These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Dave Stark
#6261 - 2014-03-27 20:46:13 UTC
Vilar Diin wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
you've never been to a carnival have you?

Aaah! Nice try at non-sequitor! I'll bite.

They already have his assets before the Bonus Room begins.

There is not one single further space cent to be squeezed out of him during the Bonus Room.

So I ask again:

What is the point of the unwinnable game?


and the guy at the carnival has my money before i play his game.

i ask you again, have you ever been to the carnival?


Oh you are a carnival kind of guy?

Do you like gladiator movies by chance? Blink


the russel crow film?
M1k3y Koontz
House of Musashi
Stay Feral
#6262 - 2014-03-27 20:46:21 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:

Where do you draw the line?

Making people sing songs is bad? (Erotica 1)
Telling a kid to kill himself is Ok? (Mittani)
Cursing on TS is bad? (Sohkar)
Disclosing personal information on people you have stalked through the internet is OK? (Digi)


And that's the decision we're waiting for CCP to come down from the mountain with. After all, our opinions are irrelevant since in cases such as this, CCP is the one who ultimately makes the call.


And next week when we have a threadnaught because someone else has taken it upon themselves to label another person who caused grief for someone else then wrote a blog about it, do we redraw that line?

What about ALOD on TMC? Is that acceptable?
What about ganking miners in a belt? Is that acceptable? Camping people in station for a week? Sitting AFK cloaked in a system? Or comments on Battleclinic, or Kugu, or Scrapheap, or EVEKILL.

Do we redraw the lines every time someone feels like they have been harassed?

Or do we keep the status quo as it has always been, and say oh gee that sucks, I feel bad for the guy, but that is just the way the game goes sometimes.

There are literally hundreds of different things that could become bannable offenses, EVERYONE has a different breaking point, everyone feels differently about every little thing, and you would need to redraw the lines every single time someone gets upset, or in this case someone gets upset on someone else's behalf.


Oh noes, slippery slope argument! There is a difference between a negative comment on a fansite and falsely promising someone their stuff back (which they WERE stupid to contract over in the first place) if they submit to the harassment of the harasser.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Salvos Rhoska
#6263 - 2014-03-27 20:47:53 UTC
Berendas wrote:
An increase in traffic for his tabloid of a blog.

Is that illegal?

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Kristalll
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#6264 - 2014-03-27 20:47:55 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:


Erotica 1 is the person who runs the "bonus room" so how is he not relevant? That's like talking about a country but not mentioning the person who rules it. By characterizing Erotica 1 I'm showing the character of the "game" or "business" he is running, your honor.


So if a manager at mcdonalds molests a child, mcdonalds is held responsible as a molester-based business?

“Die trying” is the proudest human thing.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#6265 - 2014-03-27 20:48:23 UTC
Berendas wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
And another business day passes in CCP Iceland with no acknowledgement whatsoever, other that falcon shutting down duplicate threads. Eterne spends his day tweeting about how awesome Fanfest is and commenting on how cute some animae shot also tweeted.

But zero about this scandal, in any way.
I know it will take likely take weeks to make some decision on this, but it is terrible business practice from a PR perspective not to acknowledge there is a crisis.

The thing is, this should not be a crisis, it shouldn't even register on CCP's radar. People getting scammed, and even being invited to voice comms is a regular occurrence. The only reason this is even a thing is because an influential player took it upon himself to sensationalize and exaggerate this whole matter for his own benefit. What CCP should do is lock this thread and say no more on this issue, because in reality this is just business as usual for EVE.


Really? Is that what they should do? Just lock it? Because you said so?

Or should they do what they are doing. Using it for feedback and a time killer while they formulate a response to an issue that would have come to a head sooner or later with or without Ripard as the catalyst.

They're giving us the respect of allowing us to post our feelings on this matter unmoderated. How often does that happen? If I were you I'd just back out of the thread now since you are so offended by this rare concession from CCP.

Mr Epeen Cool
Salvos Rhoska
#6266 - 2014-03-27 20:48:39 UTC
Kristalll wrote:
So if a manager at mcdonalds molests a child, mcdonalds is held responsible as a molester-based business?

Yes, if they knew he was molesting kids.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Volar Kang
Kang Industrial
#6267 - 2014-03-27 20:48:56 UTC
Personally, I hope to see Erotica not get banned and then get on the CSM. I think you will see the meta game take the final rug toward ludicrous speed when his real name is made public and one of the players who shares his mental instability goes to his house to meet him and his family.

On the other hand, CCP might want to just ban him for his own good.
Ssieth
Celestial Inc
Dracarys.
#6268 - 2014-03-27 20:50:37 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Kristalll wrote:
So if a manager at mcdonalds molests a child, mcdonalds is held responsible as a molester-based business?

Yes, if they knew he was molesting kids.


And also yes if they were not taking suitable measures to ensure the safety of their customers.

W-Spacer.  Bittervet. 75% PvP, 25% assorted other stuff.
Kristalll
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#6269 - 2014-03-27 20:50:41 UTC
H aVo K wrote:


Therein lies the *real* issue - a scammer who preys on the stupidity of people coming into Jita, using a character that never undocks, is largely immune to any form of meaningful retribution.

It's too *safe* a profession.



I'd imagine ruining the scammers reputation would meaningful retribution.

Just like killing a pvpers ship.

“Die trying” is the proudest human thing.
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#6270 - 2014-03-27 20:50:58 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
I think the actual reasons for why you find it hard to sympathise, and have no reservations about making fun of them, are rather different than you think.

You obviously know me better than I do.

Oh god.
H aVo K
Tycheon Industries
#6271 - 2014-03-27 20:51:09 UTC
Louis Robichaud wrote:
I'll be honest with you, I'm not sure where the line is exactly. It doesn't matter though. E1 crossed it by a mile. Anyone with a shred of decency can see that.

That is why all the arguing about minutiae and the exact definition of the law or EULA is quite revealing.


is it?

I'd like to see this sort of gameplay removed, or at least made less *safe* for those who engage in it. I mean, scamming idiots in Jita is MORE SAFE than MINING IN HISEC .... there's just something fundamentally wrong with that, y'know?

... but I worry that simply banning him out of hand under the auspices of some new or existing rule could be bad.

... I worry that suddenly people who do similar activities (like this hilarious example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCEilTdoyR0 ) will suddenly find themselves getting banned.

I think that that would be bad for the game.

So, yes, the minutiae is the important part of this whole thread. Those minutiae are the very reason why this whole shitshow hasn't been locked yet, and why CCP said they're paying close attention to the thread.

They're important.
Salvos Rhoska
#6272 - 2014-03-27 20:52:02 UTC
Kristalll wrote:
scammer....reputation.


Pick one.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
LUMINOUS SPIRIT
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#6273 - 2014-03-27 20:52:10 UTC
Big Lynx wrote:
Ssieth wrote:
OK - now I've had chance to think about it here's my take:

Quite simply this individual and their behaviour are not things that I want me or the gaming hobby to be associated with. I've lived many years with people thinking that gamers are maladjusted sociopaths and having this sort of event to pin those opinions on are fuel for the fire. The main-stream gaming press have already started to pick up on this story and I doubt it'll be long before it gets grabbed by the wider media. In this case the damage is already done and all that can be achieved is to make it clear that the rest of us playing EVE aren't sub-normal gutter-feeders.

In the wider context, though, it makes sense to make sure that this doesn't become the norm for EVE online. That may well have swung fine when the answer to "I want to play a space MMO" was "Well there's EVE Online and er.. some other thing, no, wait, it's gone". The horizon for space MMOs looks to be big and varied and there's going to be places for the sane people to hang out without fear of the psychos.

Now - there's been a lot of arguments in here to support the actions of E1 and I thought I'd adress the main ones:

1. This is a slippery slope to....
Slippery slope arguments are, well, a slippery slope. Everything is a slippery slope to everything else and you can always assert hyperbolic consequences to anything. Quite simply, slippery slope areguments are irrelvant.

2. What was done was not a violation of the EULA
I think this is arguable either way and it's largely irrelevant. If CCP want to ban someone they can and they can stretch the EULA to fit where it's needed if they choose to do so. Comversely CCP can choose to ignore an obvious violation if they want to. Basically the ball is in their court and it's all about how they want the game to be and how they want it to be perceived.

3. They didn't do this other stuff that would have been much worse
Er... yeah. They didn't and you can always level that argument no matter how abhorent someone's behaviour is. The fact here is that the behaviour was bad enough. Bad enough to knowingly cause someone a hell of a lot of distress outside ofthe game and bad enough to reflect very badly on EVE and its player-base.

4. The vicitim had a choice not to be victimized
Yeah - this is one that gets levied at victims all the time. Often along with "they should have known better", "they shouldn't have looked like a victim", "they shouldn't have let themselves be bullied". Frankly, blaming the vicitim is something of a shameful act. It would be great if all players came into the game equipped to handle psychological abuse but that's not the case and it shouldn't be an entry requirement. Even if it were then it should certainly be made apparent.

5. The vicitim was especially psychologically sensitive
That may well be the case but it should be born in mind that EVE is specifically open to 13 year old children to sign up to. They could be prey to such actions and if turns out that they are, or already have been, then CCP is in for a hell of a lot more trouble than has currently been stirred up here. Seriously - if you think that a few hundred posts on a forum is turbulent then you've not seen what the media will do with that.

6. Banning E1 will kill the meta
Don't be rediculous - there's a hell of a lot more meta to the game than JIta scammers.

7. Banning E1 would be changing EVE
Yes - and for the better. Realistically, ask yourself what scammers add to the game compared to the level of annoyance they generate even without this sort of event. Frankly - how many of EVE's players would be happy to see scammers gone entirely? I can't think of a single good reason to protect them and I'd be more than happy to be able to turn up to a trade hub and not get continually spammed in local.

Ugh.. there's more I could say but I


There is hope out there.



+1
Ssieth
Celestial Inc
Dracarys.
#6274 - 2014-03-27 20:52:18 UTC
Kristalll wrote:
H aVo K wrote:


Therein lies the *real* issue - a scammer who preys on the stupidity of people coming into Jita, using a character that never undocks, is largely immune to any form of meaningful retribution.

It's too *safe* a profession.



I'd imagine ruining the scammers reputation would meaningful retribution.

Just like killing a pvpers ship.


It's not at all the same. Recovering from a reputation hit is as easy as creating a new alt.

W-Spacer.  Bittervet. 75% PvP, 25% assorted other stuff.
Dave Stark
#6275 - 2014-03-27 20:53:37 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Kristalll wrote:
So if a manager at mcdonalds molests a child, mcdonalds is held responsible as a molester-based business?

Yes, if they knew he was molesting kids.


confirming macdonalds best seller is underage children.
Endovior
PFU Consortium
#6276 - 2014-03-27 20:53:46 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Then what is the point of the unwinnable game?


Asking that is like asking what the point of EVE is. After all, EVE can be said to be an 'unwinnable' game, given that there's no end condition. The answer always has to be something along the lines of 'fun', which is definitely a nebulous concept.

I suspect that the kind of person who can approach the bonus room as a game, and proceeds to honestly try to have fun with it, is relatively likely both to enjoy and to win the bonus room. On the other hand, the kind of person who approaches the bonus room as a kind of ransom situation, in which 'their money' is being held hostage by sinister figures, will not have much fun with it, and probably won't win, either.

Either way, it remains a game... and it's certain that someone's having fun with it.
Kristalll
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#6277 - 2014-03-27 20:54:03 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Xuixien wrote:
there have been winners of the Bonus Round.


What exactly is required of a non-affiliated participant in order to win?


It certainly isn't breaking your desk, and yelling homophobic and racial slurs and levying death threats against the game hosts.

“Die trying” is the proudest human thing.
Salvos Rhoska
#6278 - 2014-03-27 20:54:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Dave Stark wrote:
confirming macdonalds best seller is underage children.


They sell underage children?!?!

Kristalll wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Xuixien wrote:
there have been winners of the Bonus Round.


What exactly is required of a non-affiliated participant in order to win?


It certainly isn't breaking your desk, and yelling homophobic and racial slurs and levying death threats against the game hosts.


Ok, so that isn't.

Then what is?

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Dave Stark
#6279 - 2014-03-27 20:55:14 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
confirming macdonalds best seller is underage children.


They sell underage children?!?!


you just siad they were a child molesting business.
Helena Russell Makanen
DRRUSSEL
#6280 - 2014-03-27 20:55:17 UTC
Volar Kang wrote:
Personally, I hope to see Erotica not get banned and then get on the CSM. I think you will see the meta game take the final rug toward ludicrous speed when his real name is made public and one of the players who shares his mental instability goes to his house to meet him and his family.

On the other hand, CCP might want to just ban him for his own good.




Actually erotica already quit the CSM race.... again.... claiming that of course it had nothing to do with all this, but because he 'forgot' to update his passport lol! BlinkBlinkBlink

"If a miner needs to go to the bathroom, for instance, I ask that they dock up first, or at the very least ask the Supreme Protector for permission to go."  -  James 315 - aka - the miner bumper