These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New Dev Blog: Alliance Panel at Fanfest 2012: The Conclusion

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Col Spinks
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1141 - 2012-03-30 13:09:19 UTC
jugornaut wrote:
still screwed over by the guy you voted for - maybe as a person in a higher position he should learn to watch his mouth instead of sticking his foot in it like most goons?

people in a position like this should be held to a higher standard - guess you loose


If all people are not held to the same code of behavior then that standard is meaningless.
Col Spinks
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1142 - 2012-03-30 13:15:03 UTC
Mashie Saldana wrote:
Goons running out of tears after only 57 pages?

What happened with the ~10058~?



Do you know how many posts CCP has deleted? Well, that's whats happening to that 10058.
Tsalaroth
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1143 - 2012-03-30 13:26:06 UTC
Col Spinks wrote:
Mashie Saldana wrote:
Goons running out of tears after only 57 pages?

What happened with the ~10058~?



Do you know how many posts CCP has deleted? Well, that's whats happening to that 10058.


Pretty much this.
Ni Cho
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1144 - 2012-03-30 13:50:17 UTC
Snot Shot wrote:
CCP Xhagen wrote:
Hi folks. We've noticed a few common questions popping up in this thread that we'd like to answer.


Q1, CCP forced the resignation of the CSM Chairman.
A1, As a part of the CSM bylaws, banned players are ineligible to sit on the CSM. This would have been an unfortunate side effect of CCP feeling that a temporary ban was the correct course of action in this case.
However, prior to any notification to this effect, The chairman of CSM6 resigned of his own volition as he had previously announced that he would do. Since the chair resigned from CSM 6 prior to being banned and was not yet seated on CSM 7 he will be able to run for future CSMs.

We have had members resign from the CSM before. The process is pretty clear in these cases, the next person on the voting poll becomes active. This is the first time the chairman of the CSM has resigned so we are discussing with the CSM if we should make amendments to the process based on that.


Q2, There is an issue of 10,058 votes. What will CCP do about that?
A2, As in most democratic societies, if an elected member resigns the governance system is designed to handle that; for CSM6 the "next" person steps in (an alternate); for CSM7, where we had removed the concept of ‘alternate’ and increased the size of the CSM to 14, the council simply continues to function minus one. If players are not satisfied with that system they should contact the CSM and propose changes for CSM 7 to discuss formally. The CSM can bring this issue up directly with CCP and propose changes should such an event happen in the future.
It is clear from many communications from CSM6 and CSM7-elect members that they take the representation of these 10,058 voters very seriously and hopefully the remaining CSM representatives will act in the spirit of those who voted for the resigned member.

We should also keep in mind that every CSM member has the obligation to, at some level, represent all of EVE and its players, and that the voting system is anonymous.


Q3, Real life actions should not equate to in game sanctions. Why did this happen?
A3, After much deliberation on the subject, CCP considers the Alliance Panel to be an official CCP forum, as it is hosted by CCP and broadcast in a similarly visible fashion to the EVE Online forums. As such, it falls under the jurisdiction of the TOS. Furthermore, the panelist, present on the panel in order to represent his in-game identity, advocated using in-game actions to achieve a real world outcome. Specifically he suggested that if anyone wanted to make another player kill themselves in real life, they should go in game and harass them to achieve that consequence. The totality of the situation including the official forum in which it was held and statements of the panelist during the Q&A, have since lead to in-game sanctions. However, it is important to note that this incidence does not necessarily create precedence for any other "real life" actions or statements triggering a ban.


Q4, Wait, so you DID vet the presentations? Meaning it was perfectly fine for him to make fun of a suicidal player?
A4, Although the contents of the Alliance Panel presentations and discussion topics are reviewed by CCP prior to the event itself, the TOS-breaking incident took place during an unscripted Q&A session after the main presentation which was not mentioned in the submitted presentation. The submitted presentation slides (although distasteful) did not give the name of the player at any time, nor did they call for direct action against that player, and therefore passed muster. CCP have always allowed substantial leeway during the Alliance Panel and we look forward to ensuring that future events remain entertaining and engaging for the EVE community.

Like a BOSS!!....Cool




This is honestly the only thing that I have ever been able to read from Snot Shot.
Takoten Yaken
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#1145 - 2012-03-30 14:33:17 UTC
Takoten Yaken wrote:
So to reiterate: posting neo-nazi views on the forums merits none of the following:

A game ban
Removal from the CSM race
A forum ban

It is, in fact, apparently against the rules to post about how a CSM candidate posted neo-nazi views on the forums and this means he is not a good candidate.

But posting about this does merit a ban, apparently. Could you elaborate on how you consider this justifiable in any way?


I'm still looking for an explanation on this issue, as well as a justification for a character getting a two week ban for "offtopic" for discussing CCP's reaction to unacceptable comments from a CSM candidate in a thread about what CCP has deemed unacceptable comments from a CSM candidate.
Don Dark
GO' R0V
Pandemic Horde
#1146 - 2012-03-30 15:12:44 UTC
Andski wrote:
10,058 paying customers totally ignored and disenfranchised. Good work, CCP.


So what your saying is .. because 10.000 paying costumers voted for him :. he should be held above the law ?
He did something against the eula .. nomatter how many supporters he has . he should be punished like everyone els .
KanashiiKami
#1147 - 2012-03-30 15:42:42 UTC
Q1, CCP forced the resignation of the CSM Chairman.

i think the player should be BAN from future involvement at FANFEST, any form of further interaction with crowd.

Q2, There is an issue of 10,058 votes. What will CCP do about that?
players who vote for him obviously likes what the player does. and VICE VERSA ... i think you will have to account for the possiblity of HOW many who did not vote for him. having the highest vote does not really mean a win, because THE others have no 1 else to look up to to vote for.


Q4, Wait, so you DID vet the presentations? Meaning it was perfectly fine for him to make fun of a suicidal player?
A4, Although the contents of the Alliance Panel presentations and discussion topics are reviewed by CCP prior to the event itself, the TOS-breaking incident took place during an unscripted Q&A session after the main presentation which was not mentioned in the submitted presentation. The submitted presentation slides (although distasteful) did not give the name of the player at any time, nor did they call for direct action against that player, and therefore passed muster. CCP have always allowed substantial leeway during the Alliance Panel and we look forward to ensuring that future events remain entertaining and engaging for the EVE community.
[/quote]

i do not like this at all ... fact of the matter is ... CCP? is this the first day you know ALEX GIANTURCO?

WUT ???
KanashiiKami
#1148 - 2012-03-30 15:47:02 UTC
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
The entire chain of events that have lead to this action are extremely regrettable and sad.

Alex was an extremely talented and energetic member of CSM6, and his absence will be keenly felt during CSM7. I am deeply saddened that CCP felt they had no choice but to take this action.

This unprecedented situation raises significant questions -- such as representation and disenfranchisement -- that CSM6 will be discussing with CCP and with the new members of CSM7 over the next few days. I think I can speak for everyone on CSM when I ask for your patience while we work through these issues.


i disagree that CSM speaks and represents ALL of EVE players. you however DO represent those who VOTED for you.

WUT ???
Elsebeth Rhiannon
Gradient
Electus Matari
#1149 - 2012-03-30 16:05:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Elsebeth Rhiannon
Quote:
i disagree that CSM speaks and represents ALL of EVE players. you however DO represent those who VOTED for you.

Sorry, but while you are entitled to your own opinion, you are not entitled to your own facts.

"The purpose of the CSM is to represent society interests to CCP. This requires active engagement with the player community to master EVE issue awareness, understanding, and evaluation in the context of the “greatest good for the greater player base”. --- A council of nine player Representatives will be democratically elected by EVE players." http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/What_is_the_CSM (empasis mine)

In a democracy, typically when there is an election to choose representatives, the idea is that whoever is chosen becomes a representative of the whole thing. They are supposed to represent the good of the whole population, not just those who voted for them. The vote is there for so that the population can have a say what sort of things they consider "good" - they are supposed to vote for someone who holds their values and ideas, say. But after they are chosen, they become, for example, "the president of Finland", not "the president of those Finns who bothered to get off their asses on the election day and thought this guy was a good candidate".

There is nothing in the CSM rules that makes me think this is intended to be otherwise in CSM. Quite the opposite, the quote above speaks of "good of the greater player base". And while 10k accounts is a lot as far as votes go, it is still only about 4 percent of all accounts - not very great a base.
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#1150 - 2012-03-30 16:19:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Darth Gustav
Elsebeth Rhiannon wrote:
Quote:
i disagree that CSM speaks and represents ALL of EVE players. you however DO represent those who VOTED for you.

Sorry, but while you are entitled to your own opinion, you are not entitled to your own facts.

"The purpose of the CSM is to represent society interests to CCP. This requires active engagement with the player community to master EVE issue awareness, understanding, and evaluation in the context of the “greatest good for the greater player base”. --- A council of nine player Representatives will be democratically elected by EVE players." http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/What_is_the_CSM (empasis mine)

In a democracy, typically when there is an election to choose representatives, the idea is that whoever is chosen becomes a representative of the whole thing. They are supposed to represent the good of the whole population, not just those who voted for them. The vote is there for so that the population can have a say what sort of things they consider "good" - they are supposed to vote for someone who holds their values and ideas, say. But after they are chosen, they become, for example, "the president of Finland", not "the president of those Finns who bothered to get off their asses on the election day and thought this guy was a good candidate".

There is nothing in the CSM rules that makes me think this is intended to be otherwise in CSM. Quite the opposite, the quote above speaks of "good of the greater player base". And while 10k accounts is a lot as far as votes go, it is still only about 4 percent of all accounts - not very great a base.


The fact of the matter is that even CCP did not act on their own policies, period. They may be able to wrap it all up nice and tidy with corporatese BS, but the facts are clear. They never dispatched IPOL or the local police to verify the well-being of the "victim" - instead they vetted slides essentially giving The Mittani the greenlight for this subject matter. The only way the "victim" knew about this was from an internet video site, when we're to understand that the ******* cops should have shown up to deal with him. Fantastic job CCP!

They streamed it live sans delay and provided copious amounts of booze.

They laughed when other pilots were named and shamed in other presentations where they had obviously been "bullied and humiliated".

They literally could have stopped this at any time. Instead they went on to praise The Mittani, award him CSM chair, do nothing for five days about the victim, and then spazzed out and inserted their respective corporate feet in their mouths when it was done.

The truth is, CCP deserves as much indignation or more. Can we ban CCP? Will there be an ISD investigation into this?

It's easy to throw people under a bus and say "Not me!"

It's also easy to hop on a bandwagon and be convinced of your smug self-righteousness' purity of motive to a fault. That looks like what's happened here.

Sorry, there's facts, and then there's THE facts.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Cahoun
BAND of MAGNUS
#1151 - 2012-03-30 16:31:54 UTC
I usually dont write on forum.
But I dont understand if someone asked "victim" player. "Are you healthy? Did you not kill yourself? Did you visit family or a doctor?"
Its more important. Its not funny do jokes if someone is depressed or have the problems in RL. But Its happens. Its better to help players if they are really have problems in their minds
Many players are unhappy after lost the ships. But Its Eve Online. Many players play games and they want to forget about problems in RL

But Mittani was drunk and he did mistake. Ok, no more CSM6 chairman member, no more CSM7 chairman member, apologies to "victim" player

But I dont know if "victim" player feels better and more important now. Whole Eve know about him. Maybe Mittani did good thing if he told about him

I dont care about politics in game. But It was Mittani who help to solve situation after Incarna expansion. I dont understand 1 month ban from game
I have fear to say something in game

Is it really still fun? Can I say my opinion in public

I am not on side of Mittani and I didnt vote and I dont like Goons. Its only my opinion.
Kile Kitmoore
#1152 - 2012-03-30 16:50:10 UTC
Well lets face it, CCP has made it's decision and Mitt's has planned out his future with the Goons and all the back and forth is not going to change that, unfortunately.

Gong to part this thread with a bit of advice for both the CSM and CCP, DON"T SCREW UP! If you guys/gals spend the next six months getting nothing done but "debating your procedures" or what shade of colors panties (or how they drop, LOL, never getting over that) should be in the character creator don't be surprised of another full-on revolt and it possibly being led by your ex-chairman. Imagine Mitt's without the constrains of CSM niceties and NDA's but instead he's just another pissed off customer with a voice, I would not want to be in the CSM or at CCP for that **** storm.

Who knows, maybe he will quietly go back to leading his alliance & meta-gaming and leave you guys to do, whatever.

Good luck to all parties and maybe the victim in this sad little tale will actually put this game down for a while and get some real help, if he really needed it at all.
Elsebeth Rhiannon
Gradient
Electus Matari
#1153 - 2012-03-30 16:52:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Elsebeth Rhiannon
Quote:
Can we ban CCP?

Sure. It's called "cancelling your account". If you think CCP acted immorally, that's what you should do - do not give your money to people whose actions you cannot morally accept.

If you think CCP acted criminally, cancel your account and report to local authorities.

Quote:
I dont understand if someone asked "victim" player. "Are you healthy? Did you not kill yourself? Did you visit family or a doctor?"

CCP has spoken to him. Mittens has also apologized to him personally. He has been reported to be ok. As I gather it, he does not want further publicity.
Ibn Taymiyyah
eM' Roid Extraction Services
#1154 - 2012-03-30 17:02:33 UTC
Only read what CCP Xhagen all this way into the thread, but the timming is irrelevant for this case.

So let me just try to get my head around this.

If I go out, kill a bunch of highsec hardcore pvers, who'll proceed to cry me a river ... if I tell someone, within caracter, "go die in a fire", I get a 30 day ban?

Because you just said:
Quote:
Furthermore, the panelist, present on the panel in order to represent his in-game identity, advocated using in-game actions to achieve a real world outcome.


Honestly, when I'm out to blow up your game, if you do end up on my TS crying (in RL about) I'm just laughing my ass off. So are you and so is everyone! You're hoping that people are dicks to one and other and get mad as in roleplaying?

* me proceeds to blow up helpless miner in a cowardly suicide gank
* miner knows he lost the ship on undock and maintaining complete posture, procedes to insult and whine and cry, calling me the root of all evil in the world

where am I getting at? When you're out to "destroy someone else game" you're looking for REAL LIFE TEARS! If you end up making a video, whining about it, the ganker WON the absolute prize! No one gets mad "in character". These two are NOT separate realities. Sorry, I can't understand the separation.

You can tell me to kill myself all day, suicide gank me every day and every hour ... what the hell does that have to do with my decision to do it or not? How in the hell are you liable for someone RL decisions with your in game actions or even words?

Mittens was not disrespectful (not in any special/uncommon way). He told people to grief the player, joking with the fact that he might actually kill himself. I got it, you got it, the audience got it. Can't understand all this! Hell, I'm actually thinking of starting suicide ganking people ... starting with that one mate, unless he's off limits due to unstable psyche, in which case you should really get a flag for those people, so we can't shoot them dead in game and having that transpire to RL! :)

I have no desire to see the guy kill himself, but have no desire for him to live. I'm indifferent to his life, as I'm indifferent to most other living beings. As a whole, society works like this except for the few hypocrites who love to say different, but eat a full meal with kids dying of hunger nearby! :)

Damn, when a friend of mine coughs, my one reply to is "just die, it's faster!".... why all this drama?

Fake edit: you case you missed my last post, I'm red to goons, I didn't vote for mittens, I'm not a suicide ganker and have no love for that type of gameplay ... but ... this was wrong!
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#1155 - 2012-03-30 17:04:10 UTC
Elsebeth Rhiannon wrote:
Quote:
Can we ban CCP?

Sure. It's called "cancelling your account". If you think CCP acted immorally, that's what you should do - do not give your money to people whose actions you cannot morally accept.

If you think CCP acted criminally, cancel your account and report to local authorities.

Quote:
I dont understand if someone asked "victim" player. "Are you healthy? Did you not kill yourself? Did you visit family or a doctor?"

CCP has spoken to him. Mittens has also apologized to him personally. He has been reported to be ok. As I gather it, he does not want further publicity.

He also probably does not want the ******* cops to show up at his house over **** he said in the context of a video game, but nobody's talking about that. Does CCP suspect that his crisis is over? When will the cops be called?

I wonder if anybody even realizes how much that matters?

This guy got off scot free because you all made him a martyr. Either he's suicidal and CCP's actions were grossly negligent and continue to be such as long as the police are not involved OR he was lying, everybody knows it, and he should spend some time with Officer Mahoney and the State Mental Facility thereafter for evaluation to drive the point home to the alleged victim that suicide is nothing to joke about.

Only then will CCP's actions make any sense whatsoever.

TL;DR - If CCP doesn't call the cops on The Wis then they literally care about nothing other than what Sony thinks of their "image."

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Elsebeth Rhiannon
Gradient
Electus Matari
#1156 - 2012-03-30 17:06:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Elsebeth Rhiannon
You do realize, I am sure, that the mail that was read in the panel was months old?

Beyond that, it is not at all our place to judge whether he was really suicidal or not. Regardless of whether he was, and what has gone on between CCP, him, and possibly the local authorities (which is none of your business, and under confidentiality, and neither the victim nor the CCP has any reason, let alone duty, to tell you any details about it), joking about something like that was a crap thing to do.

If someone makes a suicide threat you believe not to be genuine, you report to whoever can take action in case it is genuine, and then STFU about it, not coax everyone to harass him for punishment. I trust I do not have to explain why.
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#1157 - 2012-03-30 17:14:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Darth Gustav
Elsebeth Rhiannon wrote:
You do realize, I am sure, that the mail that was read in the panel was months old?

Beyond that, it is not at all our place to judge whether he was really suicidal or not. Regardless of whether he was, and what has gone on between CCP, him, and possibly the local authorities (which is none of your business, and under confidentiality, and neither the victim nor the CCP has any reason, let alone duty, to tell you any details about it), joking about something like that was a crap thing to do.

If someone makes a suicide threat you believe not to be genuine, you report to whoever can take action in case it is genuine, and then STFU about it, not coax everyone to harass him for punishment. I trust I do not have to explain why.


Oh I see. It was months old so that means it's OK. Sometimes petitions take freaking weaks to resolve. Would they not follow policy due to backlog? So now he's in the limelight and everybody assumes he's OK. I'm not saying that it's my business, but we know for a fact that he didn't get a visit from the cops. Why not, when it's ******* policy?

The answer is obvious.

CCP is really serious about that suicide policy, boy let me tell you.

[Edit: Also, if they don't need to respond after months of delay because this guy is fine, then how did Mittani victimize him? After all, now your premise is that this guy is back to being stable?

Think about it.]

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Ibn Taymiyyah
eM' Roid Extraction Services
#1158 - 2012-03-30 17:20:13 UTC
Elsebeth Rhiannon wrote:
If someone makes a suicide threat you believe not to be genuine, you report to whoever can take action in case it is genuine, and then STFU about it, not coax everyone to harass him for punishment. I trust I do not have to explain why.


Mate, I disagree. If I blow you up in game and you convo me saying you're going to kill yourself cuz of the lost pixels... I'm not going to report your bad day... I'm coming back tomorrow for seconds! And the next day, and the next day ... wtf? Kill yourself over a game? If my life is ever that devoid of content that a loss in a video game leads to a suicide note... I'm not here the next day because either:

a) I'm dead
b) I quit the game and got a life!

! What?

I can't understand all this drama. Who cares? Everyone is free to do whatever they want with their lives! Unless I'm pushing you off a cliff ... **** it! I've seen a guy jump from a bridge 2 meters in front of me. He stopped his car, came out and jumped. My reaction was getting pissed because now I had to switch lanes to get past his ******* car! No sympathy here :|
Kara Balveda
Space-Time Laboratories
#1159 - 2012-03-30 17:39:44 UTC
Two step wrote:
I disagree with this decision, and am working hard with CCP to make sure the 10,058 voters that voted for Alex have their voice heard.

More to come, just wanted to make sure I had a spot on the first page


I'd expect all of you to resign. Yeah, even the guy I cast my vote for. Then CCP has to open the process for selecting CSM 8, and the 10.058 voters can cast their votes for Mittens again. Of course, it is to be hoped that CCP sees the light when all the CSM threatens to resign.
Elsebeth Rhiannon
Gradient
Electus Matari
#1160 - 2012-03-30 17:46:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Elsebeth Rhiannon
Darth Gustav:

No, that it was months old does not make anything ok. But sending cops over somewhere because of a months old suicide threat without checking with the guy who threatened will make said cops really, really pissed off. ;) As to why that was not handled at the time by CCP is probably because no one who saw it then bothered petitioning it, instead of circulating it internally and making fun of it - not because of petition backlog. A lot of petitions get looked at fairly fast, e.g. stuck petitions, EULA/TOS violations and suspicions of exploiting; I expect this would have. Again, how the guy fares now and what his contact with authorities, legal or medical, has or has not been, is none of your effing business. If one of us knew what his medical status is and spoke of it here, we could be banned. ("An immediate permanent ban of an account may result if a player: b. Divulges private and/or personal information about another subscriber or an official EVE Online representative through the EVE Online client or web site."). Back off.

I am not going to explain to you for a hundreth time why Mittani's behavior was out of line. If you do not get it yet, you either will not read the explanations, or will never get it.

Ibn:

I have never said, and neither has CCP said, that you cannot blow up my ship if I threaten with suicide (which I won't do, but as a hypothetical ;)). For the hundreth time, Mittani was not punished for blowing the guy up; he was punished for what was said about it. This is not black and white. We can at the same time accept blowing people's ships up no matter what they say to you to plead or threaten you to stop, think threatening with a suicide in a game is a crap thing to do, and think that pointing and laughing at people who are OOCly upset is also a crap thing to do. If you cannot handle that many different aspects of thinking at the same time, maybe you should not be playing EVE. It is such complex game, it might be too much for you.