EVE General Discussion

Ya lets change gears here.

Lets discuss the harassment of Erotica 1 AND Sohkar by Ripard Teg.

If anyone should be banned it should be him.

Abrazzar wrote:
There is a point where sadism isn't a fetish anymore but a disease.

Question is: Does CCP like to be associated with this? Let's ask that question to the PR people.

No, they completely humiliated the guy for nothing but their own personal pleasure.

Ganking does have potential gain.

That wasn't what I was talking about.

I'm talking about the POST GANK tear harvesting that has ZERO in game gain.

There have been winners and it took multiple hours, which is freely available on google searches. Try "Yodaknows eve online".

Whether Goonswarm kicked Erotica 1 out or not is entirely irrelevant. This is a discussion on the Bonus Room, not on Erotica 1.

THIS GAME IS MISERABLE AND IS ABOUT MISERY AND GIVING MISERY. WEATHER YOU ARE BEING A MISERABLE MINER AND INFLICTING MISERY ON YOURSELF IN AN ASTROID FIELD OR YOU ARE AN ELITE PVPER INFLCIITNG MISERY ON YOUR EMENIES IN A GATE CAMP OR SCAMMING PEOPLE IN JITA THE HOLE GAME REVOLVES AROUND MISERY.

MISERY IS GOOD. SUFFERING IS GOOD. TRYING TO POLICE THIS IS BAD. DON'T BE BRAINWASHED INTO PICKING UP YOUR BITCHFORKS BY RIPARD TEGS.

OK - now I've had chance to think about it here's my take:

Quite simply this individual and their behaviour are not things that I want me or the gaming hobby to be associated with. I've lived many years with people thinking that gamers are maladjusted sociopaths and having this sort of event to pin those opinions on are fuel for the fire. The main-stream gaming press have already started to pick up on this story and I doubt it'll be long before it gets grabbed by the wider media. In this case the damage is already done and all that can be achieved is to make it clear that the rest of us playing EVE aren't sub-normal gutter-feeders.

In the wider context, though, it makes sense to make sure that this doesn't become the norm for EVE online. That may well have swung fine when the answer to "I want to play a space MMO" was "Well there's EVE Online and er.. some other thing, no, wait, it's gone". The horizon for space MMOs looks to be big and varied and there's going to be places for the sane people to hang out without fear of the psychos.

Now - there's been a lot of arguments in here to support the actions of E1 and I thought I'd adress the main ones:

1. This is a slippery slope to....
Slippery slope arguments are, well, a slippery slope. Everything is a slippery slope to everything else and you can always assert hyperbolic consequences to anything. Quite simply, slippery slope areguments are irrelvant.

2. What was done was not a violation of the EULA
I think this is arguable either way and it's largely irrelevant. If CCP want to ban someone they can and they can stretch the EULA to fit where it's needed if they choose to do so. Comversely CCP can choose to ignore an obvious violation if they want to. Basically the ball is in their court and it's all about how they want the game to be and how they want it to be perceived.

3. They didn't do this other stuff that would have been much worse
Er... yeah. They didn't and you can always level that argument no matter how abhorent someone's behaviour is. The fact here is that the behaviour was bad enough. Bad enough to knowingly cause someone a hell of a lot of distress outside ofthe game and bad enough to reflect very badly on EVE and its player-base.

4. The vicitim had a choice not to be victimized
Yeah - this is one that gets levied at victims all the time. Often along with "they should have known better", "they shouldn't have looked like a victim", "they shouldn't have let themselves be bullied". Frankly, blaming the vicitim is something of a shameful act. It would be great if all players came into the game equipped to handle psychological abuse but that's not the case and it shouldn't be an entry requirement. Even if it were then it should certainly be made apparent.

5. The vicitim was especially psychologically sensitive
That may well be the case but it should be born in mind that EVE is specifically open to 13 year old children to sign up to. They could be prey to such actions and if turns out that they are, or already have been, then CCP is in for a hell of a lot more trouble than has currently been stirred up here. Seriously - if you think that a few hundred posts on a forum is turbulent then you've not seen what the media will do with that.

6. Banning E1 will kill the meta
Don't be rediculous - there's a hell of a lot more meta to the game than JIta scammers.

7. Banning E1 would be changing EVE
Yes - and for the better. Realistically, ask yourself what scammers add to the game compared to the level of annoyance they generate even without this sort of event. Frankly - how many of EVE's players would be happy to see scammers gone entirely? I can't think of a single good reason to protect them and I'd be more than happy to be able to turn up to a trade hub and not get continually spammed in local.

Ugh.. there's more I could say but I

Where do you draw the line?

Making people sing songs is bad? (Erotica 1)
Telling a kid to kill himself is Ok? (Mittani)
Cursing on TS is bad? (Sohkar)
Disclosing personal information on people you have stalked through the internet is OK? (Digi)

There's a club if you'd like to go
you could meet somebody who really loves you
so you go, and you stand on your own
and you leave on your own
and you go home, and you cry
and you want to die

Aaah! Nice try at non-sequitor! I'll bite.

They already have his assets before the Bonus Room begins.

There is not one single further space cent to be squeezed out of him during the Bonus Room.

So I ask again:

What is the point of the unwinnable game?

I feel sorry for people that cant distinguish inside game and OUT OF GAME.

And that's the decision we're waiting for CCP to come down from the mountain with. After all, our opinions are irrelevant since in cases such as this, CCP is the one who ultimately makes the call.