|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |

Galdor
The Orzhov Syndicate
4
|
Posted - 2013.06.18 15:53:00 -
[1] - Quote
I support the OP on this issue because it is sorely being abused. After 10 years of playing this game off and on not once did I receive a bounty until last week.
Are those who have bounties bad players? No, I never assumed that. I have always had a "live and let live" policy towards other playstyles. It is only natural though that others should respect other playstyles as well, otherwise the game ceases to be a sandbox. I say that because a sandbox allows for all styles, not only one. Themeparks do that BS.
I have a positive security status and am not even a combat pilot, yet I receieved bounties for defending other players in chat who were being trolled by a group of players that were clearly getting their kicks at the expense of others and instigating arguments.
Of course it's against the rules to name names so I will leave it at that. The main point is, unless a person has a negative security status and has been flagged by a corp as a criminal (feature that should be added if a former corp member commits a crime) then it should NOT be so easy to harass non-combat pilots without cause or mere words in chat with bounties. |

Galdor
The Orzhov Syndicate
4
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 03:50:00 -
[2] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Malcanis wrote: The point is, he's playing the game his way.
This over all else. Example, I have begun asking that people add to my bounty and writing thank you notes. I am playing by a different set of goals than others might. The hardware store sells you a hammer, they do not follow you home to make sure it is used only on nails and thumbs. CCP made the bounty system, it is up to you what you are going to hit with it. m
Your analogy involving the hammer is incorrect. The reason is because anything and everything these days has warning labels on them stating SPECIFICALLY as to how you are to use or not use the item to avoid lawsuit.
I was also told by GM Morticia that the current uses of the bounty system is not overly liked. So I would not automatically assume CCP agrees with the common abuse of the bounty system just because they added flexibility to it.
|

Galdor
The Scope Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 14:03:00 -
[3] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Galdor wrote:I was also told by GM Morticia that the current uses of the bounty system is not overly liked. So I would not automatically assume CCP agrees with the common abuse of the bounty system just because they added flexibility to it. What abuse exactly? I keep seeing people say this, but then they fail to show any. I also have not seen any indication CCP dislike how people are using the bounty system. In fact quite the opposite is the case. I can cite example if required. Merely saying someone said something, just doesn't cut the mustard.
If you had bothered to read the thread instead of jumping to conclusions, you would have noticed that I already had previously posted my example of abuse on page 3. |

Galdor
The Scope Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 14:12:00 -
[4] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Galdor wrote:Mike Azariah wrote:Malcanis wrote: The point is, he's playing the game his way.
This over all else. Example, I have begun asking that people add to my bounty and writing thank you notes. I am playing by a different set of goals than others might. The hardware store sells you a hammer, they do not follow you home to make sure it is used only on nails and thumbs. CCP made the bounty system, it is up to you what you are going to hit with it. m Your analogy involving the hammer is incorrect. The reason is because anything and everything these days has warning labels on them stating SPECIFICALLY as to how you are to use or not use the item to avoid lawsuit. But that's to stop you from suing the hammer maker, not to make you use the hammer in approved ways at the risk of being sued. Do you think corp thieves should be eligible to have bounties placed on them? What mechanism do you suggest that qwould allow a thief to be bountied that wouldn't expose every corp CEO and director to being bountied for their normal operations?
My suggestion is that CCP needs to not be half-assed about any kind of law enforcement system for one thing.
In order for a corp to be able to honestly label a player as a corp thief, there needs to be a mechanic in place for member voting to pass by majority vote to decide if a corp member is a 'thief.' It doesn't need to require for 100% of the corp members to pass a vote due to random game times, but it would need at least 75% of a corp vote imo.
There are plenty of MMOs that are able to add all kinds of guild functionality, so a voting system solely to convict a corp criminal is far from an unusual concept. |

Galdor
Electric Sun Associates
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.27 16:35:00 -
[5] - Quote
Mag's talks about posting serious replies and thorough statements, yet when people have done this time and again, his only retort is "lol"? That's called losing any credibility in the discussion is what that is.
Both myself and others have stated clear and logical reasons why it is absurd to allow bounty placement to be done for such fickle and idiotic reasons.
Lastly, Mag suggested reading the ToS rules to Revillee, yet rules 1-3 clearly show reasons why the abuse of bounty placement should be halted by CCP.
There is ZERO reason why anyone should be able to place a bounty on another player due to mere words typed in chat that they didn't like. It is absurd. |

Galdor
Electric Sun Associates
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.27 23:43:00 -
[6] - Quote
Mag, you already proved you could care less about discussing the topic with any sense of logic so taking the ToS literally out of context without understanding the wide scope it covers, does not further your efforts in trolling the topic.
As I have said, i already posted earlier in the thread how the bounty system was being abused, and I will not re-post my statement to enable your laziness so feel free to read it yourself. |

Galdor
Electric Sun Associates
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.28 03:07:00 -
[7] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:Galdor wrote:As I have said, i already posted earlier in the thread how the bounty system was being abused, and I will not re-post my statement to enable your laziness so feel free to read it yourself. So far your argument is based on, "I feel putting a bounty on someone for reasons I don't comprehend or like is wrong." The basic counter argument that Mag has made (that I also made earlier in this thread) is that the reason for putting a bounty on someone is purely subjective. You can't honestly state that "X" reason is a "good reason" for putting a bounty on someone as another person will feel the complete opposite. This entire argument we are having is case and point of that. YOU feel that putting a bounty on someone because you don't like them is a bad reason... WE feel that it is completely acceptable.
False, I never said I don't comprehend why those abusing the bounty system post bounties. You are using an informal fallacy to base your argument on. I understand very clearly that those abusing the bounty system are doing so to satisfy their own ego in order to bully other players into not speaking freely in chat or enjoying the game as it is without being harassed by those exploiting an under-developed feature of the game. Whether I like it or not is irrelevant and is not inductive of whether the bounty system is in need of being fixed or not.
I also can very clearly state that 'X' reason is a good reason for putting a bounty on someone because bounties are not something that EVE invented, it is based on a real system in the real world. And guess what, it's not legal in that system to place a bounty on someone for something someone says either.
Again, I am not the only one who obviously feels this way about the problem or the thread wouldn't exist. Just because you lack the decency or a sense of morals to see the problem, doesn't mean anyone has or will ever put up with it. Why you added that last part "WE" I am not sure since you are only one person and have zero authority to speak for anyone but yourself. |

Galdor
Electric Sun Associates
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.28 15:16:00 -
[8] - Quote
@Shafluffers:
"Whether people put bounties on others for their own egotistical reasons is not something you can say is "bad" though. It's a perfectly valid reason to those people who do it. "
Wrong again, those exploiting the bounty system are using it as an excuse, not a reason. There is a very big difference. That being that a reason is explained through purpose as a valid course of action. While an excuse is a petty effort to remove liability or blame for a course of action. Which fits the exploiters more perfectly since they care nothing for the repercussions of their actions.
"There is a man who lives in California who would beg to differ with you on that point."
You have some nerve trying to post that as any kind of proof of anything given that if you actually looked into that issue, you would find recently it is being pushed that he is being imprisoned wrongly and will be released because it is a FACT that his video, not audio as you are trying to twist it, had nothing to do with the attack in Benghazi. You really were stretching this point trying to claim he was imprisoned for something he said which btw is scheduled for release since he was actually only there for a probation violation, NOT a bounty.
Actually I have not gone wrong on the topic of morality mechanics because it has been proven time and again, that when given too much reign, players are not responsible enough in a sandbox not to try to create total anarchy which in every single instance in history causes a collapse of civilization which is not what CCP wants or the game will end up being shut down due to the lack of "carebears" since the ignorant masses of PvPrs don't comprehend it takes both types of gameplay to sustain the economy.
That being said, it does inf act need morality control to some degree through mechanics in the game. You mention being able to place a bounty on something offensive which is a best case scenario at best. What I am referring to is the ego-maniacal many who place bounties on other players on a pure whim for reasons even less substantial than that.
There is always a correct version of morality, this is not a discussion about religion so don't bother taking it there. There are universal right and wrongs that must exist in every culture and society, this has been proven time and again. http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/cultural-relativism.htm
@Mag:
I am not side-stepping anything because for whatever reason you like reading me type the words, go read it yourself and quit being lazy?
ToS like many legal documents are created in the effect that they cover a large scope and can never be 100% specific especially in MMOs given that content is always being created, therefore it has to be flexible or it is useless. In the event such as an exploit of the bounty system is not used to serve any kind of justice and instead is used as a tool to bully and pressure other gamers to circumvent their playstyle and language to suit the desires of the aggressor it becomes pure harassment and therefore in violation of rules in the ToS.
When there are no clear checks in place to prevent a player from placing a bounty on someone due to something typed in chat, that is not a legal system, that is anarchistic at best.
When I said 'X' can be chosen as a good reason, I am basing that not off of what I think, I said it is based off of RL systems, systems in place in RL that actually work effectively. As far as CCP and bounty invention goes, legality is not apart of it naturally, but legitimacy certainly does.
Actually yes people posting about a problem does in fact by default induct that there is a problem whether you chose to acknowledge it or not. Your denial of the problem does not make something stop existing or make it any less valid. Granted it might not be as popular of a topic as it should be considering the widespread ramifications this exploited system will cause for EVE in the long run, the ignorant many are good at avoiding the obvious until it's too late usually.
And just as you avoid acknowledging the issue, you still avoid seeing or bother reading in this instance my past posts in this specific thread since you keep misquoting me and taking words out of context. So that being the case since you insist on belligerence in not bothering to effectively debate the topic I will not be replying or acknowledging your future comments, Mag.
I have been in the game for over ten years (beta too), I doubt I am the one in the wrong game. Sandbox =/= Anarchy |

Galdor
Electric Sun Associates
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 02:27:00 -
[9] - Quote
@Shahfluffers:
"See... now we're going in circles again."
No, you are going in circles because you keep trying to simplify the issue by thinking I am breaking this down as right and wrong. You have posted that same comment several times in this thread. It doesn't become more true or fit the argument the more times you post it. I never said anything about right and wrong at all. What I did say was there is a difference between excuse and reason. Right and wrong deal in ethics which are culturally specific which again, is not what I am talking about. Morality mechanics are based on morals, which are universal across cultures.
Again, when I use the terms valid, I am not basing that off of my personal opinion, you keep trying to make it sound like I am pulling this perspective out of thin air. Valid is based off of real systems in the real world that have worked for centuries. This is not the wild west where a person is allowed to shoot a person for snoring. EVE is supposed to be the far future where we supposedly have advanced considerably.
About the man imprisoned over the film, I already stated you were incorrect about his status. He was imprisoned over a violated probation only, there was no bounty and he is already scheduled for release in the near future. Therefore it is not a valid point in this discussion.
"Except the bounty mechanics won't cause all that (or have caused any of that in the 7-8 months they have been active)."
There have already been trends starting where as I have stated on page 3 that no one can freely say anything in any chat channel without the extremely high chance they will receive a bounty and have their gameplay affected because of it. This has happened to lots of players and some have left the game due to it. Some think that is fine and they are ignorant for it because anyone who knows EVE, knows dam well it takes both Carebears and PvPers to make EVE work. Without one or the other and the game would go stagnant and the market would crash completely.
Your not agreeing with me does not make a correct version of morality that is universal , "un-universal." It proves nothing except that you apparently support anarchistic beliefs and go against what is universally acceptable, which is of course your right to play how you choose.
However, CCP has shown through their videos, lore and novels time and again that New Eden is about a hopeful future in that humanity will be able to rise from the ashes and survive the harshness of current events. Wild West idiotic bounty placement for mere words exchanged hardly sounds like the hopeful future for humanity according to CCP's vision. |

Galdor
Electric Sun Associates
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 18:44:00 -
[10] - Quote
@Shafluffers:
Apparently you are abandoning the debate since you refuse to acknowledge the commonly known difference of dictionary-defined English words as well as disregarding cited argument points recognized by any accredited university.
My points are based on official sources and citations proving the current bounty system is anything but that. It is currently only a means to enable bullying.
Not to mention it is disturbing to hear current "criminals" in EVE to boast giving bounties to other wannabe pirates as if it were a level of achievement. That reminds me of the RL gang use of tattooing a teardrop to represent how many cops they have killed as a sign of achievement. It is disgusting to say the least.
Also, based on CCP's own bullet statements of what they had intended to provide with the changes to the bounty system, none of it was accomplished in it's current state. The following is a quote from CCP's notes on those changes:
--To support Bounty Hunting as a career choice, preferably in a way that makes it possible for newer players as well as veteran players to get involved.
The only way new players are actually involved is in being the targets for the veteran bounty hunters.
--To build upon the theme of the expansion of strengthening ties between actions and consequences, including making the company you keep a factor in that
Words in a chat box are in no way an "action" to be resolved through consequences, neither does that chat induct that a player keeps "bad company."
--To give people faith that the money they put into the bounty system has a fair chance of actually leading to the retribution the funds were intended for
As proven above, there is nothing "fair" about the current bounty system.
http://www.eveonline.com/retribution/bounty-hunting/
As far as the other comments you posted on, I already disproved your falsely quoted articles and I already made it clear I have read the lore, as well as reading the novels.
The society in the novels by the way does not support anarchistic actions and those types of personas are not nearly as common as you seem to think they are.
Which also by the way, as I have pointed out, no sandbox that tries to embrace anarchistic ideal fully lasts. There has to be a balance between playstyles which I also already stated clearly. Therefore, I am not forcing my ideals on anyone, so try re-reading my comments. Again, anyone who truly understands how things work in EVE, knows it requires a balance of playstyles.
EVE cannot have anarchy or it will, not if, will fail in the long run. |
|

Galdor
Electric Sun Associates
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.30 16:43:00 -
[11] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Good lord, are people still wasting time with this?
Since when is making the use of the assembly hall for voicing matters that concern players a waste of time? Never. That came off as a very biased comment from a CSM that is allegedly to be unbiased on player comments in a forum section such as this imo.
Fairness was brought up because fairness was in CCP's direct quote is why, RoAnnon.
It boggles my mind also in that CCP just last year made it very clear after the panel bullying incident that CCP does not endorse harassment in any form, yet the new bounty system is exactly that, a bully enabler.
GÇ£I want to reassure you that CCP in no way condones the harassment of players, especially those who suffer from depression or suicidal thoughts, as we understand the possible consequences of such abhorrent behavior,GÇ¥ CCPGÇÖs Ned Coker said." |

Galdor
Electric Sun Associates
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.31 04:02:00 -
[12] - Quote
@Nikk:
Essentially you are right. Those exploiting the current bounty system are using it as a weapon against those they cannot openly attack as freely as they would like since those players they target do not normally stoop to their level.
|

Galdor
Electric Sun Associates
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 02:54:00 -
[13] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Galdor wrote:@Nikk:
Essentially you are right. Those exploiting the current bounty system are using it as a weapon against those they cannot openly attack as freely as they would like since those players they target do not normally stoop to their level.
You have succintly described what a bounty system is for.
No. You have proven you did not read CCP's own description of what the bounty system is intended for at the link I provided and quoted. That being that fair retribution for actions leading to consequences based on those actions. None of that is being done when bounties are falsely placed based on mere words posted in a chat channel.
This right here is the main problem of these forums. There is entirely too much childish rhetoric thrown about by many who apparently are not able to understand the significance of properly cited comments made and their implications validating a person's point.
How can anyone expect anything to be resolved via the CSMs here if they themselves cannot perform as CCP has stated the purpose of a CSM is. All I have seen so far is biased, snide remarks that come off as them remaining indifferent toward the playerbase as a whole that may or may not have voted for them.
"The purpose of the CSM is to represent society interests to CCP. This requires active engagement with the player community to master EVE issue awareness, understanding, and evaluation in the context of the greatest good for the greater player base."
http://community.eveonline.com/community/csm/ |

Galdor
Electric Sun Associates
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.02 03:27:00 -
[14] - Quote
Thanks for bumping the thread so this topic stays in the spotlight where it belongs, despite the condescending, short-sighted and immature comments. |

Galdor
Electric Sun Associates
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.03 14:22:00 -
[15] - Quote
The only thing the last two are proving is that EVE has a large population of illiterate goons. Like I said, attacking the arguer instead of disproving an argument logically, is called an informal fallacy, i.e; ad hominem. Feel free to pick up a dictionary some time or even take an English college course. |

Galdor
Electric Sun Associates
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 20:15:00 -
[16] - Quote
Malcanis, why do you assume I would expect you to take this important issue to EVE? I never said that once. Thankfully, you are not the only CSM and that your 'term' is limited.
Especially given the fact I already pointed out, you do not seem to even comprehend the stated purpose of a CSM that CCP posted and you severely lack any kind of people skills on top of the inability to comprehend the difference between substantial and subjective proof apparently.
It is also mildly interesting, how other certain posters continue posting and helping to bump the thread. Even though they already proved as well that they are apparently not able to accept substantial proof in light of their own anarchistic ideals not falling in line with the written lore and EVE novels.
Granted, there are seedy types within the lore of EVE. However there is nowhere near the large unregulated population of anarchists that those few claim exist in the lore. I would post links to quotes of that evidence, but those posters have proven they have an inability to concede being wrong so far and insist on pure trolling at this point.
Regardless of the trolls and the egomaniacal Malcanis, it does not make the issue of exploited bounties magically vanish. Especially given the fact the number of players that post on these forums are nowhere near the representative consensus of players who play EVE Online. I have been in EVE for over ten years now, staying the course and playing the same way based on the same ideals, and I will be here another 10 years as well doing the same.
This bounty issue is only a recent problem with the latest expansion, so it is not irreparable and certainly not wholly representative of the usual nature of EVE based on it's short exposure in-game so far. |

Galdor
Electric Sun Associates
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.05 19:23:00 -
[17] - Quote
@mynnna:
I would not expect you to agree with anything that is not anarchistic given either of your history. As far as respecting the sandbox goes, as I pointed out previously, no other MMO has ever been able to sustain profitability by allowing anarchistic behavior to rule supreme in a game. Every single other open-pvp that started out as anarchistic has had to revamp their game completely to allow for a balance of playstyles.
@Malcanis:
My posts have been about facts and objective logic, not subjective opinion and personal condescension which discredits any sort of valid argument. If by using proper grammar and fundamental tactics of stating an argument is considered classic, then I accept the compliment.
Fortunately as I pointed out yesterday, CSM 'terms' are limited. It also helps that since CCP is so apt to re-adding useless ship spinning features to the game, fixing the exploited bounty system is definitely more likely to occur inevitably due to it being a much more useful feature in the preservation of the playstyle population balance.
Additionally, the fact that none of the naysayers still haven't admitted the fact, as I said earlier, that EVE requires a balance of 'carebears' and 'pvpers' is also added proof in your inability to grasp the facts. As a result of the new bounty changes, it only caters to the pvpers who want to force everyone to pvp and offsets the balance of the playstyles in EVE. |

Galdor
Electric Sun Associates
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 16:14:00 -
[18] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Galdor wrote:They are solely basing their dislike for my right to post here in the forums as an excuse to abuse the system. This is an excellent use (not abuse) of the bounty system, perfectly mirrored in the real world, as if that matters. Or are you going to claim that's a "subjective opinion" too?
It is not a claim, it is a fact that you obviously do not understand what a subjective opinion is.
Simply put, you are stating that persecuting a player for posting an opinion is in line with CCP's objective for the bounty system, which is false. That is because an opinion is not an action and therefore not in line with CCP's own statement on the purpose of the bounty system.
Nowhere in the definition of the word 'action' does it state that an opinion is an action, which is what I am being persecuted for. Which by the way is illegal in most countries if you want to make false claims that persecution in the real world for an opinion based on existing laws and freedoms is somehow in itself illegal is absurd to say the least.
As far as the continued threats go on about adding bounties go, those only further prove my stance that the system is being exploited based on the facts, not opinion. Just as I keep having to bring up, CCP themselves said that one of the purposes of the change in the bounty system was:
"To build upon the theme of the expansion of strengthening ties between actions and consequences, including making the company you keep a factor in that"
http://www.eveonline.com/retribution/bounty-hunting/
That being the case, an opinion, just to help refresh your memories, is NOT an action based on the dictionary definition. http://oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/action
Therefore an opinion should not be allowed to be used in EVE as an exploited premise to seek retribution. To deny the facts is pure ignorance and anarchistic. |

Galdor
Electric Sun Associates
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 19:16:00 -
[19] - Quote
"The Assembly Hall Section is there to encourage debate of the issues being presented." -CCP Eterne
There is nothing encouraging for any kind of debate here when players are spamming condescending remarks and blatantly trying to harass my character in-game via the bounty system.
As far as placing bounties on someone being any kind of badge of "respect" is complete nonsense. I highly doubt those who continue to waste isk by adding bounties on my character in-game are trying to show respect for my opinion.
Here is the official statement by CCP last year on player harassment after the fanfest:
"I want to reassure you that CCP in no way condones the harassment of players..." -CCP public relations and social media specialist Ned Coker
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-03-26-ccp-launches-investigation-after-eve-online-fanfest-panel-accused-of-mocking-suicidal-player
I have played EVE for over ten years and will continue to not be idle about the recent bounty system changes. Regardless of the insistent trolling by a vocal minority, bounties based on forum posts are childish, not validly based on CCP's own bounty purpose statements and certainly not encouragement for players to post future posts. |

Galdor
Electric Sun Associates
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 19:14:00 -
[20] - Quote
@mynnna:
I would not expect a person who cannot use proper capitalization of a name to understand the definition of the word 'action.'
It is unfortunate how everyone ignored the fact that CCP Eterne quote about this forum section being intended to be used to encourage debate on topics. Condescension and immaturely mocking remarks have no place in any kind of credible debate.
Threatening me with further bounties only proves you and others are trying to harass me based solely on my opinion which has never been stated in any CCP official capacity about the bounty system. Never mind the fact that harassment of players outside of a game is in fact considered illegal in many states in the US and internationally recognized by many countries including UK and Iceland specifically.
I am sure many of the more mentally unstable here might find that humorous, since I doubt they know much about anything involving legalities outside of taking note if they are within the legal drinking age in their region.
However the fact remains, consistent harassment outside of a game against the same person repeatedly online is something to not be taken lightly. Especially when certain people make the effort to search down a character in-game based on their name in a forum outside of a game.
http://www.wisegeek.org/what-are-internet-harassment-laws.htm |
|

Galdor
Electric Sun Associates
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 14:46:00 -
[21] - Quote
Apparently these forums are officially useless and the "Assembly Hall" is a joke. It is also apparent that with the new bounty system changes, anyone who has an honest opinion is only a target here for egomaniacal children with god complexes.
Which is unfortunate for EVE and the writers who took the time to develop the novels and game environment that has nothing to do with the anarchistic mentality that those here on the forums are intent on trying to establish in-game.
What this means for me is that I am washing my hands of this farce of an assembly hall forum that clearly has no intentions of an intelligent debate unless it suits the hate-mongering bigots that infect this game. This does not mean however that I will give up playing EVE after 10 years of investing time in it, despite the bullying tactics of my current bounty.
On a final note, the bounty system name should be changed to something more fitting. Because a bounty infers justice and hunting down a person based on an opinion that did no harm to anyone or anything, is anything but justified. Instead, the bounty system would be better off being called a 'hit list.' |
|
|
|