EVE General Discussion

Indeed, and that's what makes it so grey.

When you map it against a "properly calibrated moral compass" (whatever that is), then it's very much morally and ethically indefensible.

However, so is the majority of EVE, in that respect.

Think of it this way:

If you drive down my street, I cannot blow up your car, haul you out of the smoking wreckage and put a bullet through your head.

That sort of thing is frowned upon.

However, if you fly through my space, I can blow up your ride, haul your pod out of the smoking wreckage and put a bullet through your head.

That sort of thing is a social norm within EVE; Not only allowed, but encouraged.

One of the pillars of this game is to blow up things owned by other players/corporations/alliances/coalitions. To then further humiliate them by smacking in local is also largely accepted, just like tea bagging in your average FPS is largely accepted.

Ransoming someone's 3bil pod by making them sing a 2 minute long song on TS, only to then say "sorry mate, you didn't sing with enough heart" and then pop them .... that would also be largely accepted.

Enter the grey area.

You notice how this article u linke is neutral. Now take a look at this one.
http://evenews24.com/2014/03/25/jesters-trek-the-bonus-round/
Can you claim it unbiased? Torture. lawl.

Last one



No, It's funny to me. (<- period) AND he's stupid (<- we all agree there, no?)
Since nobody was harmed in any way shape or form, I'm confident in laughing about his hate filled little balloon bursting.
He is as much a victim of abuse as Chico, Harpo, and Groucho were on their tv show. In other words; Not real.

You find me creepy? I find you clingy. Good thing we aren't sharing bunks at space camp, because I'd prank you soooo hard if we would be.

D. OUT. (I promise )

I fail to see how banning E1 = jail for Sohkar. This isn't ever going to go to court for the reasons I mentioned in my post coupled with the fact that government agency or lawyer would take this on in their right mind. Again, this is not a legal issue and never will be.

Do you want to go to jelly school?
Because, I'm calling it.
I'm calling the jelly school, 'mkay?

This thread is beyond the point where CCP should have killed it for off topic posts etc. But while its still here I might as well throw myself into the meat grinder.

I think Erotica 1 should be banned from the game for his actions in this instance. His actions should have ended at taking the mans ISK, instead he verbally and psychologically abused the man for two hours.

However I also condemn those who may or may not have Blackmailed Erotica 1 for one reason or another. I also do not agree with the victims racist and homophobic comments, even if they were made under duress.

That said I'll go ahead and try to counter the main arguments for those in opposition to a ban of Erotica 1.

He could have left at any time.: A common argument and at first glance it holds up to scrutiny, which is why those who haven't given it enough thought continuously trot it out. And the original statement is true. He did not HAVE to be on the TS server. But this does not at all excuse Erotica 1's actions. Erotica 1 ALSO had a choice. He and his friends did not have to continuously and repeatedly make fun of the victim behind his back, they could have scammed him, took his assets and then said 'good day to you sir' and then ended it.

Instead they chose to keep stringing this man out, specifically target a speech impediment, and when this man finally snapped and shouted insulting racial and gay slurs they also could have ended it, instead they continued. When the mans wife tried to intervene the ridicule moved to her as well.

Disregarding the rights of the Victim's, and blaming them for being 'in the wrong place at the wrong time' is alarming to me. Its like the archaic way of thinking of women and minorities. “Well she shouldn't have dressed so slutty”, “He shouldn't have been in a white neighborhood”, “He shouldn't have kissed his boyfriend when I was right there.”

He consented to join the TS and have it recorded. He did not consent to be ridiculed for two hours while desperately trying to get his Internet Space Money back.

He was an idiot/naive/greedy so its his fault and he deserved it: This Darwinism is another classic argument posted many times and also blames the victim. It also smacks of archaic thinking. If I willingly give someone my credit card information, and then they steal all my money using that credit card, it in no way reduces the criminal liability of the person who took my information because I was an idiot.

Stupidity, greed, or naivety are not excuses for a man to be taken, humiliated repeatedly and publicly. EVE is supposed to be dark yes. But the darkness is not supposed to stem from outright cruelty and abuse, but from the fact that a persons actions have consequences in the game world. The victim suffered the consequences when he stupidly/greedily/naively consented to handing over all his assets by LOSING those assets.

But at no point did he say 'you have all my assets so make fun of me as you like, and my wife as well, and if you guys want one of my weak points to target I have certain problems with speaking'.

Its just ISK, its not real and doesn't matter The ISK involved is not real yes. But the abuse exhibited on the victim by Erotic 1 and co. is real. Verbal Abuse leaves no physical marks but it sure as hell can hurt someone.

And if it was only about the ISK the argument would be about the scam itself, not what happened afterward.

CCP can't do anything because it happened out of Game/ Didn't break the actual rules etc. Fon Revedhort was prevented from running for CSM because of his political views. Did he get banned because he said these things in game? No. He stood up on a pedestal outside of CCP's purview, via Websites, Podcasts etc. and because CCP did not want the CSM and EVE as a whole to be associated with his views they prevented him from running for an office that dealt primarily with the game.

RMT also happens out of game. Everything that happens in game, aside from bots, is completely legitimate play until it becomes associated with dealings outside the game. And CCP has been actively working against RMT, with the wide support of the community for a while now.

“User content” Is the specific word used in the rulebook. This is a very broad definition, probably intentional, and this situation involves a TS recording by multiple EVE users, for the purpose of distribution to EVE users, by ridiculing and verbally and psychologically abusing another EVE user. Under any but the most obtuse lawyers definition could this not be defined 'player content'.

It wasn't torture and Ripard shouldn't have put it as such The actual phrase torture might be a BIT to much for this case. Harassment would be a better term. Here is the actual definition from the NCSL Link at the bottom of the post.

Cyberharassment usually pertains to threatening or harassing email messages, instant messages, or to blog entries or websites dedicated solely to tormenting an individual.

Of course, because most lawyers are tech illiterate, it does not include voice communication. But you notice something? You don't have to read blog entries or websites, or open emails and text messages. And yet this is not mentioned anywhere about the victim of harassment being liable for viewing their harassment. The blame falls squarely on the abuser.

Using an internet medium for the sole purpose of tormenting an individual? Check.

http://www.ncsl.org/research/telecommunications-and-information-technology/cyberstalking-and-cyberharassment-laws.aspx

Pranks pranks pranks, all good fun.
But there's always that sadistic poser who has to hammer it beyond fun into just tragic.

Wrong.

Remember folks, apparently real life violence and appalling racism are ok... as long as someone else made you mad on the internet.

+1

And you should not be shy about calling it like it is - torture, plain and simple.

And EVE community does not stand for this sort of thing.

BAN THEM ALL>