These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Proposal] CSM Member Real Life Names

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#181 - 2012-04-04 21:23:21 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Cearain, you're trying to make this proposal into something it's not. Are you really so dense that you can't understand it?

-Liang



If its so easy to understand what you are proposing, why not answer the questions I pose?

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
The Elusive Tekitsu
Doomheim
#182 - 2012-04-04 21:23:25 UTC
/signed

Some yadda yadda reiterated reason as to why I support this when others have clearly done so and/or better than I could've said so myself. Cool



Wha, wha, what? Didn't hear, see, mind, or cared to pay attention. Sleep is awesome
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#183 - 2012-04-04 21:23:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Liang Nuren
Prince Kobol wrote:

I was totally unaware what happened to Jade and again, I find it a totally reprehensible act, yet I also find it funny how many members of Goonswarm were on the forums saying what was said about Alex to be terrible, yet them themselves are just as bad.. double standards here I think....


That appears to have happened early 2008. Darius JOHNSON (CCP Sreegs) gave the 2009 Goonswarm Fanfest presentation as the CEO of Goonswarm. At the time, The Mittani was the Goonswarm Spymaster, but I'm not sure how much of a hand he had in any of that.

Notably, I contacted The Mittani to see if I could arrange to have that page taken down and it turns out that Goons don't actually own that site, but it is a rip of their internal wiki from early-mid 2008. I also sent an email to the addresses on record from whois, but they appear to be mum so far. The wiki rip as a whole is kinda useless at this late date, as even game mechanics have widely changed. There's several other really bad crossovers to RL trolling from that time, too (also documented on the wiki). Aside from Darius III, I'd say that I haven't seen that sort of campaign from Goons in a long time.

Quote:

As for Larkonis Trassler, before this post I had never heard of him. Did a quick google search and found he was kicked off the CSM for using insider information to make isk. None of the articles I found including CCP's official statement mentioned anything regarding NDA.


I didn't say that Lark broke the NDA - I said he was removed for misconduct. Which is linked to his real life name. Which could have similar RL implications.

Quote:

Lets be honest here, it makes no difference whether we know their rl names or not, personally I would not.

What I would like to add is, I do not know if Alex was a member of the Goons or was personally involved, or was in charge at the time those personal attacks were made on Jade, but if he was, then I would sincerely hope he now has a better understanding of what it is like being personally attacked and maybe, just maybe, he makes sure that whilst he is leading the goons, he does his best to make sure it doesn't happen again to anybody else.


I'd say that the game appears to have matured quite a bit since most of the major meta gaming scandals - and no matter what we as an Eve Community have proven ourselves to be just as Goonish as the old Goons, if not worse. Again: we have shown that we simply cannot be trusted with this kind of RL information.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#184 - 2012-04-04 21:24:59 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Cearain, you're trying to make this proposal into something it's not. Are you really so dense that you can't understand it?

-Liang


If its so easy to understand what you are proposing, why not answer the questions I pose?


Line your questions out in one single post in a concise format.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#185 - 2012-04-04 21:28:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
Elsebeth Rhiannon wrote:
Yep, sounds reasonable.

It might make sense to require CSM members to reveal any "public figure" alts, though. At least require that if you have been in the CSM before, you run under the same character name again. It would be weird if we could not use information on past performance in the CSM while making voting decisions. :)

Obviously, real identities will be revealed when people meet each other for RL, be it for CSM or for Fanfest or just local meets. But EULA/TOS already forbids you from posting that information to the forums, ingame, etc.



What do you mean forums ingame "etc"?

Are we able to post it on failheap challenge?

What about other mediums that have nothing to do with eve?

When massively reports the names of the csm members (because the csm showed up at a public event like fanfest) will all employees of massively have their eve accounts banned?

If people make their identity public by showing up in person with others it is sort of hard to unring the bell.

Is ccp supposed to police the internet for any mention of somones name and then try to track down who released it and then see if they have an eve account?

And why are they doing this again?

Is it because someone somewhere said something stupid to the guy who was telling people, who said they were considering ending their lives, to go ahead and kill themselves?

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#186 - 2012-04-04 21:31:15 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:

Also other then Alex and Eva, who else on the CSM have openly self promoted themselves outside of Eve?

Do you not find it funny that the only 2 CSM members that have had issues outside of the game, because of the game, have both been very vocal, very self promoting, always courting the media outside of Eve?

I personally believe that in both cases being on the CSM had very little to with anything.

As I said before, their real life names were already known on the internet because they chose to tell the world, not because they were on the CSM.


If you read the thread, Jade Constantine has some pretty serious issues spring up without being so vocal and self promoting... furthermore the constant accusation leveled at Darius III of breaching the NDA could potentially have RL implications. Larkonis Trassler also could be looking at similar problems.

-Liang



I don't know about Jade. But as far as the nda, if real life people are violating real life contracts, it can have real life consequences.

Why is this bad?

This seems good I mean that gives extra protection that csm will play by the rules.

If the only thing that happened was some sort of in game thing then csm would be more likely abuse the information they receive right?

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#187 - 2012-04-04 21:34:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Liang Nuren
Cearain wrote:

I don't know about Jade. But as far as the nda, if real life people are violating real life contracts, it can have real life consequences. Why is this bad? This is good right? I mean that gives extra protection that csm will play by the rules. If the only thing that happened was some sort of in game thing then csm would be more likely abuse the information they receive right?


You are confused. I'm not complaining about consequences for breaking real life contracts. I'm talking about how the CSM candidates and members having real life information available implicitly makes accusations of breaking the NDA a matter of RL importance. I'm talking about RL defamation, character assassination, and harassment derived from the RL information that's just given out for no reason at all.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#188 - 2012-04-04 21:34:17 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Cearain, you're trying to make this proposal into something it's not. Are you really so dense that you can't understand it?

-Liang


If its so easy to understand what you are proposing, why not answer the questions I pose?


Line your questions out in one single post in a concise format.

-Liang


I gave the questions in a clear format feel free to number them if that makes it easier for you. But most of the questions came in a context so I will not take them out of the context or try to recreate the context for you. Sorry.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#189 - 2012-04-04 21:42:59 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Cearain wrote:

I don't know about Jade. But as far as the nda, if real life people are violating real life contracts, it can have real life consequences. Why is this bad? This is good right? I mean that gives extra protection that csm will play by the rules. If the only thing that happened was some sort of in game thing then csm would be more likely abuse the information they receive right?


You are confused. I'm not complaining about consequences for breaking real life contracts. I'm talking about how the CSM candidates and members having real life information available implicitly makes accusations of breaking the NDA a matter of RL importance. I'm talking about RL defamation and character assassination derived from the RL information that's just given out for no reason at all.

-Liang


It should be a matter of real life importance. Its a real life NDA and real life accusations of its breach by real life people. This is a good thing because csm is a group of real life people who sometimes run based on their real life accomplishments.

If ccp wrongly defames anyone for violating the nda then they would be subject to the laws of the relevant jurisdiction.

I agree with your first sentence. I am confused what your issue with this is.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#190 - 2012-04-04 21:45:06 UTC
Cearain wrote:
What do you mean forums ingame "etc"?


CCP's forums are covered by CCP's EULA and TOS. This is readily apparent.

Quote:

Are we able to post it on failheap challenge?
What about other mediums that have nothing to do with eve?


It's worth mentioning that CCP has banned people for posts on 3rd party sites that claimed EULA/TOS violations. However, at this point you're basically talking about a systematic campaign of harassment and RL character assassination. I honestly can't believe I'm having this conversation with you. What in the hell makes you think its any more ok to do this about CSM members than it is about you or me?

Quote:

When massively reports the names of the csm members (because the csm showed up at a public event like fanfest) will all employees of massively have their eve accounts banned?

If people make their identity public by showing up in person with others it is sort of hard to unring the bell.


Its worth pointing out here that media, twitter, and blog coverage of Fanfest have almost universally referred to people by their in game names. I suspect there's a lot of reasons for this, but the biggest is probably because RL names are kinda meaningless to us.

You seem to be attacking the proposal on the basis that this is an attempt at security through obscurity, but I'm not sure that's a reasonable thing to do. Ultimately, there is A LOT of information that's out there but isn't easily accessible - if its accessible at all. Just because I showed up and had lunch with a member of VETO last year doesn't mean that suddenly everyone on the internet knows his real name and where he lives.

Quote:

Is ccp supposed to police the internet for any mention of somones name and then try to track down who released it and then see if they have an eve account?
And why are they doing this again?


They aren't, and I'm very confused as to why you keep talking about systematic campaigns of RL character assassination, defamation, and harassment as if it's a reasonable thing for people to be doing.

Quote:
Is it because someone somewhere said something stupid to the guy who was telling people, who said they were considering ending their lives, to go ahead and kill themselves?


No, there's a lot of reasons that the current proclamation of RL information isn't necessary - or wise.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#191 - 2012-04-04 21:47:31 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Cearain wrote:

I don't know about Jade. But as far as the nda, if real life people are violating real life contracts, it can have real life consequences. Why is this bad? This is good right? I mean that gives extra protection that csm will play by the rules. If the only thing that happened was some sort of in game thing then csm would be more likely abuse the information they receive right?


You are confused. I'm not complaining about consequences for breaking real life contracts. I'm talking about how the CSM candidates and members having real life information available implicitly makes accusations of breaking the NDA a matter of RL importance. I'm talking about RL defamation and character assassination derived from the RL information that's just given out for no reason at all.

-Liang


It should be a matter of real life importance. Its a real life NDA and real life accusations of its breach by real life people. This is a good thing because csm is a group of real life people who sometimes run based on their real life accomplishments.

If ccp wrongly defames anyone for violating the nda then they would be subject to the laws of the relevant jurisdiction.

I agree with your first sentence. I am confused what your issue with this is.


You are confused. Again. I'm not talking about CCP accusing people of breaking the NDA. I'm talking about PLAYERS accusing people of it. Here in Eve, the propaganda machine plays a particularly center role in crushing your foes - and systematic campaigns of in game character assassination are absolutely expected. But people go a bit far sometimes with those campaigns, and can cause irreparable harm when needlessly linked to someone's real name.

Seriously, Jade Constantine and Darius are pretty well perfect examples of why we should not be proclaiming RL information just for ***** and giggles.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#192 - 2012-04-04 22:30:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Petrus Blackshell
I think people are missing the point of Liang's proposal. A tl;dr of it is:

Quote:
Currently, CSM candidates have to announce their real life identities and locations to the Eve public. As recent events have shown the Eve public will not handle this information in a mature manner, it is proposed that future CSM candidates do not have to publicly reveal their RL identities.


That's it. No more, no less. These are not any things included in the proposal:

  • CCP not knowing the candidates' names. CCP has every interest in the RL identities of the CSM, for purposes of NDA, making sure the community is not being deceived by one guy with multiple characters, etc.
  • Making it EULA-illegal to mention someone's RL identity. By all means, if you want to talk about some Bob Smith from New York, or to be on real first-name basis with your corpmates, feel free. RL harrassment remains illegal, though.
  • CSMs can't tell anyone their name. CSMs can tell their RL identities to anyone they want. The proposal simply means that they do not have to tell the whole internet publicly.
  • Liang's secret agenda to get onto the CSM. Ultimately whether you trust a CSM or not is (hopefully) based not on whether their last name is "Smith" or "Adams" or "Petrusson". It's based on their views and trustworthiness in game and as a player. If Liang, or Mittens, or Chribba decides to run for CSM with a no-name alt, that's perfectly fine: no credibility means no election success.
  • No accountability. It is perfectly legal to endlessly harass the CSMs in game, to blast them on forums and news sites, and (gasp) even to not vote for them in the next election. It is not legal to threaten them IRL, or to verbally or physically assault them. Liang's proposal makes the latter illegal behavior harder to achieve, and doesn't do anything at all to hamper the former. No legal accountability is removed.


Seriously. I'm starting to think most people can type but not read or think, and that only helps solidify Liang's argument that the Eve community is not worth being trusted with RL details.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Killer Gandry
The Concilium Enterprises
#193 - 2012-04-04 22:53:14 UTC
Signed
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#194 - 2012-04-05 01:55:16 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
I
  • Liang's secret agenda to get onto the CSM. Ultimately whether you trust a CSM or not is (hopefully) based not on whether their last name is "Smith" or "Adams" or "Petrusson". It's based on their views and trustworthiness in game and as a player. If Liang, or Mittens, or Chribba decides to run for CSM with a no-name alt, that's perfectly fine: no credibility means no election success....

    • Trustworthiness "in game"? Surely you jest. Mittani got the most votes in the history of csm due to him being trustworthy in game?

    Real life careers and skills have come into play in past elections. Seleene, mittani and pretty much all candidates have at least mentioned what they do and tried to spin it as to why that means we should vote for them. How much of an impact did these claims have? I don't know. But it comes up. Real life skills are important for csm members.

    If this proposal works players will have absolutely no way to investigate the accuracy of the players claims about this. Perhaps that means players won't get elected unless they do indeed give their real names. In that case this proposal won't change anything.

    Again I don't really care that much. There are allot of odd players here. CCP promotes the game as a way to pursue unhealthy grudges against others. I mean the one ad had a guy plotting for months or even years to avenge the loss of his cruiser that probably cost a dollar. Thats not normal healthy human behavior. In that ad the odd player gets his revenge in game. What if his in game plan failed? We are left to wonder what that sort of person does then?

    Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
    Cearain
    Plus 10 NV
    #195 - 2012-04-05 02:10:07 UTC
    Liang Nuren wrote:
    Cearain wrote:
    What do you mean forums ingame "etc"?


    CCP's forums are covered by CCP's EULA and TOS. This is readily apparent.

    Quote:

    Are we able to post it on failheap challenge?
    What about other mediums that have nothing to do with eve?


    It's worth mentioning that CCP has banned people for posts on 3rd party sites that claimed EULA/TOS violations. However, at this point you're basically talking about a systematic campaign of harassment and RL character assassination. I honestly can't believe I'm having this conversation with you. What in the hell makes you think its any more ok to do this about CSM members than it is about you or me?
    -Liang



    Why is posting someones name on a forum such as failheap "character assassination?"

    Your just getting a bit looney with your concerns about "character assasination."

    And what is so wrong with real life laws that protect real life people? There are laws to protect people in real life and there are laws to protect free flow of information. The free flow of information is often important so that people can make informed decisions in an election.

    Your proposal won't prevent people from giving their name if they want. It just makes it so people don't have to give their name. So i don't really have a problem with proposal. I think the whole proposal is just overly dramatic.

    Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
    Cearain
    Plus 10 NV
    #196 - 2012-04-05 02:18:00 UTC
    Liang Nuren wrote:
    Cearain wrote:
    Liang Nuren wrote:
    Cearain wrote:

    I don't know about Jade. But as far as the nda, if real life people are violating real life contracts, it can have real life consequences. Why is this bad? This is good right? I mean that gives extra protection that csm will play by the rules. If the only thing that happened was some sort of in game thing then csm would be more likely abuse the information they receive right?


    You are confused. I'm not complaining about consequences for breaking real life contracts. I'm talking about how the CSM candidates and members having real life information available implicitly makes accusations of breaking the NDA a matter of RL importance. I'm talking about RL defamation and character assassination derived from the RL information that's just given out for no reason at all.

    -Liang


    It should be a matter of real life importance. Its a real life NDA and real life accusations of its breach by real life people. This is a good thing because csm is a group of real life people who sometimes run based on their real life accomplishments.

    If ccp wrongly defames anyone for violating the nda then they would be subject to the laws of the relevant jurisdiction.

    I agree with your first sentence. I am confused what your issue with this is.


    You are confused. Again. I'm not talking about CCP accusing people of breaking the NDA. I'm talking about PLAYERS accusing people of it. Here in Eve, the propaganda machine plays a particularly center role in crushing your foes - and systematic campaigns of in game character assassination are absolutely expected. But people go a bit far sometimes with those campaigns, and can cause irreparable harm when needlessly linked to someone's real name.

    Seriously, Jade Constantine and Darius are pretty well perfect examples of why we should not be proclaiming RL information just for ***** and giggles.

    -Liang



    Again i don't know what you are talking about with Jade. But Darius had some unknown people on the internet accuse him of breaching a contract. To the extent they had good evidence to support their claim then Darius may and perhaps should have real life consequences. To the extent they had little or no evidence to support their claim Darius does not have real life consequences. Real Life is not that bad. The CSM are a bunch of thirty something people who can take care of themselves.

    Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
    Liang Nuren
    No Salvation
    Divine Damnation
    #197 - 2012-04-05 02:31:24 UTC
    Cearain wrote:

    Why is posting someones name on a forum such as failheap "character assassination?"

    Your just getting a bit looney with your concerns about "character assasination."

    And what is so wrong with real life laws that protect real life people? There are laws to protect people in real life and there are laws to protect free flow of information. The free flow of information is often important so that people can make informed decisions in an election.

    Your proposal won't prevent people from giving their name if they want. It just makes it so people don't have to give their name. So i don't really have a problem with proposal. I think the whole proposal is just overly dramatic.


    The entire context of this conversation is based around the RL ramifications of using someone's real name. You continually make statements like:

    Cearain wrote:

    Again I don't really care that much. There are allot of odd players here. CCP promotes the game as a way to pursue unhealthy grudges against others. I mean the one ad had a guy plotting for months or even years to avenge the loss of his cruiser that probably cost a dollar. Thats not normal healthy human behavior. In that ad the odd player gets his revenge in game. What if his in game plan failed? We are left to wonder what that sort of person does then?


    How in the **** do you expect me to take your comments? You are shifting goalposts like a ************ here and I'm about a quarter inch from blocking all your posts as being from an obvious troll.

    -Liang

    I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
    Liang Nuren
    No Salvation
    Divine Damnation
    #198 - 2012-04-05 02:32:26 UTC
    Cearain wrote:

    Again i don't know what you are talking about with Jade. But Darius had some unknown people on the internet accuse him of breaching a contract. To the extent they had good evidence to support their claim then Darius may and perhaps should have real life consequences. To the extent they had little or no evidence to support their claim Darius does not have real life consequences. Real Life is not that bad. The CSM are a bunch of thirty something people who can take care of themselves.


    Stop troll poasting long enough to read the thread at least.

    -Liang

    I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
    Cearain
    Plus 10 NV
    #199 - 2012-04-05 03:19:58 UTC
    Liang Nuren wrote:
    Cearain wrote:

    Why is posting someones name on a forum such as failheap "character assassination?"

    Your just getting a bit looney with your concerns about "character assasination."

    And what is so wrong with real life laws that protect real life people? There are laws to protect people in real life and there are laws to protect free flow of information. The free flow of information is often important so that people can make informed decisions in an election.

    Your proposal won't prevent people from giving their name if they want. It just makes it so people don't have to give their name. So i don't really have a problem with proposal. I think the whole proposal is just overly dramatic.


    The entire context of this conversation is based around the RL ramifications of using someone's real name. You continually make statements like:

    Cearain wrote:

    Again I don't really care that much. There are allot of odd players here. CCP promotes the game as a way to pursue unhealthy grudges against others. I mean the one ad had a guy plotting for months or even years to avenge the loss of his cruiser that probably cost a dollar. Thats not normal healthy human behavior. In that ad the odd player gets his revenge in game. What if his in game plan failed? We are left to wonder what that sort of person does then?


    How in the **** do you expect me to take your comments? You are shifting goalposts like a ************ here and I'm about a quarter inch from blocking all your posts as being from an obvious troll.

    -Liang



    It means I am a reasonable person and acknowledge some reasons for your proposal even though I think it is mostly based on undue drama.

    But in the end I guess I sort of wish ccp wouldn't promote the game as something for people who are not healthy enough to simply get over the loss of a spacepixel cruiser. That would be one way to address the issue I raise.

    Your solution is to sort of just to accept that the people who play this game are so unhealthy ccp shouldn't even publish the names of the csm candidates for fear they will be attacked. Anything is possible in life. So yes it can possibly happen. But I think you are being overly dramatic with this stuff.

    I would prefer that ccp encourage healthy people to play the game instead of just taking the line that no one in this game should ever know your real name or you are likely to be attacked. Its just a difference of approach.



    Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
    Seamus MacMartin
    VNM Biological Survey Corps
    #200 - 2012-04-05 03:23:03 UTC
    Signed.

    CCP, don't reveal Real Life names of CSM candidates. This should increase the personal safety of the CSM member and limit liability for any persons concerned.Cool

    CSM candidates as players can reveal their RL names any time they want anyway.

    "Rudeness is the weak man's imitation of strength." - Eric Hoffer

    "A warrior may choose pacifism. Others are condemned to it." - Unknown