These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Finally a CCP Ishukone Gate response!

First post
Author
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#61 - 2013-10-08 19:53:44 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
[

There is no outrage here, sorry. Even if you feel outrage, it's based on a misunderstanding at best, outright jealousy at worst. That doesn't constitute justified outrage in a rational man's book.


I think there are actually some rational people "outraged" over this.

I think it's mighty silly (CCP owns EVE, they can do as they please), but everyone has different buttons. Things that would push me to a screaming fit might bounce over some of these guys without a blink.

That being said, all the rabble rabble is useless, especially since the outrage is no where near universal. you can see here on GD that it's a virtual handful of people keeping these topics going. TBH, I think that's what drives some of them to be MORE outraged, the fact that many others of us are like "meh, it's just pixels".

Kate stark
#62 - 2013-10-08 19:55:03 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
[snip]
Haha yeah, I do that too. So idk, man.

[snip]
Oh yeah, that's right. It was that event where EVE was trying for a record Peak Concurrent Users, and you sent an evemail guessing what the magic number was going to be. I forgot what the winner was supposed to get, though.


aye, we could tell them we're not renewing!

and yes! that was it! i forgot what they were going to get too, but still they don't need blink to get things out to the community. hell, the monocles that dropped from the dev roam... that's another way of getting things to the community, all you needed was a noobship to scoop the loot.

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.

Kate stark
#63 - 2013-10-08 19:56:54 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
You can see here on GD that it's a virtual handful of people keeping these topics going. TBH, I think that's what drives some of them to be MORE outraged, the fact that many others of us are like "meh, it's just pixels".

just because only 5 people care that a local park is closing, doesn't stop stop the closing of a park being a bad thing.

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.

Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#64 - 2013-10-08 20:04:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Kate stark wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
You can see here on GD that it's a virtual handful of people keeping these topics going. TBH, I think that's what drives some of them to be MORE outraged, the fact that many others of us are like "meh, it's just pixels".

just because only 5 people care that a local park is closing, doesn't stop stop the closing of a park being a bad thing.


You're right, it's never about how many people want it, it's about the merits of what is being accomplished. If all things were decided based entirely on popular vote, we'd have never gone to space, amongst many other achievements of academic and technological advancement.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
#65 - 2013-10-08 20:17:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Miilla
Incarna never went away you know :)


In the future they apparently call Water Closets.... Captains Quarders where you can try on hats.
Jimmy Farrere
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#66 - 2013-10-08 20:18:41 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Jimmy Farrere wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Bischopt wrote:
..snip...


...


Okay, so you seem to know where the suffix 'gate' comes from. Now we just need to clear up your definition of 'scandal'..

scan·dal (skndl)
n.
1. A publicized incident that brings about disgrace or offends the moral sensibilities of society: a drug scandal that forced the mayor's resignation.
2. A person, thing, or circumstance that causes or ought to cause disgrace or outrage: a politician whose dishonesty is a scandal; considered the housing shortage a scandal.
3. Damage to reputation or character caused by public disclosure of immoral or grossly improper behavior; disgrace.
4. Talk that is damaging to one's character; malicious gossip.


Congratulations, you can read a dictionary. So far, nothing has caused any outrage. There is no outrage. There's a lot of overreacting and tantrum throwing, but no outrage.


Yes, while I can read and comprehend a dictionary. You apparently cannot..

out•rage (ˈaʊt reɪdʒ)

n., v. -raged, -rag•ing. n.
1. an act of wanton cruelty or violence.
2. anything that strongly offends or affronts the feelings.
3. a powerful feeling of resentment or anger aroused by an injury, insult, or injustice.


Whilst you may not have any of these feelings, I think that the 74 page thread would indicate that many others do. It's good that you keep posting in the threads about something you don't care about though, it really shows how much you don't care. Heh.
Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
#67 - 2013-10-08 20:19:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Miilla
This is so Comedic that it should have been a Blackadder script with some Baldrik one liners.



I have a cunning plan.... Baldrick. We shall totally screw up the game, and the company,... and people will pay just to see what idiotic move we make next.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#68 - 2013-10-08 20:23:48 UTC
Jimmy Farrere wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Jimmy Farrere wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Bischopt wrote:
..snip...


...


Okay, so you seem to know where the suffix 'gate' comes from. Now we just need to clear up your definition of 'scandal'..

scan·dal (skndl)
n.
1. A publicized incident that brings about disgrace or offends the moral sensibilities of society: a drug scandal that forced the mayor's resignation.
2. A person, thing, or circumstance that causes or ought to cause disgrace or outrage: a politician whose dishonesty is a scandal; considered the housing shortage a scandal.
3. Damage to reputation or character caused by public disclosure of immoral or grossly improper behavior; disgrace.
4. Talk that is damaging to one's character; malicious gossip.


Congratulations, you can read a dictionary. So far, nothing has caused any outrage. There is no outrage. There's a lot of overreacting and tantrum throwing, but no outrage.


Yes, while I can read and comprehend a dictionary. You apparently cannot..

out•rage (ˈaʊt reɪdʒ)

n., v. -raged, -rag•ing. n.
1. an act of wanton cruelty or violence.
2. anything that strongly offends or affronts the feelings.
3. a powerful feeling of resentment or anger aroused by an injury, insult, or injustice.


Whilst you may not have any of these feelings, I think that the 74 page thread would indicate that many others do. It's good that you keep posting in the threads about something you don't care about though, it really shows how much you don't care. Heh.


Interesting how you bolded injustice. Please, post the dictionary definition for that as well, just for posterity's sake, and explain how it applies to a community contributor being rewarded for their efforts.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

YesYes NoNoNo
Karmic Rebalance
#69 - 2013-10-08 20:33:44 UTC  |  Edited by: YesYes NoNoNo
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
CCP: You're not allowed to talk about CCP developers who directly spawn items for specific individuals in secret!

That is truly a worse response than anything I could have thought of


I was just thinking the same thing. It would probably actually have been better to just continue ignoring the issue in the hopes that it would go away on its own.
Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
#70 - 2013-10-08 20:36:10 UTC
CCP PR: Quick!!! Put some fuel on the fire... somebody post a public reply demanding we all stfu.
Frying Doom
#71 - 2013-10-08 20:58:07 UTC
Good to see this game is progressing so well

CCP don't have a clue

The CSM doesn't have a clue.

After all why would people get angry over CCP secretly giving ships that can be sold for hundreds of billions of isk to a select few of their choice.

Yet another Fail, brought to you by CCP.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Jimmy Farrere
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#72 - 2013-10-08 21:00:02 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:


Interesting how you bolded injustice. Please, post the dictionary definition for that as well, just for posterity's sake, and explain how it applies to a community contributor being rewarded for their efforts.


injustice [ɪnˈdʒʌstɪs]
n
1. the condition or practice of being unjust or unfair
2. an unjust act

Sure, we'll get down to the nitty-gritty on this then.

Is it fair to all Eve players that one ingame entity is selected arbitrarily to be secretly gifted ~600 billion isk worth of ships?

You could perhaps argue that this was a just reward for the effort they have put into the game. But in order to be 'fair' surely others who have put in equal amounts of effort and given the community great tools and services should be rewarded in the same way.

Would it be 'fair' if this isk injection was given to a group you were currently at war with? Would it be fair if this advantage was gifted to hisec gankers because they're very good at what they do? How about they gift a few Titans to The Mittani for providing content for 30,000 accounts as the head of the CFC, not to mention all the good work he's doing with his website?

For many, Eve is a competitive game so yes, gifting one entity an advantage just because a dev 'likes what they've done' is unjust and unfair.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#73 - 2013-10-08 21:10:44 UTC
Jimmy Farrere wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:


Interesting how you bolded injustice. Please, post the dictionary definition for that as well, just for posterity's sake, and explain how it applies to a community contributor being rewarded for their efforts.


injustice [ɪnˈdʒʌstɪs]
n
1. the condition or practice of being unjust or unfair
2. an unjust act

Sure, we'll get down to the nitty-gritty on this then.

Is it fair to all Eve players that one ingame entity is selected arbitrarily to be secretly gifted ~600 billion isk worth of ships?

You could perhaps argue that this was a just reward for the effort they have put into the game. But in order to be 'fair' surely others who have put in equal amounts of effort and given the community great tools and services should be rewarded in the same way.

Would it be 'fair' if this isk injection was given to a group you were currently at war with? Would it be fair if this advantage was gifted to hisec gankers because they're very good at what they do? How about they gift a few Titans to The Mittani for providing content for 30,000 accounts as the head of the CFC, not to mention all the good work he's doing with his website?

For many, Eve is a competitive game so yes, gifting one entity an advantage just because a dev 'likes what they've done' is unjust and unfair.


The argument isn't the effort they've put into the game, it's the contribution they've made to the community. That's the bottom line. I'm no more a fan of opacity and secret dealing than anyone else, but the secrecy of it aside, I am man enough to accept that even if I was at war with a corp that had made as massive a contribution to the community as Somer has, and they were given gifts of ships for their efforts, I would not consider it unreasonable. Seriously, it's just more shinies for me to blow up.

On the other hand, who said EVE was fair?

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

ISD LackOfFaith
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#74 - 2013-10-08 21:10:47 UTC
Quote:

11. Discussion of forum moderation is prohibited.

The discussion of EVE Online forum moderation actions generally leads to flaming, trolling and baiting of our ISD CCL moderators. As such, this type of discussion is strictly prohibited under the forum rules. If you have questions regarding the actions of a moderator, please file a petition under the Community & Forums Category.

17. Impersonation of another party is prohibited.

Forum users are strictly prohibited from impersonating any other party on the EVE Online forums. This includes but is not limited to ISD volunteers, CCP employees, CCP partners and other forum users. This also includes suggesting that an employee of CCP or an ISD volunteer will perform a task for you.

22. Post constructively.

Negative feedback can be very useful to further improve EVE Online provided that it is presented in a civil and factual manner. All users are encouraged to honestly express their feelings regarding EVE Online and how it can be improved. Posts that are non-constructive, insulting or in breach of the rules will be deleted regardless of how valid the ideas behind them may be. Users are also reminded that posting with a lack of content also constitutes non-constructive posting.

Putting words in the mouth of CCP employees is not permitted. Thread locked and forwarded to the community team for review.

ISD LackOfFaith

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

I do not respond to Eve Mail or anything other than the forums.

Ghost Phius
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#75 - 2013-10-08 21:20:11 UTC
Quote:
CCP Eterne wrote:
We are unable to comprehend the difference between an announced, (probably) random ship lottery used to promote an official Eve event through a 3rd party and directly and secretly gifting ships to a favored group of players within the game, all further discussion of the matter is prohibited.



This is so full of so much FAIL and ARROGANCE it's as if the entire Incarna apology was nothing more than Hilmer whacking off in our collective faces.

What CCP fails to comprehend is real integrity in these matters does count. CCP obviously lacked integrity in the manner in which they decided to handle this entire incident. CCP do you remember Wrangler? Where is your integrity today?

The arrogance to think that they can control the players thoughts via the ban hammer for "prohibited" topics being discussed openly in a transparent manner is just sickening.

This smacks of EA style of handling things. Oh that's right they recently hired some EA people and gave them power...well here we go.

Absolutely disgusting.Oops