These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123
 

Proposal: Removal of Ripard Teg from the CSM

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#41 - 2014-03-26 02:39:15 UTC
mynnna wrote:
I'm sure the irony of someone calling for a CSM member to be removed as a result of remarks made on an out of game platform, about a person that engages in behavior many distasteful at best via an out of game platform, is lost on not only the OP but most of the posters in this thread.


That's basically the point, yeah.

It was Malcanis' point in the threadnaught, also. If we can ban for "distasteful", then we've opened the floodgates.

I don't participate in or particularly condone the "Bonus Room" activity. But I do think "I don't like them" is not really ok as a reason to ban somebody. Certainly not for a sitting CSM member.

"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.
Kirsi Kirjasto
Aggressive Structural Steel Expediting Services
#42 - 2014-03-26 02:39:17 UTC
Erotica 1 wrote:
The only question I have is the timing. Is this to get me to drop out of CSM running? Sohkar is old news.

*edit* I have heard rumours that Riptard presented something to the CSM and/or CCP and did not like the answer so he decided to manufacturer a media shitstorm to try and make CCP look bad or something. Is there any truth to this?


Wouldn't surprise me, but nobody here can likely answer that question.

I'm not sure how 'upset' CCP is about the 'shitstorm' though. Notice this quote on some of those locked threads?

Quote:
This is a situation that we've been monitoring for some time now, and recent events have sparked renewed discussion with regards to what, if anything will be done in regards to what's happened.

Thanks.
CCP Falcon


Sounds like laying the groundwork for arbitrary enforcement using arbitrary justifications. 'Ex post facto' is par for the course in this area of the game.
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#43 - 2014-03-26 02:43:37 UTC
Kirsi Kirjasto wrote:
Its not so much that he 'has a problem' with Erotica 1.

A) It is the irresponsible way in which he expressed it using highly personal nature of the attacks on Erotica 1's very humanity.
Essentially reducing another EVE player - not the toon, but the actual person to a 'vile, evil, dispicable torturer' is, ahem, quite vile.

And, ultimately, I personally wouldn't have a problem with that. People can blog about anything they want, and I can choose not to read it.

Except that leads us to B.

B) Ripard Teg isn't just any old EVE player with a blog that nobody reads. He's a CSM member, representing CCP - which drives quite a bit of traffic to his blog and gives him an outsized 'megaphone'. When he (ab)uses it to attack other players in such terms, by name - I have a problem with it.

Sanctions on Ripard are in order - no matter which side of the 'bonus room' you are on.



Agreed with this, but I'd draw the line at censure.

Ripard is NOT responsible for the RL threats that have happened.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#44 - 2014-03-26 02:44:26 UTC
Quote:
16. Redundant and re-posted threads will be locked.

As a courtesy to other forum users, please search to see if there is a thread already open on the topic you wish to discuss. If so, please place your comments there instead. Multiple threads on the same subject clutter up the forums needlessly, causing good feedback and ideas to be lost. Please keep discussions regarding a topic to a single thread.

Thread closed.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Senior Lead

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department
Previous page123