These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

The Future of Highsec - New CSM Candidates?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tarvos Telesto
Blood Fanatics
#21 - 2013-02-04 00:07:08 UTC
James 315 broke eula rules long time ago, wonder he still here, things like " pay me virtual goods or you wont be able to play eve" is harresment and action against eula, ofc is my opinion.

Ps.Im not miners defender and im not against idea to make miners life in eve harder etc, hovewer i think his behavoir broke meny eula points, as you see you can avoid eula if CCP decide to give you VIP status ;)

EvE isn't game, its style of living.
SPIONKOP
Spaghetti Cannon
Sentinels Amongst Warriors
#22 - 2013-02-04 00:07:12 UTC
How many lemmings James threads we going to have the next few weeks?
Lin Suizei
#23 - 2013-02-04 00:19:05 UTC
One Highsec, one Code, one Saviour!

James has demonstrated a solid understanding of the problems facing New Eden today, as well as a solid track record of strong leadership - highsec could ask for no better candidate. A vote for James is a vote for a better EVE!

Lol I can't delete my forum sig.
Wescro
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#24 - 2013-02-04 00:21:45 UTC
Tarvos Telesto wrote:
James 315 broke eula rules long time ago, wonder he still here, things like " pay me virtual goods or you wont be able to play eve" is harresment and action against eula, ofc is my opinion.

Ps.Im not miners defender and im not against idea to make miners life in eve harder etc, hovewer i think his behavoir broke meny eula points, as you see you can avoid eula if CCP decide to give you VIP status ;)


It's your opinion that asking for ISK in exchange for not ganking is against the EULA? How is that an opinion? Do you know what an opinion is?

That's like me saying it's my opinion that the Earth is flat...

Moreover, if you think asking payment in return for safety is harassment, I'd love to hear what you have to say about straight up ganking, no negotiations involved. =)

http://crossingzebras.com/2013/02/17/csm8ripardteg/
Beatrice Wankmeister
United Systems Industry
#25 - 2013-02-04 00:26:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Beatrice Wankmeister
I'm so tired of seeing these random posts by obvious alts and James315 followers on their knees with their lips wrapped firmly around his jewels. I wouldn't vote for him solely on that fact.

If you're really interested in running for CSM, try to stop annoying everyone on the forums.

I couldn't care less about your miner bumping or how you want to play the game. I'm just sick of reading your stupidity.

Take care.
Len Ross
Doomheim
#26 - 2013-02-04 00:40:13 UTC
CSM a total joke. you think CCP puts its profits in the hands of players. dream on.
James315 even more a joke. vote for somone who has his minions bumping your mining ship continually asking for isk to stop. That isnt inovation thats harrasment.
Peter Raptor
Galactic Hawks
#27 - 2013-02-04 00:41:41 UTC
First of all James315 solution to make hisec afk mining "interactive" is to charge miners 10 mil per year to be able to afk mine LOL

(BTW AFK Ice mining THE ONLY WAY to ice mine, unless you're on medication and enjoy watching ice mining lasers turn over every half hour)


The problem in Eve is NULL sec, not Hisec, Hisec is the Engine that keeps the Eve economy going, wreck the engine, you wreck the game.

The Massive Monopolies in Null are the real problem, sucking Trillions in Isk with absolutely ZERO risk from Gankers etc, something Hisec dwellers have to live with each day.

Fix Broken Nullsec, , Hisec working Much better than Null.

Evelopedia; 

The Amarr Empire, is known for its omnipresent religion  †  
Tarvos Telesto
Blood Fanatics
#28 - 2013-02-04 00:44:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Tarvos Telesto
Len Ross wrote:
CSM a total joke.

Nuff said.

Ps. Another therad caled, play EvE like James 315 play, because only spending time on belts and waste whole day on bumping miners is best way to play EvE, sorry this isn't my santbox vision, personaly i prefer ship spining than waste whole day on similar boring proffesion.

EvE isn't game, its style of living.
Alana Charen-Teng
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2013-02-04 00:47:58 UTC
Not Politically Correct wrote:
Never met James315. Have met Billmurray. I wouldn't let my ex-wife's dog go on a date with him without an armed chaperone.

Your ex-wife's dog must be really vicious!
Ustrello
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2013-02-04 00:50:48 UTC
Peter Raptor wrote:
First of all James315 solution to make hisec afk mining "interactive" is to charge miners 10 mil per year to be able to afk mine LOL

(BTW AFK Ice mining THE ONLY WAY to ice mine, unless you're on medication and enjoy watching ice mining lasers turn over every half hour)


The problem in Eve is NULL sec, not Hisec, Hisec is the Engine that keeps the Eve economy going, wreck the engine, you wreck the game.

The Massive Monopolies in Null are the real problem, sucking Trillions in Isk with absolutely ZERO risk from Gankers etc, something Hisec dwellers have to live with each day.

Fix Broken Nullsec, , Hisec working Much better than Null.


Yeah because towers cant be reffed or taken away.
Felicity Love
Doomheim
#31 - 2013-02-04 00:55:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Felicity Love
Well, I spun the empty rum bottle on a makeshift "Wheel of Fortune" hastily scribbled on the back of a pizza box.... and the most common result was... LET IT BURN.

Not wishing to seem fatalistic, I will instead blame it on the lump of mozzarella cheese the empty rum bottle seemed to get stuck on more often than not.

It always comes down to "cheese". Roll

"EVE is dying." -- The Four Forum Trolls of the Apocalypse.   ( Pick four, any four. They all smell.  )
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#32 - 2013-02-04 00:58:42 UTC
I have to say, I haven't been particularly impressed with the CSM representation this round. Hopefully the next one will be better. I'm really not interested in having EVE turned into an arcade game. To me, it seems that, (outside of continuous spiteful infighting), the CSM this term has been very focused on a different EVE. One that doesn't really seem particularly EVE-like at all.

Am I the only one that sees this? No idea really, but that is how it appears to me, and I'm not talking about WiS development or Skinning ships either. I just feel like they want it to be a cartoon series.
zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Tarvos Telesto
Blood Fanatics
#33 - 2013-02-04 01:02:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Tarvos Telesto
Wescro wrote:
Tarvos Telesto wrote:
James 315 broke eula rules long time ago, wonder he still here, things like " pay me virtual goods or you wont be able to play eve" is harresment and action against eula, ofc is my opinion.

Ps.Im not miners defender and im not against idea to make miners life in eve harder etc, hovewer i think his behavoir broke meny eula points, as you see you can avoid eula if CCP decide to give you VIP status ;)


It's your opinion that asking for ISK in exchange for not ganking is against the EULA? How is that an opinion? Do you know what an opinion is?

That's like me saying it's my opinion that the Earth is flat...

Moreover, if you think asking payment in return for safety is harassment, I'd love to hear what you have to say about straight up ganking, no negotiations involved. =)


Kamikaze atacks are ok, they are part of game and part of risk, while harrasing people by forcing them to pay isk because i do x thing to you are totaly against eula, stalking and harassment are agains eula.

Here we go with eula.

Read point 1 and 4, where you can see that (James 315 "role-playing" playing cant be used as excuse)
http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp

EvE isn't game, its style of living.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#34 - 2013-02-04 01:12:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Tarvos Telesto wrote:


Kamikaze atacks are ok, they are part of game and part of risk, while harrasing people by forcing them to pay isk because i do x thing to you are totaly against eula, stalking and harassment are agains eula.

Here we go with eula.

1.

You may not abuse, harass or threaten another player or authorized representative of CCP, including customer service personnel and volunteers. This includes, but is not limited to: petitioning with false information in an attempt to gain from it or have someone else suffer from it; sending excessive e-mails, EVE-mails or petitions; obstructing CCP Employees from doing their jobs; refusal to follow the instructions of a CCP Employee; or implying favoritism by a CCP Employee.

4.

You may not use “role-playing” as an excuse to violate these rules. While EVE Online is a persistent world, fantasy role-playing game, the claim of role-playing is not an acceptable defense for anti-social behavior. Role-playing is encouraged, but not at the expense of other player. You may not create or participate in a corporation or group that habitually violates this policy.


Well it's a good job that you don't get to decide what is and what is not a violation of the the EULA then, the only people that get to do that are CCP, and so far it seems that James 315 and the New Order do not, and have not violated the EULA as far as they're concerned. If you really feel that the EULA has been violated then raise a petition.

By the way your statement "Ps.Im not miners defender and im not against idea to make miners life in eve harder etc, hovewer i think his behavoir broke meny eula points, as you see you can avoid eula if CCP decide to give you VIP status ;)" is in itself a possible violation of the "or implying favoritism by a CCP Employee" clause. Should I raise a petition about that? (hint: I'm not that petty)

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Ustrello
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#35 - 2013-02-04 01:18:46 UTC
Tarvos Telesto wrote:
Wescro wrote:
Tarvos Telesto wrote:
James 315 broke eula rules long time ago, wonder he still here, things like " pay me virtual goods or you wont be able to play eve" is harresment and action against eula, ofc is my opinion.

Ps.Im not miners defender and im not against idea to make miners life in eve harder etc, hovewer i think his behavoir broke meny eula points, as you see you can avoid eula if CCP decide to give you VIP status ;)


It's your opinion that asking for ISK in exchange for not ganking is against the EULA? How is that an opinion? Do you know what an opinion is?

That's like me saying it's my opinion that the Earth is flat...

Moreover, if you think asking payment in return for safety is harassment, I'd love to hear what you have to say about straight up ganking, no negotiations involved. =)


Kamikaze atacks are ok, they are part of game and part of risk, while harrasing people by forcing them to pay isk because i do x thing to you are totaly against eula, stalking and harassment are agains eula.

Here we go with eula.

Read point 1 and 4, where you can see that (James 315 "role-playing" playing cant be used as excuse)
http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp


Well seeing how ccp said miner bumping is ok and have not acted on hundreds of petitions pretty sure it isn't againt the eula. But try harder
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#36 - 2013-02-04 01:20:40 UTC
Great, now I can't decide between malcanis or james...

Thanks, Obama!

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#37 - 2013-02-04 01:20:43 UTC
Agent Eunoli wrote:


James 315 stands for making Highsec an enjoyable and interactive region of space for all players. A place where players don't feel that to "play" the game they "have" to go AFK. James 315 will bring a vision of Highsec that is clearly articulated and important for the game at its current state of development.

Now is the time for us, the players of EVE, to start looking at the various CSM candidates and to start making some noise about what we are looking for. The future of the game is impacted by the CSM and, in theory, the CSM are chosen by the players to represent the players.


Shocked

James 315 is nothing more than a Barracuda.

James 315 has promoted a lot of Heartless actions towards high security citizens.

James 315 would have been dusted a long time ago If Looks Could Kill.

James 315 is gonna have to Even It Up a lot before he get's high security votes.

Roll



DMC

'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
Lipbite
Express Hauler
#38 - 2013-02-04 01:23:55 UTC
Doesn't matter because CSM has nothing to do with high-sec - as well as with democracy and game development.

It's meta-game invented by CCP for for giant null and low alliances to keep their leaders busy in the game instead of leaving for other games along with hundreds / thousands of subscribers - by bribing them with free rides to Iceland and fanfest. Nothing to see here.
Tarvos Telesto
Blood Fanatics
#39 - 2013-02-04 01:32:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Tarvos Telesto
Ustrello wrote:
Tarvos Telesto wrote:
Wescro wrote:
Tarvos Telesto wrote:
James 315 broke eula rules long time ago, wonder he still here, things like " pay me virtual goods or you wont be able to play eve" is harresment and action against eula, ofc is my opinion.

Ps.Im not miners defender and im not against idea to make miners life in eve harder etc, hovewer i think his behavoir broke meny eula points, as you see you can avoid eula if CCP decide to give you VIP status ;)


It's your opinion that asking for ISK in exchange for not ganking is against the EULA? How is that an opinion? Do you know what an opinion is?

That's like me saying it's my opinion that the Earth is flat...

Moreover, if you think asking payment in return for safety is harassment, I'd love to hear what you have to say about straight up ganking, no negotiations involved. =)


Kamikaze atacks are ok, they are part of game and part of risk, while harrasing people by forcing them to pay isk because i do x thing to you are totaly against eula, stalking and harassment are agains eula.

Here we go with eula.

Read point 1 and 4, where you can see that (James 315 "role-playing" playing cant be used as excuse)
http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp


Well seeing how ccp said miner bumping is ok and have not acted on hundreds of petitions pretty sure it isn't againt the eula. But try harder


Miners bumping is ok because EvE is santbox where people can do what they want, end even harassmen is against eula CCP alow this kind of harassment, because lack of definition what is good or what is bad, hovewer like you mention here for sure hundreds of petitions form people who feel that somone harrasing them.

I can compare "Give me isk or you wont be able to play EvE" to give me isk or i spam your mailbox everyday and every day i will spam your private message window, Thank God it never happens because of block mechanic which protect people from idiots.

EvE isn't game, its style of living.
Ustrello
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#40 - 2013-02-04 01:45:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Ustrello
Tarvos Telesto wrote:
Ustrello wrote:
Tarvos Telesto wrote:
Wescro wrote:
[quote=Tarvos Telesto]James 315 broke eula rules long time ago, wonder he still here, things like " pay me virtual goods or you wont be able to play eve" is harresment and action against eula, ofc is my opinion.

Ps.Im not miners defender and im not against idea to make miners life in eve harder etc, hovewer i think his behavoir broke meny eula points, as you see you can avoid eula if CCP decide to give you VIP status ;)


It's your opinion that asking for ISK in exchange for not ganking is against the EULA? How is that an opinion? Do you know what an opinion is?

That's like me saying it's my opinion that the Earth is flat...

Moreover, if you think asking payment in return for safety is harassment, I'd love to hear what you have to say about straight up ganking, no negotiations involved. =)


Kamikaze atacks are ok, they are part of game and part of risk, while harrasing people by forcing them to pay isk because i do x thing to you are totaly against eula, stalking and harassment are agains eula.

Here we go with eula.

Read point 1 and 4, where you can see that (James 315 "role-playing" playing cant be used as excuse)
http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp


Well seeing how ccp said miner bumping is ok and have not acted on hundreds of petitions pretty sure it isn't againt the eula.
Miners bumping is ok because EvE is santbox where people can do what they want, end even harassmen is against eula CCP alow this kind of harassment, because lack of definition what is good or what is bad, hovewer like you mention here for sure hundreds of petitions form people who feel that somone harrasing them.

I can compare "Give me isk or you wont be able to play EvE" to give me isk or i spam your mailbox everyday and every day i will spam your private message window, Thank God it never happens because of block mechanic which protect people from idiots.


Well you can move to another system, seeing how you are given a lot of forewarning to when they are coming. Or yoy can go to a wh or a more novel idea pay the ten mil and watch your competition disappear