These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

An Announcement Regarding Real Life Harassment

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#621 - 2014-03-28 20:36:35 UTC
Jarod Garamonde wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Jarod Garamonde wrote:
In general, where are we drawing the line, here?


I answered this question a few pages page.

The short answer is that the person controlling the situation has the responsibility to see that it doesn't go too far. I assume that you're sufficiently intelligent to determine when you're about to push someone over the line. This most specifically does not include in game actions: if someone goes into a screaming meltdown because you blew his ship up, then too bad for him. If you continue to interact with him and goad him for no reason other than to goad him, then you're in the red zone.

Scam all you like.
Gank all you like.
Spy all you like.
Awox all you like.

Excercise judgement & discretion when rubbing salt into the wound afterwards.

Is that so hard to understand?


That's what I'm talking about, right there.
I don't care how much he does or doesn't rage at me. If he keeps coming back into the lowsec system I live in, when he knows full-well, by now that he's going to be rewarded for it with a facefull of Ferox, I'm GOING to keep giving it to him.
Now, all he has to do at that point is petition me, and send the GM the EVEmails whereby he raged at me and demanded that I stop preventing him from encroaching on my home, breaking my ratting chain, and scaring off better targets, and I responded by sending him the lyrics to Particle Man.
Now, poor old Garamonde is temp banned for harassment, and the moron carebear that doesn't understand what lowsec means, gets pretty much "Lethal Weapon 2 Style Diplomatic Immunity" as a result. All he has to do is claim that I was deliberately targeting him, simply to harass him.

That's total crap and you know it.



I don't know what part of "gank all you like" was too hard for you to understand; I deliberately used one-syllable words, so I'm not sure how I could make it any easier.

But if it helps I'm willing to go over it with you on comms.

(you know the preconditions already, right?)

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Duchy Duke
Fresh Provisions
#622 - 2014-03-28 20:36:44 UTC
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
I have refrained from public comment on this issue because of all the ongoing CSM/CCP consultations, but now that CCP has issued their statement, I feel it is only appropriate to give my perspective.

Lying, cheating, general douchebaggery and the harvesting of tears are all part of the "sandbox" that is the game of EVE Online.

But that said, all of us have a responsibility to recognize when a fellow player is starting to lose emotional control -- when things stop being a game -- and respond in a humane manner. And deliberately trying to induce and deepen that loss of control is reprehensible conduct that should shock and dismay the vast majority of the community.

So the tl/dr for me is: Feel free be a douchebag inside the sandbox, but if you kick the sand outside of the sandbox, don't be surprised if CCP kicks you out of the sandbox as well.

Stuff like losing your sh*t on comms and bitching out the people in your fleet is not something I would worry about. Nor is making people sing for their ship.

But if you make someone sing for their ship and then sadistically wratchet up the psychological pressure until they are a total wreck, then you're a real-life scumbag, and I won't shed a tear if CCP decides they no longer care to do business with you.


I've seen allot of great points on both sides of the argument (amongst the rest of the ****). But this is a well written gem.

Sums it up.
Tor Norman
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#623 - 2014-03-28 20:37:47 UTC
H aVo K wrote:
Morihei Akachi wrote:
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Khan D'Amarr wrote:


Different situation entirely so I have no idea.


Ya, **** someone off, permaban, try to get them to kill themselves, 3 months. Seems legit

One time incident versus repeat offender. Public apology versus laughing it off.


public apology, stepped down from CSM immediately and sent the entire contents of his wallet to the wis.... and all that happened the instant he sobered up, the next day. Well before CCP had even commented on the situation.

I'm not a Mittens fan, but at least he understood that he crossed a line, and did what he could to try and make amends.

E1 laughed it off and pre-emptively gave all his stuff to his buds, and "went out with a bang", while asking Sohkar a list of questions designed to try and whitewash this whole thing.

Mittens crossed a very obvious and well defined line. Encouraging suicide, in any form, is unacceptable. Ribbing a mark was never defined as a breach of EULA. By all means, a clarification on the rules along with a warning sent Erotica's way would have been the proper course of action on the matter.

This is a worrying turn of events.

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

For the ISK and the yarr!
Vance Armistice
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#624 - 2014-03-28 20:37:53 UTC
Jebediah Phoenix wrote:
So we can get perma-banned now for asking people to do a little song and dance? When the "victim" wasn't punished for racism and death threats? When apparently encouraging someone to commit suicide is worth only a 3 month ban?

Yeah, nice priorities CCP. Successful witch hunt guys.


Perhaps instead on whining you have some miners that you could bump off their rocks.

Surely there are permits to check. Don't you have to enforce the CODE? Or do you feel rudderless and without the direction of the queen ant?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#625 - 2014-03-28 20:37:59 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
Kaius Fero wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
[.

Refresh us.. why the community should vote fore you? Except being a goon pet,,,

I mean.. if I need a scam king, I vote for any goon...



In all of this I have been beyond impressed with how Malc has dealt with this.

I do not know if he was designated by the CSM to post here and on the other thread, I do not know if he volunteered or if he was posting as a CSM rep or just a everyday player, either way I am glad I voted for him and it is a crying shame he is not re-running for the next CSM.

Just want to say thanks for the work you did on one this Malc, you actually have done what I though was impossible given me faith in the CSM again.


Seconded, and I have not previously been an admirer of Malcanis.



That's my fault for not properly communicating how awesome I am.

Please accept my apologies!

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Hendrick Tallardar
Doomheim
#626 - 2014-03-28 20:38:03 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Malcanis wrote:


It's about what was happening after erotica1 & co already had all the mark's ISK, assets and even his API. Once they've got all his stuff, then what happened after that wasn't about being an evil character in game. It was just about being evil.


Then talking to them on TS was evil?

Like I said, I guess I just dont get it


Then get this: once you've got all your target's money and killed all his ships, leave him alone.


So let's say I get scammed/ganked by a guy in a ransom. If he sends me a smug EVE Mail is that considered harassing? If I get killed auto-piloting and someone sends a "you need to pay your autopilot license" mail, is that harassing?

Basically what I'm getting at is where does the "line" stand on what is considered harassing and going to far after you do something in-game (i.e. suicide gank, steal, etc.)
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#627 - 2014-03-28 20:38:35 UTC
Malcanis may have not been the CSM you wanteed but he was the one you deserved and I agree

He has been a hero in these threads.

Read back. He stood in front of the mob, demanding due process and then has been tryiong to explain to you that due process has now taken place

When things don't go your way don't blame Atticus Finch

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
H aVo K
Tycheon Industries
#628 - 2014-03-28 20:39:43 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Jarod Garamonde wrote:
In general, where are we drawing the line, here?


I answered this question a few pages page.

The short answer is that the person controlling the situation has the responsibility to see that it doesn't go too far. I assume that you're sufficiently intelligent to determine when you're about to push someone over the line. This most specifically does not include in game actions: if someone goes into a screaming meltdown because you blew his ship up, then too bad for him. If you continue to interact with him and goad him for no reason other than to goad him, then you're in the red zone.

Scam all you like.
Gank all you like.
Spy all you like.
Awox all you like.

Excercise judgement & discretion when rubbing salt into the wound afterwards.

Is that so hard to understand?


Ya but thats the thing. My line could be a tiny dot compared to someone like you (hypothetically of course) My judgement says, singing a bunch of songs while being scammed is fine. The victim of the scam must realize they have been had. Should responsibility also not fall up on them to say when enough is enough.

That is what is arbitrary about it and why we had 380 page thread (400 including this) discussing the "line". We all don't have the same limits on what and what is not considered harassment.

If I gank the same miner a dozen times in a night because he hasn't learned how to defend himself, or go find a different place...I see that as taking advantage of someone who is being a moron repeatedly, he might consider it griefing and harassment.

Which one of us is right? There are hundreds of systems he can mine in, and nothing prevents me from killing him every time he undocks. Should I have to say, well I killed him 11 times already I guess ill let him go the 12th time just incase he says im harassing him?

Or does it only apply to TS related things, and at what point does it become the "victims" responsibility to remove themselves from a situation they may find uncomfortable.

We can draw arbitrary lines all over the sandbox. It would be nice to know at what point we reach the limits of the sandbox, so EVERYONE knows where that line is, otherwise it amounts to personal opinion, and that changes from me to you, to the next guy, even CCP Employees have differing individual opinions.


My understanding is that you can continue to gank him willy nilly.

My understanding is that you could also do a complete repeat of everything that happened in the Bonus Round with Sohkar, and be fine.... provided you shut the whole thing down the instant it becomes clear that he's starting to lose his mind.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#629 - 2014-03-28 20:40:47 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
Malcanis may have not been the CSM you wanteed but he was the one you deserved and I agree

He has been a hero in these threads.

Read back. He stood in front of the mob, demanding due process and then has been tryiong to explain to you that due process has now taken place

When things don't go your way don't blame Atticus Finch

m
And yet he fails to answer simple direct questions.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Toshiro Ozuwara
Perkone
#630 - 2014-03-28 20:40:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Toshiro Ozuwara
Hendrick Tallardar wrote:
So let's say I get scammed/ganked by a guy in a ransom. If he sends me a smug EVE Mail is that considered harassing? If I get killed auto-piloting and someone sends a "you need to pay your autopilot license" mail, is that harassing?

Basically what I'm getting at is where does the "line" stand on what is considered harassing and going to far after you do something in-game (i.e. suicide gank, steal, etc.)

The line in game is the EULA. The line out of game is CCP's discretion.

Keep it in game and within the EULA.

This is not rocket science.

It didn't take long to locate the tracking beacon, deep inside the quarters for sleepin' They thought they could get away Not today, it's not the way that this kid plays
Kaius Fero
#631 - 2014-03-28 20:41:01 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Kaius Fero wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
[.

Refresh us.. why the community should vote fore you? Except being a goon pet,,,

I mean.. if I need a scam king, I vote for any goon...


The answer will cost you all your ISK and stuff.

Full API verification will be required.

...u die in fire.. Same with the knight of NI

errrr sorry bout that. Now, lets get back to the tea :)

Anselmo & The Illegals
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#632 - 2014-03-28 20:41:37 UTC
Hendrick Tallardar wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Malcanis wrote:


It's about what was happening after erotica1 & co already had all the mark's ISK, assets and even his API. Once they've got all his stuff, then what happened after that wasn't about being an evil character in game. It was just about being evil.


Then talking to them on TS was evil?

Like I said, I guess I just dont get it


Then get this: once you've got all your target's money and killed all his ships, leave him alone.


So let's say I get scammed/ganked by a guy in a ransom. If he sends me a smug EVE Mail is that considered harassing? If I get killed auto-piloting and someone sends a "you need to pay your autopilot license" mail, is that harassing?

Basically what I'm getting at is where does the "line" stand on what is considered harassing and going to far after you do something in-game (i.e. suicide gank, steal, etc.)


Tell me where you think it is.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Sable Moran
Moran Light Industries
#633 - 2014-03-28 20:41:46 UTC
CCP Guard wrote:
Sturmwolke wrote:
CCP Falcon wrote:

CCP, in collaboration with the CSM, have agreed and would like to state in the strongest possible terms and in accordance with our existing Terms of Service and End User License Agreement, that real life harassment is morally reprehensible, and verifiable examples of such behavior will be met with disciplinary action against game accounts in accordance with our Terms of Service.


Good post, but I'd like a clarification on "disciplinary action against game accounts".
Does this constitute all known accounts held by the player? or just a single account?


There's no single rule for that, it's always a case by case decision based on internal guidelines and precedents.


Wait, what?!

I have always been under the impression that when the ban hammer falls it will fall on all accounts of the 'bad guy/gal'. Have I been under the wrong impression or is this a recent change in policy?

Sable's Ammo Shop at Alentene V - Moon 4 - Duvolle Labs Factory. Hybrid charges, Projectile ammo, Missiles, Drones, Ships, Need'em? We have'em, at affordable prices. Pop in at our Ammo Shop in sunny Alentene.
Big Lynx
#634 - 2014-03-28 20:41:56 UTC
I know the essential problem. Many people waste too much time with internet and lose the capability of factual subjektive arguing, because google and wikipedia should know better. There is no human being that explains what is right or wrong; there is my pc and my virtual education. Too lazy to think, unable to form individual opinions, unable to show empathy, unable to understand social interaction.
Jarod Garamonde
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#635 - 2014-03-28 20:42:25 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Jarod Garamonde wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Jarod Garamonde wrote:
In general, where are we drawing the line, here?


I answered this question a few pages page.

The short answer is that the person controlling the situation has the responsibility to see that it doesn't go too far. I assume that you're sufficiently intelligent to determine when you're about to push someone over the line. This most specifically does not include in game actions: if someone goes into a screaming meltdown because you blew his ship up, then too bad for him. If you continue to interact with him and goad him for no reason other than to goad him, then you're in the red zone.

Scam all you like.
Gank all you like.
Spy all you like.
Awox all you like.

Excercise judgement & discretion when rubbing salt into the wound afterwards.

Is that so hard to understand?


That's what I'm talking about, right there.
I don't care how much he does or doesn't rage at me. If he keeps coming back into the lowsec system I live in, when he knows full-well, by now that he's going to be rewarded for it with a facefull of Ferox, I'm GOING to keep giving it to him.
Now, all he has to do at that point is petition me, and send the GM the EVEmails whereby he raged at me and demanded that I stop preventing him from encroaching on my home, breaking my ratting chain, and scaring off better targets, and I responded by sending him the lyrics to Particle Man.
Now, poor old Garamonde is temp banned for harassment, and the moron carebear that doesn't understand what lowsec means, gets pretty much "Lethal Weapon 2 Style Diplomatic Immunity" as a result. All he has to do is claim that I was deliberately targeting him, simply to harass him.

That's total crap and you know it.



I don't know what part of "gank all you like" was too hard for you to understand; I deliberately used one-syllable words, so I'm not sure how I could make it any easier.

But if it helps I'm willing to go over it with you on comms.

(you know the preconditions already, right?)


I understood, full-well, what YOU were saying.
My point that you missed is what steps are going to be take to ensure that carebears understand, completely, that this is not a "can't touch me" card, and that GM's will be properly educated on the subject. Will there be actions taken against carebears for trying to cheat the system? Will GM's be disciplined for handing out bans against gankers?

I've debated with you, before, Malcanis... you're intelligent enough to be far above subtly calling someone stupid. Don't degrade yourself, like that.

That moment when you realize the crazy lady with all the cats was right...

    [#savethelance]
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#636 - 2014-03-28 20:43:45 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
It's not really a fringe question. Singing for ransom is a VERY common practice, but it's also an out of game action and could just as easily be called harassment. How is calling for a ruling on a specific and common case anything to do with describing colours?


The ruling specifically does not touch specific actions. CCP has not done anything against singing ransoms. This seems more targeted at prolonged interactions asking for more and more of the mark each time. Asking them to sing a song or two? Fine. Having them sing the song, demanding two more, then once those are finished, three more, and continuing until they refuse? Probably not so fine.

Founder of Violet Squadron, a small gang NPSI community! Mail me for more information.

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie's Space Mediation Service!
Toshiro Ozuwara
Perkone
#637 - 2014-03-28 20:43:49 UTC
Jarod Garamonde wrote:
My point that you missed is what steps are going to be take to ensure that carebears understand, completely, that this is not a "can't touch me" card, and that GM's will be properly educated on the subject. Will there be actions taken against carebears for trying to cheat the system? Will GM's be disciplined for handing out bans against gankers?

Sounds like CCP's problem, not yours.

It didn't take long to locate the tracking beacon, deep inside the quarters for sleepin' They thought they could get away Not today, it's not the way that this kid plays
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#638 - 2014-03-28 20:44:46 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Mike Azariah wrote:
Malcanis may have not been the CSM you wanteed but he was the one you deserved and I agree

He has been a hero in these threads.

Read back. He stood in front of the mob, demanding due process and then has been tryiong to explain to you that due process has now taken place

When things don't go your way don't blame Atticus Finch

m
And yet he fails to answer simple direct questions.


You've been answered. You just didn't get a ruling that you could rules-lawyer your away around, and instead were left with the onerous burden of exercising adult judgement.

So sorry.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#639 - 2014-03-28 20:44:50 UTC
So can we get all emotional and act crazy to get people to vacate a station camp?

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~
Ahost Gceo
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#640 - 2014-03-28 20:45:08 UTC
EVE is legendary for this sort of stuff. Scams, traps, losses, and thefts. It should stay that way because it creates a story or ties in with the ever changing story of the players.

But what it shouldn't be known for is the small sliver of the player population that indulges in sadistic exploitation, intrinsic humiliation, and public display of such activities for the sake of their own entertainment/ego every single day they log on.

This is not PvP or "playing" the game. This is not even what I would consider content creation because people like those who run the "Bonus Room" go far outside the game to achieve their idea of enjoyment meanwhile destroying someone's enjoyment of the game itself.

CCP ignore me please, I make too much sense.