These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Restrict NPC Corporation Posting Abilities.

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#161 - 2014-05-18 18:06:26 UTC
Shivanthar wrote:
afkalt wrote:

I get the whole trolling thing, but that can be addressed in better ways as it's something of a seperate issue. That said, a lot of people seem to confuse "trolling" with "disagreeing".


They're not confusing any terms. They're confusing about who are you. Make the forums choose your most skilled character, and we will not be talking with a shady picture and some name including "alt" and "afk". You will have to pay an upkeep for it! With your paid upkeep and your beautiful haired main man/woman talking, will you be able to disagree as easy as you did? Try it, believe me, it will be enjoying.



Perhaps if you argued less about the character and more about their points? So long as the points they make are within the rules, who makes them should be irrelevant.

Like I say, trolling should be jumped on, but people should be free to post with whom they see fit - irrespective of their space weath or alt armies.

If trolling is ... let's say eliminated (impossible, but lets say it is), then what purpose does this serve? It matters not one iota who makes the post
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#162 - 2014-05-18 18:20:54 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
hmskrecik wrote:

La Nariz stated explicitly that he/they want to be able to retaliate in game against anyone who posted on forums anything they didn't like.

And if it's not about retaliation then what is the problem with NPC alts posting?


Rephrase that to:

"La Nariz stated explicity that he wants ANYONE to be able to retaliate in game against anyone who posted something they found unpalatable on the forums."

I think you're deliberately misinterpreting what I said to support your own fallacies.


It's all cool that you might be thinking exactly in the way you phrased it but it does not remove the fact that you could still do exactly what the first phrasing was. ISD and anyone participating in the moderation not having the right tools to do the moderation is the core issue of the problem. They are forum janitor cleaning the mess people always create but have no clear way to get the individuals out of the place for good.

Even recently, when Falcon's topic about what was happening with the monument clearly mentioned personal attack against DEVs would be dealt harshly, all we saw is post after post from ISDs saying they had to clean the thread for the Xth time and to pay attention to the statement Falcon had said about personal attacks being not accepted.

"Don't do this again or I will have to edit'delete your post."

This will totally stop people from trolling/shitpoasting right?

Give ISDs the tool and power to start cleaning this cesspit for good and the quality will improve.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#163 - 2014-05-18 19:16:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Prince Kobol wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:


Personally, I'm not joining a corp to have a discussion about a ship fit or about a market tactic. I'm not going to have my in game decisions held hostage over my ability to discuss certain topics. All it means is that a new character with no actual gameplay will be born, a character with no means of being held accountable for their words. This is not that character, this character actually logs in and flies ships, that one will not and will be purely immune from any backlash it's words will bring.


Why join a corp, create a your corp for your own characters.

Why do you feel the need to hide in a NPC Corp?

Calling it hiding is unnecessarily pejorative. Consider that it provides no protection from any aggressive action taken against me save for the one that provides 24 hours warning anyways, nor has any affect at all in encounters likely to happen outside of highsec. I'm still searchable from locators. My ships blow up the same as yours.

But to the question of why I'm there, payers corps as they currently exist provide little tangible benefit for a solo player. NPC corps on the other hand provide wardec immunity. While this feature exists at the center of great debate regarding it's appropriateness, so long as it does exist it provides utility greater than my sum defensive capacity against a wardec. Also considering that game mechanics provide me no reason to actually fight I'd either log off or in the case of a persisting dec or decs, just end up dodging back to NPC to begin with, as such staying there cuts out the middle man.

It's just a logical move in a game that rewards logical moves.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#164 - 2014-05-18 19:30:44 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
There is a reason for restriction its because NPC alts are continually being used for trolling and derailing threads to the point they are locked. They are deliberately decreasing the quality of the forums and hence the community. There is evidence that this approach can work because CAOD quality increased when this occurred. I think the :effort: wall is high enough so if you decide to circumvent it go right ahead.

Aside from the increased cost in game associated with creating a corp the distinction between creating a character and creating a character and putting them in a trash corp is minimal to the point that I believe anyone with the intent of obfuscating or interfering with legitimate discussion will likely do so.

This is further evidenced by the fact that the characters you are trying to avoid created posting alts in the first place. We basically have a clear precedent with alt posters that anonymity is worth effort. Even further, some of the more trollish elements of the community are already in player corps, so it is reasonable to conclude that many others are not simply because that effort isn't mandated.
Prince Kobol
#165 - 2014-05-18 19:52:19 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Calling it hiding is unnecessarily pejorative. Consider that it provides no protection from any aggressive action taken against me save for the one that provides 24 hours warning anyways, nor has any affect at all in encounters likely to happen outside of highsec. I'm still searchable from locators. My ships blow up the same as yours.



No it doesn't because you can chose to war dec my corp thus giving you the option to shoot me if I travel in HS. I can not do the same to you. For me to shoot you if I am in HS I will lose my ship no matter what.

So lets say I chose to come after you for what ever reason all you have to do is retreat to HS and there will next to nothing I can do other then lose ship after ship.

Tyberius Franklin wrote:
But to the question of why I'm there, payers corps as they currently exist provide little tangible benefit for a solo player. NPC corps on the other hand provide wardec immunity. While this feature exists at the center of great debate regarding it's appropriateness, so long as it does exist it provides utility greater than my sum defensive capacity against a wardec. Also considering that game mechanics provide me no reason to actually fight I'd either log off or in the case of a persisting dec or decs, just end up dodging back to NPC to begin with, as such staying there cuts out the middle man.

It's just a logical move in a game that rewards logical moves.


This why I would go further then what has been suggested and remove a lot of what is possible whilst being in a NPC Corp. I would remove the ability to run mission above a certain level, I would hit refining so that for example you could only ever get say 85%. I would increase S&I costs to say 25%, I would basically hit NPC's Corps so hard that if you chose to stay you will pay a very heavy price.

What you have described in my eyes only detracts from the game and does not improve it in anyway shape or form. Thank you for giving an example on why NPC corps are bad for this game.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#166 - 2014-05-18 20:06:54 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Calling it hiding is unnecessarily pejorative. Consider that it provides no protection from any aggressive action taken against me save for the one that provides 24 hours warning anyways, nor has any affect at all in encounters likely to happen outside of highsec. I'm still searchable from locators. My ships blow up the same as yours.



No it doesn't because you can chose to war dec my corp thus giving you the option to shoot me if I travel in HS. I can not do the same to you. For me to shoot you if I am in HS I will lose my ship no matter what.

So lets say I chose to come after you for what ever reason all you have to do is retreat to HS and there will next to nothing I can do other then lose ship after ship.

Tyberius Franklin wrote:
But to the question of why I'm there, payers corps as they currently exist provide little tangible benefit for a solo player. NPC corps on the other hand provide wardec immunity. While this feature exists at the center of great debate regarding it's appropriateness, so long as it does exist it provides utility greater than my sum defensive capacity against a wardec. Also considering that game mechanics provide me no reason to actually fight I'd either log off or in the case of a persisting dec or decs, just end up dodging back to NPC to begin with, as such staying there cuts out the middle man.

It's just a logical move in a game that rewards logical moves.


This why I would go further then what has been suggested and remove a lot of what is possible whilst being in a NPC Corp. I would remove the ability to run mission above a certain level, I would hit refining so that for example you could only ever get say 85%. I would increase S&I costs to say 25%, I would basically hit NPC's Corps so hard that if you chose to stay you will pay a very heavy price.

What you have described in my eyes only detracts from the game and does not improve it in anyway shape or form. Thank you for giving an example on why NPC corps are bad for this game.
NPC corps aren't what prevents you from catching me in a wardec, the fact that I don't have to stay in a wardec'd corp prevents you from catching me in a wardec. Either way you won't attack me in highsec without losing a ship. Staying in a NPC corp just defers the corp hopping for a tax. As stated, there's no good reason for me to fight a war, so I won't.

As far as your suggestion, feel free to keep suggesting it. Hopefully CCP will see the folly in it. But really all you are suggesting is that you want CCP to motivate me to increase my income by 11% while still dodging decs. Either way, I profit.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#167 - 2014-05-18 20:10:59 UTC
I would like to add a thought on this matter.

In the event that NPC corp character posting ability is curtailed, can we make sure that does not apply to characters in a faction warfare NPC corporation?

They're a bit of a special case, imo.

"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.
hmskrecik
TransMine Group
Gluten Free Cartel
#168 - 2014-05-18 20:27:51 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
This why I would go further then what has been suggested and remove a lot of what is possible whilst being in a NPC Corp. I would remove the ability to run mission above a certain level, I would hit refining so that for example you could only ever get say 85%. I would increase S&I costs to say 25%, I would basically hit NPC's Corps so hard that if you chose to stay you will pay a very heavy price.

Somehow your statement reminds me famous Catbert quote: layoffs will continue until morale improves.

If you think you can force people into your favourite sort of activities you are as much fool as who thinks he can prevent anyone from doing them. If you want more players taking part in so called content creation, start by showing them that those who do are not douchebags wanting to drive into oblivion those who don't.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#169 - 2014-05-18 22:59:46 UTC
hmskrecik wrote:

I'm okay with sandbox and playing within rules. The same rules allow existence of alts and give them full rights.

In my opinion it does have to do with RL identities. As much as you want choices made in game to have consequences stay within game, similarly choices on forums should have consequences on forums. This is very important. Forums and the game itself are governed by different rules. It's widely accepted that the game is not RL. By the same token forums are not a game.

I have no personal qualms with CFC in general nor with Goons in particular. I had no direct in game interactions with neither of you and it's my intention for it to stay this way. However it is my understanding that you market yourselves as evil guys of EVE so when you propose something you have to forgive my skepticism, that I don't readily trust it's good for whole player base, me included, not just for Goons.

Lastly, the more I think about it the more I'm convinced there will be working here something which for lack of better terms let's call Reverse Malcanis Law: any technical measure intended to police some player behaviour will affect only new and inexperienced players while old and experienced will find a way around it. Trolling will not be stopped, trolls will find ways to do their work. Instead this will become political censoring tool. If this is what you're about, have balls to honestly admit it.


That's your opinion now what is the explanation of how this will involve RL identities and bring about deleterious RL consequences? What is the justification for that explanation?

I specifically accounted for confused newbies by suggesting that new citizens remain free roam and that when visiting the forums they are first shunted to new citizens to make finding resources/answers easier for them. Do you have a reason and justification for why this isn't enough?

I only deal with recruitment not politics this suggestion is because I would like to see forum quality increase.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#170 - 2014-05-18 23:07:11 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
hmskrecik wrote:

La Nariz stated explicitly that he/they want to be able to retaliate in game against anyone who posted on forums anything they didn't like.

And if it's not about retaliation then what is the problem with NPC alts posting?


Rephrase that to:

"La Nariz stated explicity that he wants ANYONE to be able to retaliate in game against anyone who posted something they found unpalatable on the forums."

I think you're deliberately misinterpreting what I said to support your own fallacies.


It's all cool that you might be thinking exactly in the way you phrased it but it does not remove the fact that you could still do exactly what the first phrasing was. ISD and anyone participating in the moderation not having the right tools to do the moderation is the core issue of the problem. They are forum janitor cleaning the mess people always create but have no clear way to get the individuals out of the place for good.

Even recently, when Falcon's topic about what was happening with the monument clearly mentioned personal attack against DEVs would be dealt harshly, all we saw is post after post from ISDs saying they had to clean the thread for the Xth time and to pay attention to the statement Falcon had said about personal attacks being not accepted.

"Don't do this again or I will have to edit'delete your post."

This will totally stop people from trolling/shitpoasting right?

Give ISDs the tool and power to start cleaning this cesspit for good and the quality will improve.


We have the best espionage team in the game there is literally nothing stopping us as in goons from doing the first interpretation of that. However I do not feel that is the best for the game hence this suggestion and my original phrasing that would permit everyone to do that.

Like I stated in the first post that you must have missed, this change is only one step in correcting the problem adding more ISD tools would be another potential step to solving the problem.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#171 - 2014-05-18 23:09:29 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Aside from the increased cost in game associated with creating a corp the distinction between creating a character and creating a character and putting them in a trash corp is minimal to the point that I believe anyone with the intent of obfuscating or interfering with legitimate discussion will likely do so.

This is further evidenced by the fact that the characters you are trying to avoid created posting alts in the first place. We basically have a clear precedent with alt posters that anonymity is worth effort. Even further, some of the more trollish elements of the community are already in player corps, so it is reasonable to conclude that many others are not simply because that effort isn't mandated.


The counterpoint is that CAOD quality significantly improved when this suggested change happened. Sure some people will climb the :effort: wall but, the change will still have its desired effect, decreasing over all npc alt troll posting.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#172 - 2014-05-18 23:12:43 UTC
hmskrecik wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
This why I would go further then what has been suggested and remove a lot of what is possible whilst being in a NPC Corp. I would remove the ability to run mission above a certain level, I would hit refining so that for example you could only ever get say 85%. I would increase S&I costs to say 25%, I would basically hit NPC's Corps so hard that if you chose to stay you will pay a very heavy price.

Somehow your statement reminds me famous Catbert quote: layoffs will continue until morale improves.

If you think you can force people into your favourite sort of activities you are as much fool as who thinks he can prevent anyone from doing them. If you want more players taking part in so called content creation, start by showing them that those who do are not douchebags wanting to drive into oblivion those who don't.


You're making a strawman of this no one is trying to force anyone into anything.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#173 - 2014-05-18 23:13:28 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
I would like to add a thought on this matter.

In the event that NPC corp character posting ability is curtailed, can we make sure that does not apply to characters in a faction warfare NPC corporation?

They're a bit of a special case, imo.


I take it this is because we can shoot them if we join the opposing FW and they effectively block off half of highsec?

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#174 - 2014-05-18 23:17:29 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
I would like to add a thought on this matter.

In the event that NPC corp character posting ability is curtailed, can we make sure that does not apply to characters in a faction warfare NPC corporation?

They're a bit of a special case, imo.


I take it this is because we can shoot them if we join the opposing FW and they effectively block off half of highsec?


More along the lines of that if they are in a faction warfare corp regardless of it being an NPC one or not, they aren't hiding from anybody.

They've already passed the test, albeit in an unusual manner.

"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.
hmskrecik
TransMine Group
Gluten Free Cartel
#175 - 2014-05-19 00:15:49 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
hmskrecik wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
This why I would go further then what has been suggested and remove a lot of what is possible whilst being in a NPC Corp. I would remove the ability to run mission above a certain level, I would hit refining so that for example you could only ever get say 85%. I would increase S&I costs to say 25%, I would basically hit NPC's Corps so hard that if you chose to stay you will pay a very heavy price.

Somehow your statement reminds me famous Catbert quote: layoffs will continue until morale improves.

If you think you can force people into your favourite sort of activities you are as much fool as who thinks he can prevent anyone from doing them. If you want more players taking part in so called content creation, start by showing them that those who do are not douchebags wanting to drive into oblivion those who don't.


You're making a strawman of this no one is trying to force anyone into anything.


Not strawman, off-topic. This was my, knee-jerk I admit, reaction to an assumption that making life of players in NPC corps unbearable enough will make them resign and in turn adopt some desired play style.

La Nariz wrote:
hmskrecik wrote:

I'm okay with sandbox and playing within rules. The same rules allow existence of alts and give them full rights.

In my opinion it does have to do with RL identities. As much as you want choices made in game to have consequences stay within game, similarly choices on forums should have consequences on forums. This is very important. Forums and the game itself are governed by different rules. It's widely accepted that the game is not RL. By the same token forums are not a game.

Lastly, the more I think about it the more I'm convinced there will be working here something which for lack of better terms let's call Reverse Malcanis Law: any technical measure intended to police some player behaviour will affect only new and inexperienced players while old and experienced will find a way around it. Trolling will not be stopped, trolls will find ways to do their work. Instead this will become political censoring tool. If this is what you're about, have balls to honestly admit it.


That's your opinion now what is the explanation of how this will involve RL identities and bring about deleterious RL consequences? What is the justification for that explanation?

I specifically accounted for confused newbies by suggesting that new citizens remain free roam and that when visiting the forums they are first shunted to new citizens to make finding resources/answers easier for them. Do you have a reason and justification for why this isn't enough?

I only deal with recruitment not politics this suggestion is because I would like to see forum quality increase.

I thought I was clear enough. Let's make it point by point:
1. RL actions used to have RL consequences.
2. In game actions should have consequences only in game.
3. On forum actions should have on forum consequences.
4. Mixing above yields bad or hilarious results, depending on combination.
5. You want to be guaranteed that you can incur in game consequences for on forum actions. This is what I object against.

That you personally don't deal with politics does not mean nobody else does. And your original proposal to me is exactly it, a political tool.

If you want to increase forum quality, address and solve the problem at forum level. Ignore list is one example of such solution, punitive harassment of player(s) in game is not.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#176 - 2014-05-19 00:25:23 UTC
hmskrecik wrote:

Not strawman, off-topic. This was my, knee-jerk I admit, reaction to an assumption that making life of players in NPC corps unbearable enough will make them resign and in turn adopt some desired play style.

I thought I was clear enough. Let's make it point by point:
1. RL actions used to have RL consequences.
2. In game actions should have consequences only in game.
3. On forum actions should have on forum consequences.
4. Mixing above yields bad or hilarious results, depending on combination.
5. You want to be guaranteed that you can incur in game consequences for on forum actions. This is what I object against.

That you personally don't deal with politics does not mean nobody else does. And your original proposal to me is exactly it, a political tool.

If you want to increase forum quality, address and solve the problem at forum level. Ignore list is one example of such solution, punitive harassment of player(s) in game is not.


RL still has nothing to do with it if anyone is trying to dox or do things in RL over the game contact CCP and law enforcement. Point 3 we disagree on the forums the game provided forums are part of the game. Your actions should have consequences and in attaching forum actions to consequences forum quality will be increased. It is not harassment for me to do something because you posted something unpalatable. That's my choice and should I decide you're worth awoxing/ganking/wardecing I pay the consequence for those actions. Harassment is addressed in the EULA/TOS and expressly forbidden.

Addressing the problem at the forum level can be another step in improving the quality of the forums remember I note that this is only part of the solution.

Any reference to politics is once again your own goonspiracy my intention with this suggestion is to do nothing more than increase forum quality.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#177 - 2014-05-19 01:30:54 UTC
I have reservations about this idea.

Mainly because one career path - AWOXing - results in people taking part in it spending a good deal of time in NPC corps. And lots of AWOXers are good forum posters.

There's definitely workarounds possible but they will cause ridiculous bloat in employment histories (if you want to see why this is a bad thing, fly to a safe spot, then load Psychotic Monk's corp history, and see how long it is until you can act again in-game).

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#178 - 2014-05-19 01:33:12 UTC
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
I have reservations about this idea.

Mainly because one career path - AWOXing - results in people taking part in it spending a good deal of time in NPC corps. And lots of AWOXers are good forum posters.

There's definitely workarounds possible but they will cause ridiculous bloat in employment histories (if you want to see why this is a bad thing, fly to a safe spot, then load Psychotic Monk's corp history, and see how long it is until you can act again in-game).


As an awoxing hobbyist myself I personally do not mind making the sacrifice to improve the forum quality but, your concern is noted.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Dalto Bane
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#179 - 2014-05-19 02:12:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Dalto Bane
La Nariz wrote:
Not to long ago there was a post in general discussion discussing how to improve forum quality. Several ideas were brainstormed such as removing general discussion, giving ISD more tools, providing harsher punishments for forum rule breaking, etc. Those all have some merit but, I feel the best way to improve the quality of the forums is:

Restricting NPC corporation members to EVE New Citizen's Q&A, Features & Ideas Discussion, Character Bazaar and Alliance & Corporation Recruitment Center.

There has already been a precedent set for this idea by CAOD; in CAOD NPC alts cannot post and the quality of that forum is significantly better than other forums albeit slower.

Enacting this change would:

-Increase the quality of the forums because NPC corporation posters are notoriously know for being devoted to being troll alts,

-It is easily circumvented by players that wish to have a solo experience in EVE and wish to post via one man corporations,

-It provides consequences/content for actions by exposing posters to war declarations should their posts be deemed unpalatable by other players,

-Potentially decrease ISD/Community Manager workloads,

-Leave newbies unaffected as they can still post questions, ideas and look for corporations.

-Leave the character trading system unaffected.

-Decrease the amount of thread derailment and trolling.

-Adds an incentive to joining a player made corporation.

---
An alternative of this is enacting some sort of CSPA fee for NPC corporation posters so they must pay per post but, it is less friendly to newbies.
---

An alternative from a former CSM:
Malcanis wrote:
Rather than decrease player freedom, perhaps we could address the problem by increasing it.

Rather than blocking NPC corp members from posting, perhaps it would be better to allow us to ignore by corp. Thus rather than ignore TrollyMcAlt of The Scope, La Nariz would simply be able to ignore everyone in The Scope.

Then those people who find that reading NPC corp member posts decreases the utility of the forums for them can easily avoid doing so. If sufficient numbers of players agree, then the trolling opportunities would greatly decrease.

Taking a leaf from the standing system, a useful refinement could be to allow individual "forum standings" - ie have the "corp ignore" not be a seperate flag as such, but a batch job that sets the ignore flag for all members, but allows people override that on an individual basis. So when La Nariz sets The Scope to ignore, he's effectively individually ignoring every member of The Scope at once.

So then if La Lariz was impressed by the posting of a specific exceptional (or temporary) NPC corp member in the Scope, he could just uncheck the ignore flag for that member and read her posts, whilst continuing to ignore by default everyone else in The Scope

---
A commonly suggested alternative: Restrict posting to the highest SP character on the account.


I often find myself agreeing with your posts, and this post is no different. NPC Corps are the cancer that is hurting the forums and Eve alike. NPC Corps are troll(forums) and bot-aspirant(Gameplay).

Drops Mic
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#180 - 2014-05-19 03:17:17 UTC
Dalto Bane wrote:
I often find myself agreeing with your posts, and this post is no different. NPC Corps are the cancer that is hurting the forums and Eve alike. NPC Corps are troll(forums) and bot-aspirant(Gameplay).
If only being "bot aspirant" was a real thing, you might have had a point.