle" , where do I send a petition to?

Hit F12 ingame, there's a sub category for it. :P

Looking for more thoughts? Follow me on Twitter.
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#140 - 2012-03-29 14:50:43 UTC
First off, a huge thanks to the GM for posting that up here. I will admit that probably frustration on the issues show. Is unfortunate since it did come off a little unprofessional, but the message stands.

Different sections to the postings that have come up so far. Instead of mass quoting, I will summarize my opinion on what I have seen so far.

1. What if somebody says "If I you blow me up, I am going to kill myself"

From what I read, that is not a halt and don't do it, in those cases, lack of communication is your better bet. If they take how people reply to these seriously, than by the same effect, issuing false statements will be equally as serious. The GM's are going to be busy with more reports as people try to abuse the system now. But as a player, follow the game mechanics, and choose words and reply carefully. If somebody starts making the statements and you blow them up, take their loot, and be done with it. Leave with a Cya.... that is "Cover your ass"

2. You start following somebody through highsec, repeatedly ganking them and they ask you directly to leave them alone. Gankings have no valid reason, or person yields in regards to whatever situation, then you are the one who should yield. Beyond that, it is intentional attempt to disrupt the enjoyment of the game which I did read is not allowed by EULA rules. Once you cross to the lowsec, this would really no longer apply it is PvP space.. Float in pirate space, you get blown, no avoiding of it. You can camp station, do whatever, person can leave lowsec to be rid of you. They have the options.

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.