These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Finally a CCP Ishukone Gate response!

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#41 - 2013-10-08 19:17:18 UTC
CCP: You're not allowed to talk about CCP developers who directly spawn items for specific individuals in secret!

That is truly a worse response than anything I could have thought of
Kate stark
#42 - 2013-10-08 19:20:28 UTC
i'm actually surprised that this hasn't been locked yet. discussing moderation, and all.

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#43 - 2013-10-08 19:22:45 UTC
Jimmy Farrere wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Bischopt wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Here's what I wanna know....

Why is the word 'gate' thrown on the end of anything that might be considered a scandal? What gate was involved exactly?


It's a reference to Watergate. Google it.


I know what it is. The Watergate scandal took place in the Watergate Hotel, a place that exists and has the word 'gate' already in it, making it relevant. The only thing I can think of that might make sense is suddenly, everyone wants to uncover some big scandal and they want their scandal to be just as big as Watergate, so they use 'gate' on the end to make it seem bigger than it is. It is most frequently used, I've noticed, when there is no scandal at all, like Climategate, or this rubbish.


Okay, so you seem to know where the suffix 'gate' comes from. Now we just need to clear up your definition of 'scandal'..

scan·dal (skndl)
n.
1. A publicized incident that brings about disgrace or offends the moral sensibilities of society: a drug scandal that forced the mayor's resignation.
2. A person, thing, or circumstance that causes or ought to cause disgrace or outrage: a politician whose dishonesty is a scandal; considered the housing shortage a scandal.
3. Damage to reputation or character caused by public disclosure of immoral or grossly improper behavior; disgrace.
4. Talk that is damaging to one's character; malicious gossip.


Congratulations, you can read a dictionary. So far, nothing has caused any outrage. There is no outrage. There's a lot of overreacting and tantrum throwing, but no outrage.

“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
Solstice Project's Alt
Doomheim
#44 - 2013-10-08 19:24:54 UTC
Wow, who would have funk!

The thread lead nowhere!

I am so surprised!

Really!

\O_O/

See?


Buy Solstice Project for PLEX4GOOD ! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=301266 (this alt-character will get deleted once the sale is done, on 6th of december)
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2013-10-08 19:25:27 UTC
Cipher Jones wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Cipher Jones wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Here's what I wanna know....

Why is the word 'gate' thrown on the end of anything that might be considered a scandal? What gate was involved exactly?


Learn history or repeat it.


Read my last post. I know what Watergate was. Learn not to assume.


If you know what Watergate was then you know why they throw "gate" on the end of a word directed at a scandal FFS.


I can postulate, and if you'd read my last post on the first page before you jumped down my throat to 'learn history' you'd know what that postulation was. Fact is, there is no more point to throwing the word 'gate' into the name of every scandal that catches popular attention than there is adding the prefix 'Mc' to the beginning of every tasty burger.

“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
Kate stark
#46 - 2013-10-08 19:26:21 UTC
Solstice Project's Alt wrote:
Wow, who would have funk!

The thread lead nowhere!

I am so surprised!

Really!

\O_O/

See?




it didn't lead to nowhere, it lead to two unrelated threads. did you not read CCP eterne's post? :D

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.
Karak Terrel
Foundation for CODE and THE NEW ORDER
#47 - 2013-10-08 19:28:59 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
So far, nothing has caused any outrage. There is no outrage. There's a lot of overreacting and tantrum throwing, but no outrage.

try harder plz
Solstice Project's Alt
Doomheim
#48 - 2013-10-08 19:29:35 UTC
Kate stark wrote:
it didn't lead to nowhere, it lead to two unrelated threads. did you not read CCP eterne's post? :D
Hahahahahahahaha XD

One more time i'll point it out for the clueless masses:

They don't care.
You either make it a *real* issue for them,
or admit that you are clueless, whining, decadent, spoiled children
who believe that bitching around, even collectively, is enough to get taken seriously.

Buy Solstice Project for PLEX4GOOD ! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=301266 (this alt-character will get deleted once the sale is done, on 6th of december)
Galen Darksmith
Sky Fighters
Rote Kapelle
#49 - 2013-10-08 19:34:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Galen Darksmith
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Jimmy Farrere wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Bischopt wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Here's what I wanna know....

Why is the word 'gate' thrown on the end of anything that might be considered a scandal? What gate was involved exactly?


It's a reference to Watergate. Google it.


I know what it is. The Watergate scandal took place in the Watergate Hotel, a place that exists and has the word 'gate' already in it, making it relevant. The only thing I can think of that might make sense is suddenly, everyone wants to uncover some big scandal and they want their scandal to be just as big as Watergate, so they use 'gate' on the end to make it seem bigger than it is. It is most frequently used, I've noticed, when there is no scandal at all, like Climategate, or this rubbish.


Okay, so you seem to know where the suffix 'gate' comes from. Now we just need to clear up your definition of 'scandal'..

scan·dal (skndl)
n.
1. A publicized incident that brings about disgrace or offends the moral sensibilities of society: a drug scandal that forced the mayor's resignation.
2. A person, thing, or circumstance that causes or ought to cause disgrace or outrage: a politician whose dishonesty is a scandal; considered the housing shortage a scandal.
3. Damage to reputation or character caused by public disclosure of immoral or grossly improper behavior; disgrace.
4. Talk that is damaging to one's character; malicious gossip.


Congratulations, you can read a dictionary. So far, nothing has caused any outrage. There is no outrage. There's a lot of overreacting and tantrum throwing, but no outrage.


Believe it or not, you do not get to decide when someone else is outraged. That's pretty much up to them. Similarly, if enough people are outraged over an issue it constitutes a scandal, whether you think it should or not. Some people don't think that politician's philandering should generate enough outrage to create scandals. Suck it up, buttercup.

"EVE is a dark and harsh world, you're supposed to feel a bit worried and slightly angry when you log in, you're not supposed to feel like you're logging in to a happy, happy, fluffy, fluffy lala land filled with fun and adventures, that's what hello kitty online is for." -CCP Wrangler
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#50 - 2013-10-08 19:34:46 UTC
Sugar Von MurdererTits wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Sugar Von MurdererTits wrote:
Link?

He's paraphrasing this.


Thanks. I did read it, but didn't interpret it the same way.

Well if you noticed he linked to two threads that dealt with an entirely different (but related subject), as noted in the OP of this thread. If Eterne had even read the title of my thread he would have realized it had to do with CCP rewarding SOMER Blink with the SIWs, not CCP handing them items to give away in their lottery. Commentary on the first subject is irrelevant to the threads that he linked, so it's essentially saying that we can't talk about it any more unless we make more threads about it (which is risky for reasons I don't think I have to expand upon here).

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Kate stark
#51 - 2013-10-08 19:37:48 UTC
Solstice Project's Alt wrote:
Kate stark wrote:
it didn't lead to nowhere, it lead to two unrelated threads. did you not read CCP eterne's post? :D
Hahahahahahahaha XD

One more time i'll point it out for the clueless masses:

They don't care.
You either make it a *real* issue for them,
or admit that you are clueless, whining, decadent, spoiled children
who believe that bitching around, even collectively, is enough to get taken seriously.


to care, they'd have to read the thread; which evidently didn't happen.

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#52 - 2013-10-08 19:37:58 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Sugar Von MurdererTits wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Sugar Von MurdererTits wrote:
Link?

He's paraphrasing this.


Thanks. I did read it, but didn't interpret it the same way.

Well if you noticed he linked to two threads that dealt with an entirely different (but related subject), as noted in the OP of this thread. If Eterne had even read the title of my thread he would have realized it had to do with CCP rewarding SOMER Blink with the SIWs, not CCP handing them items to give away in their lottery. Commentary on the first subject is irrelevant to the threads that he linked, so it's essentially saying that we can't talk about it any more unless we make more threads about it (which is risky for reasons I don't think I have to expand upon here).

Well, to be fair, the thread in question was discussing the whole issue... not just the 30 IScorps. And the root of the issue is in the two threads linked.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Kate stark
#53 - 2013-10-08 19:39:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Kate stark
Ranger 1 wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Sugar Von MurdererTits wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Sugar Von MurdererTits wrote:
Link?

He's paraphrasing this.


Thanks. I did read it, but didn't interpret it the same way.

Well if you noticed he linked to two threads that dealt with an entirely different (but related subject), as noted in the OP of this thread. If Eterne had even read the title of my thread he would have realized it had to do with CCP rewarding SOMER Blink with the SIWs, not CCP handing them items to give away in their lottery. Commentary on the first subject is irrelevant to the threads that he linked, so it's essentially saying that we can't talk about it any more unless we make more threads about it (which is risky for reasons I don't think I have to expand upon here).

Well, to be fair, the thread in question was discussing the whole issue... not just the 30 IScorps. And the root of the issue is in the two threads linked.


no it wasn't, it was specifically discussing why secretly handing out assets to people with no set criteria is ******* dumb.
aside from somer being the recipents of the bevolence, the two have nothing in common.

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.
Solstice Project's Alt
Doomheim
#54 - 2013-10-08 19:41:32 UTC
Kate stark wrote:
to care, they'd have to read the thread; which evidently didn't happen.
Wrong perspective, Mrs. Stark.

They don't need to care, because "you" don't give them reason to care,
thus there is no real reason to read the thread in the first place.

Buy Solstice Project for PLEX4GOOD ! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=301266 (this alt-character will get deleted once the sale is done, on 6th of december)
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#55 - 2013-10-08 19:42:45 UTC
No, it seems pretty clear to me that CCP had different reasons for the two giveaways. For the EVE Vegas event I'm sure CCP would have rather liked to do it themselves, but they didn't have any of the infrastructure to do such a thing themselves. Of course they overlooked some of the problems inherent in doing this (which is a separate issue entirely from the original prizes they chose for this event). Whereas for the SIW giveaway their intent was, as they stated, to reward them directly.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#56 - 2013-10-08 19:45:27 UTC
Solstice Project's Alt wrote:
Kate stark wrote:
to care, they'd have to read the thread; which evidently didn't happen.
Wrong perspective, Mrs. Stark.

They don't need to care, because "you" don't give them reason to care,
thus there is no real reason to read the thread in the first place.

Jesus christ, we get it already. There are several different levels of negotiation. While ultimately subscriptions are our only real bargaining chip as you keep reminding us (like we didn't already know), unsubscribing too quickly doesn't exactly tell CCP why we're unhappy and what they could do better. We're waiting to get comment from them before deploying the nuclear option, as it were.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#57 - 2013-10-08 19:46:17 UTC
Galen Darksmith wrote:


Believe it or not, you do not get to decide when someone else is outraged. That's pretty much up to them. Similarly, if enough people are outraged over an issue it constitutes a scandal, whether you think it should or not. Some people don't think that politician's philandering should generate enough outrage to create scandals. Suck it up, buttercup.


There is no outrage here, sorry. Even if you feel outrage, it's based on a misunderstanding at best, outright jealousy at worst. That doesn't constitute justified outrage in a rational man's book. I like how you specifically bolded the parts of the dictionary definition that suited how you feel about the situation, that agree with how you feel about the situation, instead of actually trying to rationally understand the situation.

Tell me, do you think evolution is a scandal? Because creationists certainly claim to feel 'outrage' over that as well.

Simplistic dictionary definitions are all well and good, but they rarely if ever cover all nuances of word usage in the English language, just the ones that are academically approved generalisations of the word.

“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
Kate stark
#58 - 2013-10-08 19:47:09 UTC
Solstice Project's Alt wrote:
Kate stark wrote:
to care, they'd have to read the thread; which evidently didn't happen.
Wrong perspective, Mrs. Stark.

They don't need to care, because "you" don't give them reason to care,
thus there is no real reason to read the thread in the first place.
but all of my accounts are canceled? i cancel them the moment i have paid my subscription as i don't like having recurring subscriptions. so what do i do? :(

James Amril-Kesh wrote:
No, it seems pretty clear to me that CCP had different reasons for the two giveaways. For the EVE Vegas event I'm sure CCP would have rather liked to do it themselves, but they didn't have any of the infrastructure to do such a thing themselves. Of course they overlooked some of the problems inherent in doing this (which is a separate issue entirely from the original prizes they chose for this event). Whereas for the SIW giveaway their intent was, as they stated, to reward them directly.
didn't ccp run a thing a while ago where you just sent an eve mail to a CCP account with a guess of a time, or an isk value or something on it, and the first one they received that was the closest guess won something? or did i dream that?

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.
Little Chubby
Atrocity.
#59 - 2013-10-08 19:50:26 UTC
Bischopt wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Here's what I wanna know....

Why is the word 'gate' thrown on the end of anything that might be considered a scandal? What gate was involved exactly?


It's a reference to Watergate. Google it.


I think you mean Watergategate.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#60 - 2013-10-08 19:52:15 UTC
Kate stark wrote:
Solstice Project's Alt wrote:
Kate stark wrote:
to care, they'd have to read the thread; which evidently didn't happen.
Wrong perspective, Mrs. Stark.

They don't need to care, because "you" don't give them reason to care,
thus there is no real reason to read the thread in the first place.
but all of my accounts are canceled? i cancel them the moment i have paid my subscription as i don't like having recurring subscriptions. so what do i do? :(

Haha yeah, I do that too. So idk, man.

Kate stark wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
No, it seems pretty clear to me that CCP had different reasons for the two giveaways. For the EVE Vegas event I'm sure CCP would have rather liked to do it themselves, but they didn't have any of the infrastructure to do such a thing themselves. Of course they overlooked some of the problems inherent in doing this (which is a separate issue entirely from the original prizes they chose for this event). Whereas for the SIW giveaway their intent was, as they stated, to reward them directly.
didn't ccp run a thing a while ago where you just sent an eve mail to a CCP account with a guess of a time, or an isk value or something on it, and the first one they received that was the closest guess won something? or did i dream that?

Oh yeah, that's right. It was that event where EVE was trying for a record Peak Concurrent Users, and you sent an evemail guessing what the magic number was going to be. I forgot what the winner was supposed to get, though.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)