These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

@ CCP, why do you have rules that you refuse to enforce?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
#61 - 2011-12-13 21:02:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Cipher Jones
baltec1 wrote:
Cipher Jones wrote:


Funny you should say that, as plenty of people have come on the forum and overtly claimed they were doing it only "for the lulz".

Secondly, "attempt" is not written or implied in the definition.



This did not answer the question asked.


Because asking for 10 hypothetical situations the way to win the internet. He is one post away from winning and I dont want it to be from me.
/sarcasm

In all seriousness baltec1 would you really answer a question like that?

Quote:
and if the person is in a NPC Corp?


Then you can't really say you are trying to cut off say Brutor Tribes supply lines. If the guy is just trying to make a living and you blow him up repeatedly to the point of (you) not being able to make any ISK whatsoever, the "rule" applies.

internet spaceships

are serious business sir.

and don't forget it
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#62 - 2011-12-13 21:10:09 UTC
Cipher Jones wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Cipher Jones wrote:


Funny you should say that, as plenty of people have come on the forum and overtly claimed they were doing it only "for the lulz".

Secondly, "attempt" is not written or implied in the definition.



This did not answer the question asked.


Because asking for 10 hypothetical situations the way to win the internet. He is one post away from winning and I dont want it to be from me.
/sarcasm

In all seriousness baltec1 would you really answer a question like that?



Would I answer a question asking for 10 examples....

I think I managed that in just about every exam I ever took. My most recent being when I trained on how to use a snow plow.
Jita Alt666
#63 - 2011-12-13 21:26:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Jita Alt666
Cipher Jones wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Cipher Jones wrote:


Funny you should say that, as plenty of people have come on the forum and overtly claimed they were doing it only "for the lulz".

Secondly, "attempt" is not written or implied in the definition.



This did not answer the question asked.


Because asking for 10 hypothetical situations the way to win the internet. He is one post away from winning and I dont want it to be from me.
/sarcasm

In all seriousness baltec1 would you really answer a question like that?

Quote:
and if the person is in a NPC Corp?


Then you can't really say you are trying to cut off say Brutor Tribes supply lines. If the guy is just trying to make a living and you blow him up repeatedly to the point of (you) not being able to make any ISK whatsoever, the "rule" applies.


1. You believe people who come on the forums and say "I did it for lulz" - more the fool you.
2. You snipe away at numerous interpretations of the definition provided using Internet legalise yet overlook the phrase:
Quote:
At our discretion
- more the fool you.
3. NPC pilots are often player owned alliance pilots seeking to avoid conflict. Killing a Brutor Tribe alt is not an attempt at killing off the Brutor Tribe, it is an attempt at disrupting the game-play/economic influence of the alliance that the owner of the alt belongs to. - how can you not understand the role meta gaming plays in Eve Online? Complete the fool you.

Addressing your refusal to respond in a constructive manner: Your OP implies that CCP are not enforcing their own terms of service. How? Where? When? You can't make a claim with no evidence and expect us to treat you like you have any intelligence.
Myrdraeus Keaunt
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#64 - 2011-12-13 21:37:02 UTC
Cipher Jones wrote:

Funny you should say that, as plenty of people have come on the forum and overtly claimed they were doing it only "for the lulz".

Secondly, "attempt" is not written or implied in the definition.


"lulz" are a form of currency, are they not? If not, then WTF am I trading my cash for when I pay the bill for this game every month???

Also, art...even temporary, is a commodity as well. Every 4th we Americans shell out millions and millions of dollars on stuff that is meant to only shortly brighten up the sky in brilliant explosive colors. Ever seen a retriever pop? It's quite pretty! It's like a garden of flowers that dies in the wind. Nothing gold can stay...

There's also practice as well. Skills are a commodity that can only come through work. Stepping into the deep end right away makes it harder to learn. Popping a couple vessels in a short timespace can be a learning experience. First couple times I tried I failed and learned more about damage types and resistances.

So there's many forms of "profit" available in ganking. There's the "lulz". There's the artwork. There's the experience. Finally, in some cases, there's the ISK. I'm sure others can think of more.

Surely CCP understands these things as if they didn't they wouldn't bother making gun animations, cool novas, and pretty explosions. We'd just play EvE through a terminal and stare at a blank void. People wouldn't pay for that though....we expect to be entertained and we want to feel like we get more entertainment than we're paying for. Being entertained is a form of profit!
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#65 - 2011-12-13 21:44:19 UTC
I'm still waiting for the list of reported yet unbanned noob system baiters...

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
#66 - 2011-12-13 21:46:19 UTC
Refusing to answer a question that is off topic of the OP is called not being trolled.

You are debating what griefing is. You are asking me for examples so that you may interpolate them. You can do that without me. We all understand that some things are griefing and some things are not. I am asking CCP why they allow the ones that are griefing, as defined by them, not you or me, to continue.

I did not overlook any phrase, I mentioned it specifically and asked them why they choose not to exercise the option.


internet spaceships

are serious business sir.

and don't forget it
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
#67 - 2011-12-13 21:50:21 UTC
Myrdraeus Keaunt wrote:
Cipher Jones wrote:

Funny you should say that, as plenty of people have come on the forum and overtly claimed they were doing it only "for the lulz".

Secondly, "attempt" is not written or implied in the definition.


"lulz" are a form of currency, are they not? If not, then WTF am I trading my cash for when I pay the bill for this game every month???

Also, art...even temporary, is a commodity as well. Every 4th we Americans shell out millions and millions of dollars on stuff that is meant to only shortly brighten up the sky in brilliant explosive colors. Ever seen a retriever pop? It's quite pretty! It's like a garden of flowers that dies in the wind. Nothing gold can stay...

There's also practice as well. Skills are a commodity that can only come through work. Stepping into the deep end right away makes it harder to learn. Popping a couple vessels in a short timespace can be a learning experience. First couple times I tried I failed and learned more about damage types and resistances.

So there's many forms of "profit" available in ganking. There's the "lulz". There's the artwork. There's the experience. Finally, in some cases, there's the ISK. I'm sure others can think of more.

Surely CCP understands these things as if they didn't they wouldn't bother making gun animations, cool novas, and pretty explosions. We'd just play EvE through a terminal and stare at a blank void. People wouldn't pay for that though....we expect to be entertained and we want to feel like we get more entertainment than we're paying for. Being entertained is a form of profit!


Profit must be monetary or advantageous.

internet spaceships

are serious business sir.

and don't forget it
Velicitia
XS Tech
#68 - 2011-12-13 21:52:41 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:

and if the person is in a NPC Corp?



Then, they're likely an out-of-corp hauler alt for someone. maybe.

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#69 - 2011-12-13 21:55:02 UTC
Cipher Jones wrote:
CCP wrote:
Grief play
What is grief play?
Griefing
A grief player, or "griefer," is a player who devotes much of his time to making others’ lives miserable, in a large part deriving his enjoyment of the game from these activities while he does not profit from it in any way. Grief tactics are the mechanics a griefer will utilize to antagonize other players. At our discretion, players who are found to be consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience for others may receive a warning, temporary suspension or permanent banning of his account.

This should not be confused with standard conflict that might arise between two (or more) players, such as corporation wars. The EVE universe is a harsh universe largely driven by such conflict and notice must be taken of the fact that nonconsensual combat alone is not considered to be grief play per the above definition.

An example of grief play would be the so called "Can baiting" in starter systems. An experienced player drops a cargo container with some items in front of a station in a starter system and waits for a new player to take from it. The new player is flagged and promptly attacked and killed by the owner of the container. Doing the same in starter tutorial complexes is also considered grief play and will not be tolerated.


Its counterproductive to your game, and its costing you a lot of money. You have never enforced this policy yet you retain it, it is very confusing. Is it simply the cost of enforcing it? Or apathy? Or did you just print that to bait people into subbing, with them thinking "EvE can't be as harsh as people say if blatant griefing is against the rules". Or do you plan on enforcing it someday? Just wondering why a company would allow itself to hemorrhage money like that, especially after this summer.

Eagerly waiting your response, also eagerly awaiting griefer replies telling me what a bad poster I am and how what they do is either justified or not griefing.



Cipher, give us some idea of how many people you think have been reported for can baiting in noob systems and did not get banned? Or is that not really what your thread is about?

If it's really about griefing in general, then the debate/questions above are perfectly reasonable.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#70 - 2011-12-13 22:01:53 UTC
The Mittani wrote:
oxytopes at 1500, the bad thread index is spiking across the forums, it's a crisis of market democracy~



Goons - hiding real in-game goals behind griefing.

Greifers - hiding their true intent under the fiat of in-game goals.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#71 - 2011-12-13 22:43:08 UTC
Cipher Jones wrote:
Lady Spank wrote:
While I don't really know why I am bothering to respond to this tiresome poster...

Suicide ganking IS profitable, just because you don't know how to make ISK doing it just further shows your limited understanding of the game.

Have fun trying to troll people on the forums though.


You show your own limited understanding of the game, actually.

Scenario A: guy suicide ganks a badger and gets a BPO ~ not griefing.

Scenario B: guy suicide ganks a badger pilot 7 times and looses money ~ griefing.

The OP was about griefing. I guess for some people its a "tiresome" task to read and understand.


i have been suiciding mackinaws with such fury and laziness that i have been losing money (and a large amount of it to a highsec peasant like yourself, though piddling amounts to me), I am doing this solely based on malicious reasons and while it has caused a great profit based on my oxytope holdings early in the campaign I have since sold those and continued to fuiously grief ice miners to the greatest extent possible in game with no expectation of financial profit; through suiciding them, podding them, scamming them, and mocking them

is this sufficently clear for you

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#72 - 2011-12-13 23:04:42 UTC
what you, and other ****** rules lawyers, fail to understand is the concept of a 'catch-all'

the griefing rule exists to allow CCP to sweep out certain activities that, while not technically violating a specific rule, violate the spirit of the rules (or to allow for small exceptions to the general rule in sufficently serious situations)

what matters, therefore, is not the specific wording of the catch-all; what matters is the spirit of the rules. the catch-all exists to allow the gms to enforce the spirit of the rules despite a poorly-worded rule or a novel situation the rules do not address

the spirit of EVE is unquestionably that not only is it permitted to brutally savage you, your pod, mock you in local and scam you, it is the highest form of EVE; to shoot someone just for the hell of it

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Psychophantic
#73 - 2011-12-13 23:30:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Psychophantic
Weaselior wrote:
spirit of the rules


Must be a lawyer. I'll look you up next time I break a law.

In the meantime don't you have an ambulance to chase?
JamesCLK
#74 - 2011-12-14 01:00:52 UTC
When I see threads about this kind of thing it really makes me want to shoot badgers. Q_Q

/Drinks his own tears...

.......... AND THEN KESTRELS. AGAIN.


Can we harden the **** up please?

-- -.-- / -.-. .-.. --- -. . / .. ... / - --- --- / . -..- .--. . -. ... .. ...- . / - --- / ..- -. -.. --- -.-. -.- / ... - --- .--. / .--. .-.. . .- ... . / ... . -. -.. / .... . .-.. .--. / ... - --- .--.
Ladie Harlot
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#75 - 2011-12-14 01:05:38 UTC
Was it time for another Cipher Jones "High sec isn't safe enough" thread? According to the schedule it wasn't due until after Christmas.

The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.
Taiwanistan
#76 - 2011-12-14 03:13:23 UTC
cipher you are griefing me with the wearing no shirt and a monocle

TA on wis: "when we have a feature that is its own functional ecosystem of gameplay then hooks into the greater ecosystem of EVE as a whole, and it provides good replayability."
Mistress Lilu
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#77 - 2011-12-14 03:16:33 UTC
The Mittani wrote:
oxytopes at 1500, the bad thread index is spiking across the forums, it's a crisis of market democracy~

Mittani shut up...No one wants to here your dudu about isos..
you should be kicked from csm if you ask me..
Lady Spank
Get Out Nasty Face
#78 - 2011-12-14 05:35:07 UTC
No one asks scrubs from NPC corps for their opinions, get out.

(ಠ_ృ) ~ It Takes a Million Years to Become Diamonds So Lets Just Burn Like Coal Until the Sky's Black ~ (ಠ_ృ)
Ioci
Bad Girl Posse
#79 - 2011-12-14 05:43:23 UTC
My question is, if it's free for all why am I always buying new ships?

R.I.P. Vile Rat
Shivus Tao
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#80 - 2011-12-14 05:49:26 UTC
Cipher Jones wrote:
Lady Spank wrote:
While I don't really know why I am bothering to respond to this tiresome poster...

Suicide ganking IS profitable, just because you don't know how to make ISK doing it just further shows your limited understanding of the game.

Have fun trying to troll people on the forums though.


You show your own limited understanding of the game, actually.

Scenario A: guy suicide ganks a badger and gets a BPO ~ not griefing.

Scenario B: guy suicide ganks a badger pilot 7 times and looses money ~ griefing.

The OP was about griefing. I guess for some people its a "tiresome" task to read and understand.


For scenario B to be griefing you'd have to qualitatively prove that the target in question was the sole target and/or was not part of a corp or alliance subject to economic warfare and logistics interdiction and/or acted to reduce potential risk while in transit to his destination. If any of the above are false, then it's anything but griefing.