| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
|
kieron
   |
Posted - 2005.11.08 15:15:00 -
[1]
Every once in a while, something happens in-game that raises controversy. It may be a change to game mechanics, changes to set of weapons, or a wide range of other possibilities.
If you are a recent forum visitor, you would have noticed a number of threads about a recent pair of corporation name changes. The topic generated a lot of discussion, the actions reviewed and a decision made. The results of the decision can be found in a new Dev Blog.
As stated in the blog, this is not going to be a popular decision with a number of players. However, the decisions made will not be reversed. I would ask that petitions, forum posts, and e-mails cease.
kieron
Community Manager,
EVE Online
|
|
Dark Shikari
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 15:17:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Dark Shikari on 08/11/2005 15:18:37
\o/
First.
(Sweet, SAS is back!)
BTW, Oveur, I think we need a slight clarification on the naming policy. As people were pointing out, almost any name in EVE could be construed as violating it. The naming policy should be made a lot more concise and less general, so that it only includes what isn't allowed.
Also, why not allow corps to change their name to whatever they want, if the name is found to not be allowable?
-
Proud member of the [23].
Don't get the reference in my sig? Click it.
|
Professor McFly
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 15:19:00 -
[3]
2nd 
|
Quanteeri
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 15:20:00 -
[4]
 Originally by: Dark Shikari
Edited by: Dark Shikari on 08/11/2005 15:18:37
\o/
First.
(Sweet, SAS is back!)
BTW, Oveur, I think we need a slight clarification on the naming policy. As people were pointing out, almost any name in EVE could be construed as violating it. The naming policy should be made a lot more concise and less general, so that it only includes what isn't allowed.
Also, why not allow corps to change their name to whatever they want, if the name is found to not be allowable?
I could've had you beat. 
Go Fred!
<- Having a hard time adjusting to life in the Whorum Fore Retirement Home. |
Deja Thoris
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 15:22:00 -
[5]
Common sense prevailed.
GJ guys.
|
DEVILSENIGMA
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 15:22:00 -
[6]
Edited by: DEVILSENIGMA on 08/11/2005 15:22:49
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Also, why not allow corps to change their name to whatever they want, if the name is found to not be allowable?
From the blog: Originally by: kieron
The 4S corporation leaders are encouraged to contact the GM team for a new corporation name.
From this I think he means that 4S CEOs should contact the GMs to have them give a name they(4S) choose.
However at the time of petition I think it should be changed because it might something bad which needs to be changed asap.
--
My Blog |
Dark Shikari
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 15:25:00 -
[7]
Originally by: DEVILSENIGMA
Edited by: DEVILSENIGMA on 08/11/2005 15:22:49
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Also, why not allow corps to change their name to whatever they want, if the name is found to not be allowable?
From the blog: Originally by: kieron
The 4S corporation leaders are encouraged to contact the GM team for a new corporation name.
From this I think he means that 4S CEOs should contact the GMs to have them give a name they(4S) choose.
However at the time of petition I think it should be changed because it might something bad which needs to be changed asap.
Oh nice. CCP wins EVE.
-
Proud member of the [23].
Don't get the reference in my sig? Click it.
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 15:27:00 -
[8]
Quote:
The name change applied to the corporation SAS was done mistakenly and will be reverted. The change was applied without consultation of GMs in the position to make such a decision.
I think that could do with a little clarification.
______________________________________________
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
CmdrRat
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 15:34:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Avon
Quote:
The name change applied to the corporation SAS was done mistakenly and will be reverted. The change was applied without consultation of GMs in the position to make such a decision.
I think that could do with a little clarification.
A junior GM over steped his bounds and messed up. Fixed. Done. Over.
Let it pass.
_
____
_______
_________________________________________________________
|
Marcus Aurelius
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 15:35:00 -
[10]
Dissapointing blog.
When will we see the rest ?
|
Traxio Nacho
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 15:44:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Traxio Nacho on 08/11/2005 15:46:13
Quote:
The name change applied to the corporation SAS was done mistakenly and will be reverted. The change was applied without consultation of GMs in the position to make such a decision.
So someone came along and thought "hmmmm, i'm bored what can I do today lets change a corp name without speaking to anyone in authority first"?
Also if you look at least 50% of corp/charc names in Eve, are offensive/religous or poltical in some way
|
BillyBong2
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 15:50:00 -
[12]
CCP made the best of a bad situation. I do hope that an interal process will be set-up to keep this from happening in the future.
Many players put a lot of effort into their corp names and into their corps. Its a shame that something that has been effect for so long hasn't been enforced until now, so CCP got the backlash for not enfocing it from the very begining.
CCP did what they could in this situation.
B.
|
Sobeseki Pawi
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 15:51:00 -
[13]
Hopefully this won't be an issue again.
~Captain Cutie, HFS Event Horizon
Biomass fears me.
Sovereignty 2.0 |
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 15:53:00 -
[14]
Originally by: CmdrRat
Originally by: Avon
Quote:
The name change applied to the corporation SAS was done mistakenly and will be reverted. The change was applied without consultation of GMs in the position to make such a decision.
I think that could do with a little clarification.
A junior GM over steped his bounds and messed up. Fixed. Done. Over.
Let it pass.
You are probably right. Let's hope that's what happened.
______________________________________________
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Slink Grinsdikild
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 15:54:00 -
[15]
So does this mean other corporations are now up for review? 4S isn't the only corporation or character name ingame with a nationalistic tint.
As was said in the blog, double standards ftl. 
|
Virida
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 15:55:00 -
[16]
Can anyone please enlighten me about the 4S term? i for some reason dont find anything about it.
|
t3mpus II
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 16:00:00 -
[17]
Edited by: t3mpus II on 08/11/2005 16:06:23
The rules as stated in the EULA remain very general and if followed to the letter half of names in EVE (NPC, player characters, corps and ships) should be changed.
I think that for CCP's and their GMs own protection this part of the EULA:
Quote:
Reflect, glorify or emulate any real-world group or organization, terrorist society, criminal elements, discriminating organizations or their leaders and figureheads. This includes the use of names of real-world military, political or religious groups.
should change to this
Quote:
Reflect, glorify or emulate any real-world terrorist society, criminal elements, discriminating organizations or their leaders and figureheads.
This covers nearly all the "bad" names, without giving too much power to the GMs for wrong decisions as in the case of SAS. Some other category could be added if needed, but not all real-world groups or organizations.
As for 4S I find it also wrong, but it seems CCP have made up their mind. National symbols have been used in many atrocities in many parts of the world in history. They are not forbidden because of that. And a simple search on google for 4s, shows that many corporations and institutes are using it around the world, without minding.
This precedent could cause many trouble.
|
Harlequin D'Earth
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 16:02:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Virida
Can anyone please enlighten me about the 4S term? i for some reason dont find anything about it.
Threads here and here talk about the 4S issue and contain explainations.
As to the blog in question, CCP did the only thing they really could do in this situation - pure damage control to stop a huge downward spiral - albeit with heavy agression towards a community that for a breif moment spoke up with one voice about something.
Let's hope this issue isn't revisited.
|
s4mp3r0r
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 16:13:00 -
[19]
Edited by: s4mp3r0r on 08/11/2005 16:13:59
CCP itself relates to a hurtfull name (i do hope you get this but prolly won't).
I mean come on CCP this is a game !!!!!! NOT REAL LIFE !!
Isn't that what the GM's and ISD say when we get upset too much ?
So first off you get owned by having hurtfull names on mods, military RL connections with npc corps AND do not DO what you SAY yourself.
So, either change ALL the npc corps names that are offensive or you still loose this debate.
In the end you lost this one very hard, you lost another piece of my respect and I think (hope) the community. When you could have easily let this one go past WITHOUT any problem.
Man and to think i was planning to come to expensive Iceland to talk about this game I'm addicted to with the people that make it. OW well, I won't loose money over it, you will. Congrats.
Proud CEO of the I have a mirel yirrin corpse and do freaky things to it club.
Convo me ingame for details on how to join, and a free " I ♥ mirel yirrin Ö" Bumpersticker!! |
Blacklight
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 16:22:00 -
[20]
I agree with Marcus that this can of worms is still wide open and we need some more clarity on the outstanding issues.
1) Will the name change policy and wording of the EULA be revisited?
2) What are CCP doing about all the other corporations in game with national links in their names?
3) How are CCP instructing their GMs to handle these kind of petitions in the future?
4) What is CCPs view and policy towards grief petitions (which is what the majority of us believe both of the current cases to be inspired by)?
5) Are CCP going to implement any changes at character, corporation and alliance creation to help prevent these kind of issues going forward?
6) Please explain how you reconciled in your thought process regarding these name changes, the fact that the names had been in place for approaching 2-2.5 years with no issue against the fact that a player had petitioned them out of the blue.
....and probably a whole lot more.
The whole affair leaves a sour taste in my mouth and a lack of confidence in CCP's ability to satisfactorily deal with similar issues in the future. I think a degree of 'putting your cards on the table' is required to fully explain to us how you are going to deal with these issues going forward, some clarity and candour is all we are looking for.
Eve Blacklight Style
|
s4mp3r0r
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 16:26:00 -
[21]
lol @ damage control at yet another thread....
Some answers to all questions like Blacklights questions (very well put) are what is needed at the moment.
Discussion is the way forward CCP, I have given hope on you though, don't bother on my account(s)...
Proud CEO of the I have a mirel yirrin corpse and do freaky things to it club.
Convo me ingame for details on how to join, and a free " I ♥ mirel yirrin Ö" Bumpersticker!! |
Virida
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 16:29:00 -
[22]
Ummm, that type of nationalistic slogans exist everywhere, even norway got some, as everything for norway(alt for norge). Think iceland is the only european country without any sort or traces of slogans used by armed forces, namely since they never had any army.
Pff, i dont get this, not quite.
|
Traxio Nacho
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 16:34:00 -
[23]
Quote:
Reflect, glorify or emulate any real-world group or organization, terrorist society, criminal elements, discriminating organizations or their leaders and figureheads. This includes the use of names of real-world military, political or religious groups.
Surely having pirates themselves are against the EULA?
Btw nothing against pirates just chucking it in there, to show how so many things could be deemed under that quote
|
Marcus Aurelius
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 16:40:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Marcus Aurelius on 08/11/2005 16:46:14
I have to add that my earlier comment about this decision being correct (as to the cases at hand) is hereby retracted.
the decision made in the 4S case is wrong imo, seeing it is made on the basis if what seems to be lacking and subjective material.
|
Zeromancer
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 16:42:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Blacklight
6) Please explain how you reconciled in your thought process regarding these name changes, the fact that the names had been in place for approaching 2-2.5 years with no issue against the fact that a player had petitioned them out of the blue.
Has it occured to you and the others ranting on and on about this namechange that even though this name has existed for 2 years + that this was petitioned by a new player?
One that Joined this game recently and mabye is from Bosnia?
Mabye this was a person that got his family exterminated by those that wore this symbol on their uniform?
This name probably meant nothing to the GM's and ccp staff, or for anybody else in this game, but for this person it brought back all the horror from 15 years ago.
Just a thought.
For me personally it doesent matter what corps or alliances are called.
I can divide real life from a game.
But there are people out there that obviosly can't.
|
Marcus Aurelius
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 16:48:00 -
[26]
The question is do you act on the opinions of those people or not ?
After all, you are entering a grey area here, and even when it concerns a new player or not, the eula clause in question was available from the start.
|
s4mp3r0r
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 16:49:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Zeromancer
Originally by: Blacklight
6) Please explain how you reconciled in your thought process regarding these name changes, the fact that the names had been in place for approaching 2-2.5 years with no issue against the fact that a player had petitioned them out of the blue.
Has it occured to you and the others ranting on and on about this namechange that even though this name has existed for 2 years + that this was petitioned by a new player?
One that Joined this game recently and mabye is from Bosnia?
Mabye this was a person that got his family exterminated by those that wore this symbol on their uniform?
This name probably meant nothing to the GM's and ccp staff, or for anybody else in this game, but for this person it brought back all the horror from 15 years ago.
Just a thought.
For me personally it doesent matter what corps or alliances are called.
I can divide real life from a game.
But there are people out there that obviosly can't.
Well put.
Should their (one person) feelings count more than other people ? No, I'd say.
Especially NOT in a game. A game where you're supposed to ROLEplay.
Proud CEO of the I have a mirel yirrin corpse and do freaky things to it club.
Convo me ingame for details on how to join, and a free " I ♥ mirel yirrin Ö" Bumpersticker!! |
Raid
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 16:51:00 -
[28]
Yikes,
The dev blog only talks about the current name changes and does not adress the bigger picture. CCP needs to clarrify this before it gets even farther out of hand.
Read up for Blacklights points that covers most of it.
|
Blacklight
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 16:52:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Zeromancer
Has it occured to you and the others ranting on and on about this namechange that even though this name has existed for 2 years + that this was petitioned by a new player?
One that Joined this game recently and mabye is from Bosnia?
Mabye this was a person that got his family exterminated by those that wore this symbol on their uniform?
This name probably meant nothing to the GM's and ccp staff, or for anybody else in this game, but for this person it brought back all the horror from 15 years ago.
Just a thought.
Yes of course it has, which is partly why I am trying to understand CCP's thought process on this issue.
The other reason I am asking that specific question is because it sets a precedent regarding changing meanings in real life affecting in game labels.
For example, suppose someone creates the XX corp in game this week, at this time there are no major issues with an XX reference in the real world, no association with anything 'bad'. However in two years time a real life organisation called XX comes along and causes widespread death, destruction and misery. A new player joins the game in two years time, sees the corp name XX and petitions it..... CCP's response would be what??
That may not be the best example but it does relate to the 4S issue because before the war in Bosnia the 4S symbolism was probably considered harmless, now several years later to some people it is not.
It is consideration of these issues that prompt me to ask for some further clarification.
I'm not suggesting that CCP are right or wrong in their response to this so far, what I am suggesting is that their response is incomplete and that further clarification is required.
Eve Blacklight Style
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.11.08 16:54:00 -
[30]
" The catalyst for 4S' name change came as the result of some web research. SAS has not been referred to in the documents of any war crime tribunals. 4S has been referred to in numerous war crime tribunal documents, associated with Radovan Karadzic and atrocities commited by those under his command.
The survivors of that war have the right to not be reminded of what happened. "
Kieron, it is clear that CCP's heart is in the right place over this, but unfortunately this is matter for the brain.
'Internet Research' may well have shown that the term 4S was used in a war crimes tribunal, but in what context?
Are CCP suddenly (after 2+ years) experts in international relations, or was some hasty Googling done to save face?
As I understand it, almost every Serbian faction carried the 4S symbol. Were they all criminals? Are all Serbs criminals? Further still, are all Muslims victims?
This whole matter is very much in the public eye, and yet seems to have been a PR nightmare. Not because of the subject, but because of the way it was handled. Now we are in a situation where one corp has (imho unfairly) lost its name, and CCP's reputation has suffered for it. And for what? Who has been protected by this? What great right has been done?
If anything, this has probably caused more offence than the name ever could. CCP have shown disregard for, and ignorance of, a complicated issue. The handling of which has been quite disrespectful.
As community manager you have a resposibility to the community. The whole community. This farce has shown a side of CCP I really didn't think was there. This could have been a chance to learn about a different culture, a tragic turning point in 20th century history, and how much people value their national identities.
What it has become is a an example of how trying to be PC can make you more of a bigot than a racist.
Shame on you.
"The survivors of that war have the right to not be reminded of what happened."
Forgetting the past does not make it go away, it just leaves the door open for when it cares to return.
______________________________________________
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |