These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Jester Trek Latest Blog

First post First post
Author
Enthropic
Infinite Point
Pandemic Horde
#201 - 2014-03-25 14:20:57 UTC
I didnt read through the entire topic, nor did I listen to the entire recording, just the last 30 min when the guy started to lose it.

I can actually understand why the Erotica1 and his buddies enjoyed themselves, it can be fun to a certain point.
In my opinion however, the line was clearly crossed.
I love drinking internet spaceship drama tears, but you guys should be ashamed.

It was too much and the guy on the other end of the line (although reacting very poorly) was clearly suffering.
Not because of the lost ISK, but because of the humiliation.
At some point much earlier, you should have simply stopped, but you didnt, I pity you for this attitude.
Salvos Rhoska
#202 - 2014-03-25 14:22:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Jenn aSide wrote:
You'd be laughing at someone who outplayed someone in a video game being physically assaulted. The only thing Erotica1 could do to justify physical assault is physcially assult someone.


I'd be laughing at someone getting it in the face as a result of their own conduct in deliberately griefing and humiliating other human beings above and beyond the scope of the game itself, with provable malice and intent to cause harm.

Perfectly justified.

Jenn aSide wrote:
If you don't understand why you are wrong, I can't help you understand it now. Such understanding needs to be instilled while a person is still young by parents and by a community that values right and wrong.


Yes. That would seem to be the case for Erotica1. Thanks for supporting that!
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#203 - 2014-03-25 14:23:46 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
The only reason for someone to use physical force is in defense of themselves or another innocent person.

Or property. Nor does the other person have to qualify as "innocent" in order to legally justify physical force being used in their defense.

You just showed you are lying about having legal training.

Thanks for playing!


Even in my state (Texas), use of force or deadly force in defense of property must be 'reasonable' where as defense of self or an innocent third person is almost absolute. And the term innocent third person is important because you can't claim self defense for your drug dealing buddy when things go wrong (as an example).

I do so enjoy being called a liar by some untrained and immoral civilian who probably doesn't even live in my country.
Machagon
Amamake Anarchist Community College
#204 - 2014-03-25 14:25:06 UTC
Malcanis, I love the job you do on the CSM, and I agree 100% with your point about banning people for non-rulebreaking behaviour, but your bullying as homosexuality metaphor here is a huge stretch, not very helpful, and kind of offensive on its own.

I personally think that Erotica 1's behaviour in the audio log is reprehensible and reflects very poorly on him as a human being. I take on the personality of a pirate with no moral compass when I play this game, and I think that the ISK doubling scam is a great one that I support entirely. But, when I am interacting with other EVE players (rather than their characters) I treat them with the same kindness and respect I would any other human being.

There is definitely a line crossed here where this interaction is no longer about EVE in any way and is just one group of out-of-game people bullying another out-of-game person. They are delighting in the distress of his wife, for god's sake.

I don't think Erotica 1 should be banned. I would theoretically love to see a rules change to make this sort of thing bannable, but in practice that's a terrible rabbit hole to go down and entirely unenforceable besides.

What we CAN do, is reflect as a community and decide whether this is something we are really comfortable with. What we can do is stop believing that defending the amazing concept of the true sandbox means we have to defend the behaviour Erotica 1 displays on TS here. This is not a long con, it is bullying. It's real-world harassment. Please don't use my game as a casting call for real world torture victims.
TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#205 - 2014-03-25 14:25:13 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


No, there isn't.

Because you can say precisely the same thing about Monopoly. You can take someone's play money over and over, until they've had enough.


This isn't about the money, dude. I haven't touched on the money issue at all. Reread my posts.
This entire blog and this thread are about the bullying behavior. Making people humiliate themselves in front of a group of people. And the things mentioned in the blog are hardly the worst behavior I've ever heard about within EVE. This is about the way people treat each other as human beings inside of EVE and how that behavior crosses several lines way too often.

Screw the money, seriously.

My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!

My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#206 - 2014-03-25 14:25:19 UTC
I'm up a while past my bedtime, so I'll just part with "in before lock".

To those of you who have expressed that in game activity merits real life violence, to hell with you. Literally. You're morally bankrupt, and you've replaced morality with this caricature of morals prioritizing hurt feelings on the internet above the welfare and safety of actual human beings.

People like you are the reason I post on an alt. Because you lot can't manage to keep the game, within the game. I sincerely urge all of you to quit this game immediately, before you cause harm to a real person.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

arabella blood
Keyboard Jihad
#207 - 2014-03-25 14:26:12 UTC  |  Edited by: arabella blood
I just hope this thing get out of hand. That this thing hit major gaming sites etc, and create enough talk to actually force some mind change in CCP behaviour towards it.

If that won't work, i sure hope Erotica and his friends falls on the wrong victim. The 1 that will actually finds them IRL.
Isnt that RISK VS ISK enough?

Troll for hire. Cheap prices.

Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#208 - 2014-03-25 14:26:43 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
The only reason for someone to use physical force is in defense of themselves or another innocent person.

Or property. Nor does the other person have to qualify as "innocent" in order to legally justify physical force being used in their defense.


Money and perception > life and security from physical harm in your book then

Im going on a limb here but I would bet that you feel there are circumstances where physical and mental torture in real life is justified.

Of course, I dont gamble.

That's a sin.

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#209 - 2014-03-25 14:27:29 UTC
arabella blood wrote:
I just hope this thing get out of hand. That this thing hit major gaming sites etc, and create enough talk to actually force some mind change in CCP behaviout towards it.

If that won't work, i sure hope Erotica and his friends falls on the wrong victim. They 1 that will actually finds them IRL.
Isnt that RISK VS ISK enough?


I know my last post said I was done for now, but...

You sir, are slime.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#210 - 2014-03-25 14:28:53 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:

I'd be laughing at someone getting it in the face as a result of their own conduct in deliberately griefing and humiliating other human beings above and beyond the scope of the game itself, with provable malice and intent to cause harm.

Perfectly justified.


Your ideas of what justifies violence concern me somewhat. As an autistic person who got bullied a lot all throughout school, I can tell you now, that kind of violence would be nothing but a display of the attacker's lack of self control. In fact, this whole thread should now be locked for inciting violence against an individual.

“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

Michele Bachmann
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#211 - 2014-03-25 14:30:40 UTC
greed
grēd/
noun
noun: greed

1.
intense and selfish desire for something, esp. wealth, power, or food.
synonyms: avarice, cupidity, acquisitiveness, covetousness, rapacity; More
materialism, mercenariness;
rarepleonexia;
informalmoney-grubbing, affluenza
"human greed"
gluttony, hunger, voracity, insatiability;
gourmandism, intemperance, overeating, self-indulgence;
informalpiggishness
"her mouth watered with greed"
desire, appetite, hunger, thirst, craving, longing, lust, yearning, hankering;
avidity, eagerness;
informalyen, itch
"their greed for power"
antonyms: generosity, temperance, indifference

Despite what I think of Erotica1 I think even less for the people they scam for they have taken greed and let it blind them from something that is most obviously a scam.
Salvos Rhoska
#212 - 2014-03-25 14:30:52 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Even in my state (Texas), use of force or deadly force in defense of property must be 'reasonable' where as defense of self or an innocent third person is almost absolute. And the term innocent third person is important because you can't claim self defense for your drug dealing buddy when things go wrong (as an example).

I do so enjoy being called a liar by some untrained and immoral civilian who probably doesn't even live in my country.


Oh so much wrong with this, and ESPECIALLY as specific to Texas.

Firstly. the circumstances of the threat determine whether force or deadly force is justified, not what is being defended by the act. Deadly force is not reasonable when someone is attacking either you or your property with a plastic spoon.

Second, police officer protecting a convicted individual in their custody can use necessary force to defend them against an aggressor (for example a relative of whoever the convicted individual had committed a crime against). The person protected is not "innocent", but protecting them with force is still justified.

You are a liar. You don't have any formal legal training.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#213 - 2014-03-25 14:31:31 UTC
arabella blood wrote:

If that won't work, i sure hope Erotica and his friends falls on the wrong victim. They 1 that will actually finds them IRL.
Isnt that RISK VS ISK enough?


Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

To those of you who have expressed that in game activity merits real life violence, to hell with you. Literally. You're morally bankrupt, and you've replaced morality with this caricature of morals prioritizing hurt feelings on the internet above the welfare and safety of actual human beings.


Dont even need to write my own replies sometimes.

Oh crap, Im botting.

Oh wait, wrong thread phew.

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann

Jita Otsito
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#214 - 2014-03-25 14:32:07 UTC
Silvetica Dian wrote:
Jita Otsito wrote:
1. I find Erotica behavior despicable. My line is when you get nothing in game for your effort but still continue to goad/insult person out of game just to get reaction out of them. Thats why Im reasonably ok (dont want to really play with them, but dont mind them being in game) with people that scam people out of their ingame assets, but discussed kind of behavior is unacceptable for me.
2. IMO if CCP wanted to act point one of TOS gives them all justification theyd need: "You may not abuse, harass or threaten another player or (...)" (abuse: to treat in a harmful, injurious, or offensive way)
3. to avoid slippery slope you can just define this as "abusing people out of game originating in game for no in game purpose".



I think you will find all the abuse and IRL threats are directed at Erotica /James /Minerbumbers/ pirates /awoxers/ thieves /margin scammers and rarely if ever from these groups. Many "victims" of these people are indeed banned by CCP for precisely the reasons you suggest.
Time to think about what you have written and to whom it applies.

I dont really mind them being punished for such threats - they let their emotions run loose so they should face consequences. If the only provocation was destroying some of their ingame assets - doubly so.
While I personally dislike all kinds of griefers, scammers etc and think they sometimes harm the game, Im fine with them being there. Its just when they stop playing the game and start abusing someone out of it for no other reason then that they can, that I find it wrong.
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#215 - 2014-03-25 14:33:31 UTC
I can't even conceive why some people here would defend Erotika for his actions. Especially from a community that can be so willing to fight in-game then so friendly RL.

I don't event understand how people can babble about suicide laws when mittens was banned for this precise reason without any law to back this up. And everything thought that it was a legitimate move of CCP at the time.

Also lets note that Erotika didn't even answer the thread, usually thats the kind of person to answer with bravado to threads like this. Guilt sign?

I also took notice that Malkanis, the CSM member the most widely known for misbehaving and being agressive toward community members on public forums -its not against the CSM rules mind you, just against ethical rules, like here- has been answering quite actively to this thread. To the point where it becomes disturbing...

So... Clearly there is a part of the community here that misunderstood the sandbox concept. They took the in-game caracteristic and used it to justify actions done on a personal-level, out of the game.

Is the fact of torturing someone on non-eve comms against the EULA? Nope.
Is the fact of recording said actions and sharing them with the eve community? If it was for mittens, it definitely is. (remember that part of CCP's justification was because it was done on stream, thus recorded and shared).
Is it a good advertising of the game and an expected behaviour coming from an eve player? Nope.

People are banned on other MMOs because its against the EULA to talk about their game with negativity. if THIS is an acceptable ban behaviour, then again, banning Erotika surely is.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart

BLACK-STAR
#216 - 2014-03-25 14:34:21 UTC  |  Edited by: BLACK-STAR
Malcanis wrote:
Tuscor wrote:
Just ban Erotica1. The community does not need poisonous twats like that - and I for one am happy for the sandbox and 'emergent gameplay' to take second seat to cleaning the community of such filth.


People talk about gays in very similar terms to the ones you have used in your post.

Come to that, so have insane monogonadal austrian dictators.


That was out of touch, much? austrian dictators lol.. I'm out of this thread. Just pointing a finger at --edit: err nothing
Salvos Rhoska
#217 - 2014-03-25 14:41:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Your ideas of what justifies violence concern me somewhat.


I did not say the violence is justified.

I did say I would laugh and applaud if it occured to an individual as a result of their deliberate griefing and humiliation of other human beings above and beyond the purview and context of the game.

I would laugh and applaud a kid KO:ing the bully who has been griefing and humiliating him as well.

Everyone can agree that EVE allows for a wide range of aggression towards other players.
That is all well and fine.

In these specific incidents perpetrated by Erotica1, however, the extent of abuse, humiliation and griefing extends beyond the confines of the game and becomes frankly an issue for actual legal action. The only thing that protects Erotica1 from that, is that he does not live in the same legal jurisdiction as his victims.

Make no mistake, bring these recordings before any judge or jury, and explain the context to them, and they will all find in favor of the plaintiff.

CCP needs to decide whether they really want to place their stamp of approval on this kind of extreme conduct, griefing and humiliation. I would most certainly encourage that they do NOT accept it, and take punitive action against those who take this game to such extremes.

EVE, the game, does not need or benefit in anyway shape or form from what Erotica1 is doing as evidenced by these recordings.
Not. One. Bit. Neither does the community, and neither does CCP. Infact we ALL stand to lose, thanks to this ridiculously extreme behavior by one single individual. Get rid of them. We don't need or want this kind of poison here.
Tyburn Stannis
Xenon Salvage Inc.
#218 - 2014-03-25 14:42:29 UTC
Basic principle of Eve - you are responsible for your own stuff, and responsible for your own actions. Not your corpmates, not your CEO, not CCP, not your mother.

If you give it away, trade it, put it in a corp hanger, contract it to a total stranger, then it's on you. If you decide to take a problem out of game, onto teamspeak or forums, then it's on you. You, and only you, are the one who clicked "send" or "accept" or "join channel".

o/
Azami Nevinyrall
172.0.0.1
#219 - 2014-03-25 14:42:44 UTC
This is what CCP created.

Are you Happy?

...

Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#220 - 2014-03-25 14:44:58 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Even in my state (Texas), use of force or deadly force in defense of property must be 'reasonable' where as defense of self or an innocent third person is almost absolute. And the term innocent third person is important because you can't claim self defense for your drug dealing buddy when things go wrong (as an example).

I do so enjoy being called a liar by some untrained and immoral civilian who probably doesn't even live in my country.


Oh so much wrong with this, and ESPECIALLY as specific to Texas.

Firstly. the circumstances of the threat determine whether force or deadly force is justified, not what is being defended by the act. . Deadly force is not reasonable when someone is attacking either you or your property with a plastic spoon.

Second, police officer protecting a convicted individual in their custody can use necessary force to defend them against an aggressor (for example a relative of whoever the convicted individual had committed a crime against). The person protected is not "innocent", but protecting them with force is still justified.

You are a liar. You don't have any formal legal training.


You aren't sane. Look up the Texas Penal Code for yourself if you don't understand (the highlighted part, in particular is just wrong, it's circumstances AND what is being defended, along with 'when' because there are justifications for nighttime acts that don't apply to daytime). And protecting a person in custody isn't the same as defense of a third person, two different laws. When i use the term innocent I'm not talking about their conviction status

But seriously dude, you need help. I've dealt with a lot of know it all jail house lawyers but you take the cake.