These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#5081 - 2014-03-27 13:02:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
LordOfDespair wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
LordOfDespair wrote:
Crumplecorn wrote:
LordOfDespair wrote:
"Unless something is against the rules its okay" is such a shallow and dimwitted way of thinking about things.

Do you seriously need somebody to tell you what is okay and what isn't?
You just managed to miss the sole purpose of all explicitly stated rules everywhere in all of the past, present and future.

Kudos.


Oh sod off.

Have you seen the EvE Eula? It is so vague you can find a way to do practically ANYTHING and say it isn't against the rules.


No, it's not that vague. It's quite specific, actually.

Tell me, you go from telling us that the rules should take second seat to our better judgement to implying that the rules need to be more specific.

How did you even learn to work your keyboard?


Wrong.

And nice insult. Can't argue without it? Lol.


Not wrong.

What? It works for you to just state 'wrong' without clarifying. I can play 5th grade "you're wrong and I'm right" as well as the next person.

Here's a real challenge for you though.

You say I'm wrong.

Prove it.

For the record, my arguments have been presented both with and without observations made of the person arguing with me. Or, what you call 'insults'. You can ignore the arguments and focus on your hurt feelings all you like, but that would be...


wait for it....


a logical fallacy.

You love pointing out logical fallacies, don't you.

“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
LordOfDespair
Deep Dark Fantasy.
#5082 - 2014-03-27 13:02:22 UTC
Tor Norman wrote:
LordOfDespair wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Moloney wrote:
I would like to point out that it does not matter whether E1 broke the EULA or not.

The point being made by people in this thread is that we do not want to be associated with such a morally wrong and disgraceful example of a human being.

We would like to play Eve.

We would like to think that when such a disgraceful representative of our game boasts publicly about being the scum of the planet, that appropriate repercussions are handed out to state "this is not right, this will not be accepted by anyone and under no circumstances should anyone believe it a good idea to replicate this persons actions "


"CCP, you should ban this person because I do not like them despite the fact that they have done nothing against the rules"


"Unless something is against the rules its okay" is such a shallow and dimwitted way of thinking about things.

Do you seriously need somebody to tell you what is okay and what isn't?

It's not a matter of whether Erotica 1's actions are right or wrong. It's a matter of how "ban people I don't like" can be turned against anyone, including you. Unless someone can present an argument that defines a legitimate reason to ban Erotica 1 that doesn't also adversely affect other players, nothing can be done about it.


It isn't "ban players that I don't like".

It is "ban players whos only purpose is to glorify bullying others".
Salvos Rhoska
#5083 - 2014-03-27 13:02:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Jenn aSide wrote:
just to get at someone they don't like.


Strawman. This is about his conduct, not him personally.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Alana Charen-Teng
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#5084 - 2014-03-27 13:03:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Alana Charen-Teng
One very important issue nobody has brought up yet...

who's going to fix Sohkar's broken desk?

May this thread never die.
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#5085 - 2014-03-27 13:04:27 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Now that I've sobered up I've realised how dumb this thread is & most of the people in it. Would anyone like to join Goonwaffe?


Do I have to turn over all my ISK and sing songs?

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~
PinkPanter
Valhalla Drinking Team
#5086 - 2014-03-27 13:04:43 UTC
lollerwaffle wrote:
PinkPanter wrote:
lollerwaffle wrote:


Wow, you really, really don't understand what I've been posting despite my repeated emphasis. You must be as thick as that alt of Sokhar who needs things spelt out in black and white. Ok, final attempt:

A. Your feelings about the moral character of another player should not be justification that the person should be perma-banned by CCP.

B. If you think that personal feelings are sufficient grounds for CCP to ban another player, that implies that you are OK with CCP banning YOU if another player deems you to be offensive etc.

C. In this case, if I felt you were offensive, should CCP ban you too?

If you're still confused at this point, please read (A) above again to understand the point I'm trying to make. If you understand my premise now, well done, it only took 3 pages and 10 posts but we got there in the end.

Ok, to address your post itself: Humiliation of a player that can opt out at any time is more serious than issuing a RL death threat over a video game, because it is 'justified'? Does that mean that if I find your posting style offensive and it is driving me into a rage, I would be fully justified in issuing RL death threats to you?

(Sorry, I posted the above on the assumption you will get what I am inferring. To make it easy to understand what I'm talking about, I am responding specifically to your stated "One gets perma ban for doing this deliberately other gets a warning or a shortie for going bonanza (although he can be justified because he was simply pushed to the limit)")


A. if he goes telling how it's set up to bypass in game laws (he's luring people out of logged comms) to avoid ban then yeah he should get kicked because he knows his actions are wrong from the start and the only purpose he is to inflict some sort of harassment for personal amusement.

B. If I do it in a manner that deliberately tries to avoid in game laws yet you use this platform as a ignition of this whole process then yeah. No different that a botter.

C. I'm within CCP rules so your attempt is nothing but personal and has no ground for them to even look at it.

I'm not thick it's just you have no idea what are you talking about because E1 actions all base from within this game and it is his platform to lure targets out to avoid banhammer.

Despite laying it out in very easy to follow chunks, you can still throw random arguments which have NO bearing to my posts. I give up. Sorry, English isn't my first language too but you are just really really really too thick to talk to.


I answer questions you throw tantrums and wonder why I don't even bother in most cases.
Brainz need oil I'm telling you. Works wonders.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#5087 - 2014-03-27 13:05:08 UTC
LordOfDespair wrote:

It isn't "ban players that I don't like".

It is "ban players whos only purpose is to glorify bullying others".



So, was it the Disney song, the reading of the CODE, the Wikipedia entries? Which of those is bullying? I am literally dying to know, so if you don't provide a clear and cogent response, you're torturing me.

"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.
Crumplecorn
Eve Cluster Explorations
#5088 - 2014-03-27 13:05:32 UTC
LordOfDespair wrote:
It isn't "ban players that I don't like".

It is "ban players whos only purpose is to glorify bullying others".

The guy who wrote the blog and many people in this thread are spending all their time bullying E1. Ban them.

Gee, that sure didn't turn around on you instantly.

Witty Image - Stream

Not Liking this post hurts my RL feelings and will be considered harassment
LordOfDespair
Deep Dark Fantasy.
#5089 - 2014-03-27 13:05:49 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Giovanni erkelens2 wrote:
Moloney wrote:
I would like to point out that it does not matter whether E1 broke the EULA or not.

The point being made by people in this thread is that we do not want to be associated with such a morally wrong and disgraceful example of a human being.

We would like to play Eve.

We would like to think that when such a disgraceful representative of our game boasts publicly about being the scum of the planet, that appropriate repercussions are handed out to state "this is not right, this will not be accepted by anyone and under no circumstances should anyone believe it a good idea to replicate this persons actions "


this. my sir. this is what i wnat to hear.


theres hope.


Hope for tyranny and injustice. Because that's what you people are asking for.

The existence of the witch hunt crowd should scare everyone here. Look at all these people willing to totally ignore rules, laws, important values of fairness and due process ect ect just to get at someone they don't like.

We've literally fought terrible wars against people who thought like this. Documents like the Magna Carta and the U.S. Constitution exist to stamp out arbitrary use of power (such as 'I don't like you, so now you get to go away').

But there are still plenty of people who think these vile ideas are valid when in fact it's these vile ideas are the true evil and people like E1 are just the side affect and consequence of our freedoms.


LOL, way to dramatize everything way out of proportion.
Kiryen O'Bannon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#5090 - 2014-03-27 13:05:56 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Malcolm from Marketing wrote:


Your counter arguments are empty of content and pathetic at best.

Your point out Erotica broke no rules or laws, your quite correct. What he has done can be likened to bringing the game into disrepute by going above and beyond to push the boundaries of whats acceptable in the name of emergent gameplay.
CCP should consider very carefully if this is the type of behavior they want associated with their game as it's treading very dangerous grounds.
Ignoring all that, it's simply a case of morals, ( ironic in a game such as EVE i know ) yes its a game, yes he was a willing participant but that still doesnt excuse what's happened and has happened many times previous.

CCP should remove ALL his assets over ALL his accounts and give him a temp ban. Thats the right course of action in this case, but of course thats not what your interested in is it.


I'll ask again. How could CCP resist religious groups or the Russian government if they demanded that CCP remove people who engage in "unacceptable" behaviour that "bring the game into disrepute"?

After all, "it's simply a case of morals", right?


As soon as CCP have conceded the right of any group to demand the removal of a player simply because they dislike what he does out of game, then they're wide open to every pressure group out there who thinks they have a duty to make sure you and I live our lives as they think we should.

"it's simply a case of morals"


The problem with your position is that its based on Slippery Slope Fallacy.

1) Erotica1s actions are only "out of game" in the most pedantic sense. They are a final step in a progression of events that takes place in game, and directly relate to and concern the disposition of in game assets. Out-of-game software is used only to evade obvious violations of CCPs terms, and allow the sort of amateurist legal argument you are making. Even in real life law there are principles of equity and fairness in application; not just a linguistic battle to see who is closer to the letter of the law or contract, hence why we have lawyers argue cases rather than linguists.

2) It is a Slippery Slope Fallacy to claim that CCP would be open to any and all calls for bans by any group becaus they banned oneplayer based on a generalized community reaction. "People who don't like Erotica 1" are not a group in any meanngful sense; their unity is solely around the issue at hand. CCP could just as easily be pressured to ban gays by homophobes or Russians whether or not they ban Erotica; th dollar vote is equally strong. CCP on the other hand has absolutely no obligation to listen to those groups just because they ban Erotica 1; it is not as if homophobes or Russians have any right to demand "consistency", andCCCP would not be inconsistent in the first place. Being gay is unrelated to game play; Erotica's performance is directly connected to it, pedantic claims that its "out of game" notwithstanding.

You make a poor attempt at reducio ad absurdm based on slippery slope and pedantry. Neither vays nor scammers are at any risk if Erotica 1 gets banned.

Eternal Father, King of birth, /Who didst create the heaven and earth, /And bid the planets and the sun/ Their own appointed orbits run; /O hear us when we seek thy grace /For those who soar through outer space.
lollerwaffle
Perkone
Caldari State
#5091 - 2014-03-27 13:06:02 UTC
LordOfDespair wrote:
Tor Norman wrote:
LordOfDespair wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Moloney wrote:
I would like to point out that it does not matter whether E1 broke the EULA or not.

The point being made by people in this thread is that we do not want to be associated with such a morally wrong and disgraceful example of a human being.

We would like to play Eve.

We would like to think that when such a disgraceful representative of our game boasts publicly about being the scum of the planet, that appropriate repercussions are handed out to state "this is not right, this will not be accepted by anyone and under no circumstances should anyone believe it a good idea to replicate this persons actions "


"CCP, you should ban this person because I do not like them despite the fact that they have done nothing against the rules"


"Unless something is against the rules its okay" is such a shallow and dimwitted way of thinking about things.

Do you seriously need somebody to tell you what is okay and what isn't?

It's not a matter of whether Erotica 1's actions are right or wrong. It's a matter of how "ban people I don't like" can be turned against anyone, including you. Unless someone can present an argument that defines a legitimate reason to ban Erotica 1 that doesn't also adversely affect other players, nothing can be done about it.


It isn't "ban players that I don't like".

It is "ban players whos only purpose is to glorify bullying others".


glorifying bullying others isn't against the rules though.

"I don't like people glorifying bullying"
"Ban players whose only purpose is to glorify bullying others"

ergo

"Ban players that I don't like"

To say otherwise would be to infer that you like people who glorify bullying.
Danalee
A Blessed Bean
Pandemic Horde
#5092 - 2014-03-27 13:06:20 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
just to get at someone they don't like.


Strawman. This is about his conduct, not him personally.


His conduct? You mean as a good spaceship captain creating content for all of us?
Or you mean the conduct of sokhar (you) as a reprehensible bigotted racist with a very short fuse?

D.

Bear

Proud member of the Somalian Coast Guard Authority

Member and Juror of the Court of Crime and Punishment
Alana Charen-Teng
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#5093 - 2014-03-27 13:07:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Alana Charen-Teng
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

So, was it the Disney song, the reading of the CODE, the Wikipedia entries? Which of those is bullying? I am literally dying to know, so if you don't provide a clear and cogent response, you're torturing me.


Haven't you heard: the dulcet tones of Erotica 1's voice is an enhanced interrogation technique.

May this thread never die.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#5094 - 2014-03-27 13:07:13 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
just to get at someone they don't like.


Strawman. This is about his conduct, not him personally.


No, this is ABSOLUTELY about him personally and has been since before this thread existed. People here weren't born yesterday. If this wasn't just about Ero, and about 'activities', then Sokhar would be copping it as well.

You have lied, demonstrably and repeatedly, throughout this thread. I've said it before and I'll say it again - I definitely believe you when you claim to be a lawyer. But you're not a very good one.

“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
LordOfDespair
Deep Dark Fantasy.
#5095 - 2014-03-27 13:07:13 UTC
Crumplecorn wrote:
LordOfDespair wrote:
You are trying to rationalize a logical fallacy.

LOL
If you don't have an actual response I can't really follow up, so I guess we're done.


Can't reason with somebody who doesn't understand reason.

Cya.
lollerwaffle
Perkone
Caldari State
#5096 - 2014-03-27 13:07:36 UTC
PinkPanter wrote:
lollerwaffle wrote:
PinkPanter wrote:
lollerwaffle wrote:


Wow, you really, really don't understand what I've been posting despite my repeated emphasis. You must be as thick as that alt of Sokhar who needs things spelt out in black and white. Ok, final attempt:

A. Your feelings about the moral character of another player should not be justification that the person should be perma-banned by CCP.

B. If you think that personal feelings are sufficient grounds for CCP to ban another player, that implies that you are OK with CCP banning YOU if another player deems you to be offensive etc.

C. In this case, if I felt you were offensive, should CCP ban you too?

If you're still confused at this point, please read (A) above again to understand the point I'm trying to make. If you understand my premise now, well done, it only took 3 pages and 10 posts but we got there in the end.

Ok, to address your post itself: Humiliation of a player that can opt out at any time is more serious than issuing a RL death threat over a video game, because it is 'justified'? Does that mean that if I find your posting style offensive and it is driving me into a rage, I would be fully justified in issuing RL death threats to you?

(Sorry, I posted the above on the assumption you will get what I am inferring. To make it easy to understand what I'm talking about, I am responding specifically to your stated "One gets perma ban for doing this deliberately other gets a warning or a shortie for going bonanza (although he can be justified because he was simply pushed to the limit)")


A. if he goes telling how it's set up to bypass in game laws (he's luring people out of logged comms) to avoid ban then yeah he should get kicked because he knows his actions are wrong from the start and the only purpose he is to inflict some sort of harassment for personal amusement.

B. If I do it in a manner that deliberately tries to avoid in game laws yet you use this platform as a ignition of this whole process then yeah. No different that a botter.

C. I'm within CCP rules so your attempt is nothing but personal and has no ground for them to even look at it.

I'm not thick it's just you have no idea what are you talking about because E1 actions all base from within this game and it is his platform to lure targets out to avoid banhammer.

Despite laying it out in very easy to follow chunks, you can still throw random arguments which have NO bearing to my posts. I give up. Sorry, English isn't my first language too but you are just really really really too thick to talk to.


I answer questions you throw tantrums and wonder why I don't even bother in most cases.
Brainz need oil I'm telling you. Works wonders.

Do you even read what other people post? Do you know what tantrums mean?
Salvos Rhoska
#5097 - 2014-03-27 13:07:49 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
I am literally dying to know, so if you don't provide a clear and cogent response, you're torturing me.

Someone inform CCP that this person is in need of psychiatric assistance immediately, and to inform emergency health professionals in his locality.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#5098 - 2014-03-27 13:08:24 UTC
Alana Charen-Teng wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

So, was it the Disney song, the reading of the CODE, the Wikipedia entries? Which of those is bullying? I am literally dying to know, so if you don't provide a clear and cogent response, you're torturing me.


Haven't you heard: the dulcet tones of Erotica 1's voice is an enhanced interrogation technique.

May this thread never die.


Thank God I don't have a radio voice myself then.

"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.
PinkPanter
Valhalla Drinking Team
#5099 - 2014-03-27 13:09:05 UTC
Danalee wrote:
PinkPanter wrote:

I'm not thick it's just you have no idea what are you talking about because E1 actions all base from within this game and it is his platform to lure targets out to avoid banhammer.


Yes, you are quite thick. If the recording had been with ingame means (Eve voice) the result would have been a perma ban on shokar and kuddos to ero for not taking steps against him.

I'm gonna post this every time someone beats the poor dead horse;

What happend;
Ero: Give me your isk and I double it.
Adult ATC: Here's all my isk
Ero: haha, you need to come on teamspeak and win a bonus round where I invent the rules as we go
Adult ATC: ok
Ero: read this text please
Adult ATC: Ok, N-BOMB, Gaybash, shout, scream, rant
Ero: Sing songs
Adult ATC: NO! N-BOMB, Gaybash, shout, scream, rant
Adult ATC: I'l gonna kill you!
Adult ATC: My wife will come and scream at you some more

How it should have been;
Ero: Give me your isk and I double it.
Adult ATC: Here's all my isk
Ero: haha, you need to come on teamspeak and win a bonus round where I invent the rules as we go
Adult ATC: Wait what? Naaaah... You scammed me, well played.

What normal people do:
Ero: Give me your isk and I double it.
Adult ATC: No way dude, I know it's just pixels but I want to buy space bling with them.
D.

Bear


Hey hey hey, I have a carrot for you BUT you have to follow me to a place where CCP can't ban me because I know I will **** you up good else why would I leave logged comms?

Now I will hear TS Bette yadda yadda yadda.

This is how people get scammed because even this simple TS excuse sounds so good that you put no doubt about its actual meaning.

So go repost like a turd. It's all you can do bot. Click, post, copy,, paste click post (so opinionated and clever!)
Tor Norman
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5100 - 2014-03-27 13:09:42 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Now that I've sobered up I've realised how dumb this thread is & most of the people in it. Would anyone like to join Goonwaffe?

Sure. Please direct me to the nearest recruitment officer.

I talk about EVE trading and general space violence in my blog.

For the ISK and the yarr!