Crime & Punishment

It's not "can't". It's "shouldn't". I believe that online actions should never beget real actions. Because it's a completely inappropriate response, like hitting someone because they said something you didn't like.

This is a role playing game. I did that...I played a character in a game, and someone else playing another character in the game got so upset about it that he took it outside the game.

If I leave my house unlocked and someone steals my TV, is it my fault or theirs? Sounds like in your world, it's my fault for not locking my door. I should just accept the consequences of my actions, even though the thief is the only person in the story who actually did something WRONG.

Welcome to the real world.



What he did was indeed wrong. And he will pay with jail time. But it's still YOUR fault for not locking your door. You should secure your property. This is a stupid illustration.

OK, I'm going to go all serious mode.

First of all, people act however they want in the game for many reasons. But regardless of those reasons, it is NOT WRONG to do so because players in EVE are RATIONAL and have EACH accepted a social contract that dictates events in game do not reflect real world morals, ethics, or laws. This social contract allows players to become pirates, to rob, to steal, to kill, and to do everything and anything they want to do in the context of the game -- knowing perfectly well that events in game are separate from real life.

By playing this game you are agreeing to this social contract. Should this contract be more explicit? I don't think so. The game is marketed as a sandbox with trailers that clearly depict what may happen to you in game. The tutorial explains very clearly that you WILL lose your ship and you WILL die. If taken proportionally, you are shown what it is like to lose almost everything as soon as you finish the mission that involves you losing one of your first ships. Like joining a club sport or participating in a study, you are told up front what will happen.

Now for the matter of cause and effect. Yes, obviously Skunkworks’ actions led this player to react. However, they did not force him to act beyond the context of the game. This player effectively broke the social contract by taking his grievances beyond the context of the game and into the real world.

Subsequently, one may argue that because non-rational players may be present in this game others should act accordingly. But this is false. It is only ever right to consider every person as rational, as it is a core tenet in the philosophy of human behavior. There are exceptions, but to act according to the exceptions breaks down social constructs and alters fundamental aspects of our society. If you want a clearer picture as to why it is RIGHT to believe all persons to be rational, writings by David Hume and Immanuel Kant are a good place to start.

Ultimately, however, people are stupid. This doesn’t mean they aren’t rational, but because of free will (predetermined, or otherwise) they are capable of acting in such a way that a perfectly rational person would not. And because no one is perfectly rational, everyone – you, me, your awesome uncle – will all make a mistake. How we all react to those mistakes determines who or what we are. And it is in my humble opinion that laughing at and learning from mistakes is the best reaction.

As for enjoying tears? Like I said people are stupid, forgive us :)

No, I whole heartily agree with you that rage over a popped CNR was not called for, but that the egging on that came after really did not help anything.

But no, the rage was not justifiable over the CNR lost.

Attempting to solicit a reaction by opening your statement tauntingly with something I said a page ago. How cute.

If you don't believe trolling someone is not intentionally egging someone on to rage, then you are simply delusional and another extremist tear collector trying to make an excuse for their horrid past time.

And he did nail it with the locked door illustration, he showed how both parties are at fault :)

As a recruitment officer I get plenty of death threats from, spies, awoxers, and people who mess up their applications but never have I been harassed IRL. If I were in your situation I'd press as many charges as I possibly could, I have zero tolerance for this kind of crap.

Third person? Are you referring to what I said when he nailed it? I thought you were trying to take his side and confirm his illustration was good for HIS purposes, when I said they were good for MY purposes. Sorry for the confusion. But I'm glad we agree on that.

I'm throwing out random insults because it seems to be the language of business in C&P. I don't care what credibility you think I have. I say what I say, and I will continue to say it; both parties are at fault. One more so than the other for stalking, but both are at fault.

Guys, perhaps we should leave Unit alone. Its obvious that he feels coming after us IRL for disagreeing with him on a forum is an acceptable behaviour, and we are likely all in danger at this point.

After all, his every post is telling us that we should be expecting it.

I'd say sedation and a straight-jacket are an appropriate reaction tbh.

So not only can you not read, but you're a gun totting pro-vigilante hooligan to boot. Everything makes so much more sense now.

But I'm a generous soul, and I will refer you back to posts 184, 178, 170, and 103, all which clearly show that you are a liar and that I do not condone such behavior, but say that both parties have fault.

You are ill informed, unable to see another superior argument to your faulty view point, and you continue to condone the actions of griefers while saying they should get away with instigating real world reactions and refusing to take any responsibility for being the catalyst of such an event. You are no longer credible and a non-participant in this argument.

You are everything wrong with Eve. Have a pleasant day. :)