These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Jester is pulling the plug on his blog

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Josef Djugashvilis
#361 - 2014-06-03 14:25:03 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
CCP came to the conclusion that they did not want Ero's custom for their own reasons, the notion that Ripard in any way forced their hand or 'persuaded' CCP to act in a way they would not otherwise have done, is to credit Ripard with more influence than any single player has, and is an insult to CCP as a company.

Those who think CCP only acted at the prompting of Ripard, should take the only honorable course of action and quit the game in protest.

I quite enjoyed reading his blog even if I did not always agree with his views.

Mind you, Gevlon's blog is great fun to read.


except that doesn't really make sense when ero had been doing nothing more than his business as usual, until ripard blogged about it.

i sincerely doubt it was coincidence that ero got banned shortly after the blog post.


If what you say is true (and I do not for one moment think it is) then Ripard realy did win Eve Online.

This is not a signature.
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
#362 - 2014-06-03 14:27:39 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Ab'del Abu wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
Ab'del Abu wrote:
Love how forums have become a bonus-room for all that E1-groupies. They went all in for him and they'll never get him back :>



Has nothing to do with that.

What it has to do is that because of Riptard's personal vendetta against 1 player, he abused his position on the the CSM by creating a inflammatory blog knowing that it would gain attention to get a player banned for something which happened out of game.

If he was so proud of what he did why did he do everything he could to distance himself form the **** storm he caused?


Pretty sure he failed to change EVE as CSM, so he used (!= abused) his influence as blogger to create a shitstorm. Get your arguments straight.
If he wasn't a CSM member, his opinions wouldn't have been hawk-eyed by gaming websites the like to the degree it was. When you have a person in a position of power publicly throwing around words like "torture" to push their own agenda, that is abuse of their position.


People have voted him into that position for him to speak his mind. If he deems E1's behavior a form of torture, a statement many a people and definitions clearly seem to agree with, I would fully expect of a responsible elected representitive to make this case. It would appear CCP's decision (+ the full CMS's approval) of the ban would prove him right.
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#363 - 2014-06-03 14:29:20 UTC
It's astonishing, and a bit unnerving, the number of people on this forum who claim to be able to know just exactly what Jester was thinking. People here have listed at least 30 things "that he did...and exactly why he did them". All you can know is what he has written. All else is conjecture and speculation.

To me, this is as nuts as the folks who claim to know what God is thinking.

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Dave Stark
#364 - 2014-06-03 14:30:20 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
CCP came to the conclusion that they did not want Ero's custom for their own reasons, the notion that Ripard in any way forced their hand or 'persuaded' CCP to act in a way they would not otherwise have done, is to credit Ripard with more influence than any single player has, and is an insult to CCP as a company.

Those who think CCP only acted at the prompting of Ripard, should take the only honorable course of action and quit the game in protest.

I quite enjoyed reading his blog even if I did not always agree with his views.

Mind you, Gevlon's blog is great fun to read.


except that doesn't really make sense when ero had been doing nothing more than his business as usual, until ripard blogged about it.

i sincerely doubt it was coincidence that ero got banned shortly after the blog post.


If what you say is true (and I do not for one moment think it is) then Ripard realy did win Eve Online.


i'm not going to pretend it's the truth and i know better than everyone else, but i just find that it's significantly harder to believe that ccp would ban some one for doing what they're known to have been doing with no change to that player's activities rather than them doing it due to external pressure. Especially when we consider the chronology of the events.
Josef Djugashvilis
#365 - 2014-06-03 14:30:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Josef Djugashvilis
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
It's astonishing, and a bit unnerving, the number of people on this forum who claim to be able to know just exactly what Jester was thinking. People here have listed at least 30 things "that he did...and exactly why he did them". All you can know is what he has written. All else is conjecture and speculation.

To me, this is as nuts as the folks who claim to know what God is thinking.


I always know what God is thinking, except when I am drunk Smile

This is not a signature.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#366 - 2014-06-03 14:31:30 UTC
Ab'del Abu wrote:

People have voted him into that position for him to speak his mind. If he deems E1's behavior a form of torture, a statement many a people and definitions clearly seem to agree with, I would fully expect of a responsible elected representitive to make this case. It would appear CCP's decision (+ the full CMS's approval) of the ban would prove him right.


That argument falls apart fairly easily when it is mentioned that, if Ripard Teg was actually acting in honesty, then he completely ignored the actual "victim" of this, not only failing to even speak to him but ignoring it when the victim himself contradicted his wild statements.

Ergo, it was not in honesty, and was done to push his agenda. Which fits in nicely since banning scamming, ganking, and pushing a whole bunch of other carebeary things is all **** he has actually said.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#367 - 2014-06-03 14:32:11 UTC
I'm surprised by the number of people being mean, these articles were very nice!

7o Ripard, thank you for making the blog I red the most in 2013-14.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart
Dave Stark
#368 - 2014-06-03 14:35:56 UTC
Altrue wrote:
I'm surprised by the number of people being mean, these articles were very nice!

7o Ripard, thank you for making the blog I red the most in 2013-14.


nobody is being mean.

the absence of people fawning doesn't mean that everyone is being mean.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#369 - 2014-06-03 14:36:15 UTC
Ab'del Abu wrote:
People have voted him into that position for him to speak his mind. If he deems E1's behavior a form of torture, a statement many a people and definitions clearly seem to agree with, I would fully expect of a responsible elected representitive to make this case. It would appear CCP's decision (+ the full CMS's approval) of the ban would prove him right.
OK, so if a CSM member doesn't like you, they can stir up bad press about you too then, until CCP ban you? You consider that acceptable because we voted them into power?

And you think the method for CSM memebrs to communicate their concerns with CCP is to blog about it in ludicrous terms and stir up a shitstorm?

Oh and just FYI, deeming it a form of torture is an insult to people who are legitimate victims of torture. It's like how a **** victim would feel if you said that someone winking at you is ****.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#370 - 2014-06-03 14:38:54 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Altrue wrote:
I'm surprised by the number of people being mean, these articles were very nice!

7o Ripard, thank you for making the blog I red the most in 2013-14.


nobody is being mean.

the absence of people fawning doesn't mean that everyone is being mean.


In fairness, I am definitely being mean. I think the man is a dishonest, despicable piece of dirt, and his constituents, such as they are, have more in common with a sock with buttons sown on it than actual thinking, reasoning beings.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#371 - 2014-06-03 14:40:15 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Altrue wrote:
I'm surprised by the number of people being mean, these articles were very nice!

7o Ripard, thank you for making the blog I red the most in 2013-14.


nobody is being mean.

the absence of people fawning doesn't mean that everyone is being mean.


In fairness, I am definitely being mean. I think the man is a dishonest, despicable piece of dirt, and his constituents, such as they are, have more in common with a sock with buttons sown on it than actual thinking, reasoning beings.


I wish you'd stop holding back so much and tell us how you really feel!

Cool

Oh and +1
Dave Stark
#372 - 2014-06-03 14:40:57 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Altrue wrote:
I'm surprised by the number of people being mean, these articles were very nice!

7o Ripard, thank you for making the blog I red the most in 2013-14.


nobody is being mean.

the absence of people fawning doesn't mean that everyone is being mean.


In fairness, I am definitely being mean. I think the man is a dishonest, despicable piece of dirt, and his constituents, such as they are, have more in common with a sock with buttons sown on it than actual thinking, reasoning beings.


exception that proves the rule.

i'll allow it.
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
#373 - 2014-06-03 14:41:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Ab'del Abu
Lucas Kell wrote:
Ab'del Abu wrote:
People have voted him into that position for him to speak his mind. If he deems E1's behavior a form of torture, a statement many a people and definitions clearly seem to agree with, I would fully expect of a responsible elected representitive to make this case. It would appear CCP's decision (+ the full CMS's approval) of the ban would prove him right.
OK, so if a CSM member doesn't like you, they can stir up bad press about you too then, until CCP ban you? You consider that acceptable because we voted them into power?
.


They are very welcome to try. I don't think I qualify for a ban just for the occasional ganking of miners in w-space ;)

Lucas Kell wrote:
Oh and just FYI, deeming it a form of torture is an insult to people who are legitimate victims of torture. It's like how a **** victim would feel if you said that someone winking at you is ****.


LOL, sure. Someone that lost a couple limbs to torture might think differently about a little waterboarding too.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#374 - 2014-06-03 14:42:14 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Ab'del Abu wrote:
People have voted him into that position for him to speak his mind. If he deems E1's behavior a form of torture, a statement many a people and definitions clearly seem to agree with, I would fully expect of a responsible elected representitive to make this case. It would appear CCP's decision (+ the full CMS's approval) of the ban would prove him right.
OK, so if a CSM member doesn't like you, they can stir up bad press about you too then, until CCP ban you? You consider that acceptable because we voted them into power?

And you think the method for CSM memebrs to communicate their concerns with CCP is to blog about it in ludicrous terms and stir up a shitstorm?

Oh and just FYI, deeming it a form of torture is an insult to people who are legitimate victims of torture. It's like how a **** victim would feel if you said that someone winking at you is ****.


Elected representatives are allowed to change to the definition of torture?

Oh wait, in some countries they regularly do that

To allow it.

"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
Dave Stark
#375 - 2014-06-03 14:43:23 UTC
Ab'del Abu wrote:
They are very welcome to try. I don't think I qualify for a ban just for the occasional ganking of miners in w-space ;)

it does if they feel tortured.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#376 - 2014-06-03 14:45:10 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Ab'del Abu wrote:
They are very welcome to try. I don't think I qualify for a ban just for the occasional ganking of miners in w-space ;)

it does if they feel tortured.


Or if a sitting CSM member says they do. Even if they don't.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Liese Shardani
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#377 - 2014-06-03 14:50:41 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
there was nothing systematic or continued about what E1 did, it was a single bonus room.


Umm, by E1's own admission, there were dozens or as many as hundreds of Bonus Rooms, each of them hours in length. Several recordings are easy to find on SoundCloud.
Dave Stark
#378 - 2014-06-03 14:54:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
Liese Shardani wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
there was nothing systematic or continued about what E1 did, it was a single bonus room.


Umm, by E1's own admission, there were dozens or as many as hundreds of Bonus Rooms, each of them hours in length. Several recordings are easy to find on SoundCloud.


yes, with just as many participants. by the definition given, no single participant was "harassed" irrespective of how many participants there were.
Serene Repose
#379 - 2014-06-03 15:24:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Serene Repose
Lucas Kell wrote:
. Further to that, the banning was retroactive, so it's like "oh, what you did yesterday was fine yesterday but today it's not fine anymore so BAN BAN BAN!". And it's also about what that means going forward. The line appears to have not been moved, so everything that was previously accepted should in theory be accepted going forward, but what happens next time a CSM member chooses to start a witch hunt against someone they hate?
Funny. You, perhaps, sought a preemptive ban? This E1 person, whether anyone wishes to believe it or not, participated in some rather bizarre, if not psychologically disturbed behavior. Anyone who's bothered to familiarize themselves with LAW - the law where the player resides, Icelandic law where CCP resides, the over-arching federal laws of all nations involved (as I've said before) much to your SURPRISE you'll find a lot more in there than "harassment".

And, you will find that incident with "E1" (as he is affectionately called) walked all over several of these laws. That it was brought to CCP's attention belatedly matters not to the law enforcement apparatus of the world. That it was brought to their attention and they took no action makes CCP complicit, and I'll tell you a little secret. None of you would be at the barricades supporting CCP should their rights be trampled. It's laughable to think CCP staff should pay fines or go to jail to appeal to YOUR idea of fairness, justice and propriety.

In fact, reading over this thread, most of the participants haven't got clue one about the actual subject matter, and are busy arguing whether Chicken Little was actually hit with a piece of sky...or maybe it was something else. The real world welcomes you any time you all wish to make an appearance.

We must accommodate the idiocracy.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#380 - 2014-06-03 15:27:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
@Serene Repose:

Which country bans making people sing Disney songs? Or laughing at them? Or stealing their video game money?

I mean, it'd be really nice to know which international laws I might be breaking by laughing at someone.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.