These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
lollerwaffle
Perkone
Caldari State
#4621 - 2014-03-27 08:17:35 UTC  |  Edited by: lollerwaffle
Space Juden wrote:
lollerwaffle wrote:
Space Juden wrote:
How could he be banned if there were no rules in place forbidding the behavior prior to this incident?

To me the question became

should behavior like this or worse than this warrant a reanalysis of CCP's stance

I pointed out how difficult this would be in that current employees of CCP engaged in just this sort of behavior.

Since there are no rules forbidding this behaviour, why should he be banned? Because you don't like this behaviour?

BTW ,behaviour like this has happened throughout the 10+ year history of EVE. As and when CCP decides an individual has stepped over the line, they will take action. This action is not determined nor enforced by a subset of players who don't like said behaviour, or do not find it acceptable according to their moral standards.


Should you be in this thread at all if you have such a fundamental deficiency in reading comprehension?

We all have questions

Oh look, attack the poster and not his arguments. Well played Roll

By the way, you could also pick up some reading comprehension lessons yourself Smile
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#4622 - 2014-03-27 08:17:37 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Mr Epeen wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

"Grr, not breaking the rules but I don't like you anyway."


That's not really your call, is it?

It's up to CCP whether any rules were broken. CCP makes the rules and CCP interprets them. Not me. Not you.

I suppose we'll find out soon enough, so give it a rest about rules. It just doesn't wash.

Mr Epeen Cool

At least we provide some support beyond: he makes me feel bad on the inside. But you are correct, CCP will decide.


Any 'support' you provide is moot. And I don't make a habit of willfully misunderstanding your posts for some perceived advantage. Why don't you offer me the same respect?

Mr Epeen Cool
Anomaly One
Doomheim
#4623 - 2014-03-27 08:18:25 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
If I get a big enough lynch mob, can I get someone banned, too?


depends, does it cause PR damage? is it full of propaganda ? did you use fancy words and exclamation marks with hyperbole? if yes, then you most certainly can!

Psychotic Monk for CSM9 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326497 you want content in highsec? vote Monk
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#4624 - 2014-03-27 08:19:37 UTC
This whole thread is harassment designed to cause emotional damage.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~
Dacus Minor
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#4625 - 2014-03-27 08:20:26 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Space Juden wrote:

should behavior like this or worse than this warrant a reanalysis of CCP's stance

I pointed out how difficult this would be in that current employees of CCP engaged in just this sort of behavior.

I have no problem with the discussion taking this course, but that isn't the course the individuals calling for a ban are taking.


IMHO, this is the main issue that should be discussed, and yes, I do consider this an issue.

It's not if one can or cannot cope with this but... One can find scamming and bad behavior in any and all on-line activities (games or otherwise) but I do not think one can find too many places (i.e. games) where scamming is endorsed and has risen to the rank of major feature.

I would lie if I said that I read all 230 pages, but I think most have gone the wrong about this... a whistle should be blown.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#4626 - 2014-03-27 08:20:31 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Yes he was obviously. It comes down to reasonable perceptions. Would you want a loved one to be subjected to similar abuse in a computer game?

If they're a functioning adult, I wouldn't care. If they're someone who relies on support, like a child, then I'd supervise their online activities and not allow them to get into that kind of situation.

Quote:
A normal person listening to the recording would reasonably be expected to conclude that the intention of the people in the recording was to humiliate, abuse, insult, tease and make fun of this person.

So?

Quote:
A reasonable person when asked if that would constitute an intention to cause harm to that person would very likely respond in the affirmative.

A reasonable person would not make such presumptions based on such little evidence.

Quote:
Stop trying to justify your unjustifiable behavior by calling the victim a 'client', you don't fool me and you likely don't fool even yourself. Your behavior is extremely poor and this is probably a wake up call for you to reassess it.

Why would I want to justify it? It is what it is, I don't need approval.

Lol. Sorry but you idiots not only recorded the 'evidence' you then released it into the public domain so everyone could listen to it. There's a good 2 hours of evidence which clearly shows that you intended to cause harm by humiliating, abusing, teasing (including the persons speech impediment) and making fun of this person for your enjoyment.

It clearly shows laughing and snide comments regarding the victims and his wife's upset reactions. There is no doubt at all that the people involved intended to cause, knew they caused and despite that continued to cause harm.

Don't try to slime your way out of it through pretense of ignorance.

As for your not needing approval, I think its clear that either a) you're all sociopathic, people incapable of caring and empathy, or more likely b) have low self esteem and you're making up for it by trying to outdo each other in a sad game of "lets feel more powerful by denigrating someone".

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#4627 - 2014-03-27 08:21:26 UTC
Anomaly One wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
If I get a big enough lynch mob, can I get someone banned, too?


depends, does it cause PR damage? is it full of propaganda ? did you use fancy words and exclamation marks with hyperbole? if yes, then you most certainly can!


"And for only 3 easy payments of $10.99..."

"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.
Salvos Rhoska
#4628 - 2014-03-27 08:21:50 UTC
Can someone please post the full list of tasks required, as well as what is required to fulfill those tasks, in order to win the "Bonus Room"?

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Abrei-Kaii
Petrolinvest
#4629 - 2014-03-27 08:22:14 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:

Quote:
A normal person listening to the recording would reasonably be expected to conclude that the intention of the people in the recording was to humiliate, abuse, insult, tease and make fun of this person.

So?


Okay erot... I mean Riot Girl, is that all you have to say for yourself? Really? You really think this appropriate and doesn't cross the line? Based on your remarks thus far in this tread it appears to me that you don't care one bit for anything... or anyone...

Enjoy your ban...
Cjtirith
Foo Holdings
AL3XAND3R.
#4630 - 2014-03-27 08:22:15 UTC
Ok, here's another angle :

Would it be a problem if the act in question was published on the front page of a newspaper? in the sense that there would be a general outcry of the majority of the population, and a strong backlash.
(and this is not just used for emails)

If the answer is yes, then CCP must address it, because without a response there *will* be more widespread publicity over this incident, just as B-R got widespread publicity.

Also, coming from the finance industry I'm very tempted to go fish for the contact information of CCP's investors and see how THEY would react if CCP did nothing...
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#4631 - 2014-03-27 08:23:04 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Can someone please post the full list of tasks required, as well as what is required to fulfill those tasks, in order to win the "Bonus Room"?


Good Lord! It's a SCAM. Roll

get a life

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~
Josef Djugashvilis
#4632 - 2014-03-27 08:23:34 UTC
lollerwaffle wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Do any of the folk speaking up for Ero think that the making fun of a person's speech impediment was acceptable?

I would like to think that even the most ardent 'Eve Online laissez faire' folk find the part of that whole sorry episode unacceptable.

Do you think that the 'victim' using racist and homophobic language, or issuing RL death threats was acceptable?

Both are in the wrong. No one should be banned just because someone 'feels offended', which is actually how this silly threadnaught got started.


Cause and effect.

The mark should not have resorted to the sort of language he used.

This is not a signature.
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#4633 - 2014-03-27 08:23:37 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:

Any 'support' you provide is moot. And I don't make a habit of willfully misunderstanding your posts for some perceived advantage. Why don't you offer me the same respect?

Mr Epeen Cool

Hardly moot. CCP has a tendency to occasionally listen to well supported discussions on the forums. It doesn't happen often, but it does happen (See: Somer Blink, ESS, various balance discussion threads e.g. the stratios proposal).

My apologies for any offense caused. I merely meant to say that providing some support is better than none. Just my opinion.
Prince Kobol
#4634 - 2014-03-27 08:24:16 UTC
I have just finished Funky Bacons blog on the matter and one thing struck me.

I noticed that it was stated somewhere in this thread that E1 stated that he has reviewed the EULA/TOS carefully to ensure that he does not break them, hence him making sure he uses 3rd Party Comms, and also makes sure he gain consent so he does not break any laws.

If what he is doing fine then why so be so careful you are not breaking any laws?

You would only check this as you know what you are doing is both morally and ethically wrong and want a way out if something goes wrong.

If you know that what you are doing is fine you wouldn't go to the lengths he has to cover his own ass.
Muestereate
Minions LLC
#4635 - 2014-03-27 08:25:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Muestereate
lollerwaffle wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Already been cited multiple times. You may not harass other players. You may not cause damage to CCP's reputation.

I really think you need to look at the precedent set on that harassment clause. CCP is VERY loose on it. This is by design. One of their game trailers focuses on taking revenge for actions that happened a year before for god's sake.

Harassment is harassment. Harming CCP's reputation and the reputation of EvE is harming CCP's reputation and the reputation of EvE.

CCP markets EVE as a persistent, dark, cold world where skullduggery is allowed and often encouraged. They don't have a reputation for pink fluffy cuddly unicorn teddy bears...



People consistently post this, Im really having a bit of a time finding this. In the main blurp about eve it brags about exploration. THE EVE UNIVERSE

Going to the next link it talks about the sandbox and various careers. The only scoundrel activity mentioned is the pirate.

Piracy Sandbox



  • I fly a heavily-armed combat vessel able to halt and attack other ships
  • My prey of choice is other capsuleers, as they often provide the greatest rewards
  • I setup ambushes at stargates or hunt in asteroid belts and other locations
  • When unsuspecting ships fly into my trap or I find a target I strike
  • I can demand a ransom for letting ships go or destroy them and seize their cargo


It says you can demand a ransom to let go of ships, not toput other players through what we are discussing.

I know scams are allowed but I don't see them marketed. I really don't see this game as marketed as so many claim. Perhaps long ago when dark meant black background. I can't find CCP references. At least anything current . There are of course old forum posts mentioning skullduggery and goons in the same sentence but I really don't see CCP marketing this game in any manner reminiscent of many forum posters claims. Their policies and advertisement conversely imply that they CARE about their reputation.

Like I said, this is a popular opinion and don't take it as a personal singling out.
Salvos Rhoska
#4636 - 2014-03-27 08:25:52 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Can someone please post the full list of tasks required, as well as what is required to fulfill those tasks, in order to win the "Bonus Room"?


Good Lord! It's a SCAM. Roll

get a life


My question still stands.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#4637 - 2014-03-27 08:25:59 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:


If what he is doing fine then why so be so careful you are not breaking any laws?





... because he wants what he is doing to be fine? In a legal sense, of course. Yeesh, put more effort into your trick questions.

"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.
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#4638 - 2014-03-27 08:26:05 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Lol. Sorry but you idiots not only recorded the 'evidence' you then released it into the public domain so everyone could listen to it. There's a good 2 hours of evidence which clearly shows that you intended to cause harm by humiliating, abusing, teasing (including the persons speech impediment) and making fun of this person for your enjoyment.

It clearly shows laughing and snide comments regarding the victims and his wife's upset reactions. There is no doubt at all that the people involved intended to cause, knew they caused and despite that continued to cause harm.

I wasn't in that bonus round, but nothing you say really means a lot. Making fun of a speech impediment is kinda low, but still, it's hardly a human rights violation.

Quote:
Don't try to slime your way out of it through pretense of ignorance.

Okay, I won't.

Quote:
As for your not needing approval, I think its clear that either a) you're all sociopathic, people incapable of caring and empathy, or more likely b) have low self esteem and you're making up for it by trying to outdo each other in a sad game of "lets feel more powerful by denigrating someone".

They're both pretty much the same thing. That's how sociopaths work.

Oh god.
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#4639 - 2014-03-27 08:26:46 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
I have just finished Funky Bacons blog on the matter and one thing struck me.

I noticed that it was stated somewhere in this thread that E1 stated that he has reviewed the EULA/TOS carefully to ensure that he does not break them, hence him making sure he uses 3rd Party Comms, and also makes sure he gain consent so he does not break any laws.

If what he is doing fine then why so be so careful you are not breaking any laws?

You would only check this as you know what you are doing is both morally and ethically wrong and want a way out if something goes wrong.

If you know that what you are doing is fine you wouldn't go to the lengths he has to cover his own ass.


Because breaking the law is bad? Fear of the law does not imply guilt, nor should it.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#4640 - 2014-03-27 08:27:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
Muestereate wrote:


People consistently post this, Im really having a bit of a time finding this. In the main blurp about eve it brags about exploration. THE EVE UNIVERSE

Going to the next link it talks about the sandbox and various careers. The only scoundrel activity mentioned is the pirate.

Piracy Sandbox



  • I fly a heavily-armed combat vessel able to halt and attack other ships
  • My prey of choice is other capsuleers, as they often provide the greatest rewards
  • I setup ambushes at stargates or hunt in asteroid belts and other locations
  • When unsuspecting ships fly into my trap or I find a target I strike
  • I can demand a ransom for letting ships go or destroy them and seize their cargo


It says you can demand a ransom to let go of ships, not toput other players through what we are discussing.

I know scams are allowed but I don't see them marketed. I really don't see this game as marketed as so many claim. Perhaps long ago when dark meant black background. I can't find CCP references. At least anything current . There are of course old forum posts mentioning skullduggery and goons in the same sentence but I really don't see CCP marketing this game in any manner reminiscent of many forum posters claims. Their policies and advertisement conversely imply that they CARE about their reputation.

Like I said, this is a popular opinion and don't take it as a personal singling out.


It doesn't say "Coalition Leader" in there anywhere, either. I guess that shouldn't exist either.

Oh, and their advertisement includes the HTFU song. At least work a little harder on your cherrypicking of "facts".

"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.