These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Restrict NPC Corporation Posting Abilities.

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Prince Kobol
#141 - 2014-05-18 13:56:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Prince Kobol
hmskrecik wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
afkalt wrote:
Does no-one else see the risk that we create forums under the rule of "might is right". I can already see EvE mails flying around threatening war if things are disagreed with.

Furthermore, it grants people living in non-high sec a louder, more fearless voice - perhaps the intention but people shouldn't be marginalized for where they live. One of my characters lives in null - ask me how little of a crap I give about the threat of war.


Utter rubbish.

Do you think a large null sec entity is going to go to war with a few guys in a HS corp because they posted something they did not agree with on the forums

Seriously?

You know, so what if they did? If a entity such as goons war decc'ed a small HS Corp for the sole reason they dared to disagree with them on a forum post they would be laugh at, scorned, mocked and generally have the **** taken out of them forever and a day.

On top of that it would just mean everybody and their dog would be able to jump on the side of the HS corp as allies.

The simple fact is NPC corps do not advance / help / progress this game in any way shape or form.

If anything they NPC corp detract from the game, they make the game worse.

La Nariz stated explicitly that he/they want to be able to retaliate in game against anyone who posted on forums anything they didn't like.

And if it's not about retaliation then what is the problem with NPC alts posting?


So what if they wanted to.. again if I knew that the goons or anyone else would start to war dec small corps because of forums posts then good, It just means people can jump on the war against them for free.

Anything that promotes player driven content is a good thing and NPC Corps do not do this, if anything they go against player driven content.

You or anybody else who supports NPC Corps has yet to given any good reason how they promote anything good for the game
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#142 - 2014-05-18 13:57:04 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
afkalt wrote:
Does no-one else see the risk that we create forums under the rule of "might is right". I can already see EvE mails flying around threatening war if things are disagreed with.

Furthermore, it grants people living in non-high sec a louder, more fearless voice - perhaps the intention but people shouldn't be marginalized for where they live. One of my characters lives in null - ask me how little of a crap I give about the threat of war.


Utter rubbish.

Do you think a large null sec entity is going to go to war with a few guys in a HS corp because they posted something they did not agree with on the forums

Seriously?

You know, so what if they did? If a entity such as goons war decc'ed a small HS Corp for the sole reason they dared to disagree with them on a forum post they would be laugh at, scorned, mocked and generally have the **** taken out of them forever and a day.

On top of that it would just mean everybody and their dog would be able to jump on the side of the HS corp as allies.

The simple fact is NPC corps do not advance / help / progress this game in any way shape or form.

If anything they NPC corp detract from the game, they make the game worse.


So then what's the point of this idea again then? You've posted a paradox.

"Ban npc posters because we can't retaliate in game towards them"
"We're not going to retaliate"

Pick one, they are mutually exclusive.


Might is right in game only, it has little place on an out of game forum where things such as balance etc are debated.

It's just a forum, sticks and stones and all that.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#143 - 2014-05-18 14:00:28 UTC
afkalt wrote:
So then what's the point of this idea again then? You've posted a paradox.

"Ban npc posters because we can't retaliate in game towards them"
"We're not going to retaliate"

Pick one, they are mutually exclusive.


Might is right in game only, it has little place on an out of game forum where things such as balance etc are debated.

It's just a forum, sticks and stones and all that.


You left out "Just because I'm not going to retaliate *this time* doesn't mean I don't want the option to some other time. Also, the forum is very much part of the (meta) game.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Marsha Mallow
#144 - 2014-05-18 14:05:02 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Eshtir
ISD LackOfFaith wrote:
Banning and account-wide actions are completely out of ISD territory.

Basically everything is managed by hand, and the hands are few and working based on very limited information. If you would like to help, please make reports of rule-breaking as detailed as possible. Letting us know via a report that someone is being a recurring problem makes it much more likely someone will look into the problem poster.

Oh, and quick note: URLs in reports are bad. All the text in a report after a "?" is truncated for some reason, so all we ever see is "https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx", which is not useful at all.

A lot of the comments here seem to support ISDs having the ability to temp ban, or at the least issue warnings. I'm not suggesting policy is shifted towards a very harsh system of moderation, warnings should be issued first just in case people are unaware they are causing a problem, but there should be consequences for those who are actively and deliberately disruptive. It will initially increase workload on the Community team, but chances are it'll have a positive effect and cut down on a lot of the moderation needed at the moment. As I mentioned before I think there should be a sticky on each subforum with guidelines, etiquette and rules, and perhaps a message from Community Support about the overall tone they would like to encourage.

In the meantime though, if you want reports there's no reason we can't do that. I know some people are doing so already which I was a bit leery about doing because it feels a bit stalkerish to complain about individuals persistently. Having said that the difference is apparent as soon as those types disappear, mainly that threads don't go to 40 pages of garbage in a day purely because of 2 or 3 people :P

Ripard Teg > For the morons in the room:

Sweets > U can dd my face any day
hmskrecik
TransMine Group
Gluten Free Cartel
#145 - 2014-05-18 14:13:35 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
Anything that promotes player driven content is a good thing and NPC Corps do not do this, if anything they go against player driven content.

You or anybody else who supports NPC Corps has yet to given any good reason how they promote anything good for the game

Not promoting player driven content is still valid and legal way of playing. If you have problem with it, change TOS/EULA first.
hmskrecik
TransMine Group
Gluten Free Cartel
#146 - 2014-05-18 14:28:15 UTC  |  Edited by: hmskrecik
admiral root wrote:
hmskrecik wrote:
La Nariz stated explicitly that he/they want to be able to retaliate in game against anyone who posted on forums anything they didn't like.

And if it's not about retaliation then what is the problem with NPC alts posting?


The idea is for *anyone* to be able to retaliate, not just a handful of people.

It's also worth noting (for the benefit of the "OMG, not whant consequences" crowd) that Doomsdale Little has exactly 1 loss this year, and that was only an MTU. Given the amount of nonsense he spews all over the forum, together with the fact that he's not in an NPC corp (and therefore wouldn't be prevented from posting under the proposed change), we'd hardly be likely to see a massive increase in people being exploded for stupid posts.

Yes, I know 1 example is statistically insignificant. OTOH, he's probably manages to raise the average number of shiptoasts:person quite a bit all on his own.

First off, I don't know the guy and I will appreciate if you keep me in my ignorance.

To the rest, I'm not discussing retaliator part, I'm taking on retaliatee. Why anyone should be punishable in game for what they are writing on forum? What makes forum posting that much different from in game actions for which I might want to know identities of perpetrators as well? Like market scams, contract scams, local smacktalk, double-your-isk scams, neutral reppers, neutral scouts, etc? For each of them I might demand to know identities of their main accounts/characters. And tell you what, I might find playing such game bearable. Could you?
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#147 - 2014-05-18 15:04:56 UTC
Tsane Uchonela wrote:
The only really decent idea that has been posted in this thread was posted by Malcanis. Otherwise it is simply another attempt to nerf NPC corps/hisec. The original poster has already made it clear that he is not so much interested in actually reducing trolling but instead giving him and and his like free access to the forums while locking out those who are not in the 'In Club". Sorry guys if you cannot blob and spam F1 you have not invested enough time in the game and your efforts are meaningless because of the superhuman efforts it takes to be a member of a large alliance.


This has nothing to do with highsec and keep that crap out of the thread. The issue is forum quality and this suggestion admits to only being one step in being the solution to the problem. Do you have any more reasons and justification why this idea would not do as I have claimed it will?

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#148 - 2014-05-18 15:12:40 UTC
hmskrecik wrote:

No, I didn't ask you to make any kind of sandwich. I can make my own, thank you.

I asked not to use choices and consequences cliche because it's a bullshit. And it's a bullshit because at certain level choices and consequences are driving features of EVERY game, tic-tac-toe, WoW or HKO included, while on another level there are no meaningful consequences of some choices present in EVE Online. Or prove me wrong and tell me please what was the worst, to you, thing a single individual or a small corp did to CFC?

Sorry, this wasn't my question. My question was if you feel entitled to be able to put your wrath on anyone playing EVE? This question is about if anyone with enough power, however measured, should be able to effectively silence those who do not agree with them?

These questions border with right to anonymity and freedom of speech.

Anonymity is what you already enjoy. Apart from your character's name and fancy avatar there's nothing I know about you. CCP knows your email and if you buy PLEX for ISK and didn't run for CSM then the story end here. And it's for very good reasons.

And yet you want to deny similar level of protection within a game? How quaint.

With freedom of speech there goes right not to listen. You can choose not to read posts/threads/forums you don't like. And personal ignore list is nice tool helping with that.

On the other hand, ISD/CCP have judgement and executive power to keep discussions as clean as possible. With your proposal you want to have part of this power. Even if it turned out it doesn't hurt the game as a whole it is still something I don't like. And do not support.


That's part of the sandbox, I'm allowed to do what I like within the rules of the game so if I decide I don't like what you're saying I can go ahead and do as I like in retribution.

Much like reddit you don't understand that freedom of speech is not freedom from the consequences of that speech. This idea also has nothing to do with RL identities.

The CFC and whatever conspiracies/anger you have towards us has no bearing on this thread or any of the ideas I'm going to politely ask you once to justify whatever reason you have against the idea so we can discuss it.

This idea is really no different from responding to someone saying something in local that you do not like. For example person A says "all miners are terrible" in local. Person B a member of a mining corporation fits out a destroyer and uses his locator to find this person. Then person B waits until that person is floating along in a pod and pods them. Consequences for actions and improving the forum quality all coupled in one compact idea.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#149 - 2014-05-18 15:15:44 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Restriction and prevention are not the same thing, but they are both negative. There is no reason any rule biding player should not have access to communicate with the community or CCP with the same means another rule biding player has save for positions like the CSM where they confide information which they are not yet prepared to share with all users.

There is also no reason to segregate discussion regarding the game with our peers. CCP has on many occasions stated that they look at the forums even without solicitation of feedback or direct response. As such, unless this practice has been stopped, it is further restrictive of the interaction capacity for any individual without full board access.

Furthermore this saddles upon ISD the responsibility of vetting all manner of the inevitable off topic posts that all the affected players would have to use a small subset of forums to discuss subjects which will frequently fall outside of those forum subsections.

Personally, I'm not joining a corp to have a discussion about a ship fit or about a market tactic. I'm not going to have my in game decisions held hostage over my ability to discuss certain topics. All it means is that a new character with no actual gameplay will be born, a character with no means of being held accountable for their words. This is not that character, this character actually logs in and flies ships, that one will not and will be purely immune from any backlash it's words will bring.


There is a reason for restriction its because NPC alts are continually being used for trolling and derailing threads to the point they are locked. They are deliberately decreasing the quality of the forums and hence the community. There is evidence that this approach can work because CAOD quality increased when this occurred. I think the :effort: wall is high enough so if you decide to circumvent it go right ahead.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#150 - 2014-05-18 15:17:19 UTC
Shivanthar wrote:
If you want clean environment by banning, there must be an alternative available. I'm against "preventing". But rather, I would choose autonomy.

First of all, in terms of forum policy, player anonimity is a must, but not character anonimity. If I'm mistaken, please cite the terms conflicting with this knowledge.
Then, alternative comes from by automatically choosing the most skilled character from your account to post. If you're too afraid to post your ideas from your main character, don't post. That's it.

What I've seen so far is, those are not new players trolling the most. Those are the skilled players, hiding behind their recently created alts who are trolling. If forums choose your most skilled character for you to post, everybody would think twice before talking.


This idea comes up a lot I might as well add it to the OP. I agree the npc troll alts are not newbies they are hiding behind the NPC corp.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#151 - 2014-05-18 15:20:57 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Does no-one else see the risk that we create forums under the rule of "might is right". I can already see EvE mails flying around threatening war if things are disagreed with.

Furthermore, it grants people living in non-high sec a louder, more fearless voice - perhaps the intention but people shouldn't be marginalized for where they live. One of my characters lives in null - ask me how little of a crap I give about the threat of war.


Locator agents exist for a reason and its very hard to survive without jita so I don't think this will be that big of a deal. If someone wants retribution and is willing to put out the effort they're going to get it.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#152 - 2014-05-18 15:23:17 UTC
hmskrecik wrote:

La Nariz stated explicitly that he/they want to be able to retaliate in game against anyone who posted on forums anything they didn't like.

And if it's not about retaliation then what is the problem with NPC alts posting?


Rephrase that to:

"La Nariz stated explicity that he wants ANYONE to be able to retaliate in game against anyone who posted something they found unpalatable on the forums."

I think you're deliberately misinterpreting what I said to support your own fallacies.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#153 - 2014-05-18 15:27:33 UTC
afkalt wrote:


So then what's the point of this idea again then? You've posted a paradox.

"Ban npc posters because we can't retaliate in game towards them"
"We're not going to retaliate"

Pick one, they are mutually exclusive.


Might is right in game only, it has little place on an out of game forum where things such as balance etc are debated.

It's just a forum, sticks and stones and all that.


Consider that this change encompasses more than the CFC and evil goons. Take off the goonspiracy goggles and look at the whole change in the context of literally everyone in EVE then get back to us.

I think I've got everyone if you didn't get a reply from me and want one quote this sentence and repost.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Markus45
Doomheim
#154 - 2014-05-18 15:27:49 UTC
It is quite obvious this is just another typical Goon thread asking for something that specifically benefits them. Sorry Goons, isn't owning far more space than you can logically defend enough? Do you really need everything?

-1, NPC posters are important, mainly due to the aggressive nature of large blocs which will go after those who disagree with them.

Children's books in my day. Children's books today.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#155 - 2014-05-18 15:30:23 UTC  |  Edited by: admiral root
Markus45 wrote:
It is quite obvious this is just another typical Goon thread asking for something that specifically benefits them. Sorry Goons, isn't owning far more space than you can logically defend enough? Do you really need everything?


He's quite clearly asking for a change that benefits everyone who isn't an NPC Nobody.

Quote:
-1, NPC posters are important, mainly due to the aggressive nature of large blocs which will go after those who disagree with them.


I refer you to my earlier post about Doomsdale - there won't be an apocalypse because of better in-game consequences for forum shiptoasting.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#156 - 2014-05-18 15:38:21 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
afkalt wrote:


So then what's the point of this idea again then? You've posted a paradox.

"Ban npc posters because we can't retaliate in game towards them"
"We're not going to retaliate"

Pick one, they are mutually exclusive.


Might is right in game only, it has little place on an out of game forum where things such as balance etc are debated.

It's just a forum, sticks and stones and all that.


Consider that this change encompasses more than the CFC and evil goons. Take off the goonspiracy goggles and look at the whole change in the context of literally everyone in EVE then get back to us.

I think I've got everyone if you didn't get a reply from me and want one quote this sentence and repost.


It's nothing to do with goons, I don't give a monkeys nut about you, or CFC. It's the simple principle that people should be able to speak their minds without fear of retribution. This isn't 1950's Russia.


I get the whole trolling thing, but that can be addressed in better ways as it's something of a seperate issue. That said, a lot of people seem to confuse "trolling" with "disagreeing".
Prince Kobol
#157 - 2014-05-18 16:15:49 UTC
Markus45 wrote:
It is quite obvious this is just another typical Goon thread asking for something that specifically benefits them. Sorry Goons, isn't owning far more space than you can logically defend enough? Do you really need everything?

-1, NPC posters are important, mainly due to the aggressive nature of large blocs which will go after those who disagree with them.


Considering I am about as far removed as a goon that is possible then your argument fails.. utterly.

Also I consider La Nariz approach to NPC Corps and their problems be light handed, I want to go a lot further, a hell of lot further.

Again, I have yet to see anybody put forward a case for what good NPC Corps bring to our game.

As for people speaking their mind, there is nothing stopping you doing that, the only difference is that you will no longer have the ability to hide behind faceless NPC Alt #4173 and will instead have to voice your opinion with your in game character that is part of a player own corp.

This means it might give some people a moment of pause when deciding to try and derail a thread or post some utter and complete nonsense in a pathetic attempt to troll.

On top of that considering the game we play, being able to exact some kind of in game retribution if a person wants to do that and is willing to put in the time and effort required is a good thing, a damn good thing.
Marsha Mallow
#158 - 2014-05-18 16:25:28 UTC
Markus45 wrote:
It is quite obvious this is just another typical Goon thread asking for something that specifically benefits them. Sorry Goons, isn't owning far more space than you can logically defend enough? Do you really need everything?

-1, NPC posters are important, mainly due to the aggressive nature of large blocs which will go after those who disagree with them.

Read the comments and you'll see a cross section of the forum regulars who are not Goons supporting/discussing the merits of various parts of this proposal as well as comments from the moderation team. Who made the proposal is irrelevant. It's not an attack on players who reside in NPC corps, although obviously that is a related issue which concerns some players and keeps popping up.

There are only a dozen or so Goons who post on GD regularly and funnily enough they are among the better posters who engage in discussions constructively. It's people (who look suspiciously like you, 1 day old NPC alt) who cannot engage in discussion productively with others regardless of where they reside ingame and resort to personal attacks, trolling and flaming from anonymous alts.

Ripard Teg > For the morons in the room:

Sweets > U can dd my face any day
Shivanthar
#159 - 2014-05-18 16:30:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Shivanthar
afkalt wrote:

I get the whole trolling thing, but that can be addressed in better ways as it's something of a seperate issue. That said, a lot of people seem to confuse "trolling" with "disagreeing".


They're not confusing any terms. They're confusing about who are you. Make the forums choose your most skilled character, and we will not be talking with a shady picture and some name including "alt" and "afk". You will have to pay an upkeep for it! With your paid upkeep and your beautiful haired main man/woman talking, will you be able to disagree as easy as you did? Try it, believe me, it will be enjoying.

_Half _the lies they tell about me **aren't **true.
hmskrecik
TransMine Group
Gluten Free Cartel
#160 - 2014-05-18 16:39:11 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Rephrase that to:

"La Nariz stated explicity that he wants ANYONE to be able to retaliate in game against anyone who posted something they found unpalatable on the forums."

I think you're deliberately misinterpreting what I said to support your own fallacies.

Misinterpreation wasn't deliberate and I have no problem with the version as rephrased by you. My objection is not about those who would benefit from your proposal but about who would suffer.

La Nariz wrote:

That's part of the sandbox, I'm allowed to do what I like within the rules of the game so if I decide I don't like what you're saying I can go ahead and do as I like in retribution.

Much like reddit you don't understand that freedom of speech is not freedom from the consequences of that speech. This idea also has nothing to do with RL identities.

The CFC and whatever conspiracies/anger you have towards us has no bearing on this thread or any of the ideas I'm going to politely ask you once to justify whatever reason you have against the idea so we can discuss it.

This idea is really no different from responding to someone saying something in local that you do not like. For example person A says "all miners are terrible" in local. Person B a member of a mining corporation fits out a destroyer and uses his locator to find this person. Then person B waits until that person is floating along in a pod and pods them. Consequences for actions and improving the forum quality all coupled in one compact idea.

I'm okay with sandbox and playing within rules. The same rules allow existence of alts and give them full rights.

In my opinion it does have to do with RL identities. As much as you want choices made in game to have consequences stay within game, similarly choices on forums should have consequences on forums. This is very important. Forums and the game itself are governed by different rules. It's widely accepted that the game is not RL. By the same token forums are not a game.

I have no personal qualms with CFC in general nor with Goons in particular. I had no direct in game interactions with neither of you and it's my intention for it to stay this way. However it is my understanding that you market yourselves as evil guys of EVE so when you propose something you have to forgive my skepticism, that I don't readily trust it's good for whole player base, me included, not just for Goons.

Lastly, the more I think about it the more I'm convinced there will be working here something which for lack of better terms let's call Reverse Malcanis Law: any technical measure intended to police some player behaviour will affect only new and inexperienced players while old and experienced will find a way around it. Trolling will not be stopped, trolls will find ways to do their work. Instead this will become political censoring tool. If this is what you're about, have balls to honestly admit it.