These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1681 - 2014-03-26 02:58:11 UTC
Shizuken wrote:
Xuixien wrote:

You said it was against the EULA. You were asked to quote it. You made an excuse not to, and are now saying "well it's up to CCP's interpretation".

Just wanting to make sure I have this straight.


Quote:


Suspension and Ban Policy

Though we have made every effort to anticipate all the possible circumstances we may encounter as caretakers of the persistent world of EVE Online, there issues may arise that we had not foreseen.

...

Therefore, this document should not been seen as all-inclusive, but rather to give our players a general idea of the guidelines we follow in dealing with these or similar cases.

...

3. HARASSMENT - Severe offences may result in an immediate ban without warning; however, warnings may be given for first time offenses, followed by account suspensions of varying degree and ultimately a permanent ban if a player:

a. Is abusive, obscene, offensive, sexually explicit, ethnically or racially offensive, or threatening to another player or an official EVE Online representative.
b. Uses role-playing as an excuse for violating the guidelines regarding fair play with others.



There is your justification. As I said in another thread, it takes no mental or semantic gymnastics to fit everything Erotica1 did in that box. There is nothing arbitrary or vague about a ban stemming from the behavior being discussed here.


E1 did non of those things while the "victim" did fall under Harassment for his racially offensive and being threatening to another player.
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#1682 - 2014-03-26 02:58:41 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:

Consent is only valid if its given freely and without coercion. Since the method is to remove a persons virtual property and using that as a means of obtaining the consent that consent is not given freely and so its voided.

Does this mean I can get my bitcoins back???
stoicfaux
#1683 - 2014-03-26 02:58:41 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:


It won't go well for CCP if this gets any traction in the mainstream media due to a slow news day or an EVE fan in the news department.

And so it begins: http://massively.joystiq.com/2014/03/25/heres-some-of-the-cyberbullying-that-happens-in-eve-online/

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Eli Kzanti
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1684 - 2014-03-26 02:58:59 UTC
I'm not sure why this is being discussed in the first place tbh... I suspect Erotica1 alts :P and James 315 alts... etc. etc. :P


I mean... theres such a thing as going too far, ya dig? And some people crossed that line a long time ago...
Berendas
Ascendant Operations
#1685 - 2014-03-26 02:59:11 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
"C. User Content

The System may allow you to communicate information, such as by posting messages in chat rooms, on bulletin boards and other user-to-user areas (collectively, "User Content").

User Content that you cause to be communicated to the System may not (i) violate any statute, rule, regulation or law; (ii) infringe or violate the intellectual property, proprietary, privacy or publicity rights of any third party"

Erotica1 is communicating, ingame, through means of chat functions and bulletin boards that he provides a service OUTSIDE of the game, namely the "Bonus Room".

What that "Bonus Room" has turned out to be, as evidenced by the recording, is a 2hr psychological torture, coerced by the players seized assets and leveraged against the false promise of its return if the person completes the humiliating, degrading and arbitrary demands issued to him by the persons located in this out of game environment, while simultaneously harassing, ridiculing and insulting him.

The conduct the victims are subjected to in this OUT OF GAME environment....


Seized Assets? Torture? Oh please. The assets were given willingly and Sohkar was taken for a ride like the fool we was. VoIP is hardly an out of game environment, seeing as how EVE has its own voice communication features. Are you saying that if the interaction took place over EVE Voice then it would be okay?
Xander Delacroix
Doomheim
#1686 - 2014-03-26 02:59:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Xander Delacroix
Goldiiee wrote:
I would think E1 would be more concerned with winning CSM than anything else, disclosing who he is and by extension where he lives might not be the brightest idea at this point and time.


Oh, I don't think this is going to be a problem to be perfectly honest, Erotica1 may have the courage of his convictions now, but once the tank of his faceless and nameless anonymity is stripped away by the CSM electoral process, he has nothing to hide behind. Ergo, he will pull out of the election at the eleventh hour. Probably citing "cyber-bullying" as his justification... Oh the irony, the irony.
Xuixien
Solar Winds Security Solutions
#1687 - 2014-03-26 02:59:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Xuixien
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Xuixien wrote:
Shizuken wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:


Recording and publishing information that should be private, as in private conversations is defamation, is a breach of privacy. You cannot record a private conversation and publish that conversation on the EvE forums without breaking the law.



Indeed. It violates nearly every US wiretap statute.


Not if you say you consent to being recorded and are aware that the recording may be posted to social media sites. This happens in... every... Bonus Round.

Consent is only valid if its given freely and without coercion. Since the method is to remove a persons virtual property and using that as a means of obtaining the consent that consent is not given freely and so its voided.


Except that would only be valid if they said "The Bonus Round can only proceed if you consent to being recorded." There have been unrecorded Bonus Rounds wherein the client did not consent to being recorded. The contracts ("virtual property") is only obtained after the client consents to being recorded. So really, again, it doesn't hold up.

Also I really doubt "virtual property" would really hold up in court, depending on the judge. In most cases: Probably not.

Everything the client does is consensual, sorry.

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist
Wulfy Johnson
NorCorp Security
#1688 - 2014-03-26 03:00:23 UTC
Its not gamecontent, its repulsive behaviour. In some countrys this can get you jailed up, also for aiding in such.
Space Juden
Supermassive Potato Pancake
#1689 - 2014-03-26 03:00:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Space Juden
Quote:
Yawn. Get off your soap box would ya? You sound like a real ass.


Coming out against this in the EVE community is probably more difficult than supporting it. I don't think it makes him an ass at all.

It's a two hour recording of someone with a speech impediment being manipulated and humiliated. Most people will feel some sort of moral indignation to it and that does say a lot in view of the former.

Which is the base of this long, tedious controversy.
Mario Putzo
#1690 - 2014-03-26 03:01:01 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:


Apologist much.

Hey guys its ok to stand up on a panel at EVE FEST broadcast around the world, and tell a kid to kill himself, as long as you apologize.

But a POX be upon you if you "A known Scammer" Scam someone via TS3.


This is nothing to do with their scamming. It is to do with their RL harassment & abuse of a PERSON.
Note the key point here, they were not doing actions to someones in game avatar. They were directly abusing a PERSON.
Using blackmail in order to keep them there to be abused.

The fact the blackmail in this case happened to be digital goods does not excuse that type of behaviour.


Yet Publicly hazing a guy at Fan Fest, and telling him to kill himself doesn't qualify as that?

I mean if you are going to call a spade a spade, lets get Mittani perma banned if we are going to jump on a moral high horse, lets rehash the fact that the head of the CSM told a kid to kill himself in a live setting, broadcast globally on the internet.

But hey its cool he was drunk and apologized right.

If Erotica 1 is to be banned then the Mittani should be right behind him. Or in front of him given the claer difference in severity of the harassment.
Genseric Tollaris
Hard Cog Industry
#1691 - 2014-03-26 03:01:31 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:


Apologist much.

Hey guys its ok to stand up on a panel at EVE FEST broadcast around the world, and tell a kid to kill himself, as long as you apologize.

But a POX be upon you if you "A known Scammer" Scam someone via TS3.


This is nothing to do with their scamming. It is to do with their RL harassment & abuse of a PERSON.
Note the key point here, they were not doing actions to someones in game avatar. They were directly abusing a PERSON.
Using blackmail in order to keep them there to be abused.

The fact the blackmail in this case happened to be digital goods does not excuse that type of behaviour.


Erotica and co never abused anyone, that was the guy getting scammed doing the abusing.
Kethry Avenger
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1692 - 2014-03-26 03:02:18 UTC
I think banning Erotica1 and those like him could be made on similar grounds as the reason for banning botters.

Botters are banned because of the harm they do to the game, specifically the in game economy. The rules and lines are way more clear here though.

Using EVE to source victims for bullying could also be banned for the harm it does to the game. Both the long term financial harm, from people not playing due to EVE's reputations and just to the harm to the community as a whole, morale spirit. etc.

Malcanis is right that these lines would be hard to define, but I don't think that means CCP shouldn't try to find them.

I think some of those lines could revolve around the publishing and sharing of the events. There are probably legal grounds for this in many places. Invasion of privacy, cyber-bullying, extortion, stuff like that.

And great now I have to go really read the EULA and TOS to be able to argue with people who think this behavior should be allowed to continue.
Tor Norman
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1693 - 2014-03-26 03:02:26 UTC
Shizuken wrote:
Xuixien wrote:

You said it was against the EULA. You were asked to quote it. You made an excuse not to, and are now saying "well it's up to CCP's interpretation".

Just wanting to make sure I have this straight.


Quote:


Suspension and Ban Policy

Though we have made every effort to anticipate all the possible circumstances we may encounter as caretakers of the persistent world of EVE Online, there issues may arise that we had not foreseen.

...

Therefore, this document should not been seen as all-inclusive, but rather to give our players a general idea of the guidelines we follow in dealing with these or similar cases.

...

3. HARASSMENT - Severe offences may result in an immediate ban without warning; however, warnings may be given for first time offenses, followed by account suspensions of varying degree and ultimately a permanent ban if a player:

a. Is abusive, obscene, offensive, sexually explicit, ethnically or racially offensive, or threatening to another player or an official EVE Online representative.
b. Uses role-playing as an excuse for violating the guidelines regarding fair play with others.



There is your justification. As I said in another thread, it takes no mental or semantic gymnastics to fit everything Erotica1 did in that box. There is nothing arbitrary or vague about a ban stemming from the behavior being discussed here.

I don't get it. "Is abusive, obscene, offensive, sexually explicit, ethnically or racially offensive, or threatening to another player or an official EVE Online representative." would hint that the victim is up for account action because he dinged every single one of those definitions during his rants, not Erotica.

I talk about EVE trading and general space violence in my blog.

For the ISK and the yarr!
PinkPanter
Valhalla Drinking Team
#1694 - 2014-03-26 03:02:35 UTC
Xuixien wrote:
EI Digin wrote:
Mr Epeen wrote:
CCP has a legal obligation to maximize profit. Agree or not, that's the way it is.
CCP is not a publicly traded company.


Is that true? If so, Mr. Epeen is not very smart. Pretty much why I never read or respond to his posts anymore.


Oh yeah, being one of very few profitable companies in Iceland they can just go **** it all up and go home.


Hahahah some of you seriously need to stop hiding and simply state you are E1 cause as stupid as people can be there are limits even in this matter.

You're **** E1. Stop trying to change subject with such desperation.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1695 - 2014-03-26 03:02:42 UTC
Xuixien wrote:

Also I really doubt "virtual property" would really hold up in court.


Especially as the game's user agreement explictly states that all in game assets are the property of CCP.

"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.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#1696 - 2014-03-26 03:03:21 UTC
Eli Kzanti wrote:
I mean... theres such a thing as going too far, ya dig? And some people crossed that line a long time ago...


Sure there is, but it's the measure of what's too far that isn't so clearly determined.

That's been an aspect of the discussion from the start of the thread and it generally comes back to what each of us individually decide is the line. Unfortunately that line isn't consistent between us all.
Xuixien
Solar Winds Security Solutions
#1697 - 2014-03-26 03:03:56 UTC
Tor Norman wrote:
Shizuken wrote:
Xuixien wrote:

You said it was against the EULA. You were asked to quote it. You made an excuse not to, and are now saying "well it's up to CCP's interpretation".

Just wanting to make sure I have this straight.


Quote:


Suspension and Ban Policy

Though we have made every effort to anticipate all the possible circumstances we may encounter as caretakers of the persistent world of EVE Online, there issues may arise that we had not foreseen.

...

Therefore, this document should not been seen as all-inclusive, but rather to give our players a general idea of the guidelines we follow in dealing with these or similar cases.

...

3. HARASSMENT - Severe offences may result in an immediate ban without warning; however, warnings may be given for first time offenses, followed by account suspensions of varying degree and ultimately a permanent ban if a player:

a. Is abusive, obscene, offensive, sexually explicit, ethnically or racially offensive, or threatening to another player or an official EVE Online representative.
b. Uses role-playing as an excuse for violating the guidelines regarding fair play with others.



There is your justification. As I said in another thread, it takes no mental or semantic gymnastics to fit everything Erotica1 did in that box. There is nothing arbitrary or vague about a ban stemming from the behavior being discussed here.

I don't get it. "Is abusive, obscene, offensive, sexually explicit, ethnically or racially offensive, or threatening to another player or an official EVE Online representative." would hint that the victim is up for account action because he dinged every single one of those definitions during his rants, not Erotica.


Note, that none of what happens on TS3 is actually being "entered into the System", ie, the EVE Client or the EVE forums or anything related to EVE.

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist
Xuixien
Solar Winds Security Solutions
#1698 - 2014-03-26 03:04:52 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Xuixien wrote:

Also I really doubt "virtual property" would really hold up in court.


Especially as the game's user agreement explictly states that all in game assets are the property of CCP.



Exaaaaactly. So it wasn't even his property to begin with.

Seriously.

You people trying to speak Legalese.

You don't know the language.

So stop.

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist
Salvos Rhoska
#1699 - 2014-03-26 03:05:34 UTC
Xuixien wrote:
...but not violating any rules, regulations, laws, etcetc.

Because it happens outside of the game, (and even if it happens inside it) all local and international rules, regulations and laws apply.

As I have demonstrated earlier in this thread, if any of the victims wish to make a police report on how they where treated in the TS, and/or how they where coerced into that TS, that is their prerogative. Good luck as a defendant explaining to a Judge or Jury that:
"Well, your Honor, it was a scam...!"
The hammer will drop on you instantly.

There is so much legally wrong with what Erotica1 is doing that imo it could potentially be prosecuted as any number of crimes.

Some of you seem to have forgotten where the difference between the game and reality is.

You can't go around scamming people IRL, as you do in EVE. Which is exactly what this "Bonus Room" is.
There is a massive set of complex systems that you can't even begin to imagine without years of legal studies which prevent you, me and everyone else from doing so.

Its a huge legal liability for CCP too, because who knows what could potentially culminate out of this degree of OUT OF GAME abuse of other players, including someone getting physically hurt or at worst some nut showing up to a Fanfest with a home-made pipebomb.

Just drop the garbage. The majority of the community does not want this kind of **** in their EVE experience.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Xuixien
Solar Winds Security Solutions
#1700 - 2014-03-26 03:05:42 UTC
PinkPanter wrote:
Xuixien wrote:
EI Digin wrote:
Mr Epeen wrote:
CCP has a legal obligation to maximize profit. Agree or not, that's the way it is.
CCP is not a publicly traded company.


Is that true? If so, Mr. Epeen is not very smart. Pretty much why I never read or respond to his posts anymore.


Oh yeah, being one of very few profitable companies in Iceland they can just go **** it all up and go home.


Hahahah some of you seriously need to stop hiding and simply state you are E1 cause as stupid as people can be there are limits even in this matter.

You're **** E1. Stop trying to change subject with such desperation.


I was thinking of making a troll post "Confirming I am Erotica 1."

...but impersonating another player is against the rules now. LolCool

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist