These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Announcement From Gorila

First post First post
Author
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#61 - 2014-12-25 21:52:51 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Of course the real winners are people like me who refuse to engage with griefers, and happily continue our PvE isk accumulating gameplay, unaffected by CODE.


Do you get dizzy from spinning that hard?

"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.

Black Pedro
Mine.
#62 - 2014-12-25 22:18:22 UTC
Jennifer en Marland wrote:

SO...JTClone Ares said an admittedly offensive word, then immediately apologised. Another guy I've never seen before was too rude about loyalanon, and 2 people went to some lengths to tell him to stop being a douche. And then someone else I've never seen before started being a d-bag, I told him to stop, and I'm still toying with the idea of banning him anyway.

And in 24 hours of chat, in a public channel of over 300 people, with hundreds of messages being written everyday, you found 3 sentences that were offensive? When you can probably hear much worse in any fleet comms? And gankers say the entire channel is rotten? Give me a break.

My only point (which was made perhaps too sardonically) was that there is some basis to the concerns that the AG channel contains an unhealthy level of toxic expression toward other players, not to mention the "banning" of anyone putting forth a less-than-complete opposition to the presence of ganking in the game which I didn't quote.

Do I think the majority of the members in the channel participate in the unacceptable behaviour towards other players? Of course not - you are an example of a reasonable Eve player and a worthy in-game opponent and most of the time the channel serves as a civil and fun (albeit sometimes misguided) place for players to exchange anti-ganking tactics. Do I think you should ban the players that made the comments I referenced? No, not really. But there is a worrisome level of vitriol thrown about, not just at other Eve characters (which is fine - "I hate those gankers let's go blow them up"), but at the actual players behind the characters on a not infrequent basis. Sure you can say it is our job to "police" them, and you are right that on some level it is and we should take the time to send a message to the channel moderators (or CCP) for the worst of it, but it doesn't change the fact that this makes it not the most pleasant channel to hang out in.

Sarah Flynt wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:
The ban list is completely futile for opsec as the entire content of the channel appears in near real-time here:

http://evelocal.com/Anti-ganking

The ban list is neither about opsec nor about preventing people from reading the channel, it never was. It's about preventing people from writing in it. How it looks like when the banlist doesn't exist was demonstrated impressively last night.

Btw: Astecus himself asked Chribba to include both channels on evelocal.com who in turn was so nice to add them. You're welcome.

Then why was my ganker and looting alt that had never spoken a word in AG banned from the channel? Granted this was a while ago, but clearly someone at some point was adding known gankers and thier associates for presumably opsec reasons. Or are all gankers just assumed by the moderators to be boorish trolls by default unworthy of even the chance to say anything? Am I allowed to idle now in the channel on this character now that the ban list has been cleared?

Azov Rassau
The Hornets Cartel
#63 - 2014-12-25 22:28:39 UTC
Kaely Tanniss wrote:
There's nothing wrong with being an "opposing force" against Code or any other entity in Eve, that's all part of the game. The problem is the hatred that has been brewing over actions in a game.

It's this hasty accusation again.
Genuine anti-gankers who have fun opposing the gankers don't hate anyone. I'll just direct you to this post so that you clearly understand how real anti-gankers behave. you obviously confuse us for those white knight-wanna-be carebears who do nothing but insult, RL threaten etc. via those channels.

As an anti-ganker who has been opposing Catalysts since late 2012 (with some breaks/gameplay changes here and there), I can say that most of the genuine anti-gankers have been opposing them for years without any hateful expression. It's not surprising to see how some honest gankers actually show a certain respect to the real white knights who are polite content providers enjoying the game. Example 1, Example 2, Example 3. This type of realistic and honest gankers acknowledge our opposition's presence, enjoy dealing with it as a part of emergent competition and don't dislike the content we create. They see the difference between us and the butthurt carebears (who complain, aspire to white knight and fail and then spew their insults and hatred.) Kaely Tanniss, maybe you should see the difference too, instead of generalizing.

You're lucky though since I had scheduled this week's blog post (linked above) on this exact subject. Blink I hope it will help you see the truth and distinguish the good and the evil (=aka the butthurt gank-victim/insulter carebear) so that you will understand why I insist so much on the "genuine AG" expression.

Also, INB4 some random "tears"-obsessed ganker telling how bad we are, because we like to oppose them and create conflict in a game about opposition and conflict.


Veers Belvar wrote:
Want conflict? You got it in low/null.

I disagree. Conflict exists everywhere in EVE, including Highsec as well... EVE allows it. That's what makes this game fun. A simple example: With my Skiff, I can gatecamp Highsec outlaws and ruin their ganks just like I had camped with the same Skiff in lowsec. There's nothing wrong with being more interested in PvE, Veers. I am a miner too, after all. However, this is mainly a PvP game and a 100% safe, non-conflict Highsec is against the nature of EVE.


Alastair Ormand wrote:
You've just destroyed something they may have spent hours working for, in a few seconds.

I think you're missing the fact that a player who worked so much for that ship should also know that he is responsible for the safety of their own precious assets. I am doing some cool hauling business nowadays and my freighter pilot passes systems like Niarja, Uedama, Aufay and Hek almost every day, sometimes in those "dangerous" hours with dozens of CODE. members in Local. and I survive.

Good scouting, tanking and webifying.

This brings us to one of my favorite EVE quotes: "If you actually play the game with the already-available tools and mechanics, it's nearly impossible to die in Highsec."


Astecus wrote:
Anti-ganking is about treating others with respect

Jennifer en Marland wrote:
Saying that everyone in the channel is death-threat-sending scum just because of a hateful minority, is just as ignorant and invalid as any other stereotype

+1 to both. ^That is what many people here fail to see (or admit). In my anti-ganking career, I have never sent an insult or a RL death threat. (I have never seen genuine AGs like Jenn or Astecus do that either.) In the contrary, I respected the gankers who are my ingame opponents. Those who don't believe that, you can ask gankers like Zane Arnolles, Reginald Poppycock, Mister Simms, Dmank Adoulin, Anti-social Tendencies, ladypee, Stimfisk Lenelluc etc. etc. (this list can go on) with whom I always exchanged a simple and sincere 'o7' or 'gf' in Local after I ruined their ganks with my Falcon/Skiff or saw them in Local.

Some people here is too quick to call us all 'toxic' and confuse us with some of those angry carebears who keep up their RL verbal attacks and endless pression for more CONCORD buffs. All those people (miner or not) who are unable to separate Real life and a video game, are invited to biomass themselves. or stop whining and have fun playing this awesome game (with some cool RP if they want...).

Including RL threats in a video game is big mistake. Just because a person ganks in game doesn't mean he's a bad person in real life.
A RL friend of mine is a pirate in EVE and a Port Security Officer in real world. Lady Areola is a suicide ganker in EVE and a quality, generous-hearted person in real life. Psychotic Monk is a wardeccer, awoxer (LF guild!!Smile), thief, scammer in EVE yet he leaded "Ganking4Good" which raised over 100 billion ISK for the Plex for Good charity, which contributed to the aid for the Philippines hit by a typhoon. These are just three of the many, many examples confirming that the type of gameplay we choose in this virtual Universe has nothing to do with who we actually are in real world.

Be the change you want to see in Highsec.

Anti-Ganking Fun: www.gankerjamming.com

Amyclas Amatin
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#64 - 2014-12-25 22:33:11 UTC
If we kill people in high-sec because they are not in our team, does that make it wrong?

For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/

Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"

Tyyler DURden
Mordechai and Sons Distribution Co.
#65 - 2014-12-25 23:06:45 UTC
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:
Mag's wrote:
People who call for RL violence against other players over game play, do not have any place in the gaming community. They are bad and trying to turn it around and justify their behaviour, only places you in their camp.

Twisted moral high ground dwellers, should be treated with the contempt they deserve.



Hit the nail on the head as always, Mag's. I don't care what you do in Eve, there is absolutely no excuse for real life threats, insults, or anything of that nature. Full stop. No "buts", no extenuating circumstances, no "I was just mad cuz I got ganked".

If you resort to those sorts of threats, be them racist, sexist, homophobic, real life wishes for death and harm, you are not a member of the Eve community. You are a scumbag, pure and simple. Being a "good guy" in Eve doesn't give you permission to be vile and disgusting towards the "bad guys".



What about sarcastic accusations of real-life domestic violence? Would that kind of thing be considered bad taste?
I was just asking because I seem to recall reading some of that at www.minerbumping.com. (it gets linked quite often in local)
So does the supreme leader get a pass or should that be considered part of the no "buts", no extenuating circumstances that you were referring to?

In case you missed it its in the practicle examples section of the code.

Tyyler DURden says "use soap"

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#66 - 2014-12-25 23:12:25 UTC
Tyyler DURden wrote:

What about sarcastic accusations of real-life domestic violence? Would that kind of thing be considered bad taste?
I was just asking because I seem to recall reading some of that at www.minerbumping.com. (it gets linked quite often in local)
So does the supreme leader get a pass or should that be considered part of the no "buts", no extenuating circumstances that you were referring to?

In case you missed it its in the practicle examples section of the code.


And once again you demonstrate the problem here.

Sarcasm does not equate to, quoting my latest example, telling someone to "go hang yourself in front of an elementary school". Or any of the other innumerable vile things so routinely spouted by the "good guys".

It should be obvious.

"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.

ForTheEmpire2014
Doomheim
#67 - 2014-12-25 23:25:13 UTC  |  Edited by: ForTheEmpire2014
edit.retracted
Ria Nieyli
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#68 - 2014-12-25 23:27:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Ria Nieyli
Gorila Vengaza wrote:
-snip-


So, on a campaign against besmirching people you joined a group that is actively besmirching people. Exemplary.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#69 - 2014-12-25 23:29:11 UTC
ForTheEmpire2014 wrote:

Kaarous, using the "good guys" in this way is exactly what I referred to. Marginalizing and demoralizing to anyone who actively seeks to play the good-guy role isn't helping things. I know what you are saying, and I agree with it, but disagree with your manner. Just because you choose to play "the bad guy" doesn't mean anyone opposed is playing "the good guy".

I'm not the "good guy" either. Just a different outlook, which leads me to a different solution to the same issue at hand: How to avoid a theme-park hisec. And some fun for all.


You're reading a lot into a pair of quote marks.

"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.

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#70 - 2014-12-25 23:29:48 UTC
Azov Rassau wrote:



Veers Belvar wrote:
Want conflict? You got it in low/null.


I disagree. Conflict exists everywhere in EVE, including Highsec as well... EVE allows it. That's what makes this game fun. A simple example: With my Skiff, I can gatecamp Highsec outlaws and ruin their ganks just like I had camped with the same Skiff in lowsec. There's nothing wrong with being more interested in PvE, Veers. I am a miner too, after all. However, this is mainly a PvP game and a 100% safe, non-conflict Highsec is against the nature of EVE.


Psychotic Monk is a wardeccer, awoxer (LF guild!!Smile), thief, scammer in EVE yet he leaded "Ganking4Good" which raised over 100 billion ISK for the Plex for Good charity, which contributed to the aid for the Philippines hit by a typhoon. These are just three of the many, many examples confirming that the type of gameplay we choose in this virtual Universe has nothing to do with who we actually are in real world.



Well...I'm not part of the leadership of AG, so I can't speak for them, and anyhow, I prefer to speak for myself, and myself alone. Let's remember that non-consensual PvP in highsec is a CRIMINAL act. It has the same status as in real life, an illegal endeavor that is met with punishment at the hands of the law enforcement authorities. In Eve, as opposed to other game, suicide ganking can substantially negatively impact folks, destroying months of hard work. Now, should we change that? No. Just like in real life, danger is part of the equation. But the problem is that the way suicide ganking is being used. To wit, in a stupid fashion, blowing up empty ships at a huge financial loss to induce the maximum amount of rage and tears. That is senseless, and adds no value to the game. This isn't intelligent conflict to achieve strategic objectives, this is just blowing up anything that moves to elicit humiliating statements, and then post them on a website for pathetic amusement. That isn't what Eve and highsec are about.

I'm amused that you think that by playing "Robin Hood" Psychotic Monk is somehow a force for good in the game. Awoxxing is one of the biggest catastrophes in Eve, it preys on new and innocent players, and is the #1 (or maybe #2 after wars) force encouraging people to socially isolate themselves and avoid player run corps in highsec. It's absolutely a terrible part of the game, and CCP itself wants to remove it. How many players have left the game because Psychotic Monk blew up billions of isk of their stuff under false pretenses? I mean seriously - find some new heroes.
ForTheEmpire2014
Doomheim
#71 - 2014-12-25 23:34:29 UTC  |  Edited by: ForTheEmpire2014
edit.retracted
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#72 - 2014-12-25 23:37:13 UTC
ForTheEmpire2014 wrote:

No, the effect it has is still there.



What effect? That I unequivocally deride anyone who calls themselves a "good guy" while spouting real life threats and sexual insults, as well as the people who advocate for and defend such slime?

I do that without hesitation or regret.

"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.

ForTheEmpire2014
Doomheim
#73 - 2014-12-25 23:41:52 UTC  |  Edited by: ForTheEmpire2014
edit.retracted
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#74 - 2014-12-25 23:46:41 UTC
ForTheEmpire2014 wrote:

So because some Amarrians threaten me, all Amarrians are bad?

I don't follow your stereotyping...


Don't confuse what NPC faction you happen to belong to with who you choose to associate with.

Willingly associating with and advocating for people who make real life threats because of actions taken in a videogame is reprehensible, simple as that.

That's why they get quote marks.

"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.

ForTheEmpire2014
Doomheim
#75 - 2014-12-25 23:51:29 UTC  |  Edited by: ForTheEmpire2014
edit.retracted
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#76 - 2014-12-26 00:01:13 UTC
ForTheEmpire2014 wrote:

For clarification, then. You are referring to a person's moral position (ie. I am good), rather than a chosen role role (ie. I am the good-guy)? I just want to be clear on this. Thx.


Okay, I will do this Barney style, as they say in the military.

If someone claims to be a "good guy" in EVE Online while either:

Making real life threats, along with any other form of railing and hateful vitriol against normal behavior such as ganking or other forms of PvP in EVE Online.

or

Being an advocate, defender, or willing associate of the above.

Then they are an inveterate scumbag whom I believe should be chased out this game, and they get quote marks.

"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.

ForTheEmpire2014
Doomheim
#77 - 2014-12-26 00:09:29 UTC  |  Edited by: ForTheEmpire2014
edit.retracted
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#78 - 2014-12-26 00:14:26 UTC
ForTheEmpire2014 wrote:

Barney aside, it is an important distinction, and one that clouds the issues. By your "guilt by association" argument, anyone in a group who acts inappropriately then taints the whole group. Pretty wide swath to cut...


"Advocate, defender, or willing associate" of people who make real life threats is not a wide swathe, and I'm not the one cutting it. They cut that one out for themselves.

It's not just "acts inappropriately" either. Real life threats are just about the most unacceptable thing someone can engage in within this medium. Anyone who stakes out a position in favor of such a thing is wholly deserving of suffering the negative connotations of it.

"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.

Hiasa Kite
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#79 - 2014-12-26 00:19:26 UTC
TL;DR of Kaaroua's opinion

There is a world of difference between "good guys" and good guys.

ForTheEmpire is a good guy. He plays a good guy and has fun fighting HiSec gankers. Alistair Ormund and Veers Belvar are "good guys" as they believe there is a justification for leveling RL threats against players for winning at PvP conflict.

"Playing an MMO by yourself is like masturbating in the middle of an orgy." -Jonah Gravenstein

ForTheEmpire2014
Doomheim
#80 - 2014-12-26 00:27:09 UTC  |  Edited by: ForTheEmpire2014
edit.retracted

sorry ISDs, for the work...