EVE General Discussion

That's why you answer him and not me I see

Aww :(

Perhaps you can help me out here, why was the mark asked to get a dictionary and read out the meaning of some words?

It was not 'torture' by any definition as far as I am concerned, but it was, to put it mildly, distasteful.

But of course, you already know why, but you choose to ignore it.

That was the part of the Bonus Room experience I have an issue with.

Ero still refuses to clarify if he thinks he went too far with this particular issue or not.

I haven't read the whole mega-thread, so the points that follows may very well have been raised and debated two dozen times already.

However, there *has* to be a line in the sand somewhere.

Real people differ greatly in their personalities and backgrounds. Some are bright, some less so, some gullible, some are sick, some are on medication, some are easily provoked, some has a bad temper and some are just going through a rough time in their lives for various reasons.

Part of growing up and becoming a mature adult is knowing that in many cases it is all too easy to provoke and rile up some individuals. In fact it is frequently trivially easy to do so, and no skills are involved here, except knowing which buttons to press. Once you have caught a cold fly, then there is neither skill nor entertainment value in ripping off its wings. Sure, it may struggle and buzz a bit, but you still just caught a cold fly.

If you ever end up in a situation, where you manage to get someone to 'blow a fuse' and issue threats or anything similar, then you are in the wrong. Trying to take the high moral ground on vague legalities wouldn't cut it in most people's eye. If the opposing party drops dead from a hearth attack due to your actions, or goes on a violent rampage through his local neighborhood, then in both cases *you* caused his life to be ruined. Something, which otherwise need not have happened if you had been a bit more considerate. This is why actions like those of Erotica 1 won't win you many friends out in the bright room we call real life.

If a dog bars its teeth and starts growling, then you back off. You do this even if it initially was wagging its tail as you approached.

People cannot isolate themselves at home just because of their personalities, background, real life issues or poor health. Additionally, the internet is such an important part of society today, that you should expect to run into all types of people here, anytime. Saying because :EVE: then all manners of socially questionable behavior is justified just stresses the immaturity of some people. No, it doesn't. Your actions may still have unintended consequences for the people you meet, regardless of the venue or the media.

In my country we have had cases of teenagers bullying school mates, while recording the action on their cell phones 'for entertainment'. Something similar has happened, where the victim was an adult with a mental disability. In both cases the courts took some extremely dim views of the actions of the perpetrators.

Similarly, we once had a pair of overly bright radio hosts, who realized some individuals would do almost anything for the chance to win a prize. Sound familiar? The hosts, with an excuse of :journalists: and :ratings: convinced their 'competition participants' to pull all manners of pranks on innocent bystanders. This while asking for various forms of documentation of the deeds, intended for public consumption. Thus it was impromptu hidden camera, by and for the unprepared. Obviously the gullible people doing the 'pranks' almost exclusively selected weak individuals for their pranks, like members of the elderly, young children, small women etc.

It should come as no surprise that eventually this little game show backfired spectacularly. "Hello transmitter license," said the courts, "please meet your new best friend, paper shredder." At that point you could also all but hear the flushing in the background, as the future careers of two wannabe radio superstars went down the toilet.

Here is a little thought experiment for anybody still reading this far: Try listening to Erotica 1's recording once more. Yet this time imagine the people involved are all in the same room, within arms reach of one another. At what point would the shenanigans have stopped? Would the physical stature of the people involved influence your answer?

Im following you so far.

Now, hypothetically speaking, what if it turned out that MY point of view (Steal, kill, raep, maim, exsanguinate, humiliate and mutilate simply because I can and I want to) was in the majority?

Would you still support a mechanism for ejecting those the majority of the game found unacceptable?

Every single post that starts with this (and there are too many to count) is uninformed and assumes there is no line. There is, however. It's called a EULA.

I added a few lines to my previous post, just to elaborate a bit, if you care to review them.

Thats a tough question you ask. Considering the analogy of the entirety of EVE comprising a Corp, in which the majority (or a substantial part) wants a member gone, then yes, I would support the mechanism. Though it is then up to the people who can actually "push the button" to enact it as to whether that actually happens. Doesn't discount the members right to express that that is what they want though.

When carried to a RL context, that is how society at large operates anyways, even in systems that are not democratic. The constituent parts of every society exert influence and pressure towards attaining their own interests. RL is ofc immeasurably more complex a system, but I think it boils down to essentially the same thing.

I don't have any direct solutions for how to improve players ingame capacity to enact their will against players they either don't like, or who's activities they wish to impair and curtail. Its a relatively new and novel concept to me, and I haven't had time to formulate any, and more importantly, what larger repercussions they might have on the game.

So, if I find someone down the street getting bullied and publicly humiliated, then the next moment says he is now "over it and doesn't care," that means no one should intervene because it's now okay?

I agree with you, I'd be sick of being treated like a victim as well. But hey, which one of you bright individuals decided to release this recording to the public in the first place?

Did I hit a nerve there? Didn't take long for the personal attacks now did it?

And no, sorry.... I'm not going to reply to each and everyone one of your 100 posts for the day addressing just how wrong you are. This thread has had plenty of views already, notice how there aren't many who have addressed your concerns? Because it's a waste of time dealing with weak arguments set on repeat.

Because at the end of the day EVE is a fictitious construct, involving real people. Your actions can always have real life consequences for the people you meet, intended or otherwise, and regardless of how you meet them. There is no difference between communicating with other EVE players, or picking up the phone and calling someone.

People seem to be caught up in the :sandbox: meme, yet EVE is emphatically not isolated from the rest of society.

I think you got it right the first time.

He's not going back for seconds he's going back to help them whitewash the first recording.

I guarantee you they get him to apologise for his behaviour last time and say they did nothing wrong.

Some people just don't learn...