These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

A message regarding vandalism of the EVE Universe Monument

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ketata Shardani
Ascendance
Goonswarm Federation
#261 - 2014-05-20 07:59:29 UTC
Destination SkillQueue wrote:
TheMercenaryKing wrote:
Is the Icelandic judicial system involved? I know it's a crime, but how far is CCP going?

That is probably an issue between CCP, the criminal system and the accused. We don't have any need to know.

now I don't how it works in Iceland but in the U.S. all criminal cases, charges, court process are public record which could lead to further crimes committed towards the vandals which is probably not what CCP wants.

Artillery, some say Minmatar. I say KING OF BATTLE HOOAH
Slade Trillgon
Brutor Force Federated
#262 - 2014-05-20 14:23:42 UTC
I want a public auction of all seized in-game assets Big smileTwisted


I also, tend to agree that public humiliation is one of the best deterrents with financial reparations coming in as a close second, but I respect CCP for choosing a course and sticking to it.

Well played CCP!
Ravasta Helugo
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#263 - 2014-05-22 19:28:51 UTC
Doc Fury wrote:
What steps has CCP taken (or plans to take) to prevent future abuse/vandalism of the monument?

Permanent CONCORD spawn.
Steven Alfrir
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#264 - 2014-05-25 05:35:03 UTC
They deserve to be ripped apart in a gladiator match hosted in the Colosseum in Rome.
Nuff said

I like crazy plans
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#265 - 2014-05-26 07:22:13 UTC
Steven Alfrir wrote:
They deserve to be ripped apart in a gladiator match hosted in the Colosseum in Rome.
Nuff said


I dont know where to begin pointing out the things wrong with this sentence

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
ctx2007
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#266 - 2014-05-26 13:25:16 UTC
Hmmm no lynching party then Sad

Wot about a firing squad one post embedded deep in to the ground one length of rope to tie the permaban to and 20 fully auto paintball guns with 200 balls per gun and tie him semi naked (he gets to keep his underwear on) to the post.

Then give him PAAIIINNNN!!!!

You only realise you life has been a waste of time, when you wake up dead.
breadic jackson
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#267 - 2014-05-27 15:45:14 UTC
In the words of evefest 2014. Distry distry distry the hide of some people
Sequester Risalo
German Corps of Engineers 17
Federation of Respect Honor Passion Alliance.
#268 - 2014-05-28 14:56:19 UTC
I read the entire thread and find it highly interesting that all or most players consider permabanning the offenders a fitting response or even too lenient. Especially if I compare it to the banning of Erotica1. Let`s recap some of the arguments of Erotica's defenders:

- It's not against the EULA.
- The game is marketed as "be the villain", so let him be as evil as he likes.
- The incident was out of game (on a TS server). You cannot react ingame to out of game actions.
- Publicly deriding others is acceptable metagame and should be supported.
- I lol'd, so let him go free.
- You just want to impose your questionable moral standards on others.
- This is a slippery slope towards banning everyone for no apparent reason.

All these arguments could be applied to this incident as well. Where are all the defenders of the sandbox now?

Personally I couldn't care less if a monument in a remote country is defaced or not. I am also not affected by someone being humilated in the internet. But I know I would rather be and play with people who commit very light cases of vandalism than people who enjoy humiliating others.
Sissy Fuzz
Sissy Fuzz Communications
#269 - 2014-05-28 22:43:12 UTC
mkint wrote:
Most people don't consider vandalism to be that big a deal (unless it happens to themselves.)


Where do you have that degenerate notion from?
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#270 - 2014-05-29 08:53:36 UTC
Sissy Fuzz wrote:
mkint wrote:
Most people don't consider vandalism to be that big a deal (unless it happens to themselves.)


Where do you have that degenerate notion from?


From observation of the world around him, Ill bet.

You cleaned any grafitti up that you didnt cause or is not on your property or something you are responsible for recently?

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#271 - 2014-05-29 12:16:39 UTC
Sequester Risalo wrote:
I read the entire thread and find it highly interesting that all or most players consider permabanning the offenders a fitting response or even too lenient. Especially if I compare it to the banning of Erotica1. Let`s recap some of the arguments of Erotica's defenders:

- It's not against the EULA.
- The game is marketed as "be the villain", so let him be as evil as he likes.
- The incident was out of game (on a TS server). You cannot react ingame to out of game actions.
- Publicly deriding others is acceptable metagame and should be supported.
- I lol'd, so let him go free.
- You just want to impose your questionable moral standards on others.
- This is a slippery slope towards banning everyone for no apparent reason.

All these arguments could be applied to this incident as well. Where are all the defenders of the sandbox now?

Personally I couldn't care less if a monument in a remote country is defaced or not. I am also not affected by someone being humilated in the internet. But I know I would rather be and play with people who commit very light cases of vandalism than people who enjoy humiliating others.


So let me understand, you're fine with people vandalizing other peoples property, ruining a piece of work for the community, and causing real monetary damage

but if you ask someone to sing a song on teamspeak, thats unacceptable!

Priorities are a bit backwards there, mate
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#272 - 2014-05-29 12:46:27 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Sequester Risalo wrote:
I read the entire thread and find it highly interesting that all or most players consider permabanning the offenders a fitting response or even too lenient. Especially if I compare it to the banning of Erotica1. Let`s recap some of the arguments of Erotica's defenders:

- It's not against the EULA.
- The game is marketed as "be the villain", so let him be as evil as he likes.
- The incident was out of game (on a TS server). You cannot react ingame to out of game actions.
- Publicly deriding others is acceptable metagame and should be supported.
- I lol'd, so let him go free.
- You just want to impose your questionable moral standards on others.
- This is a slippery slope towards banning everyone for no apparent reason.

All these arguments could be applied to this incident as well. Where are all the defenders of the sandbox now?

Personally I couldn't care less if a monument in a remote country is defaced or not. I am also not affected by someone being humilated in the internet. But I know I would rather be and play with people who commit very light cases of vandalism than people who enjoy humiliating others.


So let me understand, you're fine with people vandalizing other peoples property, ruining a piece of work for the community, and causing real monetary damage

but if you ask someone to sing a song on teamspeak, thats unacceptable!

Priorities are a bit backwards there, mate


That's not what was said, but feel free to exaggerate the semantics to suit your point of view.

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#273 - 2014-05-29 17:16:55 UTC
Sequester Risalo wrote:
I read the entire thread and find it highly interesting that all or most players consider permabanning the offenders a fitting response or even too lenient. Especially if I compare it to the banning of Erotica1. Let`s recap some of the arguments of Erotica's defenders:

- It's not against the EULA.
- The game is marketed as "be the villain", so let him be as evil as he likes.
- The incident was out of game (on a TS server). You cannot react ingame to out of game actions.
- Publicly deriding others is acceptable metagame and should be supported.
- I lol'd, so let him go free.
- You just want to impose your questionable moral standards on others.
- This is a slippery slope towards banning everyone for no apparent reason.

All these arguments could be applied to this incident as well. Where are all the defenders of the sandbox now?

Personally I couldn't care less if a monument in a remote country is defaced or not. I am also not affected by someone being humilated in the internet. But I know I would rather be and play with people who commit very light cases of vandalism than people who enjoy humiliating others.

Are you really comparing a scam that combined some possibly questionable tear milking with real world vandalism that had financial and legal ramifications?

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

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie's Space Mediation Service!
Mythrandier
Solace Corp
#274 - 2014-05-29 19:59:06 UTC

Sometimes I really am ashamed to be a member of our species.

It's a game for fracks sake, sheesh.

"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." -  D. Adams.
Sequester Risalo
German Corps of Engineers 17
Federation of Respect Honor Passion Alliance.
#275 - 2014-05-30 06:53:21 UTC
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:
Are you really comparing a scam that combined some possibly questionable tear milking with real world vandalism that had financial and legal ramifications?


Although I do have an opinion on both incidents and I do indeed value the integrity and well being of persons and their privacy higher than the integrity and well-being of things that was not the point I was trying to make.

I was simply calling out Erotica1 apologists as hypocrites. They raised their arguments in one case and are silent in another. Seems like they don't stick to their own beliefs.

If their arguments, which I simply restated, seem weak to you in this case, guess what they are in the other.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#276 - 2014-05-30 07:07:47 UTC
Mythrandier wrote:

Sometimes I really am ashamed to be a member of our species.

It's a game for fracks sake, sheesh.


Actually, its a monument

But I can see how you might be confused

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#277 - 2014-05-30 07:09:17 UTC
Sequester Risalo wrote:
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:
Are you really comparing a scam that combined some possibly questionable tear milking with real world vandalism that had financial and legal ramifications?


Although I do have an opinion on both incidents and I do indeed value the integrity and well being of persons and their privacy higher than the integrity and well-being of things that was not the point I was trying to make.

I was simply calling out Erotica1 apologists as hypocrites. They raised their arguments in one case and are silent in another. Seems like they don't stick to their own beliefs.

If their arguments, which I simply restated, seem weak to you in this case, guess what they are in the other.


"There is no weaker argument than attacking someone in absentium" - Charles M Schultz

Go on, names and citations please, or are you just climbing up that ivory tower to be seen and heard?

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#278 - 2014-05-30 10:43:23 UTC  |  Edited by: TheGunslinger42
Sequester Risalo wrote:
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:
Are you really comparing a scam that combined some possibly questionable tear milking with real world vandalism that had financial and legal ramifications?


Although I do have an opinion on both incidents and I do indeed value the integrity and well being of persons and their privacy higher than the integrity and well-being of things that was not the point I was trying to make.

I was simply calling out Erotica1 apologists as hypocrites. They raised their arguments in one case and are silent in another. Seems like they don't stick to their own beliefs.

If their arguments, which I simply restated, seem weak to you in this case, guess what they are in the other.


Did you miss the part of the erotica1 ordeal where the "victim" himself came out and said he wasn't bothered by it at all - he just lost his temper, but that it wasn't a big deal to him?

Either you're unfortunately uninformed about this issue, or you're deliberately misrepresenting it, or just merely parroting what riptard said

Edit to bring it back on topic: And again, there's a big difference between someone getting irritated or annoyed by events in a video game they're playing, and willfully damaging or destroying other peoples real world property. There's no hypocrisy because the two situations are so wildly different that only a fool would compare them.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#279 - 2014-05-30 11:20:32 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
there's a big difference between someone getting irritated or annoyed by events in a video game they're playing, and willfully damaging or destroying other peoples real world property. There's no hypocrisy because the two situations are so wildly different that only a fool would compare them.


This is true

Though what I dont get is why people are so upset about a bit of damage to a thing they want to kill or maim over it

When I kill or main I dont need an excuse to get all pissy about

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#280 - 2014-05-30 16:54:47 UTC  |  Edited by: BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
Sequester Risalo wrote:
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:
Are you really comparing a scam that combined some possibly questionable tear milking with real world vandalism that had financial and legal ramifications?


Although I do have an opinion on both incidents and I do indeed value the integrity and well being of persons and their privacy higher than the integrity and well-being of things that was not the point I was trying to make.

I was simply calling out Erotica1 apologists as hypocrites. They raised their arguments in one case and are silent in another. Seems like they don't stick to their own beliefs.

If their arguments, which I simply restated, seem weak to you in this case, guess what they are in the other.

No need to use the third person here. I participated in some bonus rooms, felt a little uncomfortable with some aspects of it, and stopped. If Ero was guilty of anything, it was taking trolling a little too far. He never set out to commit criminal actions (and in my eyes did not deserve a permanent ban). You are comparing two very different cases, claiming that arguments can stand irrespective of the subject being argued.

What you don't seem to understand is that this incident is unrelated to eve as a game. It is criminal action that is hurtful towards the eve playerbase as a whole.

Quote:
- It's not against the EULA.
- The game is marketed as "be the villain", so let him be as evil as he likes.
- The incident was out of game (on a TS server). You cannot react ingame to out of game actions.
- Publicly deriding others is acceptable metagame and should be supported.
- I lol'd, so let him go free.
- You just want to impose your questionable moral standards on others.
- This is a slippery slope towards banning everyone for no apparent reason.

"Its not against the EULA" - I believe ccp cares about criminal actions at tad more than the EULA in most cases.
"The incident was out of game (on a TS server). You cannot react ingame to out of game actions." - This argument is bullshit to begin with. Even so, Ero was probably (noone except CCP knows for sure) banned for ingame references to out of game actions.
"Publicly deriding others is acceptable metagame and should be supported." - Doesn't apply to the current topic in any way.
"I lol'd, so let him go free." - What?
"You just want to impose your questionable moral standards on others." - Have you actually bothered mentioning arguments or are you just listing fallacies from a philosophy textbook?
"This is a slippery slope towards banning everyone for no apparent reason." - I guess that answers the previous question.

Ramona McCandless wrote:
This is true

Though what I dont get is why people are so upset about a bit of damage to a thing they want to kill or maim over it

When I kill or main I dont need an excuse to get all pissy about

Obviously some people aren't as well adjusted as you are Ramona!

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

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie's Space Mediation Service!