These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Winchester Steele
#361 - 2014-03-25 16:19:45 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
18 pages in and I'm still waiting for someone to tell me where they think CCP's responsibility to police our out of game actions ends.






Much like in real world governance, some people feel that responsibility has no end. Nanny state for all, in game and out.

...

Prince Kobol
#362 - 2014-03-25 16:20:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Prince Kobol
Malcanis wrote:
18 pages in and I'm still waiting for someone to tell me where they think CCP's responsibility to police our out of game actions ends.






Your completely right, CCP should take no action for anything that happens out of game.

So tell everybody why CCP inform the police if somebody says they are going to commit suicide, after all it is not in the EULA or TOS and it is an action out of game which is completely out of their control.

Would it be because morally and ethically it is the right thing to do?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#363 - 2014-03-25 16:20:23 UTC
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:
Pak Narhoo wrote:


Where is the sticker that say's you cannot play this game EVE if you have mental problems?
EVE is a GAME it means its meant to entertain.

The "people" involved in this didn't stop at scamming and kept going on and on and on and on in a real sociopathic way. Even when the victims wife asked them to give his stuff back they just rolled on in their despicable behavior.

What you write is not on trial here, not whether the guy should or not should have fallen for this scam but should we as a community say at some point this is enough. This has gone way too far?

Or would you rather say, gee, great job E1 &co. until someone gets driven over the edge kills him/herself, this ok behavior?



What's being said is, if you are not mentally stable enough to handle the environment of EVE online, you shouldn't play.

Much like how I stayed away from FPS wargames when I was dealing with PTSD. I didn't insist the game be changed to suit my then emotional instability.


In fact the sticker he refers to is located on the bottem left corner of the login screen.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Jake Rivers
New Planetary Order
#364 - 2014-03-25 16:21:14 UTC
Sephira Galamore wrote:
I think..
- Ripard's blog is overly polemic
- E1 is ethically wrong, on a worse level than The Mittani at Fanfest
- the victim overreacted aswell, but that does not make E1 right

We as a gaming community and CCP as a gaming company have a certain ethical background by which actions are judged. If my local chess club has a member that keeps dissing people we may very well debar hir. If an internet forum has a member that continuously keeps harassing other participants ze may very well get banned. If a certain customer is often near my store (on public ground) promoting a sect and I notice that it drives away other customers I may very well ban him from my store.
I see the problem being that the Eve community is a very broad one, with players from all over the world.
But maybe it's up to CCP here to make clear what they as a company think is right and what is wrong, what kind of behaviour they think is tolerable and which isn't, with the best for the overall player community in mind.
(Don't forget, we are talking about people conduct here, not character conduct)


Re: "No one was forcing him"
That's not as easy. I am sure E1 is a very intelligent person. And when it comes to rhetoric and psychology you have to look deeper.
E1 is doing his scheme in a very distinct way, on purpose. _First_ the player has to give up everything of ISK value ze owns. Players who are sufficiently intelligent (and are not trying to counterscam E1 or just messing around) likely stop right before that. Players that did this first step, are likely in a weaker state of mind. A player such as that, who already is heavily invested via the prepaid high stakes (high to hir at least), will have serious trouble just stopping.


These guys crossed a line in our game and I am appalled at the levels they went to for there own twisted amusement.

What the Mittani did at fanfest pales in comparison.

CCP has to make a choice when enough is enough and I await an official response from them in this matter.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#365 - 2014-03-25 16:21:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Herzog Wolfhammer
Interesting thread. Though it has the usual argument of right and wrong and people thinking being right or wrong determines if they can defy gravity or not.


As I have written for years, and will push yet again, this reminder: when the sandbox becomes all about kids bonking other kids over the head with a pail and shovel, and then pointing and laughing, it stops being a sandbox at that point.

So all this "hurf blurf THIS IS A SANDBOX! hurf blurf" crap starts out as a poor defense.

Part of what I have to deal with on a daily basis in RL is convincing people that:
A. Creating "you have no choice" situations for other people is never going to create an environment that you will like in the long run and
B. No matter who or what you think you are or how important or whether you are right or wrong, consequences, even if you disagree with them, will come.

The day will come when someone is going to kill themselves because they got "griefed". The people in this thread pointing their finger and accusing others of "blaming the victim" will blame the victim. It's a huge problem really. If I had a suicidal neighbor and found a way to push him over the edge, can I say "hey, he was unstable before I did anything. It was bound to happen." ?

Now when the day comes that an Eve player hangs himself after being.... blown up? In a space combat game? We play chess knowing someone is going to get checkmated..... no... humiliated, laughed at, disrespected, etc. ... things that had little to do with DPS and tank and what modules were used... it WON'T MATTER if that person was unstable before they played Eve.

Yeah, if someone gets their rookie ship popped and they go straight to the noose we would know this to be a case of someone who needed help.

But God help us if it happens after.. being pointed and laughed at.

In a world where people who work for failing mainstream media outlets need something - anything - for a story that has the potential for catch phrases like "cyberbullying". "It can happen to your kid!" it will be said. Everybody needs their boogeyman and the parents who have the TV on in the background as they do something else might not take notice long enough to see the commercials.
The journalists go to the same parties and dinners as the politicians - themselves dealing with their failing legitimacy - who will start the knee-jerking in the next legislative session.

And it's not like MMOs are thought of as a great thing either. A society that thinks kids spend too much time on the internet, while at the same time failing to notice that just about everything a teenager might do outside is deemed illegal... or at worst: won't matter to the cop who can beat them up for the lols (note the lack of accountability in RL and the results?), should not be expected to be "kind and reasonable" to some "problem" that nervous mothers start screeching about.

Yeah, it won't matter who or what. All people will see is a sandbox without sand castles and kids bleeding from the head with others pointing and laughing at them.

As much as I like this game, and I can say that the good people you will meet in this game far surpass the damage done by the ass-hats, I still have to confess that when the topic of games and MMOs come up, I always have a little pause before I tell anybody I play Eve.

If these actions around which this thread is about goes viral, I will probably have even more pause.


People will say "Hurf blurf YOU CAN'T POLICE EVERYBODY!!!1!!!".


Perhaps. But if I were "in charge" I know exactly what I would do in this case.


I would not let someone like Erotica 1 use MY copyright and construct of my intellectual property (my game) as a vehicle for "real life of meta jollies and greifing".

On other and more understandable words, while it would not be against the rules to scam people in game, and it was not against the rules to do what was done already, I would not allow players who take their scamming or activities out of game to base it on the knowledge, features, names, activites or content of my property.

Therefore, I would establish that yeah, you can go and totally make someone go apeshit and post it on youtube, but you won't be doing it saying "Hey, we were scamming in Eve Online and we got this player by the name of '' to get on team speak and we totally did XYZ taking all his (in game stuff)". In other words, grief, lols, all you want, but you WILL NOT be couching it in my game, as an activity of my game, as a feature of my game, and using any relation to any in-game identity or other content.

This would be to protect the reputation of "my" content. So yeah, you can post audio of "hey we totally pee-ed this dude off in a game" but you can't say which one.


I think this would be a perfect middle ground. The griefers can get their meta-jollies, but there's no need to play nanny for the rest of the player base. CCP controls the IP as the copyright holder and they have every right to establish rules for content outside of the game, but still drawing on or related to their property.

If the day comes that nobody who plays Eve will admit it, who then would bask in that "accomplishment"?

Bring back DEEEEP Space!

Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#366 - 2014-03-25 16:21:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Prince Kobol wrote:
One point for those who have said he could of just left.

E1 is using something a kin to the Prior Investment Trap. This is something used by many conman / woman in real life to trick all kinds of people out of their money.


Yea, and none of those traps work for an aware person, which means don't go into such a situation unaware.

it's like when I go to the casinos in Louisiana (Texas is still backwards and doesn't allow the Gold mine of gambling except for the state lottery lol). I put all my gambling money in one pocket and winnings in the other and the 2 never meet. When I'm out of gambling money, I leave (with my winnings) and I don't drink more than 2 drinks per hour in the casino despite them constantly trying to shove the free courtesy drinks down your throats.

They (the casinos) know that people tend to throw good money after bad and drunk people make bad decisions. So as an aware adult who wants to gamble and not lose the mortgage money, i take precautions. Then I watch people who didn't do that cry about how unfair it all is as they try to get someone to Western Union them enough money to get home because the sold the car they came in to keep gambling.

Personal Responsibility: It works every time.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#367 - 2014-03-25 16:23:06 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
18 pages in and I'm still waiting for someone to tell me where they think CCP's responsibility to police our out of game actions ends.






Your completely right, CCP should take no action for anything that happens out of game.

So tell everybody why CCP inform the police if somebody says they are going to commit suicide, after all it is not in the EULA or TOS and it is an action out of game which is completely out of their control.

Would it be perhaps because morally and ethically it is the right thing to do?


Thanks. But.... That's where the line starts and I haven't heard anyone complaining about that, much like I haven't heard anyone complaining that Nelson Mandela was allowed a defence lawyer.

But where does it end?

At what point does CCP stop having the right to sanction us for out of game interactions. If I buy you a beer at fanfest, and it turns out to be one beer too many and you faceplant outside Nonni's, do I get a temp ban for that? No?

OK, what's the line then.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Prince Kobol
#368 - 2014-03-25 16:23:33 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
One point for those who have said he could of just left.

E1 is using something a kin to the Prior Investment Trap. This is something used by many conman / woman in real life to trick all kinds of people out of their money.


Yea, and none of those traps work for an aware person, which means don't go into such a situation unaware.

it's like when I go to the casinos in Louisiana (Texas is still backwards and doesn't allow the Gold mine of gambling except for the state lottery lol). I put all my gambling money in one pocket ad winning in the other and the 2 never meet. When i'm out of gambling money, I leave (with my winnings) and I don't drink more than 2 drinks per hour in the casino despite them constantly trying to shove the free courtesy drinks down your throats.

They know that people tend to throw good money after bad and drunk people make bad decisions. So as an aware adult who wants to gamble and not lose the mortgage money, i take precautions. Then I watch people who didn't do that cry about how unfair it all is as they try to get someone to Western Union them enough money to get home because the sold the car they came in to keep gambling.

Personal Responsibility: It works every time.


So the elderly and mentally infirm who fall fall these scams?

Did they just deserve it, was it their fault?
Pashino
Venice Academy
#369 - 2014-03-25 16:24:58 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
18 pages in and I'm still waiting for someone to tell me where they think CCP's responsibility to police our out of game actions ends.





Oh, I don't think they can 'police' anything out of game. No bearing on current issue presented in the thread, either.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#370 - 2014-03-25 16:25:22 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:


So the elderly and mentally infirm who fall fall these scams?

Did they just deserve it, was it their fault?


Dont they have the life experience to expect it?

Dont they know anyone who they can ask for advice?

Or are they like the ones they have shown on the TV here who **** away £4000 in savings on a LOTTERY SCAM.

Greed.

It punishes us all.

"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

Prince Kobol
#371 - 2014-03-25 16:25:31 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
18 pages in and I'm still waiting for someone to tell me where they think CCP's responsibility to police our out of game actions ends.






Your completely right, CCP should take no action for anything that happens out of game.

So tell everybody why CCP inform the police if somebody says they are going to commit suicide, after all it is not in the EULA or TOS and it is an action out of game which is completely out of their control.

Would it be perhaps because morally and ethically it is the right thing to do?


Thanks. But.... That's where the line starts and I haven't heard anyone complaining about that, much like I haven't heard anyone complaining that Nelson Mandela was allowed a defence lawyer.

But where does it end?

At what point does CCP stop having the right to sanction us for out of game interactions. If I buy you a beer at fanfest, and it turns out to be one beer too many and you faceplant outside Nonni's, do I get a temp ban for that? No?

OK, what's the line then.


Again not everything is black and white, you have to take each occurrence / situation / event on its own merits.


Malcolm Shinhwa
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#372 - 2014-03-25 16:25:51 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:

Perhaps. But if I were "in charge" I know exactly what I would do in this case.


I would not let someone like Erotica 1 use MY copyright and construct of my intellectual property (my game) as a vehicle for "real life of meta jollies and greifing".

On other and more understandable words, while it would not be against the rules to scam people in game, and it was not against the rules to do what was done already, I would not allow players who take their scamming or activities out of game to base it on the knowledge or content of my property.


Just as a thought experiment, imagine if Eve had voice coms built in. Erotica 1 uses the built in voice coms to do the "bonus room". Now nothing is out of game. What would change about your argument?

Also, Eve has voice coms built in.

[i]"The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental[/i]."

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#373 - 2014-03-25 16:26:21 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:


The day will come when someone is going to kill themselves because they got "griefed".



That day arrived years ago. There have been several incidents of murders occurring between MMO players due to ingame actions.

Fortunately EVE players seem to be rather level headed, polite and civilised in real life.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Winchester Steele
#374 - 2014-03-25 16:27:51 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Tuscor wrote:
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.



Sure, and for many years that was considered an acceptable way to treat/speak about homosexuals. That is thankfully changing.

But dont try and compare this to homophobia, or german dictators for god's sake! Discriminating and vilifying minority groups is not the same as disliking and calling for action against a bullying sociopath...


Can you give me a reliable method of distinguishing them that doesn't boil down to "stuff that you personally dislike"?

I find brussels sprouts disgusting; just the thought of them makes me heave a little. Can I petition to get someone banned because they post recipes for them in local?

If not, then you're saying that only the things you find disgusting are a problem. Things I find disgusting and things evengelical christians find disgusting are just fine, however. Am I right?

Far simpler for CCP to not try and be 400,000 people's mom and stay the hell out of our out of game activities, don't you think?



Why aren't you running for CSM again? The people of New Eden need guys like you on the CSM.

...

Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#375 - 2014-03-25 16:27:59 UTC
Am I the only person who teaches any newbie I find

1) Trust No One: Paranoia is Your Friend

2) There's no such thing as free money

3) Do not look directly at Jita Local

"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

Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#376 - 2014-03-25 16:28:25 UTC
Winchester Steele wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
18 pages in and I'm still waiting for someone to tell me where they think CCP's responsibility to police our out of game actions ends.






Much like in real world governance, some people feel that responsibility has no end. Nanny state for all, in game and out.


That's probably one of my biggest problems with the people calling for Erotica's head on a stick. It smacks of nanny state tyranny to me.

Now personally, I'd never do what Erotica did, I'd feel bad about doing that to someone unless I knew they really really deserved it in some fashion (like say they scammed other people so i'm scamming them). Just like miner bumping and suicide ganking arnot my cup of tea but i support the gamers who do it as they are adding content to a sandbox game.

Some people can't separate "I don't like this" from "there should be a law against this" which is why real life politicians in Western Countries are forever trying to shove THIER morality into OUR law books lol.

Erotica1, fighter for freedom and against Tyranny. Who in hell would have thought that LOL.
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
#377 - 2014-03-25 16:29:47 UTC
...I'll reluctantly bite here.

I spend the majority of my time in EvE flying with people who's company I enjoy, looking for mostly consentual pvp (i.e. you are in lowsec, w-space, or null), or doing my share of bearing for isk.

Having said that, EvE is a richer place for having conmen, thieves, and sociopaths. In a gaming society that increasingly forces people into narrow playstyles that are strictly moderated, I enjoy the risk and the unknown, this is what adds the uncertainty that makes this game interesting.

That said, I can't help but feel for this guy. I'd also like to +1 the comments of, don't blow your stack over space pixels, it just isn't worth t.
Aralyn Cormallen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#378 - 2014-03-25 16:29:54 UTC
Keeping aside from the slightly rabid arguements, one question keeps popping up that no-one has answered, that seemed pretty obvious to me.

A lot of people have asked what the point of the bonus room, when they already had his stuff (and attributing it to malice or perversion)

Well, that one struck me as obvious straight away. Wait for it, those asking the question will likely burst out laughing in disbelief, but bare with me.

Its legitimacy.

Yeah, you heard that right. Ero's shtick has always been that he is the only one who does exactly what he says he does, the only one who doesn't scam, doesn't cheat his marks. That is the point of what was going on - to make the participant give up, and lose, hence making the loss of his items due to the fact he backed out (right at the last minute, of course). Regardless of the circumstances of the matter, he is able to, every time, state truthfully that the 'loser' gave up. Sure, the guy never had a chance, but if Ero walked with the items at any point, before the participant gave up of his own free will, that undermines his whole ethos and reputation.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#379 - 2014-03-25 16:30:42 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
18 pages in and I'm still waiting for someone to tell me where they think CCP's responsibility to police our out of game actions ends.






Your completely right, CCP should take no action for anything that happens out of game.

So tell everybody why CCP inform the police if somebody says they are going to commit suicide, after all it is not in the EULA or TOS and it is an action out of game which is completely out of their control.

Would it be perhaps because morally and ethically it is the right thing to do?


Thanks. But.... That's where the line starts and I haven't heard anyone complaining about that, much like I haven't heard anyone complaining that Nelson Mandela was allowed a defence lawyer.

But where does it end?

At what point does CCP stop having the right to sanction us for out of game interactions. If I buy you a beer at fanfest, and it turns out to be one beer too many and you faceplant outside Nonni's, do I get a temp ban for that? No?

OK, what's the line then.


Again not everything is black and white, you have to take each occurrence / situation / event on its own merits.




So basically, there are literally no rules and the only determining factor is being "offensive" to you.

If I hook up with another EVE player and form a relationship with her, should I be banned if Prince Kobol thinks she's too young for me?

How about if our alliances fight and you are offended by some of my propoganda posts on a 3rd party site?

Seriously, if you can't see why arbitrary banning for "offending" people - especially in a game like EVE - wouldn't be a huge whirlwind of a shitstorm, I don't know what to say to you. This isn't just a slippery slope: it's a 4km Luge ride straight to hell.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Winchester Steele
#380 - 2014-03-25 16:31:25 UTC
Xander Delacroix wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Xander Delacroix wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
Here is Jesters latest Blog

http://jestertrek.blogspot.com.au/2014/03/the-bonus-round.html

As you can probably tell it is to do with Erotica 1's bonus round.

It is a very damning blog.

I can only surmise that Jester has brought the subject up with CCP and was not happy with there response which thus led him to create this blog. (Many apologise if I am wrong)

I would be very interested to hear what the community at large thinks and perhaps for Erotica and friends to refute the claims being made that they actually enjoy the pain and humiliation that they cause, especially to the man in the recording linked in Jesters Blog.


Is it CCP's responsibility to police out of game interaction between their players where no law has been broken?

If so, where does that responsibility end? Should they ban a player when his wife complains about him playing EVE instead of doing the chores?

If I hook up with another EVE player who happens to be from say Japan, should CCP have the right and duty to ban me if the GM involved disapproves of inter-racial relationships? What about homosexual relationships?

What if I encourage another player to log in to fleet and miss church on sunday?

Where exactly does CCP's "responsibility" end?



Malcanis, for someone who is on the CSM you seem to be seriously missing the big picture here. Even if your supposition is true that since this happened outside of Eve itself, and therefore isn't CCP's responsibility, it was instigated in-game and it involved in-game assets. However, the big picture here is not just the reality of the situation, but rather the perception of the reality. Eve is already considered by many prospective players as being a harsh and unforgiving environment; great for all the budding pirates who think they're ruthless and feared, not so great for bringing in new players (oh yeah, and bringing in subscribers to pay for things like development). If this news breaks it's way into wider social media, possibly going viral (which is entirely possible), then Eve suddenly appears to be an incredibly toxic environment. CCP would then be forced to defend themselves, not just to us, but to the world at large. Let's face it, CCP is a business. Bad media coverage and a toxic reputation is bad for business. This means they'll have no choice but to intervene in-game if they want their business to survive. This means much more stringent and harsh restrictions being put on what people in the sandbox can do, whether you like it or not. CCP not addressing this issue is bad for business.


So you'd be in favour of CCP banning people who start homosexual relationships after meeting through EVE if it looked like religious groups or the Russian government started making a fuss about it?



Missing. The. Point. Entirely.


Yes you are missing the point entirely. Malc is trying to patiently show you though. Keep trying, you'll get it eventually.

...