Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Caleb Ayrania
Gallente TarNec
|
Posted - 2011.06.08 14:00:00 -
[91]
Social ostracizing is redundant in EVE. You ban one character and dont know anything about how many alts are around, and even if it was the scammers main.
I believe that the whole argument is flawed. With an open policy if anyone is in contact with questionable characters, they can be warned by the rest. Also there is the whole discussion of redemption. More than once a scam has been avoided either be warning or redemption "rethinking"..
On VVs comments If Brock or any other scammer comes to the channel gloating and trolling, that is acting like an arse and kick is relevant, even ban if he or she persist in the nagging and acting badly.
I wont entertain the Ad Hominems.
Tycoon wannabe go here: SCC Lounge cocktails and Dreams. |
Brock Nelson
Caldari T2 Technologies Unlimited SRS.
|
Posted - 2011.06.08 14:02:00 -
[92]
Oh please, I hardy bring the scam up and most people bring it up to ask questions about it.
Funny this get brought up for the first time since big time scammers have been in there such as Bad Bobby, Riethe, etc etc and its not only until I scam, somebody cries about the non-ban policy?
|
RAW23
|
Posted - 2011.06.08 14:20:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Brock Nelson Oh please, I hardy bring the scam up and most people bring it up to ask questions about it.
Funny this get brought up for the first time since big time scammers have been in there such as Bad Bobby, Riethe, etc etc and its not only until I scam, somebody cries about the non-ban policy?
Well, if you remember it was an issue that was raised in relation to Riethe when he was made a mod for the channel (causing the scc/signatures split). But the conclusion of that debate (a little bit over a year ago) was that it was unacceptable to put a known scammer who had a history of using the lounge to scam in a position of authority over the lounge but he was still welcome to use it as a social area. Which seems to be the policy Caleb is continuing here.
Personally, I think the current policy is a good one. Whilst I would advocate for business ostracism for scammers (no loans, collateralised or otherwise; no third party services available to them etc) and I would also think that social ostracism would have some minor detterent effect, actually implementing such a social approach would be rather too harsh for in-game 'crimes' since it is debatable how much of the social interaction that goes on is 'in-game interaction' despite the location of the chat window. I mean, would you also refuse to speak to a scammer at fanfest?
|
Sovie Panda
|
Posted - 2011.06.08 14:25:00 -
[94]
Edited by: Sovie Panda on 08/06/2011 14:26:17 Yeah Caleb your Business sense is really strange. If you are trying to grow the channel at least. It's clear many of your 'customers' do have an issue with it. I hope harboring scammers is its own reward for you.
You have a strange definition of gentleman as well. Have you ever met one? Do you know what they are?
|
Brock Nelson
Caldari T2 Technologies Unlimited SRS.
|
Posted - 2011.06.08 14:35:00 -
[95]
Originally by: RAW23
Originally by: Brock Nelson Oh please, I hardy bring the scam up and most people bring it up to ask questions about it.
Funny this get brought up for the first time since big time scammers have been in there such as Bad Bobby, Riethe, etc etc and its not only until I scam, somebody cries about the non-ban policy?
Well, if you remember it was an issue that was raised in relation to Riethe when he was made a mod for the channel (causing the scc/signatures split). But the conclusion of that debate (a little bit over a year ago) was that it was unacceptable to put a known scammer who had a history of using the lounge to scam in a position of authority over the lounge but he was still welcome to use it as a social area. Which seems to be the policy Caleb is continuing here.
How does this pertain to me if I'm not in any position of authority in the channel?
|
RAW23
|
Posted - 2011.06.08 14:41:00 -
[96]
Originally by: Brock Nelson
Originally by: RAW23
Originally by: Brock Nelson Oh please, I hardy bring the scam up and most people bring it up to ask questions about it.
Funny this get brought up for the first time since big time scammers have been in there such as Bad Bobby, Riethe, etc etc and its not only until I scam, somebody cries about the non-ban policy?
Well, if you remember it was an issue that was raised in relation to Riethe when he was made a mod for the channel (causing the scc/signatures split). But the conclusion of that debate (a little bit over a year ago) was that it was unacceptable to put a known scammer who had a history of using the lounge to scam in a position of authority over the lounge but he was still welcome to use it as a social area. Which seems to be the policy Caleb is continuing here.
How does this pertain to me if I'm not in any position of authority in the channel?
It doesn't. The bit that applies to you is the bit after the section you bolded. My point was that this discussion has been had before and that Caleb is just being consistent with the position he arrived at over the Riethe issue.
|
Tutskii
|
Posted - 2011.06.08 15:39:00 -
[97]
Posting to confirm that I support removing Brock from the channel. He acts like an asshat, scams, and when he had mod powers, blatantly abused them.
The choice to keep him there changes my opinion of Caleb. Fortunately, he lost moderator powers (recently) but his continued presence is only used to gloat at those he scammed and be a general pest.
For it to be a gentlemen's club, entrance should be restricted to gentlemen. Brock is the homeless guy, half drunk, with no shirt, that keeps stealing drinks, change, and whatever he finds while spitting in people's faces.
By his own admission, I was personally defrauded by him, in the channel. That should cover the scamming in the channel rule.
-Tutskii Go make a new disaster, that's what I'm counting on. You're someone else's problem, now I only want you gone...
http://www.eveonline.com/iNgameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1516147mcvs![/u |
Brock Nelson
Caldari T2 Technologies Unlimited SRS.
|
Posted - 2011.06.08 15:41:00 -
[98]
Edited by: Brock Nelson on 08/06/2011 15:41:47
Originally by: Tutskii when he had mod powers, blatantly abused them.
When? If this is in regards to the Edwin thing, were you even there?
Quote: By his own admission, I was personally defrauded by him, in the channel. That should cover the scamming in the channel rule.
When?
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2011.06.08 19:19:00 -
[99]
Quote:
Also there is the whole discussion of redemption. More than once a scam has been avoided either be warning or redemption "rethinking"..
Redemption is possible, but only after the involved person admits the wrong doing, takes his responsibilities and commits to change.
Before that time, by doing nothing, we can't talk about redemption but of laissez faire.
Auditing | Research | 3rd Party | Collateral Holding | EvE RL Charity |
Companion Qube
Minmatar Electron Conservation Inc SRS.
|
Posted - 2011.06.08 20:16:00 -
[100]
Oh hey look! Drama in SCC-!
...Who'd have guessed?
...they see me trollin', they hatin' ♥
|
|
Lazarus Vex
|
Posted - 2011.06.08 20:43:00 -
[101]
... Well... Everyone seems to have some good taste in Dubstep music lol
|
Jerry Pepridge
|
Posted - 2011.06.09 00:15:00 -
[102]
Edited by: Jerry Pepridge on 09/06/2011 00:15:40 So basically. Anyone that scams Is welcomed to join your gentlemen's club, as long as they "behave themselves". You quite happy to allow the newer MD crowd access to scammer's so as they can hear 'how easy it was'.
This does very little for the channel's reputation as a "gentlemen's club" as asshats like brick nubson are allowed to be there.
IMO if you scam, you deserved to be an outcast, & fed to the wolves simple as that.
Its the same thing as why brick nubson is still in his carebear alliance SRS, as from now on any offering that is related to them is going to be labelled scam, due to asshattery.
tl:dr pull your head out of your ass, fence sitters are weak minded.
Yours Trolly,
Mr Misty.... |
Sojelly
|
Posted - 2011.06.09 01:11:00 -
[103]
Well I don't know much about EVE yet. But I do know about people. From reading this thread I think I have an ok idea of what went on.
Theoretical Sitch: You girlfriend sleeps with your best friend.
Caleb strikes me as the type of guy who would try to remain friends with his best friend and keep his relationship with his girlfriend.
People are different that is why I think others do not understand what he is doing.
|
flakeys
The Great cornholio's
|
Posted - 2011.06.09 08:32:00 -
[104]
Originally by: Sojelly People are different that is why I think others do not understand what he is doing.
There is a difference between understanding why caleb allows it and approving of it
Brock told me , when i told him it amazed me he was in scc the day after the scam , that he could easily get in with an alt and no one could stop that.I then made the same theory that there is a distinction between a scammer being able to get into scc and allowing them into scc.
HUGE difference in my book.
|
Caleb Ayrania
Gallente TarNec
|
Posted - 2011.06.09 11:57:00 -
[105]
Just to follow up a little bit on the endless arguments on why I should change my policy. (Which I wont)
When your playing a football match (thats soccer to aX the pond), and you miss a clear goal chance shoot. There are two ways to react. One is acknowledging the shot and your fault in missing something that obvious. This can be a HUGE problem say if its in a major match. So how can you react then? Well usually you have to fake it or make up an excuse. You "pretend to trip", do a show actress and draw a drama card from the defender, or you say there is something wrong with the new fifa approved ball. Fact remains your try to get out of the responsibility.
If you acknowledge the failure you risk being blamed, and "shunned", if you use the blame tactic you might get called on it, and risk being even more ostracized. So there is no one way out. Its down to choice what risk you are willing to take.
In MD and business its much the same. I keep the lounge open for people because I dont trust mine or others judgement in what the situation was. I judge the person, and by that standard I might ban ricdic, for perpetually being an arrogant and obnoixious character, but Brock or Riethe are generally nice people. Are they criminals or not? Its not my call we have no judgemental system.
If however we came together OFFICIALLY and created something like that I would maybe reconsider my policy. I believe strongly in a justice system by peers, but not by the mob mentality with torches and pitchforks.
A small sidenote. Should our "scam rule" also apply to market prices? To contracts? To unwarranted aggression, to can flipping? What level of crime is accepted? I see EVE as PVP. IPO scams are a trust based con, and that is why people get so emo. Its rubbing their own stupidity in their face, and they dont like being reminded. On a market scam noone can see you made a mistake, so that is acceptable, getting ganked you can claim afk, or some other circumstance. In investment you really have little out and have to stand by the bet and misplaced trust. I say man up a bit and just take the hit. I have personally lost everything in real life to the financial crisis, and ofc I voice that and blame "the system".. but I acknowledge the fact that my rage at the system is rather tainted by my personal bad choices and inability to get out in time.
Tycoon wannabe go here: SCC Lounge cocktails and Dreams. |
Rafia Landras Audeles
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.06.09 15:03:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Caleb Ayrania A bunch of blame the victim nonsense.
Yep, that girl wearing the mini skirt was totally asking for it.
Nothing like blaming the victim to justify doing nothing, but hey, you scammed Ji, who was also like, totally asking for it, so who are you to judge others huh?
Pathetic.
|
Rhivre
Caldari TarNec
|
Posted - 2011.06.09 15:41:00 -
[107]
Edited by: Rhivre on 09/06/2011 15:45:28
Originally by: Rafia Landras Audeles , but hey, you scammed Ji, who was also like, totally asking for it, so who are you to judge others huh?
Pathetic.
Its a shame you didnt bother to read what Ji actually said before posting that, but hey, as I said before, dont let anything get in the way of a good story.
Edit: it is also totally worth mentioning that one of the most vocal people on this topic is a moderator in the lounge.....so could quite easily do what they wanted anyway
|
The Illustrious Juden
|
Posted - 2011.06.09 15:53:00 -
[108]
This is in response to Caleb
You can argue that being ostracized isn't a very good deterrent. But doing the opposite and welcoming a scammer back with open arms, laughing and joking together seems like almost an encouragement.
Quote:
I dont trust mine or others judgement in what the situation was.
I can say I'm pretty sure and I don't claim to be an expert but Brock scammed.
Quote: A small sidenote. Should our "scam rule" also apply to market prices? To contracts? To unwarranted aggression, to can flipping? What level of crime is accepted? I see EVE as PVP.
Surely, you see the difference between running a fraudulent offering on MD and can flipping.
You go on to say that it was the victim's own personal failing which caused them to be scammed. Sure, they could have not invested but in this situation there is a real outside cause, the scammer. What bothered me the most is that is how scammers falsely justify their actions, a perspective you seem to share.
|
Tutskii
|
Posted - 2011.06.09 16:05:00 -
[109]
I will join in with my opinion.
Caleb, I am disappointed. There is no contesting the fact that Brock is a scammer. And the "they had it coming" rhetoric is downright offensive.
Someone said "I hope harbouring scammers is its own reward" I'll echo that sentiment.
I don't know what is the positive you see from having Brock dangling E Trade's money (for instance) over him every day and generally being a ****, but you have a rather wide view of what a "nice person" is.
Protip: Its the people like Flakeys who are leaving your "gentlemen's club" because of your actions.
But that is just my two cents.
Go make a new disaster, that's what I'm counting on. You're someone else's problem, now I only want you gone...
http://www.eveonline.com/iNgameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1516147mcvs![/u |
Hexxx
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2011.06.09 16:52:00 -
[110]
Originally by: Caleb Ayrania Just to follow up a little bit on the endless arguments on why I should change my policy. (Which I wont)
When your playing a football match (thats soccer to aX the pond), and you miss a clear goal chance shoot. There are two ways to react. One is acknowledging the shot and your fault in missing something that obvious. This can be a HUGE problem say if its in a major match. So how can you react then? Well usually you have to fake it or make up an excuse. You "pretend to trip", do a show actress and draw a drama card from the defender, or you say there is something wrong with the new fifa approved ball. Fact remains your try to get out of the responsibility.
If you acknowledge the failure you risk being blamed, and "shunned", if you use the blame tactic you might get called on it, and risk being even more ostracized. So there is no one way out. Its down to choice what risk you are willing to take.
In MD and business its much the same. I keep the lounge open for people because I dont trust mine or others judgement in what the situation was. I judge the person, and by that standard I might ban ricdic, for perpetually being an arrogant and obnoixious character, but Brock or Riethe are generally nice people. Are they criminals or not? Its not my call we have no judgemental system.
If however we came together OFFICIALLY and created something like that I would maybe reconsider my policy. I believe strongly in a justice system by peers, but not by the mob mentality with torches and pitchforks.
A small sidenote. Should our "scam rule" also apply to market prices? To contracts? To unwarranted aggression, to can flipping? What level of crime is accepted? I see EVE as PVP. IPO scams are a trust based con, and that is why people get so emo. Its rubbing their own stupidity in their face, and they dont like being reminded. On a market scam noone can see you made a mistake, so that is acceptable, getting ganked you can claim afk, or some other circumstance. In investment you really have little out and have to stand by the bet and misplaced trust. I say man up a bit and just take the hit. I have personally lost everything in real life to the financial crisis, and ofc I voice that and blame "the system".. but I acknowledge the fact that my rage at the system is rather tainted by my personal bad choices and inability to get out in time.
I'll make this simple.
Self admitted financial fraud through the use of financial instruments is a bannable offense from the channel. No judgement, just ban them if they admit it.
If you provide support, no matter how trivial, for financial fraud through financial instruments then you undermine the market itself by decreasing trust in very viability of those financial instruments.
|
|
flakeys
The Great cornholio's
|
Posted - 2011.06.09 17:07:00 -
[111]
If i kill you in low-sec i made no promise not to engage If i jetcan i made no promise not to kill you If i set up a sell order wich has a 10000% profit i did not tell you that was the right price for the item and it would be wise to buy it And if i gank your hulk in empire i did not promise i would not
NOW if i make an ipo/investment offer on the other hand and scam ... DUH.
But enough , allready letting myself more in this waste of time discussion ... been there before so enjoy.
|
Jerry Pepridge
|
Posted - 2011.06.10 00:46:00 -
[112]
lol dude acts like an in-game channel makes him some kind of god.
Make another channel Qube & ban this moron from joining it for ze lulz.
Yours Trolly,
Mr Misty.... |
Mu-Shi Ai
The Chrysalis Group
|
Posted - 2011.06.10 05:46:00 -
[113]
There's no reason, other than because you enjoy the RP of having "bad guys" hanging around, to let admitted and well known scammers hang out in SCC. Should it really matter that Brock is "generally [a nice person]"? Shouldn't we just assume that's an extension of the con game? Once scammers no longer risk even their reputations in the carrying out of a scam, the community is basically just asking to be ravaged. That's kind of sad.
|
Chesty McBadTroll
|
Posted - 2011.06.10 05:58:00 -
[114]
I don't know why anyone things Brock Nerdson is anything but a butthurt MD nerd.
|
Caleb Ayrania
Gallente TarNec
|
Posted - 2011.06.10 06:13:00 -
[115]
Maybe jumping to the conclusion that I was talking about the scammed and not the scammer would make the above allegory easier to understand. Maybe I should have made that clearer..
The lounge is a public place. end of discussion.
ccp is not granting us tools for justice.. and players arent creating one that has any real and lasting effect. What is a permaban anyways? Lifetime imprisonment, and/or Ostracizing?
Clubs, organisations etc can have rules. Also I would never have dealings with these "known" trust breakers, and would warn others. Can you ban former Enron leadership access to clubs, bars and cafes?
This crime and punishment theme is irrelevant. I believe in second chances, and as stated I think what is needed is the development and acceptance of businesses going sour and loosing investments. The current attitude from business makers is do or die, and no grey inbetween. I claim this is based on the behaviour and ostracizing attitude of the MD. OFC there are "for the lulz" and griefers, but there arent left much room to the in between intended and unintended defaulting.
Tycoon wannabe go here: SCC Lounge cocktails and Dreams. |
Sovie Panda
|
Posted - 2011.06.10 06:26:00 -
[116]
I understand now. Caleb and Brock = same person.
|
Mu-Shi Ai
The Chrysalis Group
|
Posted - 2011.06.10 06:34:00 -
[117]
But there's no ambiguity here. When somebody admits to having scammed, ostracizing them does not constitute a judgment. It's just an acceptance of, and response to, reality.
What you're really saying, then, Caleb, is that you don't want to accept the reality that Brock, or whomever else, is a scammer. That tag--one that Brock has placed upon himself, and which therefore does not need to be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt by some nonexistent game mechanism--apparently does not carry over to SCC. Or rather, you don't want it to carry over, for whatever reason.
That is problematic.
|
Liberty Eternal
|
Posted - 2011.06.10 08:32:00 -
[118]
SCC = Scam Club Clique
|
Graic Valente
Gallente Valente Galactic Enterprises
|
Posted - 2011.06.10 08:51:00 -
[119]
Originally by: Liberty Eternal SCC = Scam Club Clique
What does it actually stand for?
|
Rhivre
Caldari TarNec
|
Posted - 2011.06.10 08:55:00 -
[120]
Originally by: Graic Valente What does it actually stand for?
Secure Commerce Commission...the "corp" that runs the markets.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |