These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 Reminder Regarding Real Life Harassment

First post First post First post
Author
Josef Djugashvilis
#581 - 2014-09-12 06:36:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Josef Djugashvilis
Even when CCP does very clearly draw a line in the sand; Erotica 1 for example, a vocal minority are still not satisfied and argue that either there should be no line in the sand because this is, Eve Online and it meant to be 'ard innit' or they see the line and argue that it is is the wrong place.

Once again, I put it to those who want 'clarification' come up with a workable proposal CCP and the player base can get behind.

Most of this thread is just like three year kids kids saying, 'yeah but' to everything their parents say.

Put up, or shut up.

This is not a signature.

Sibyyl
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#582 - 2014-09-12 06:37:25 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:

Falcon stated simply and effectively what to do. He didn't say stay away from carebears. He didn't say to stop bumping the **** out of freighters. He said don't take the game into the real world. You, of all people, should understand the consequences of that.

So give it a rest people. Stop being obtuse and willfully ignorant of what CCP is stating when you know full well where the fuzzy gray line is. If you honestly can't figure it out, then you are too stupid to be a part of this community anyway and deserve the ban you will eventually get.



I was about to violently rearrange your view on this whole thing, but I can't. I have this strict e-policy to never verbally wrestle with space hunks with a gleaming cueball and tinted sunglasses.

Joffy Aulx-Gao for CSM. Fix links and OGB. Ban stabs from plexes. Fulfill karmic justice.

Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#583 - 2014-09-12 06:39:36 UTC
Mira Robinson wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Mira Robinson wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Mira Robinson wrote:
How much simpler things would be if the EULA was shortened to:

Eve contains spaceships. These spaceships may or may not shoot at each other. Sometimes things explode.

If you got exploded, don't be a crybaby.

If you did the exploding, don't be an *******, and keep it in-game.


Why is it only the people doing the exploding who need to be told to keep it in game?

Poorly worded. Keep it in game no matter what side of the wreck you're on.

But it's aimed more towards gankers because they do the tear-harvesting.


What's good for one is good for all. You can't single out a group of people based on their choice of legitimate in-game behaviour.

Hey genius, once you get them on TeamSpeak, it's not in-game behavior anymore, is it?


Don't make me link this again.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#584 - 2014-09-12 06:40:56 UTC
Sibyyl wrote:
Mr Epeen wrote:

Falcon stated simply and effectively what to do. He didn't say stay away from carebears. He didn't say to stop bumping the **** out of freighters. He said don't take the game into the real world. You, of all people, should understand the consequences of that.

So give it a rest people. Stop being obtuse and willfully ignorant of what CCP is stating when you know full well where the fuzzy gray line is. If you honestly can't figure it out, then you are too stupid to be a part of this community anyway and deserve the ban you will eventually get.



I was about to violently rearrange your view on this whole thing, but I can't. I have this strict e-policy to never verbally wrestle with space hunks with a gleaming cueball and tinted sunglasses.


I know the consequences of taking the game to the real world. The person who did it to me is still playing the game. Why, they're online right now.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Lady Areola Fappington
#585 - 2014-09-12 06:40:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Lady Areola Fappington
Mira Robinson wrote:

I agree. I think a lot of New Order folk should be handed their spaceship retirement papers. It's disgusting.



I agree with a lot of the "ideals" behind The New Order, but yeah, I disagree with the way things have been done as of late. Entirely too much "pestering" for lack of a better term, trying to get someone to snap and generate an all-important blog post.

I'm cool with a gank, a smarmy evemail asking for a permit, and going from there. It's just not cool to keep digging at and targeting someone, regardless of their "goldmine" status.

If you get tears, great, show 'em off, post 'em, and get it out there so we can all giggle. If you just get a "gf", don't keep going on someone in an attempt to elicit rage.

7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided. --Eve New Player Guide

Sibyyl
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#586 - 2014-09-12 06:43:26 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Even when CCP does very clearly draw a line in the sand; Erotica 1 for example, a vocal minority are still not satisfied and argue that either there should be no line in the sand because this is, Eve Online and it meant to be 'ard innit' or they see the line and argue that it is is the wrong place.

Once again, I put it to those who want 'clarification' come up with a workable proposal CCP and the player base can get behind.

Most of this thread is just like three year kids kids saying, 'yeah but' to everything their parents say.

Put up. or shut up.



E1 wasn't banned for being a sadist. If this were the reason, then E1's shtick would have run into a brick wall long before an Internet Space Detective posted a Bonus Room spread on their blog.

CCP has an absolute right to curb anything that causes a negative public perception of EVE (and I've been consistently in support of CCP's ability to do so). And this happened to be the case in this situation.



However, the labeling of E1's activities as sadism.. though this is a "statement" CCP has made, is something I fundamentally disagree with.

I also like the continued use of "vocal minority" as something that is terrible and bad.

Joffy Aulx-Gao for CSM. Fix links and OGB. Ban stabs from plexes. Fulfill karmic justice.

Josef Djugashvilis
#587 - 2014-09-12 06:50:36 UTC
Sibyyl wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Even when CCP does very clearly draw a line in the sand; Erotica 1 for example, a vocal minority are still not satisfied and argue that either there should be no line in the sand because this is, Eve Online and it meant to be 'ard innit' or they see the line and argue that it is is the wrong place.

Once again, I put it to those who want 'clarification' come up with a workable proposal CCP and the player base can get behind.

Most of this thread is just like three year kids kids saying, 'yeah but' to everything their parents say.

Put up. or shut up.



E1 wasn't banned for being a sadist. If this were the reason, then E1's shtick would have run into a brick wall long before an Internet Space Detective posted a Bonus Room spread on their blog.

CCP has an absolute right to curb anything that causes a negative public perception of EVE (and I've been consistently in support of CCP's ability to do so). And this happened to be the case in this situation.



However, the labeling of E1's activities as sadism.. though this is a "statement" CCP has made, is something I fundamentally disagree with.

I also like the continued use of "vocal minority" as something that is terrible and bad.



You have drawn entirely the wrong inference from my use of the term, 'vocal minority' They were a vocal minority and did argue their case very passionately, good for them.

My point is that many posters in this thread want CCP to be more explicit about what is and what is not beyond the pale, but even when CCP do draw a very clear line in the sand, some folk are still not happy.

But of course you knew that, you are just trying to twist what I said to make yourself feel good.

That is fine with me.

This is not a signature.

Sibyyl
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#588 - 2014-09-12 06:50:42 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:

What would you like to see C: changed, specifically, and what do you think the end R: result would be? Make it a one liner and then support it afterwards IF you feel that is needed.

m


C: CCP to explain the term "griefing", as it applies to a ban, with similar detail as their definition of RMT.

R: RMT bans are relatively open and shut because of the sophisticated treatment of it in EULA and CCP's official statements. If "griefing" receives a similar treatment, less people will do it and the debates that come up when a ban occurs will be brief and largely one-sided.

Joffy Aulx-Gao for CSM. Fix links and OGB. Ban stabs from plexes. Fulfill karmic justice.

Sibyyl
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#589 - 2014-09-12 06:54:04 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:


My point is that many posters in this thread want CCP to be more explicit about what is and what is not beyond the pale, but even when CCP do draw a very clear line in the sand, some folk are still not happy.




The thing about drawing clear lines, is that they shouldn't be drawn "now and then" or "when the mood strikes".


Clear lines should always be drawn.

The complaints pop up when clear lines are not drawn, which is the case with the bans that this thread is discussing.

Joffy Aulx-Gao for CSM. Fix links and OGB. Ban stabs from plexes. Fulfill karmic justice.

Ssabat Thraxx
DUST Expeditionary Team
Good Sax
#590 - 2014-09-12 06:54:25 UTC
Mira Robinson wrote:
Hey genius, once you get them on TeamSpeak, it's not in-game behavior anymore, is it?


That's right. The deeper question, then, is whether or not the TOS/EULA extend to that which takes place both out of game and on private property (such as a TS server.)

If I go to the local player meetup and get in a fistfight with one of the other players, can CCP ban me for that?




\m/ O.o \m/

"You're a freak ..." - Solecist Project

Ssabat Thraxx
DUST Expeditionary Team
Good Sax
#591 - 2014-09-12 07:01:43 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Even when CCP does very clearly draw a line in the sand; Erotica 1 for example, a vocal minority are still not satisfied and argue that either there should be no line in the sand because this is, Eve Online and it meant to be 'ard innit' or they see the line and argue that it is is the wrong place.

Once again, I put it to those who want 'clarification' come up with a workable proposal CCP and the player base can get behind.

Most of this thread is just like three year kids kids saying, 'yeah but' to everything their parents say.

Put up, or shut up.


Well, being there are thousands of people playing this game, I'm not sure that "the playerbase" can "get behind" anything. That's a whole lot of people youre expecting to agree on something.

But, I'll give you what I can get behind: CCP can and should vigorously and consistently enforce the rules of the game when we're IN their game, in their house, so to speak. CCP has no juris diction outside of their own servers and "events" such as fanfest. What I do on MY time, on MY property (MY TS server, for example) is beyond the purview of CCP's TOS/EULA. To be perfectly honest, I really can't understand why folks can't seem to wrap their head around that.

Your rules in your house, my rules in my house. Simple.

\m/ O.o \m/

"You're a freak ..." - Solecist Project

Josef Djugashvilis
#592 - 2014-09-12 07:09:48 UTC
Dear Sibyyl, instead of whinging, why don't you draw up a set of 'clear lines' that cover all possible circumstances and send them to CCP, they will be most grateful for your help I am sure.

Or, you can just carry on crying about the lack of 'clear lines' as you see it in the game right now.

If you or any other player are concerned that something you wish to do may get you perma-banned, petition CCP in advance to clear your proposed course of action.

The, we want 'more clarity' folk are asking the impossible of CCP and they know it.

But hey, it makes a change from grr goons for a couple of days.

This is not a signature.

Dave Stark
#593 - 2014-09-12 07:11:37 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Dear Sibyyl, instead of whinging, why don't you draw up a set of 'clear lines' that cover all possible circumstances and send them to CCP, they will be most grateful for your help I am sure.

Or, you can just carry on crying about the lack of 'clear lines' as you see it in the game right now.

If you or any other player are concerned that something you wish to do may get you perma-banned, petition CCP in advance to clear your proposed course of action.

The, we want 'more clarity' folk are asking the impossible of CCP and they know it.

But hey, it makes a change from grr goons for a couple of days.


actually, any clarity would be good.

"use your brain"
and
"look up the definition of harrassment if you don't know it"

have cleared up absolutely nothing.
Sibyyl
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#594 - 2014-09-12 07:17:00 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Dear Sibyyl, instead of whinging, why don't you draw up a set of 'clear lines' that cover all possible circumstances and send them to CCP, they will be most grateful for your help I am sure.




I've specified the only change I'd like to see a couple of posts above yours.


I didn't realize responding to the content in your post was whining. I was replying only for the sake of discussion.

Joffy Aulx-Gao for CSM. Fix links and OGB. Ban stabs from plexes. Fulfill karmic justice.

Josef Djugashvilis
#595 - 2014-09-12 07:25:00 UTC
Sibyyl wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Dear Sibyyl, instead of whinging, why don't you draw up a set of 'clear lines' that cover all possible circumstances and send them to CCP, they will be most grateful for your help I am sure.




I've specified the only change I'd like to see a couple of posts above yours.


I didn't realize responding to the content in your post was whining. I was replying only for the sake of discussion.


Sorry if I took you the wrong way.

My point still stands,

those who want clearer lines in the sand, should say what they want them to be.

This is not a signature.

La Rynx
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#596 - 2014-09-12 07:55:06 UTC
Arden Elenduil wrote:
I have a quick question here myself. If a player were to go outside of the game and look up my personal information such as real name, address, workplace, etc....
And use those ingame to threathen me by spreading that info around. How would you look upon that? Worthy of the same punishment as these people got?


Yes, that is a real life threat.
It invites "idiots" to take silly actions against you. (swatting)
--> bannable offense

Atomic Virulent : "You can't spell DOUCHE. without CODE."

FleetWarp Ichoriya
#597 - 2014-09-12 07:57:44 UTC
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:

Your rules in your house, my rules in my house. Simple.


And one of their rule is that they can revoke you your license you to their likings. They can revoke your license just because they don't like your face. Hell! They don't even need to state a reason.

Afterall what happened on the TS3 has a link to EVE because it started in EVE and EVE Items were used as leverage.

Mind you you only rent a license to use EVE-Online, they can nullify your license at any time.

Nothing sweeter than tears of tearcollectors. mhh yummy!

James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#598 - 2014-09-12 08:00:17 UTC
According to Josef Djugashvilis, it is impossible for CCP to clarify themselves.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#599 - 2014-09-12 08:02:21 UTC
FleetWarp Ichoriya wrote:
Mind you you only rent a license to use EVE-Online, they can nullify your license at any time.

And so can I.

Stop acting like customer-company relations is a one-way street where the company just does whatever it wants without consequence, because that really isn't the case.

If CCP starts banning a bunch of people under questionable and ambiguous circumstances, others will get fed up and take their patronage elsewhere.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Josef Djugashvilis
#600 - 2014-09-12 08:07:36 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
According to Josef Djugashvilis, it is impossible for CCP to clarify themselves.


To a degree that would cover all possible eventualities, yes.

Of course if you can do so, then please do.

In fact, if you think you can provide a better standard than the one CCP currently works to, then please share it with us.

This is not a signature.