These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Salvos Rhoska
#5801 - 2014-03-27 17:50:17 UTC
Xuixien wrote:
---


Where is the post in which you asked me these things?
Fredfredbug4
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5802 - 2014-03-27 17:50:49 UTC
lollerwaffle wrote:

Ok, can I be correct in concluding that in your opinion, E1 did not break any existing rules, new rules should be created to prevent people from humiliating themselves voluntarily, and rules should also be created to stop people from allowing other people to humiliate themselves?


Essentially yes. The final policy would need to be far more specific as someone can interpret humiliating themselves or someone else as losing an expensive ship to a suicide gank, which would be bad for the metagame.

lollerwaffle wrote:
]Yet, the major counterpoint, which you stated as well, is that the victim CHOOSES to put himself through this even after he has had his ISK and assets taken off him. At any point, the individual could have chosen to give up his assets and write them off as a loss and an expensive lesson. Therefore, CCP can't really stop people from choosing to humiliate themselves. How would you work that into the rules?

Therefore, the only option left to CCP would be to ban players from humiliating others. Again, how would you incorporate that into the rules?


It would certainly have to be something very specific. I'm not quite sure how you could stop someone from humilating themselves. Perhaps it would have to be a rule pertaining to how a scam is conducted? I'm not sure it would be done. That is something that is up to CCP should they decide this is an issue.


lollerwaffle wrote:
Second thing is, while I do not agree with his methods, Erotica did not break any existing rules, and thus there is no cause to ban him. Not under the current rules, nor for his methods (which do not break any existing rules). Therefore, the masses crying for blood are literally stating: "Give him a (lifetime) ban because I don't like him/his methods while not breaking any rules is morally reprehensible etc." What is your viewpoint on this?


I agree. Erotica 1 has not broken any rules to our knowledge. If CCP decides his fate solely based on the rules, then he does not deserve a ban. Even if CCP were to ban him on the grounds that he was doing something morally reprehensible, I would not be in favor of it. I feel EVE and the community would be better off without him, but I don't want to see him banned for reasons outside of the rules. Why?

First off all, I'm not sure if CCP would even be legally allowed to do such a thing. Erotica 1 agreed to the EULA, and if he is banned from the game for a reason not listed in the rules, that could be a potential lawsuit. Even if it doesn't lead to legal action, it would be a dangerous precedent to set.

All in all, no matter how much I dislike Erotica 1 and his cohorts, none of them should be banned at the moment.

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!

Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#5803 - 2014-03-27 17:51:07 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Andski wrote:
"I was on a B-52 that got shot down over Vietnam and the Viet Cong tortured me for years"

"That's nothing man I know a guy who was tortured by some dudes over the Internet in a teamspeak server"


I'm pretty sure any vet,ever, who has been tortured, or anyone who has been tortured, would agree that torture, no matter how slight some may perceive it as, is still wrong, in ALL its occurances.


I'm pretty sure you're not a vet that has been tortured, ever, and in fact not any kind of vet at all. Any speculation you might have about what actual torture victims would think about your assertions is just that, speculation. What you've just said amounts to more redundant waffling, but that's been your entire contribution to this thread so far so why stop now? Waffle away.

“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

Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#5804 - 2014-03-27 17:51:25 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
I'm pretty sure any vet,ever, who has been tortured, or anyone who has been tortured, would agree that torture, no matter how slight some may perceive it as, is still wrong, in ALL its occurances.


yeah I'm sure that a former POW who was subjected to actual torture will most deffo sympathize with this guy

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Brusanan
Sons of Seyllin
Pirate Lords of War
#5805 - 2014-03-27 17:51:31 UTC
LordOfDespair wrote:
Soldarius wrote:
http://massively.joystiq.com/2014/03/25/heres-some-of-the-cyberbullying-that-happens-in-eve-online/

It's happening.



"and this is why I don't play Eve anymore."

"EVE is like a Shamwow for assholes."

"Number one reason why I will never ever play EVE."

"Always liked the idea of this game but I feel the community would be too much hassle."

"With such winning personalities like this, it's not a wonder why CCP are trying to make entirely different games."

"Eve, a great place for jerks to congregate and pretend they're good at something, when in reality the only thing they're good it is being douche bags"

"Eve is full of psychopaths and sociopaths. This isn't surprising. "

"Do something about it? CCP encourages this sort of behavior. They think it's funny."


Yeah, way to make us all look bad E1. GTFO.

Yeah, it's totally new that there are some people who don't appreciate the nature of Eve. This is literally the first time ever anyone has gotten upset about the things that happen in Eve and have quit/refused to play it as a result.

Also, it wasn't Erotica who made Eve look bad. Those people aren't reacting to the bonus round, they are reacting to the blatant lies in Ripard's blog post, where he paints a false picture of what happens in the bonus rounds.
Xuixien
Solar Winds Security Solutions
#5806 - 2014-03-27 17:51:58 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Xuixien wrote:
---


Where is the post in which you asked me these things?


Are you going to answer my question, or just do what you usually do when I ask a question: Try to stall answering it?

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist

Khergit Deserters
Crom's Angels
#5807 - 2014-03-27 17:52:01 UTC
CCP Falcon wrote:
The feedback in this thread is very much appreciated, and we've been watching it since it was first posted.

While we can appreciate that tensions are high, please remember to keep within the forum rules when posting.

We'll have more information for you guys in the coming days.

Smile

Speaking of being tortured.... Poor Falcon, ISD, anyone else who's obligated to read every one of these posts. I can imagine a few sources of suffering:
-The same argument, repeated over and over by the same poster.
-The same argument, repeated over and over by latecomers who didn't scroll up.
-Evidence of inattention/poor reading skills.
-Arguments between space lawyers over little issues-- that don't even matter.
-Vast sections of the Great Wall of Text.
-Multiple back and forth arguments/sub-threads. That interweave with each other over 280+ pages.
-Blockheaded obstinate stubbornness.
-Etc.

Have a beer when you get off work, moderators, you deserve it.


Nidal Fervor
Doomheim
#5808 - 2014-03-27 17:52:05 UTC
Soldarius wrote:
http://massively.joystiq.com/2014/03/25/heres-some-of-the-cyberbullying-that-happens-in-eve-online/

It's happening.


Just looking at the comments, EVE is getting a ton of bad press from this. All these negative comments being made about EVE.
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Doomheim
#5809 - 2014-03-27 17:52:18 UTC
What would happen to the world if 'free speech' laws only applied to polite speech, and not the intolerant or vile speech?
Who would then decide what is hateful speech, and not protected?
Who would then protect your speech, on that day years later when someone determines your words are hateful to them?

EvE the 'sandbox' must be based on the same principles. It is a sandbox, or not. There is no middle ground between food and poison, just poisoned food. tldr; CCP must be very careful about coming between two players in any scenario, at risk of crushing what the sandbox stands for.

Harassment or 'bullying' as previously defined by CCP, is when a player continuously or on an ongoing basis messes with another player, without asset acquisition being their core driver.

If we look to that precedent, Erotica1 neither continuously nor on an ongoing basis messed with Sohkar, for it was a single time event with Sohkar, and Erotica1's goals were clearly asset acquisition at their core. By CCP's own precedent this was thus not harassment nor bullying, it was the sandbox, working as intended.

Now while you may denounce the way Erotica1 did what he did, you however can NOT denounce his right to do it, or you might as well denounce the sandbox, freedom of speech and the notion of freedom itself.

Why is It always liberal pansies that have to silence or jail those they disagree with in the real world, rather than win their arguments by engaging directly with the person they wish to neuter, and instead convince them? That is evil. That is Stalinism. That is today's liberal pansification in real life injecting itself into a GAME with cries to 'ban Erotica1!'...

What's missing from this thread is that Sohkar was a DUNCE. He allowed himself to be scammed, then doubled down on stupid by allowing himself to be made a fool of, driven by his personal greed and attempts to acquire quick money (ISK). Sohkar should be THANKING Erotica1 for the valuable real-life lesson he was just taught! Surely the first time he goes to nagotiate a car loan, mortgage or cellphone contract -- he will be more likely to look at the fine print and not get screwed thanks to Erotica1?

THAT is the lesson of HTFU you pansies never seem to get, that HTFU is GOOD FOR YOU. Bubble wrap a dunce or carebear, and you neuter him in real life I say. Want to know why kids are leaving their parents homes at older and older ages? Just look in the f#$king mirror you fail-enabling PANSIES!

F#)($#!

Salvos Rhoska
#5810 - 2014-03-27 17:52:42 UTC
Andski wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
I'm pretty sure any vet,ever, who has been tortured, or anyone who has been tortured, would agree that torture, no matter how slight some may perceive it as, is still wrong, in ALL its occurances.


yeah I'm sure that a former POW who was subjected to actual torture will most deffo sympathize with this guy


Torture is wrong in all its forms, and wherever it occurs.
LordOfDespair
Deep Dark Fantasy.
#5811 - 2014-03-27 17:53:02 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
LordOfDespair wrote:




Yeah, way to make us all look bad E1. GTFO.


Those people say the same thing about every scam they see. Also most ganks. And all the fights. Plus that time we deadzoned that station. Also anything goons do.

In short these people will never play a game like EVE anyway.


Speculation.


Also:
Ganking, fighting, scamming =/= Harrassment and Public Embarrassment


Effect One
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#5812 - 2014-03-27 17:53:08 UTC
Big Lynx wrote:
Effect One wrote:
Big Lynx wrote:
[quote=Effect One]This player could have walked away at any given moment. He chose not to. The end.





You do not own anything associated with your account other than the diminishing non-transferable license to play the game you acquired by way of your subscription fees.


Excuse me, but.. ( there is always a but :D) You are right, but one thing you forgot. He invested time and passion to build up his wealth he lost in one second. Is that so hard to understand? And Ero hits that vulnerability like a meteor with a devilsmile.


No, I fully understand that; it is simply irrelevant for the purpose you are trying to apply it to.

The investment of time itself, or one's projection of worth following such investment, does not opperate to physically force them to partake in an activity they do not wish to. They may feel it justifies their continuation of a certain activity to its positive or negative conclusion, but that is their psychology; different people will react to the removal of the things to which they attach worth it in different ways which is precisely what makes the sandbox interesting, and, what Erotica1's bonus room relies upon.

Once again the 'victim', as people seem to wish to call this player, is fully able to walk away regardless of his projection of loss; appealing to one's sense of morality or placing yourself in someone else's shoes does not change that.

If we were to start changing the rules of the sandbox based upon the worth an item carries in the opinion of a player, and his or her subsequent reaction on losing that item, I think we would be treading on very thin ground indeed.

'This might be internet spaceships, but it's not rocket science to protect yourself and fly with a little common sense' - CCP Falcon

Graabeerd Khagah
MoonFyre BattleGroup Holdings
#5813 - 2014-03-27 17:53:09 UTC
I been following this since the other evening when it broke out and I seriously believe the time has come to lay the subject to rest. 287 pages worth of reading is a lot for some, other a speed reading course. However tho' the issue here is whether or not if the victim in this case was being subjected to "torture" to which I think he was as far as mental torture was concerned, no physical torture. However on the other hand this to me is the most unethical use of a scam and then turn right around and go outside of eve to using TS3 for two hours or so to subject the victim to mental torture on this scale is wrong.

In my opinion however the victim had every right to refuse to continue which he didn't, Erotica1 and his cohorts kept edgeing the victim onwards to past the point of no return, Erotica1 DID in fact commit a crime of cyber bullying, and there fore has opened himself and others with him to possible charges.

IF that were the case being then, the community at large should petition on the behalf of the victim to have his entire inventory, isk and what ever else he lost returned to him notwithstanding, AND to let CCP know that this is unacceptable to the community at large. The use of Teamspeak outside the game is a matter of record for a court of law to decide on the consequences and maybe a jail term as called for earlier in this thread.

Eve is a game of course, but sometimes some people just go to the extremes sometimes and push the limits as to what is and what isn't acceptable behavior and this is a classic case of pushing beyond an acceptable boundary to which Erotica1 and his cohorts have shown in a public manner.

I know CCP has been rather silent about this matter and as one said they will release some kind of statement in the coming days ahead.
Salvos Rhoska
#5814 - 2014-03-27 17:53:29 UTC
Xuixien wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Xuixien wrote:
---


Where is the post in which you asked me these things?


Are you going to answer my question, or just do what you usually do when I ask a question: Try to stall answering it?


You said you had asked it in a previous post that I had not answered.

Where is the post with the concern I did not answer?
Anomaly One
Doomheim
#5815 - 2014-03-27 17:53:49 UTC
Quote:
This thread is just full of people intentionally blowing this way out of proportion because they just want to see Erotica banned, and they know if they don't exaggerate his crimes and blatantly make up new ones there is just no reason for CCP to ban him.


True
Let's hope CCP exercises patience and reason in this, the most damage was done by Ripard Teg because of this PR stunt and because of it now they have to make a choice, and it won't be pretty.

Quote:
I'm not claiming it's fair to ban E1 for this, I'm saying CCP can and should do it to protect their bottom line.


except they shouldn't, to appease the public and mob they would screw the others.

Psychotic Monk for CSM9 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326497 you want content in highsec? vote Monk

Big Lynx
#5816 - 2014-03-27 17:53:55 UTC
For instance:

some statistics on this threatan:

Threadnaught
LordOfDespair
Deep Dark Fantasy.
#5817 - 2014-03-27 17:54:43 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:

Of course nether text nor images were used in this case. It was only voice communication.

However cute your post is, that really isn't the whole definition now is it? Smile


:Facepalm:

Dumbass.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#5818 - 2014-03-27 17:54:45 UTC
Imryn Xaran wrote:


My logic is that E1 made the recording public, Riptard is merely trying to draw attention to it. I would argue that any damage caused to CCP's reputation would be the result of E1's actions not Riptards.

I want CCP to make the ban to limit the damage and if they were to also ban Riptard it would have the opposite effect - "CCP bans whistle blower who uncovers sick truth about EVE Online" wouldn't really limit the damage would it?

I'm not claiming it's fair to ban E1 for this, I'm saying CCP can and should do it to protect their bottom line.


Have you listened to the recording?

Riptard didn't.
Josef Djugashvilis
#5819 - 2014-03-27 17:55:00 UTC
Andski wrote:
NPC Alts Say The Dumbest Things


Usually in the hope that it will qualify them to join the goons Big smile

This is not a signature.

Giovanni erkelens2
Violent Trans Matching
Neon Nightmares
#5820 - 2014-03-27 17:55:56 UTC
bullshit.