EVE General Discussion

That's what I'm talking about, right there.
I don't care how much he does or doesn't rage at me. If he keeps coming back into the lowsec system I live in, when he knows full-well, by now that he's going to be rewarded for it with a facefull of Ferox, I'm GOING to keep giving it to him.
Now, all he has to do at that point is petition me, and send the GM the EVEmails whereby he raged at me and demanded that I stop preventing him from encroaching on my home, breaking my ratting chain, and scaring off better targets, and I responded by sending him the lyrics to Particle Man.
Now, poor old Garamonde is temp banned for harassment, and the moron carebear that doesn't understand what lowsec means, gets pretty much "Lethal Weapon 2 Style Diplomatic Immunity" as a result. All he has to do is claim that I was deliberately targeting him, simply to harass him.

That's total crap and you know it.

Plus, i would suggest to switch off the pc and experience some reallife social interaction. I am truly shocked about that one have to explain that thing multiple times.

The mental gymnastics in this thread are incredible.

To call some of these people "greifers" may be incorrect. I think we're dealing with fetishists.

I know they want a wordy, well written, concrete, chiseled into stone "ruling" on this matter so they can do what? Do everything to circumvent it. And when they find another Sohkar and get the same results, they'll throw the rules up and hide behind them when they get called out on their actions.

The line in the sandbox being vague is of no surprise, but this debate rests on something that people lose a grasp on. People want an actual "letter of the law"?


Well there's an old saying "The spirit of the law saves, the letter of the law kills".

There are many laws out there of which the spirit is simple to understand but when you get into semantics fu and wording wars, trying to change the definition of "is" for example, the same law can kill.

See as how the constitution of an entire country, written 200 years ago to protect freedom, is now the very document the denies it (and then legalizes the methods of denial) after 2 centuries of amending, word games, lawyering, and lobbying, should be enough to show how CCP's handling of this matter is very intelligent.

Not only have they engaged this matter in the best way possible, but left it wide open so that the "game the rules" crowd is left in check by their own gaming the game mentality. Of course the statement that CCP will judge matters on a case by case basis is not enough with this crowd!

Schrödinger's cat comes to mind.

These questions about other people getting banned for winding people up are kind of redundant. The answer is obviously no.

Unless we supposed to believe Erotica 1 was still going to be banned today, even if Ripard didn't write a blog about him?

Just to add to this I am colour blind so I would actually appreciate a description of the colour blue

No word of a lie, I am pretty drained by all of this.

No I wasn't designated. I made a deal in my campaign thread and I've done my best to keep it, that's all.

I am counting the days until I am no longer a space-politician and dealing with **** like this affair is someone else's job. Anyone who signs up for a second term of CSM is either insane or a hero. I'm neither.


EDIT:

It's not really a fringe question. Singing for ransom is a VERY common practice, but it's also an out of game action and could just as easily be called harassment. How is calling for a ruling on a specific and common case anything to do with describing colours?

Oh please, I'm sure some of my ganking victims have flew off the wall as hard as some bonus room victims did, why is it so different whether the cause of that was in game mechanics or having to sing 1 song too many in TS for their pixels?

]



No you're wrong. Very wrong. This would NOT have been an issue if not for that blog post. Ripard does not give a flying **** about Sohkar. He only used his story to pursue his vendetta against Erotica 1.

We're talking about singing songs for christsake. When you get tackled in a WH and sing a song to get your ship free, no one freaks out. One of the Devs even sang. But when Erotica 1 asks you to sing songs in order to get a 5x payout, people think its a scam for some reason and start crying. And yes, we HAVE had winners before. So lets think about this. If you scam someone out of all of their stuff, that's fine and good. Perfectly acceptable by the EULA. Most people would be PISSED and react in a manner similar to this so-called "victim." The only difference here is that Erotica 1 offered this guy the means to get paid 5x what his stuff was worth, because that's how the game works. Instead of being a good sport and singing along, this "victim" decides to start making IRL threats.

This is not cyber bullying. This is not emotional abuse. This is certainly not torture. This is someone who has something of someones (your ship tackled in a WH or all your assets) and simply wants a song (or a few, after all, your entire net worth is obviously worth more than one ship). If someone freaked out like this because his ship was tackled in a WH and refused to sing, his ship gets blown up. Or in this case, Erotica 1 keeps all his money and assets.

Me (and several others) have already said, this is a manufactured crisis. Singing ransoms are widespread and acceptable. Have you even listened to the recording? I doubt it. I actually sat through all 2 hours. If this was singing for a ship in a WH, NO ONE WOULD GIVE A ****. But now that its for all his assets this is labelled as "bad" and "cyber bullying."


Grow up. There's nothing wrong here



Here's a link for an accurate description of the Bonus Room:
http://podborn.com/community/psychopaths-guide-to-the-bonus-room

Don't send him the lyrics and you're good.


Your example is total crap, as nothing has changed wrt what you can do in game. What has been made clear is that taking it out of game and circumventing the EULA won't stop CCP from taking in game action.

Thanks for the tears though.