These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Prince Kobol
#5561 - 2014-03-27 16:21:54 UTC
Razefummel wrote:
Just a little thing from a Carebear like me:

We read the EULA and ToS. After that we will see that scamming ist ALLOWED. Than we will see if this Soundcloud file is an case of harrasement or not.

IF it is --> Permaban
IF it´s NOT --> Nothing has to happen.

Just as easy as that. And CCP allone has to decide IF or IF NOT.
Otherwise we coud just burn the next witch after that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGplrpWvz0I

fly safe

Raze


Well scamming is and will always be allowed. People are not saying (well most people anyway) that scamming should be banned.

It is the act of using the scam to get people out of game, recording it, causing as much humiliation as possible then posting the results on the internet for all to hear and to maximise the humiliation that is the issue.
Salvos Rhoska
#5562 - 2014-03-27 16:22:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Remiel Pollard wrote:
It's not ad hominem if it's demonstrable. And it's not ad hominem if your arguments have been addressed. Which I've done.


It is ad hominem. You apparently don't know the definition of the term.
Just like how you didn't know the definitions of the terms "sadism" and "masochism" earlier.

ad ho·mi·nem
[ad hom-uh-nuhm -nem, ahd‐] Show IPA
adjective
1.
appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason.
2.
attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#5563 - 2014-03-27 16:24:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
It's not ad hominem if it's demonstrable. And it's not ad hominem if your arguments have been addressed. Which I've done.


It is ad hominem. You apparently don't know the definition of the term.
Just like how you didn't know the definitions of the terms "sadism" and "masochism" earlier.

ad ho·mi·nem
[ad hom-uh-nuhm -nem, ahd‐] Show IPA
adjective
1.
appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason.
2.
attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.


Still failing at reading comprehension I see. Let me break it down.

1. Your stupidity is demonstrable, not prejudice.

2. I addressed your argument.

So, not ad hominem.

“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
PinkPanter
Valhalla Drinking Team
#5564 - 2014-03-27 16:24:48 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
PinkPanter wrote:
Danalee wrote:
PinkPanter wrote:
Quick! I don't have anything factuous to say, let's shoot a messenger!


Nice...

D.

Bear


I've never edited someone else's posts before


Liar.


Another impersonator trying to prove himself how he has absolutely no merit in this discussion.

Why would I change people's post?
My replies are based on them whether I like them or not so go sperg **** more you uslless impersonator.
lollerwaffle
Perkone
Caldari State
#5565 - 2014-03-27 16:24:51 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
lollerwaffle wrote:

Then why does he not comment on the vile language and RL death threats uttered by the 'victim'?


Well since I am not Jester I can only hazard a guess.

I will guess and say he is giving Sokhar the benefit of the doubt because he was under severe distress and had been driven to the point where he lost all control.

Now not knowing Sokhar personally I have no idea if he has ever voiced these kind of view points before in a calm and rational manner.

Whilst I personally feel these views are abhorrent, I do consider myself a fair person and understand that under certain circumstances when a person is in a highly emotional state then can say things that they regret later on.

However with that and still giving him the benefit of the doubt that he only said the things that he did due to the pressure he was under and his state of mind, he should still receive a ban if E1 does.

Ah, this brings us back to something someone wrote earlier:
If said person does not already harbour such thoughts in his heart, what would possess him to utter it during loss of control?

Does it imply that the person is, at heart, a racist bigot/prone to RL violence/etc? In my moments of anger I have uttered words which I would normally not say to the other person, which tend to go along the lines of what I really think of them, but would normally not utter for the sake of maintaining a civil work/family relationship. Those words do not contain threats of physical violence or racist bigotry though, although they may be personal insults.

What's your stance on this?
Danalee
A Blessed Bean
Pandemic Horde
#5566 - 2014-03-27 16:25:10 UTC
I Riven I wrote:
If I ask my daughter to sing and I give her a donut, but in the end I dont give here anything.

Is this mental abuse? Should I go to jail because of it?


Tell me about my wrong doings please.


That's just mean and makes me sad X

Now go and make up with your daughter, you bad, bad person!

D.

Bear

Proud member of the Somalian Coast Guard Authority

Member and Juror of the Court of Crime and Punishment
Asuka Langley S
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#5567 - 2014-03-27 16:25:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Asuka Langley S
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
It's not ad hominem if it's demonstrable. And it's not ad hominem if your arguments have been addressed. Which I've done.


It is ad hominem. You apparently don't know the definition of the term.
Just like how you didn't know the definitions of the terms "sadism" and "masochism" earlier.

ad ho·mi·nem
[ad hom-uh-nuhm -nem, ahd‐] Show IPA
adjective
1.
appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason.
2.
attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.


I'm still waiting for a reply to my original reply to your argument. :3
lollerwaffle
Perkone
Caldari State
#5568 - 2014-03-27 16:25:42 UTC
I Riven I wrote:
If I ask my daughter to sing and I give her a donut, but in the end I dont give here anything.

Is this mental abuse? Should I go to jail because of it?


Tell me about my wrong doings please.

That is torture, you're a bad person and should feel bad.
Prince Kobol
#5569 - 2014-03-27 16:25:46 UTC
I Riven I wrote:
If I ask my daughter to sing and I give her a donut, but in the end I dont give here anything.

Is this mental abuse? Should I go to jail because of it?


Tell me about my wrong doings please.



It depends, if it just once and between you and your daughter then of course not.

How about if I offered my son some food and kept taking it away from him until he becomes very distressed, filmed it all and then posted it on youtube..

Then repeated this a number times and posted each clip, would that be okay with you?
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#5570 - 2014-03-27 16:26:15 UTC
PinkPanter wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
PinkPanter wrote:
Danalee wrote:
PinkPanter wrote:
Quick! I don't have anything factuous to say, let's shoot a messenger!


Nice...

D.

Bear


I've never edited someone else's posts before


Liar.


Another impersonator trying to prove himself how he has absolutely no merit in this discussion.

Why would I change people's post?
My replies are based on them whether I like them or not so go sperg **** more you uslless impersonator.


Merit is not spoken for, it speaks for itself and is ignored by the meritless.

“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
Brusanan
Free State Project
#5571 - 2014-03-27 16:26:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Brusanan
Asuka Langley S wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
It's not ad hominem if it's demonstrable. And it's not ad hominem if your arguments have been addressed. Which I've done.


It is ad hominem. You apparently don't know the definition of the term.
Just like how you didn't know the definitions of the terms "sadism" and "masochism" earlier.

ad ho·mi·nem
[ad hom-uh-nuhm -nem, ahd‐] Show IPA
adjective
1.
appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason.
2.
attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.


I'm still waiting for a reply to my original relpy to your argument. :3

Keep waiting. He isn't concerned about actually being right. He is just going to keep asserting the same thing over and over again regardless of any rebuttals.

He's most likely a troll anyway. Nobody could seriously think being asked to sing a song on TeamSpeak is torture.
Salvos Rhoska
#5572 - 2014-03-27 16:26:30 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Still failing at reading comprehension I see. Let me break it down.

1. Your stupidity is demonstrable, not prejudice.

2. I addressed your argument.


Your insults and ad hominem are demonstrable, and your arguments demonstrably false.
I have answered and quashed them all, one after the other.

Go back to deliberately driving two-ton trucks at people.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
PinkPanter
Valhalla Drinking Team
#5573 - 2014-03-27 16:26:33 UTC
I Riven I wrote:
If I ask my daughter to sing and I give her a donut, but in the end I dont give here anything.

Is this mental abuse? Should I go to jail because of it?


Tell me about my wrong doings please.


Do it long enough you will develop a disturbed child that will act similar in school that will pick it up sooner or later, bug you about if first then notify Child services.

Da fuq you think this works?
lollerwaffle
Perkone
Caldari State
#5574 - 2014-03-27 16:28:14 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
It's not ad hominem if it's demonstrable. And it's not ad hominem if your arguments have been addressed. Which I've done.


It is ad hominem. You apparently don't know the definition of the term.
Just like how you didn't know the definitions of the terms "sadism" and "masochism" earlier.

ad ho·mi·nem
[ad hom-uh-nuhm -nem, ahd‐] Show IPA
adjective
1.
appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason.
2.
attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.

Says the person who dismissed the argument put forth by someone he perceived as a 'forum alt'

Hypocrite much?
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#5575 - 2014-03-27 16:28:15 UTC
Talon SilverHawk wrote:
Really ppl are supporting this ? All the in game scamming, pvp and what ever is fine, using Eve to pull someone out of the game so you can bully them isn't.

Even if they avoided the EULA and such this reflectts poorly on the Eve community and saying he did nothing wrong in game so it's fine is laughable. They used Eve to put him in the situation.

Send this to all the gaming sites BBC etc and see what the general response is.

Its not about Eve its about being a decent human being.

Tal

And another one completely and utterly misses the point.

Nobody is saying what was done was tasteful, or even funny.

We are saying no rules were broken and a ban is not an appropriate response from CCP.

Does it become clear yet?

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Fredfredbug4
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5576 - 2014-03-27 16:28:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Fredfredbug4
I Riven I wrote:
If I ask my daughter to sing and I give her a donut, but in the end I dont give here anything.

Is this mental abuse? Should I go to jail because of it?


Tell me about my wrong doings please.


Its not a crime, but it makes you an ass thats undeserving of having a daughter. And yes it could be mentally damaging. If you do that enough times, the girl might grow up with daddy and/or trust issues.

Edit: Of course doing it once or twice isnt too bad. Sadistic? Yes. But unless its done consistently nothing bad would come of it.

Watch_ Fred Fred Frederation_ and stop [u]cryptozoologist[/u]! Fight against the brutal genocide of fictional creatures across New Eden! Is that a metaphor? Probably not, but the fru-fru- people will sure love it!
Asuka Langley S
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#5577 - 2014-03-27 16:28:22 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
I Riven I wrote:
If I ask my daughter to sing and I give her a donut, but in the end I dont give here anything.

Is this mental abuse? Should I go to jail because of it?


Tell me about my wrong doings please.



It depends, if it just once and between you and your daughter then of course not.

How about if I offered my son some food and kept taking it away from him until he becomes very distressed, filmed it all and then posted it on youtube..

Then repeated this a number times and posted each clip, would that be okay with you?

This is a poor analogy as the child has not given the food to the parent, and that the parent has an actual role of power over the child. Not to mention that a child is not able to comprehend the situation in it's fullest nor is a child mentally able to see the effect of their own actions.
lollerwaffle
Perkone
Caldari State
#5578 - 2014-03-27 16:29:17 UTC
PinkPanter wrote:

My replies are based on them whether I like them or not so go sperg **** more you uslless impersonator.

Literally mental capabilities of a child
Jerome Gouillot
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#5579 - 2014-03-27 16:29:21 UTC
lollerwaffle wrote:
I Riven I wrote:
If I ask my daughter to sing and I give her a donut, but in the end I dont give here anything.

Is this mental abuse? Should I go to jail because of it?


Tell me about my wrong doings please.

That is torture, you're a bad person and should feel bad.


I would call it education. If Sokhars mom had done this to him when he was a little boy - repeatedly if needed - this thread would most likely not exist
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#5580 - 2014-03-27 16:30:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Still failing at reading comprehension I see. Let me break it down.

1. Your stupidity is demonstrable, not prejudice.

2. I addressed your argument.


Your insults and ad hominem are demonstrable, and your arguments demonstrably false.
I have answered and quashed them all, one after the other.

Go back to deliberately driving two-ton trucks at people.


You really believe that, don't you. Sorry dude, hate to break it to you, but now you've also demonstrated delusion. Maybe even narcissism. Narcissism isn't terribly bad, though. We're all a little narcissistic sometimes.

I invite you to introduce your 'way of thinking' (I refuse to use the word logic for what you're attempting) at a TED conference one day.

I also invite you to present your argument to the authorities responsible for dealing with torture cases, and do something about it if you feel you have a viable argument with no flawed premises and you feel that something must be done. You'll get the answer to how valid your argument is there for sure.

“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