These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

CSM Campaigns

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

DJ FunkyBacon for CSM9

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
DJ FunkyBacon
Rabid Ninja Space Monkey Inc.
Monkeys with Guns.
#101 - 2014-03-30 05:18:24 UTC  |  Edited by: DJ FunkyBacon
Aebe Amraen wrote:
DJ FunkyBacon wrote:
I want to make plain for those who may not be aware of everything that my stance is not in support of any one person, but the assertion that CCP has no business regulating player interactions outside of Eve on non-CCP sponsored 3rd party services.


Consider a hypothetical situation in which CCP knows that a certain player is recruiting other players in-game to participate in an unethical and potentially harmful, if perhaps not illegal in the relevant jurisdiction(s), activity. The player in question has repeatedly acknowledged, including on CCP-owned services, that yes, he is doing this.

It is my stance that CCP has an ethical obligation in this case to intervene--for example, by cutting off the offending player's access to the game, so as to prevent him from recruiting other players in game. Am I understanding your position correctly as being that CCP should not intervene in any way?


A very loaded question, but I'll play your game If the EULA/ToS are not broken in game, and nothing illegal is happening outside of it as a result, it's not CCP's problem.

Flame wars, personal attacks, and harassment on 3rd party forums for eve players are NOT CCPs problem, it's a problem for that site's moderators to deal with.

Voice comms belonging to people who are not CCP is not CCP's problem, nor are the recordings that come from them unless they specifically reference something against the TOS happening in game. In those cases, the references should lead to server logs where TOS/EULA breaching activity has occurred and can be shown by those logs without needing the support of that recording.
*Hypothetical Example: person mentions on voice comms that they sold ISK on ebay. Recording gets to CCP, they check the logs, and find RMT has occurred thanks to the tip. Ban hammer time.
*Real Life example: Botter was debugging his bot while live streaming it on own3d.tv a couple years ago. CCP came across his stream, devs flooded the system and started bumping his bot with polaris frigates, then banned him live on air. Nothing wrong there.

One coalition DDOSing the voice comms/website of another coalition just before a big supercap fight is NOT CCP's problem. Good luck proving which person actually did it anyway.

Funny or embarrassing songs posted to soundcloud about a player are not CCP's problem.

People having and expressing poor and derogatory opinions about other Eve players outside of Eve in any of these places, is NOT CCP's problem.

I could go on, but I'll stop here. Perhaps I've painted a clear enough picture for you?

Anything that happens directly within Eve IS CCP's problem. Anything that happens at a CCP sponsored event IRL IS CCP's problem. Things said and done on EveTV, definitely CCP's problem. Anything directly involving an employee or representative of CCP IS CCP's problem. Eve voice is CCP's problem. Eve-O forums are CCP's problem.

Radio Host, Blogger, Lowsec Resident, PvP Afficionado.

funkybacon.com - Blog

FunkyBacon on Twitter
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#102 - 2014-03-30 08:17:41 UTC
DJ FunkyBacon wrote:
Voice comms belonging to people who are not CCP is not CCP's problem, nor are the recordings that come from them unless they specifically reference something against the TOS happening in game. In those cases, the references should lead to server logs where TOS/EULA breaching activity has occurred and can be shown by those logs without needing the support of that recording.
*Hypothetical Example: person mentions on voice comms that they sold ISK on ebay. Recording gets to CCP, they check the logs, and find RMT has occurred thanks to the tip. Ban hammer time.
*Real Life example: Botter was debugging his bot while live streaming it on own3d.tv a couple years ago. CCP came across his stream, devs flooded the system and started bumping his bot with polaris frigates, then banned him live on air. Nothing wrong there.


I generally don't disagree with you that attacks and harassment on third party forums, voice comms & recordings not controlled by CCP, DDOSing, etc are not CCP's problem.

I do want to point out that Aebe didn't really load the question enough. The situation he should have presented is more like recordings that are the result of stolen (which, that part at least, is perfectly okay) in-game assets being used as leverage to recruit or lure players to voice comms beyond CCP's control and as incentive to keep them there. The recording as well as in-game chatlogs cross-reference each other as both make references to transaction logs in-game, tying it all together, and the person in question freely admits on platforms both in and out of CCP's control that they were doing it... hell, even claims he petitioned repeatedly to see if it were "okay". In short, a pile of what (I think, anyway) constitutes "extraordinary evidence" that links otherwise perfectly legitimate activities ingame to what would almost undoubtedly be EULA/TOS violations if only they weren't happening out of game.

Do you still feel it's not CCP's problem at that point?

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
DJ FunkyBacon
Rabid Ninja Space Monkey Inc.
Monkeys with Guns.
#103 - 2014-03-30 16:33:26 UTC
mynnna wrote:
I generally don't disagree with you that attacks and harassment on third party forums, voice comms & recordings not controlled by CCP, DDOSing, etc are not CCP's problem.

I do want to point out that Aebe didn't really load the question enough. The situation he should have presented is more like recordings that are the result of stolen (which, that part at least, is perfectly okay) in-game assets being used as leverage to recruit or lure players to voice comms beyond CCP's control and as incentive to keep them there. The recording as well as in-game chatlogs cross-reference each other as both make references to transaction logs in-game, tying it all together, and the person in question freely admits on platforms both in and out of CCP's control that they were doing it... hell, even claims he petitioned repeatedly to see if it were "okay". In short, a pile of what (I think, anyway) constitutes "extraordinary evidence" that links otherwise perfectly legitimate activities ingame to what would almost undoubtedly be EULA/TOS violations if only they weren't happening out of game.

Do you still feel it's not CCP's problem at that point?


This keeps going back to E1 specifically, and that's one of the problems I have here Mynnna. My stance here has little do do with E1, and everything to do with the next step after this, and the next step after that. If this is where it stops, and the line is CLEARLY drawn here, that's CCPs prerogative. I'm not doing a "Free E1 campaign". He's banned, there's no reversal coming nor would I ask for one.

For 11 years CCP has not acted against any player when CCP logs have shown no wrong doing. That has now changed.

Let me toss you a loaded question. Let's say we're chatting in Eve, and I say "Hey Mynnna, my hands are getting tired. Let's pop over to my TS3 server and talk about this."

I'm in there with you, maybe a couple other people. I make a recording of it, and then put it up on soundcloud. People listen to it and are outraged at you for what transpired, I blog about it, a threadnought appears.

But here's the rub: You come out on the forums in the threadnought afterwards and claim you were framed. "That's not me," you say. Other people claiming to be on the server at the time say it WAS you. They were there. Eve logs show us chatting amicably, and me suggesting we move to TS3. CCP has no way to confirm that the TS3 conversation on soundcloud is the one that happened at that time. They can't confirm I didn't doctor the recording. But it sounds like you. You didn't think to record the session yourself, so you have nothing but your word that you didn't do whatever it is we say you did.

Now, you're part of Goonswarm, so I would imagine your friends would have your back in this, and the counter smear could get ugly and result in nothing more than a locked thread, some warnings are given and nothing more comes of it. Maybe I get DDOSed a few times, obviously by one of your fellows, but I can't prove who it was so nothing happens there either.

Suppose for a minute though that you don't have many friends in Eve. Everyone has already made up their mind that you're guilty. Your supporters in that threadnought are few and far between. What then?

THAT is where I'm afraid we're going here, and ANY steps taken in that general direction are what I'm opposed to.

Radio Host, Blogger, Lowsec Resident, PvP Afficionado.

funkybacon.com - Blog

FunkyBacon on Twitter
Jerome Gouillot
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#104 - 2014-03-30 16:45:23 UTC
If you have any doubt that he is the one to give your vote to - read his blog on the Erotica 1 case and especially his comments on Riptard Smeg.
Schwa Nuts
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#105 - 2014-03-30 16:49:28 UTC
DJ FunkyBacon wrote:
Let me toss you a loaded question. Let's say we're chatting in Eve, and I say "Hey Mynnna, my hands are getting tired. Let's pop over to my TS3 server and talk about this."

I'm in there with you, maybe a couple other people. I make a recording of it, and then put it up on soundcloud. People listen to it and are outraged at you for what transpired, I blog about it, a threadnought appears.

But here's the rub: You come out on the forums in the threadnought afterwards and claim you were framed. "That's not me," you say. Other people claiming to be on the server at the time say it WAS you. They were there. Eve logs show us chatting amicably, and me suggesting we move to TS3. CCP has no way to confirm that the TS3 conversation on soundcloud is the one that happened at that time. They can't confirm I didn't doctor the recording. But it sounds like you. You didn't think to record the session yourself, so you have nothing but your word that you didn't do whatever it is we say you did.

Now, you're part of Goonswarm, so I would imagine your friends would have your back in this, and the counter smear could get ugly and result in nothing more than a locked thread, some warnings are given and nothing more comes of it. Maybe I get DDOSed a few times, obviously by one of your fellows, but I can't prove who it was so nothing happens there either.

Suppose for a minute though that you don't have many friends in Eve. Everyone has already made up their mind that you're guilty. Your supporters in that threadnought are few and far between. What then?

THAT is where I'm afraid we're going here, and ANY steps taken in that general direction are what I'm opposed to.



That's a pretty sinister view of Goonswarm, assuming that we would immediately engage in a smear campaign and DDOS attacks. Respectfully, I disagree with this.
DJ FunkyBacon
Rabid Ninja Space Monkey Inc.
Monkeys with Guns.
#106 - 2014-03-30 16:53:27 UTC
Schwa Nuts wrote:



That's a pretty sinister view of Goonswarm, assuming that we would immediately engage in a smear campaign and DDOS attacks. Respectfully, I disagree with this.


I used that as a purely hypothetical example. Of course I am aware that Goonswarn never engages in such activity, but since I was responding to Mynnna in my example (who obviously would never get caught up in such a scandal either) it didn't make sense to put in the name of another alliance that would be likely to engage in such underhanded tactics. Since this is all strictly hypothetical. I'm sure you understand.

Radio Host, Blogger, Lowsec Resident, PvP Afficionado.

funkybacon.com - Blog

FunkyBacon on Twitter
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#107 - 2014-03-30 17:37:36 UTC  |  Edited by: mynnna
DJ FunkyBacon wrote:
mynnna wrote:
I generally don't disagree with you that attacks and harassment on third party forums, voice comms & recordings not controlled by CCP, DDOSing, etc are not CCP's problem.

I do want to point out that Aebe didn't really load the question enough. The situation he should have presented is more like recordings that are the result of stolen (which, that part at least, is perfectly okay) in-game assets being used as leverage to recruit or lure players to voice comms beyond CCP's control and as incentive to keep them there. The recording as well as in-game chatlogs cross-reference each other as both make references to transaction logs in-game, tying it all together, and the person in question freely admits on platforms both in and out of CCP's control that they were doing it... hell, even claims he petitioned repeatedly to see if it were "okay". In short, a pile of what (I think, anyway) constitutes "extraordinary evidence" that links otherwise perfectly legitimate activities ingame to what would almost undoubtedly be EULA/TOS violations if only they weren't happening out of game.

Do you still feel it's not CCP's problem at that point?


This keeps going back to E1 specifically, and that's one of the problems I have here Mynnna. My stance here has little do do with E1, and everything to do with the next step after this, and the next step after that. If this is where it stops, and the line is CLEARLY drawn here, that's CCPs prerogative. I'm not doing a "Free E1 campaign". He's banned, there's no reversal coming nor would I ask for one.

For 11 years CCP has not acted against any player when CCP logs have shown no wrong doing. That has now changed.

Let me toss you a loaded question. Let's say we're chatting in Eve, and I say "Hey Mynnna, my hands are getting tired. Let's pop over to my TS3 server and talk about this."

I'm in there with you, maybe a couple other people. I make a recording of it, and then put it up on soundcloud. People listen to it and are outraged at you for what transpired, I blog about it, a threadnought appears.

But here's the rub: You come out on the forums in the threadnought afterwards and claim you were framed. "That's not me," you say. Other people claiming to be on the server at the time say it WAS you. They were there. Eve logs show us chatting amicably, and me suggesting we move to TS3. CCP has no way to confirm that the TS3 conversation on soundcloud is the one that happened at that time. They can't confirm I didn't doctor the recording. But it sounds like you. You didn't think to record the session yourself, so you have nothing but your word that you didn't do whatever it is we say you did.

Now, you're part of Goonswarm, so I would imagine your friends would have your back in this, and the counter smear could get ugly and result in nothing more than a locked thread, some warnings are given and nothing more comes of it. Maybe I get DDOSed a few times, obviously by one of your fellows, but I can't prove who it was so nothing happens there either.

Suppose for a minute though that you don't have many friends in Eve. Everyone has already made up their mind that you're guilty. Your supporters in that threadnought are few and far between. What then?

THAT is where I'm afraid we're going here, and ANY steps taken in that general direction are what I'm opposed to.


I do see where you're coming from there. I don't think I agree (that that's where we're going here, I mean), but it's the latest submission into a hefty pile of counterarguments that I've been mulling over, so who knows, perhaps it changes.

I'm not entirely sure the hypotheticals did anything but detract or distract from the point, though. Blink

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
DJ FunkyBacon
Rabid Ninja Space Monkey Inc.
Monkeys with Guns.
#108 - 2014-03-30 17:54:01 UTC  |  Edited by: DJ FunkyBacon
mynnna wrote:


I do see where you're coming from there. I don't think I agree (that that's where we're going here, I mean), but it's the latest submission into a hefty pile of counterarguments that I've been mulling over, so who knows, perhaps it changes.

I'm not entirely sure the hypotheticals did anything but detract or distract from the point, though. Blink


Harassment as enforced in game right now is fairly strict. You can get warnings, and then bans for calling someone an offensive name in local chat for example, providing it is petitioned by an offended party. This is ofc ok, because it is clearly against the TOS. By CCP saying that harassment outside of game is also covered by the TOS, and verifiable examples of such will be enforced, are they now saying that ANYTHING you say that can get you a warning or a ban IN game, can also carry over if they can verify you said it OUT of game?

CCP Falcon wrote:
CCP, in collaboration with the CSM, have agreed and would like to state in the strongest possible terms and in accordance with our existing Terms of Service and End User License Agreement, that real life harassment is morally reprehensible, and verifiable examples of such behavior will be met with disciplinary action against game accounts in accordance with our Terms of Service.


Emphasis mine.

That is a VERY large window Mynnna. I'd like to know your thoughts.

Radio Host, Blogger, Lowsec Resident, PvP Afficionado.

funkybacon.com - Blog

FunkyBacon on Twitter
Syds Sinclair
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#109 - 2014-03-30 18:20:03 UTC
Quote:
real life harassment is morally reprehensible, and verifiable examples of such behavior will be met with disciplinary action


..That is CCP's way of giving themselves a back door out of sticky situations.

My translation: "This will shut up all the whiners and make them think they've won their Holy Crusade. But also let our ruthless pilots continue on with business as usual. Verifiable examples! Who would be dumb enough to leave a paper trail of their antics!"

Teg put CCP into another un winnable situation by rallying the troops and hate-mongering.

♠ Sinclair Consulting ♠
Ali Aras
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#110 - 2014-03-30 18:20:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Ali Aras
"real life harassment" as in posting a pic on the forums and going "ali is a fat ugly *****, just look at her", as opposed to "he shot my ship! And made fun of my fit! BANNNN HIMMMMMMMMMMMMMM". That is, it's making EVE personal, not "harassment that takes place in real life", is how I read that.

http://warp-to-sun.tumblr.com -- my blog
DJ FunkyBacon
Rabid Ninja Space Monkey Inc.
Monkeys with Guns.
#111 - 2014-03-30 19:04:33 UTC
Ali Aras wrote:
"real life harassment" as in posting a pic on the forums and going "ali is a fat ugly *****, just look at her",


That would be bannable on Eve-O and in game. If that happened on some other forum, I don't think you should be punished in eve. The language of CCP Falcon's announcement suggests that you could be.

Radio Host, Blogger, Lowsec Resident, PvP Afficionado.

funkybacon.com - Blog

FunkyBacon on Twitter
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#112 - 2014-03-30 19:47:32 UTC
DJ FunkyBacon wrote:
That is a VERY large window Mynnna. I'd like to know your thoughts.


My feeling here is basically what I was trying to convey in my original answer, which is that the mundane sounding "verifiable example" necessarily dictates an exceptionally high bar for evidence that I don't think a lot of examples that are getting casually thrown around really meet.

On the flipside, your questions, and other people's questions, and questions that have occurred to me as extensions of both, have been rolling around in my head, smashing about in a violent orgy of second guessing and doubt, too. What?

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Harrigan VonStudly
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
#113 - 2014-04-01 00:50:13 UTC
Just stopping by to throw my support out there for the bacon master. I often find myself in agreement with DJ FB. I belienve he makes very well rounded arguments and has the best interest of the game and players at heart. I completely support and endorse this man. Bacon would be a very welcomed addition to a doughnut shaped table of nerds. omnomnom bacon
Ssabat Thraxx
DUST Expeditionary Team
Good Sax
#114 - 2014-04-01 16:10:29 UTC
DJ FunkyBacon wrote:
Thanks for your support Brusanan.

I want to make plain for those who may not be aware of everything that my stance is not in support of any one person, but the assertion that CCP has no business regulating player interactions outside of Eve on non-CCP sponsored 3rd party services.

Things like Teamspeak Voice comms, and outside forums, regardless of how public they are, (or how public they are made through recordings, images, and posts put up elsewhere) while related to Eve, are not Eve and in game. There are no CCP logs to back up accusations, and the potential for abuse within the meta game is extreme.

When one looks at CCPs consistent inaction (despite full knowledge of what was going on with the players in question for months prior) until a member of the CSM incited a threadnought populated by less than 400 angry characters, a person like me gets concerned for the future. Mob rule should NEVER be a reason for a shift in policy enforcement, and should not be a determining factor in doling out punishments.

Above all, if CCP does decide on changing where and when they are going to enforce policy, clear and concise lines need to be drawn to avoid confusion, so that players can clearly know where they stand, what is/is not acceptable. Ambiguous forum statements that can be interpreted multiple ways do not help the situation.


And with this, DJ, you have won my vote.


\m/ O.o \m/

"You're a freak ..." - Solecist Project
Winchester Steele
#115 - 2014-04-02 07:03:17 UTC
Your recent blog posts regarding the 'bonus room' incident are spot on and absolutely brilliant. It sums up my position far more eloquently than I ever could with 100 badposts. Thank you for that.

You definitely have my votes in the upcoming CSM elections.

...

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#116 - 2014-04-04 23:46:01 UTC
You have my vote which is saying something considering my overall opinion of eve-radio.

Founder of Violet Squadron, a small gang NPSI community! Mail me for more information.

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie's Space Mediation Service!
Abla Tive
#117 - 2014-04-05 15:01:36 UTC
GavinGoodrich
Perkone
Caldari State
#118 - 2014-04-05 16:48:50 UTC
+1 for bacon

Haaaaaalp my head's on fire
DJ FunkyBacon
Rabid Ninja Space Monkey Inc.
Monkeys with Guns.
#119 - 2014-04-07 00:32:26 UTC
Wanted to take a moment to say thank you to all of you that have posted in here with your support as well as questions.

Also, I made a blog update today regarding part of my CSM9 Platform: The currently broken link between Eve's FW and Dust 514.

You can read more about it here: http://funkybacon.blogspot.com/2014/04/csm9-platform-eve-fwdust-connection.html

Radio Host, Blogger, Lowsec Resident, PvP Afficionado.

funkybacon.com - Blog

FunkyBacon on Twitter
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#120 - 2014-04-07 05:12:06 UTC
Funky, following James 315's endorsement and the reasons he outlined for giving it, you're probably getting my second or third ballot position on each vote. (I'm a Psychotic Monk supporter).

I also *strongly* endorse any change to warp, jump and supercap mechanics that means that Heavy Interdictors are no longer the only ship capable of tackling several types of ships (supercaps and WCS-in-every-low jokefits).


A question - What ships do you feel should be capable of creating a single-target infinite point effect, to tackle supercaps and WCS abominations? (Imagine that this was decoupled from the ability to generate a bubble).

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com