EVE Information Portal

Why didn't CCP remove this comment from the broadcast if they felt so strongly about it?

And is anyone actually shocked that Mittens is a ****? Personally I don't think he did anything out of character and would not punish him one jot for it.

I hope CCP keeps these thread logs for future reference. They will be invaluable to future sociologists as they research the Emergence of Society and the Discovery of its Boundaries in Virtual Communities at the Start of the 3d Millennium.

The threadnaughts generated by this one single drunken comment and the spill over in different media is a clear indicator of the importance that virtual worlds have in our lives and EVE Online, for us, in particular. It shows that we care about what the boundaries, and consequences, should be for emergent behavior in a virtual world. This is the meta game of the meta game.

The Mittani demonstrates the significance of EVE Online in our lives and how much we care about what goes on in and around the sandbox. For that reason alone CCP should make him an honorary citizen.

Mittens is EVE Online done right. He has offered an apology, that's all he should have done. The guy apparently lost 23 (really?) Mackinaws. So, either he doesn't care about losing ships or he's an idiot for insisting to be a target to people whom he knows are not going to let up. Space isn't big enough to move away from the guys coming after you?

Either way, and I've said it before, it's a bad decision to come into the sandbox while being depressed. It's a spaceships-on-the-internet game, it's not a mental health clinic. Stay away already.

What Mitten's drunk comment has shown especially clearly, is how people will use fake outrage over someone else's perceived hurt to further their own agenda. I'm careful about losing control of my mental capacities in the company of people I don't know, for precisely the reasons that we see unfold here, I have far less respect for those who rejoice at finally having the opportunity to stab the person [and his wife, and his dog] personally only for the political expediency of the day.

Don't bring the tiny violin to tell us how bad the pain emerging from your anal cavity hurts over what some guy said when he was drunk. Your faux rage is worse because you're not even drunk when you're doing it.

I like your avatar. I think that's about all I can say about the space above this post that doesn't violate the EULA or the TOS.

Your grammar was good too.

So self-serving, so sad that CCP let this happen and made real ISK doing so.

To be honest any other company would be getting sued by their client for breach of contract. You don't throw drunks at your own bar under the bus.

CCP published the behavior live. CCP violated their own TOS and their own EULA.

An individual is falliable. Corporations are supposed to insulate against that falliability, not expose it and then feign, "Oops!"

I maintain that regardless of the limited culpability of an inebriated individual for an off-color remark, a corporation should be held to much, much higher standards. By asserting that the broadcast was tantamount to their forums, they also assert that the broadcast was moderated in a way becoming of CCP. After all, this is true of their forums. A post such as this would have been wiped out. A FORUM ban may (or may not) have been given. But it would have been handled professionally.

This was not in any way, shape, or form "professional."

I still like your avatar.

EVE Online is Tears Online, now with tears by CSM and tears by voters.

You're welcome. It really is a fetching portrait.

My point was just to emphasize that the post you said "went down the drain" did no such thing.

That is a simple matter of perspective. And no, there are not just "two sides."

There are clearly at least three sides. Maybe four if you count the gaming press. Five with the coalition of whine themselves.

1. The Mittani
2. The Wis
3. CCP
4. Gaming Press?
5. Self-serving Rabble

It's obviously more complicated than "two sides."

I was really just trying to explain my response to your post.

How can your reply be that "you either totally missed my point about the sides, or intentionally misinterpreted it?"

I was trying to explain, in the context of your reply about the exceptionally good post about how self-serving many of the loudest voices truly are, why I would reply to your comment with what I did.

Then you changed gears and said that there were more sides and issues and that's fine too.

Now you're saying I apparently don't understand...or that I DELIBERATELY misinterpreted you? Oh really? I think you were quite freaking clear. Evasive, combattive, but clear. Look, all I'm saying is that the post about the self-serving rabble was a good one. I AGREE that there is (limited) individual culpability here. But the circumstances are a complete and total sham. That does not discount that a boundary was crossed. But not just by The Mittani. CCP crossed the exact same boundary for profit. The Mittani did it for lulz.

Apparently even you share a sliver of this sentiment, but you see fit to continue to berate any attempt I make at illuminating this shameful set of circumstances with hyperbole and fallacies. I understand that you may not disagree with everything I might have to say about this, OK? Is that any better? From now on I will preface everything I post with "I understand that some of you may or may not agree with each of these points, and that our collective agreements may also differ on other, as yet unmentioned points."

For somebody who likes to toss around the "last word" euphemism, you sure seem pretty obsessed with it to be honest.

[Edit: TL;DR: That with which you do or do not agree has no impact on the veracity of my claims, and their pertinence both to your specific posts, where quoted, and to the overall tone of this thread.]

Yes, but this person did not indicate that he wanted to take his own life, thus Mittani's comment were nothing but a bad joke presented at the wrong location. I'm pretty sure Mittani would not make this joke if the victim was standing on a chair in front of him with a rope around his neck. If we all were to tiptoe around each other in fear of making a joke with a subject which someone might be related to, humor would pretty much be dead. What is essential in this case is that a drunk person was standing on a stage wearing a ******* wizard-hat, so I would claim it to be pretty obvious that everything coming out of said person's mouth should be taken with a grain of salt. Mittani made a mistake, we all do, but that does not necessary make him an evil person with intent of inflict pain, chaos and misery upon everyone around him.

Also, what baffles me is that several people are referring to his conversation before the presentation as something that strengthens the case of his "conviction". If anything, this conversation proves the absolute opposite. It proves that his joke was not particularly directed at the victim in order to make him kill himself, but more like a declaration of his IN-GAME enemies.

I love the tastes of goon tears, they taste like cherry karma, please keep those tears coming goonies, they're soooo addictive.

"People pay for what they do, and still more, for what they have allowed themselves to become. And they pay for it simply: by the lives they lead." - Edith Wharton

1. Even idiots can count.
2. No.
3. Imagine all the whining from thousands of high-sec bears all barred from hauling/trading. Tears, galore!
4. So now you're suddenly good at math? Somehow I doubt it. See also: Tenal.