These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
 

An Announcement Regarding Real Life Harassment

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#721 - 2014-03-28 21:22:23 UTC
Batelle wrote:


More like, continue abusing people on TS all you want, just be sure to not brag about it and also DENY EVERYTHING. .


That's unrealistic.

Sadistically abusing people is only half the game for these sick fucks. They can't help but then brag about their triumphs. They need to try and cultivate as many low I.Q. sycophants as they can acquire. On top of that, they honestly feel (in their broken little brains), that they are doing nothing wrong. So they will never try to hide their actions as they feel no shame for them.

Mr Epeen Cool
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#722 - 2014-03-28 21:23:09 UTC
Jebediah Phoenix wrote:


The intention of the bonus room isn't reactions like Sokhar's


Yes it was.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Danalee
A Blessed Bean
Pandemic Horde
#723 - 2014-03-28 21:23:59 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:

We now have a rule, don't push a 'victim" to the point of emotional distress... and that rule will be examined to see if it is applicable in each ticket they receive about an incident like this.


We now have a post from a CSM that says as much. NO RULE as of yet.
We are also banning people who broke said "rule" before it was written by said CSM.

Keep up, please.

D.

Bear

Proud member of the Somalian Coast Guard Authority

Member and Juror of the Court of Crime and Punishment
H aVo K
Tycheon Industries
#724 - 2014-03-28 21:24:27 UTC
Ssieth wrote:
And I have to say, having sat through pages and pages of tripe about the tears being shed for the victims of harrassment and the tears soon to be shed by those who favour vaguely civilized behaviour IRL the irony (in the modern rather than classical sense) is bitterly amusing here given the tears being shed by folks who want a line drawn in the sand so they can walk just one side of it be be not-quite-abhorrent-enough-to-ban.

Seriously, as with most of life, if the answer to "will I get into deep trouble for doing this?" is "I don't know". They the response should probably be not to do it. Or expect to suffer the consequences. Seriously - is that so hard a concept? Or is it just to gritty a thought that you have to cope with a little bit of grey rather than black or white?


One time, when I thought about trying to make isk by running courier contracts around (shudder), I saw a contract that looked like the collateral was simply too low for the amount of m3. So I accepted it, realized it was worth far more than the collateral, and kept it.

That's the only "scam" I've ever run in this game.

I do like to partake of local smack from time to time, though.

However, apart from all that, I don't really have a dog in this fight, except for wanting the sandbox to... well... y'know... remain a sandbox n stuff.

Despite that pretty "white" background of mine, though... I have a problem with everything you're posting: You're claiming that those who do operate in that darkened moral sphere are clearly monsters, and that, because they can't claim to have any sort of moral high ground at all, that their opinions are worthless.

And yet... they operate in that darkened moral sphere in a game that's advertised thusly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGplrpWvz0I

When CCP says "COME PLAY EVE! YOU CAN BE THE BADDIE!!!111" and then bans someone for being too much of a baddie... well... I find it somewhat shocking that those who play that role would be told to STFU when they ask for clarification.
Danalee
A Blessed Bean
Pandemic Horde
#725 - 2014-03-28 21:24:46 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Jebediah Phoenix wrote:


The intention of the bonus room isn't reactions like Sokhar's


Yes it was.


Bull. ****. And you know it.

D.

Bear

Proud member of the Somalian Coast Guard Authority

Member and Juror of the Court of Crime and Punishment
Jebediah Phoenix
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#726 - 2014-03-28 21:25:00 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Jebediah Phoenix wrote:


The intention of the bonus room isn't reactions like Sokhar's


Yes it was.


Then it's a spectacular failure considering that was the only reaction that extreme.
Tyrant Scorn
#727 - 2014-03-28 21:25:23 UTC
Vance Armistice wrote:
Tyrant Scorn wrote:
Ok, here is a question for all of you.

So, the debate has been going on ever since that Erotica1 thing happened and half the community is in an uproar over what he's done to this poor guy... But he used fair game mechanics and he never used any hostile language doing it all.

The guy who got scammed is actually the one who is offensive and using all sorts of threats and curse words.

Who is actually breaking the rules in this particular case ?



Hellman's, Ready Whip and Jiffy all broke rules as I understood the thread


Can anyone break down for me who broke what rules ? because to me it sounds like the guy going berserk is the one breaking the rules in terms of making threats and using very hostile language...

Malcanis, maybe you can elaborate on this ? Since you seem very active in this topic.

The Tyrant King

YouTube | Twitter | Twitch
Ssieth
Celestial Inc
Dracarys.
#728 - 2014-03-28 21:25:57 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Jebediah Phoenix wrote:


The intention of the bonus room isn't reactions like Sokhar's


Yes it was.


To the point that it was sufficiently well thought of to be worth publically posting

W-Spacer.  Bittervet. 75% PvP, 25% assorted other stuff.
Valda Abia
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#729 - 2014-03-28 21:26:55 UTC
So if an FC gives a bad order over TS which causes someone to lose a ship and that causes them undue emotional distress, is that FC liable to be banned?

I'm asking for a friend.
Liese Shardani
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#730 - 2014-03-28 21:27:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Liese Shardani
Asia Leigh wrote:
This is obviously a witch hunt for ero's head by the dude that wrote that blog for personal reasons. He stirred up a **** storm that incited a riot not only be alot of the eve community, but other gaming communities as well. Then CCP was pretty much forced into actioning ero's account weather they wanted to or not. This probably got the victims account actioned as well too...
Yes, he started a ****storm, but I don't think it's logical to conclude it was for personal reasons. Obviously, there are people who want to believe that -- and for us to believe it, as well -- to discredit criticism of their "content" or emergent gameplay.

I think it took a while for anything to get done because the forums are a big place and the blogosphere even bigger. Just because there's a dustup in one area doesn't mean it's universally known about. In the chat with Sohkar last night, it turned out he didn't know much about the thread or even about the CSM.

Even if Ripard knew about this a month ago (and I have no idea when he actually found out), do you seriously blame the guy for getting his ducks in a row first before coming out against it in public?

This "Oh, it's been going on forever so objecting to it now = personal vendetta" thing doesn't hold water.

The Bonus Room activities smell wrong to a number of people. I swear, when I heard those audios, the first thing that came to mind was the squeal like a pig scene in Deliverance. (Yeah, yeah, I know there are no guns or knives or sexual assault in the Bonus Room, but the vibe is similar.)
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#731 - 2014-03-28 21:27:12 UTC
Danalee wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:

We now have a rule, don't push a 'victim" to the point of emotional distress... and that rule will be examined to see if it is applicable in each ticket they receive about an incident like this.


We now have a post from a CSM that says as much. NO RULE as of yet.
We are also banning people who broke said "rule" before it was written by said CSM.

Keep up, please.

D.

Bear

Ahhh, no. We have a clarification of a long existing rule.

Just keeping things in perspective.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Upde
Upde Harris Industries
#732 - 2014-03-28 21:27:29 UTC
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Vance Armistice wrote:
You are being obtuse. Intentionally or not I have no idea. It has been a weird few days between the mayo revelations and all of the other headshakers forgive me if I seem skeptical.

Put plainly, you are asking a PLAYER rep who is on here to give us information to the best of his ability to answer complex hypothetical issues about rules. He is a player not a GM, thank him and move on.
No, I'm asking a representative of the players who has spoken directly to CCP regarding this very matter to relay what he would consider their position to be. IF he does not know, it's his responsibility to say that and seek an answer from CCP. The players deserve to be given clear and concise ruling on matters where an infraction could cost them their ability to play.

All I want is clarity. Is that so much to ask?


Apparently, yes. They just want their free reign to ban for anything at any time. Dont CCP already have that though?


yes, which is exactly why further clarification in detail will never be forthcoming. If you set very clear guidelines it makes it easy to do something that might be wholly questionable or inappropriate but because it is not expressly forbidden by the ToS say "well I did nothing against your rules"

Thus to prevent those cases and to leave CCP holding all the cards they make a legalese statement that is somewhat open ended and gives them the freedom to do what ever floats their boat in dodgy situations without having to appear to have succumbed to outside pressure. It basically allows them to keep their reputation and integrity in tact whilst still being seen to police their own game in the eyes of the outsiders.
Doireen Kaundur
Doomheim
#733 - 2014-03-28 21:27:58 UTC
Final score:

CCP: 1
Internet psychos: 0

It is a good day in New Eden. Big smile

_[center]For your Freighter **sized shipping needs, contact _[u]Lord Chanlin[/u].** _ Fast, affordable, reliable service._

https://gate.eveonline.com/Profile/Lord%20Chanlin[/center]
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#734 - 2014-03-28 21:28:50 UTC
Danalee wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Jebediah Phoenix wrote:


The intention of the bonus room isn't reactions like Sokhar's


Yes it was.


Bull. ****. And you know it.

D.

Bear



They already had ALL of his stuff. They literally had nothing left to gain from him IN GAME.

So yeah no, you're the bullshitter.


And you know it.


And CCP agree with me, so as previously advised, suck it up buttercup. I'm in 319- if you want to make something of it.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Jarod Garamonde
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#735 - 2014-03-28 21:29:19 UTC
Valda Abia wrote:
So if an FC gives a bad order over TS which causes someone to lose a ship and that causes them undue emotional distress, is that FC liable to be banned?

I'm asking for a friend.


Yeah, and I was just holding that little bag of "medicinal herbs" for someone else.....

That moment when you realize the crazy lady with all the cats was right...

    [#savethelance]
Tyrant Scorn
#736 - 2014-03-28 21:29:49 UTC
Malcanis wrote:


They already had ALL of his stuff. They literally had nothing left to gain from him IN GAME.

So yeah no, you're the bullshitter.


And you know it.


And CCP agree with me, so as previously advised, suck it up buttercup. I'm in 319- if you want to make something of it.


Can you please answer my question mate ?

The Tyrant King

YouTube | Twitter | Twitch
Talon SilverHawk
Patria o Muerte
#737 - 2014-03-28 21:30:05 UTC
Jebediah Phoenix wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Jarod Garamonde wrote:
In general, where are we drawing the line, here?


I answered this question a few pages page.

The short answer is that the person controlling the situation has the responsibility to see that it doesn't go too far. I assume that you're sufficiently intelligent to determine when you're about to push someone over the line. This most specifically does not include in game actions: if someone goes into a screaming meltdown because you blew his ship up, then too bad for him. If you continue to interact with him and goad him for no reason other than to goad him, then you're in the red zone.

Scam all you like.
Gank all you like.
Spy all you like.
Awox all you like.

Excercise judgement & discretion when rubbing salt into the wound afterwards.

Is that so hard to understand?


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?



Its about knowing when to draw the line whats so difficult about that ? It says more about you if you get a hard on making other ppl miserable for ***** and giggles ...


Can't believe ppl are still arguing in favor of it or see nothing wrong with what happened, you should seek help ...

Tal

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#738 - 2014-03-28 21:30:27 UTC
Valda Abia wrote:
So if an FC gives a bad order over TS which causes someone to lose a ship and that causes them undue emotional distress, is that FC liable to be banned?

I'm asking for a friend.


he absolutely is not.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Ahost Gceo
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#739 - 2014-03-28 21:30:29 UTC
Danalee wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Jebediah Phoenix wrote:


The intention of the bonus room isn't reactions like Sokhar's


Yes it was.


Bull. ****. And you know it.

D.

Bear



I'm sorry, what planet are you on? There is an entire subculture in this game including the Minerbumping collective and Erotica 1's Bonus Room that solely exists to cause emotional distress in players for their entertainment.

It's funny, to a point. Beyond that it is detrimental, and this is a clear case of what that means.

CCP ignore me please, I make too much sense.
Trebor Daehdoow
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#740 - 2014-03-28 21:30:44 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Jesus buddy, how long do you plan on protecting Sohkar to death?

If you truly think that my actions are directed towards any single player (in either a protective or punitive manner), then you clearly do not understand the nature of my role as a member of the CSM.

Kaius Fero wrote:
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
0

Here is a direct question to you as a fail politician ... give me a really good reason why ANY eve players should vote!

Why obviously, you should vote to ensure that fail politicians like me don't get re-elected. If you don't vote, don't *****.

Mario Putzo wrote:
We can draw arbitrary lines all over the sandbox. It would be nice to know at what point we reach the limits of the sandbox, so EVERYONE knows where that line is, otherwise it amounts to personal opinion, and that changes from me to you, to the next guy, even CCP Employees have differing individual opinions.

Welcome to the real world. It would be nice for me if I knew at all times exactly how much over the speed limit I can go, but I can't. If I want to push it, I have to be prepared to take my lumps and pay the ticket. If you want to test where the limits of EVE behavior are, be prepared to wake up one day and find out that CCP doesn't want you as a customer anymore. You will provide a valuable service to the community, "pour encourager les autres".

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery