I've posted on these forums a few times over the years, and I've never encountered anything but hostility, negativity, insults, etc. What the fk is up with this? I've been vocal in many gaming communities, but have never have I felt so hated as I do on these forums.

You need to add "except F&I". F&I is inarguably worse than here.

Without a doubt.
Posting the same old and tired idea, that was posted only a day or so ago. Week in, week out.

Its SMALL D!CK SYNDROME.

Period. That's what it is...people are so devoid of any common decency online because they can be billy badasses and hide behind their computer screen and you can't do anything about it. They know that. They embrace that. Its vital to who they are.

It doesn't matter if you're a decorated war veteran, a highly respected police officer, a buddhist monk, a nun or even a member of the peacecorp.

It doesn't even matter if you're a nice respectable person who tries his very best in life. The insecurity of these people will override any of that. They are insecure, whiny and tiny d!ck syndrome bearing losers.

They are also cowardly. I promise you that they would not be that way to your face. They would especially not be that way to your face with a carry permit and a firearm strapped to your side. That's the way they think.

Me? I'm a nice guy. I'll help you any way I can even if we've never talked before. If you were broke down on the side of the road, I'd stop and help you. If you were hungry and had no money for food, I'd buy you something to eat.

So I'm not going to be mean, rude, hateful or nasty to you on the forum. I don't suffer from small d!ck syndrome. So don't let these people get to you man...this is all they have. They get to be billy badasses online and that's how they grind through their grueling, meager miserable and pathetic lives.

(watch...someone will quote this post and attempt to refute it because their teeny, tiny, smidgeon of glory pressed up against their jeans will command them to do so screaming AVENGE ME! AVEEEEEENGEEEE MEEEEEE!)

I honestly don't find this community to be hostile at all. Sure shitposting is often nuked from orbit, just to be sure, but legitimate threads are often debated with mutual respect (well...mostly).

The problem with Eve-o is that people keep posting the same stupid crap over and over. If people just observed the following rules of eve-o, they might find that we forum folks aren't such a bad lot:

1. Grr goons is so 2012. Just stop. Yes they own New Eden, we know. Instead of making the 400,000th post about how much you hate goons, just use the search function and add your tears to the collective.

2. No. Ganking is not too easy. No it doesn't follow that the ganker is a psychopath in real. And no, not a single person here gives 2 sh*ts that you lost your 7th untanked hulk this week.

3. Drones are fine. HTFU.

4. WIS is dead. It doesn't matter what you think. It isn't happening.

I may have missed a rule or 2, but basically, by following these simple steps you will find that our community becomes a lot less negative and hostile. Enjoy!

Now that is hilarious. Especially since you used a word that breaks the forum rules, and is thus censored.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, but you are the biggest hypocrite I have ever encountered.

Are you a high-sec miner? Just curious.

(Protip: if you're posting a diatribe about people being d-bags on the forum, it usually helps your case to NOT be the biggest D-bag in the entire thread.)

Thief in game, thief out as well.

Who is it? Other than you that makes the choice to treat other human beings like dirt and garbage?

If you're capable of mistreating other people on the internet, how are you not capable of doing so in person as well?

Eve is a sandbox. It offers choices. You don't have to choose to want to pvp. When you choose to force unwanted pvp on someone, that's what defines you as negative, lesser person.

You're not engaging in combat with equally skilled competitors who are also seeking a challenge. When you engage someone who chooses not to live the same life you do, when you enforce your needs and wants on others at the expense of their selves, is when you define yourself as a person who isn't worthy of respect.

Your choices aren't mine. Mine hurt no one, yours hurt others.

Yet eve is a sandbox. The game comes with choices. Just like out of game, in game you get to choose how you wish to experience it.

I know full well that if I go to an ATM to withdraw $200 and I get mugged, that it was a POSSIBILITY. Just because it was a possibility, it happening does not make it "right".

Also, being a sandbox, I do not wish to remove your ability to continue assaulting people. If you wish to portray yourself as a low, self serving, despicable person, by all means, knock yourself out. What ever floats your boat, blows your hair back, bananas, whatever.

But you also have to respect my right, in this game of choices, to choose to believe that your desire to be mean to others, based on you making those choices in a game that is all about choices, is a perfectly valid platform for me to make an assumption on your character as a person.

But you don't have to choose to kill him. The objective of EVE isn't necessarily kill everyone and everything you see. You make the choice of what your objectives are, based upon those choices, it outlines who you are as a person.

I don't. Because you see, I don't assume things and I am not turning this into a personal battle about my out of game morality. Like Jonah and other people arguing against you, I'm not a combat pilot (My killboard is laughable) and my skills are focussed on refining, mining and industrial applications. I'm primarily a hauler.

So no, I don't steal from others any-more than you do when you sell your Veldspar for less than they do. Or when I undercut somebody by .01 ISK, just like you.

But, I also support the play-style of EVE Online and when there are people who can create content in a game like Burn Jita, Hulkageddon or similar that forces me to think, adapt and play smartly I can love that and enjoy it without needing to try and paint some kind of picture of them as sociapaths because of my inability to comprehend that this is a video game.

Because you're selfish, when you don't have to be. You are the product of your choices. You don't have to be mean spirited. You don't have to kill everyone you meet. Choosing to do so is a representation of you, because it's you making the choice to do so.

You are the product of your choices.

Because the dark and bitter game play aspect is only a choice. You don't have to subject others to it. I'm not even saying the choice should be removed, the choice makes your "dark and bitter" game choices make mine look that much better. It makes you a terrible person because you don't have to do it. You're choosing to make it happen.

You are making the choice.

To a prey animal, a predator must be evil.

I am aware of this. At present it pleases me to confront him with his personal failings.

I firmly believe in this quote.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

Because you obviously care enough to try and prove me wrong. I've influenced you.

Simply by stating the obvious:

People who do bad things are bad people.

You've felt it necessary to challenge me. Why? Well I don't know what you tell yourself, but my perception is because you can't handle someone making judgements.

Like you feel that your mentality is so strong, correct, and righteous that anyone doing something out of the realm of what you feel should be the norm needs to be corrected by you.

Now I can understand that there's a potential similarity in what it is I'm doing. But here's my defense:

I'm not trying to correct the actions being done that leads me to believe they are bad people. I'm simply stating my interpretation of what I observe.

I don't even think I initially made a statement towards anyone in particular. I made over arching statements addressed to whomever wished to see, and people chose to respond to me directly, which imo, justified my responding to their directly addressing me.

Did I start any sentences or quote you first at all saying: Vran DalEsra! I am requesting an audience!

No, in fact it was the other way around. I made a statement, and you all came to me.

He already has. He subscribed.

You can establish my nature to yourself all you want.

At the end of the day, I'm not the one I'm perceiving to be pathetic because they feel it necessary to impose involuntary pvp on those looking to play a game based on choice via other avenues.

I mean, it's pretty simple. . . . there's more to the game than PvP, but your choice of imposing it on those who wish to avoid it are applauded? lol, that's funny.

People who do bad things are bad people. Internet doesn't make you another person. You are still you.

everyone needs to calm down and have some cake

Separating fantasy from reality.

Lets have an example.

I'm mining in my procurer in .6 space. You're flying a, really awesome ship capable of blowing up a procurer.

You see me, blow me up. I lose about 40 million worth of ship and parts. You gain 10 million isk.

You chose to blow me up for your personal enjoyment. To know that you're hurting my progress. You had no motivation other than your belief that I'm being hurt by you.

Now, that's you and I. Your choices to inflict pain on me when I'm operating in a fashion that demonstrates no desire to inflict pain on you.

What's fantasy about you choosing to try and hurt someone?

lets say I send a virus to your computer and cause your EVE files to corrupt. Now you have to spend like, Lets just say another 4 hours of your time to redownload and reinstall. I just wasted 4 hours of your time. I didn't have to, but I did.

How is my choice different than yours? If you didn't want me to send you a virus, you wouldn't have connected to the internet.

Stealing is stealing

Value is value.

You guys seem to have super short memories so I'm going to say this again, since I feel I have to because alot of you keep approaching this like I'm trying to take away your shiny toy.

You should be allowed to be an ******* to people in EVE. I'm not asking CCP to establish a system, or change anything to prevent you from being whoever you want to be.

I'm only stating that you have to accept that I and anyone else who wants to, is allowed to think less of you for your choices.

I'm sorry if that upsets you. I wish you weren't the type of person who became upset easily over others opinions. I wish you were more secure in yourself.

You can think whatever you want to think. I'm only stating that you have to accept that I and anyone else who wants to is allowed to think less of you for thinking stupid stuff out loud. I'm sorry if that upsets you. I wish you were more secure in yourself.

So the creators of Eve are hostile?

I Ebayed the VCR, but fell in love with your collection of Tea Cosies.

YOU'RE NOT HAVIN UM BACK EVAAAAA!!!

I like the one with the blue flowers best. Just thought I'd let you know.

I cannot know you. I can only know you as the person you represent yourself to be.

What you've shown me:

You will create scenarios in your mind where it's OK to attempt to cause misery in others, or where you'll not take others feelings into consideration when you're attempting to gain enjoyment for yourself.

Because of that, everything you say could be you potentially "role playing", meaning that at any point, demonstrated already by you, you could be attempting to do so right now.

With that, nothing you say, can I ever believe as being legitimate.

So your illegitimate opinion means nothing to me.

My opinion? You need help.

Whoaaa, 18 pages, poof!

And my comparative study of EVE morality using Mario Kart as a medium, all gone :(

I guess it could have been viewed as off topic, \o/ w/e.


On a more on topic note: Free the Tea Cozy!

I'll tell you what, I'll take a pic of me wearing one and mail it you. At least you get to see one again.

Well, to put it bluntly, it seems that you get high on people-¦s suffering, as demonstrated by your choices of walks of life. Law-related activities are a prime field to witness strangers in disarray, and possibly do them in. The military is pretty self-explanatory.

There are quite a few sadists in the health professions, especially amongst nurses who take care of the elderly. Maybe their sadism is a result of having to wash old people-¦s butts on a daily basis, but I-¦d say the seed of it was in them already.

I personally think people like you have no place in an online game, since games are made to play pretend, and suppose the pursuit of ingame goals, as opposed to RL ones.

There is a huge glaring problem when a certain category of players use an online game as a platform to reap Schadenfreude, and care more about the RL reaction of some absolutely unknown random Joe whom they have had no business of any kind with, than the ingame benefit they get from scamming/ganking/whatevering him. You say you do it for the ISK first, but after a few paragraphs of self-introspection, you write




Schadenfreude-oriented gankers are a blight on online videogaming, since they will look for every little flaw or borderline exploit to get an advantage over other players, and this forces devs to plug holes that could have been left open for reasonable and fun-loving players to "exploit". In the same order of idea, CONCORD is there because of gankers. If those players were screened and banned, there would be no need for an all-powerful space police, players would police themselves and have fun doing, some play pretending pirates, some play pretending police, etc...
The foundation for a sound gaming community is players who assess that the collection of pixels they interact with is controlled by other fellow gamers, and the common sense that springs from this: don-¦t be a jerk.

Ultima Online was trammelized because of camping gankers. This sharded the sandbox, and forced devs to impose hardcoded limits on PvP. I believe the age of anonymity on the internet will come to an end in the future, once too many schoolgirls have committed suicide because of anonymous trolls trolling them.

All the cop-outs stating that RL and internet activities are de-coupled are just, well, cop-outs. Ethics, in an open sandboxy environment (that is, not Counter-Strike or Battlefield) are context irrelevant.

And, "it-¦s a game". Well, start behaving like it-¦s one, instead of having a hard-on for ingame actions that will purposefully make other players rage IRL.

The op asks "why are many people on these forums so negative". The above quoted outrageous BS is the best answer antyone could give. It not only shows it's author egotistically claiming superiority of others involved in the same gaming activity he is, it actually disparages millions of real life Law, Law Enforcement, Military and Healthcare worker, almost all of whom most likely contribute way more to the actual well being humanity way more than the author ever could.

It's may well be an example of bad people not being able to see themselves as bad but rather imagining that it's others who are the problem. You simply have to be a real, honest to God bad person to write something like the above quoted BS.

Seems to me to be a massive case of projection ie the best psychological defense a truly rotten person has is to ima other people rotten.

Take your own advice.
If person A rages in real life because person B deprived them of their imaginary spaceship I'd say that person A is the one with the problem.

Don't get mad, get even. It's what Eve is all about.

the same kind of magic circle.

It is prejudice if you're accusing them of being a bad (or good) person just by looking at how they act in a game.

How they act towards me in the game is the only basis of comparison I have to make regarding their character. Them choosing to do bad things leads me to believe they are people who choose to do bad things.

It's not prejudice, it's cause and effect.

It's not against the law of society, just as ganking a miner in eve isn't against the rules.

But if I go stand outside and pick my nose constantly, then people are allowed to look at me and come to the conclusion that I am some one who stands outside in public and picks his nose.

What you're arguing is that if you want to stand outside and pick your nose, that it's wrong for me to look at you picking your nose, and conclude you're the type of person who enjoys nose picking in public.

I enjoy pirating in lo-sec immensely and putting up outrageous sell orders hoping for easy money, and I'm also a minister of 12 years in real life who (when I'm not playing eve) loves to feed the local homeless.

No, because I see you (not even you necessarily just whomever this scenario applies to) choosing between choices.

One: Be nice
Two: Be mean.

I am seeing it. I can go look on crime and punishment and probably see an instance where a guy has been scammed or has scammed someone.

You and I posting on these forums right now, do you view this as imaginary? That we're not really having this conversation?

EVE is public. Anyone can join. Doing actions in the public of EVE is public, noticeable and observable.

Judgements can be made on that which you've observed.

I'm judging you as a person, right now, based on how I'm seeing you communicate to me.

From here.

My point is, no misery is being caused. It's not shifting the goal posts, it's a fact. If you're getting miserable over a video game, then it's you with the problem, not the person you blame for 'causing' it.

I agree. I think this discussion is one of causality.

Gankers were around before tears is my bet.

In the way back days, gankers acted to pad their killboads, make a profit, that kind of thing.

Then one day, one guy that got ganked sent a very emotional response to a ganker that had just made his ship explode, filled with vitriol, real life threats, profanity, and all manner of other things one could define as bad.

In short, Tears very, very rarely cause ganking. Ganking can but does not have to cause tears.

How one responds to getting exploded is up to the person being exploded and not to the person that is doing the exploding.

Also, you base your highsec actions on the fact that you know that the players (i.e. not their characters) choosing to play in highsec are mostly unsuspecting, and will rage when ganked. This is why you gank them.

All those carebear reeducation endeavors clearly provide your RL self with glee at the thought of RL players raging, have nothing to do with reveries of your pod pilot doing stuff in New Eden, and clearly fall outside the magic circle.

You may say I-¦m saying the same stuff over and over: I am. This is called pedagogy.

People expect others to behave as they do. In a video game, people who want to have clean fun unconsciously expect everyone else also does. My, what a bunch of idiots!

By rights you, me and Jenn should be amongst the people complaining about gankers and wardecs in Eve, we are what is colloquially known as Carebears because of our non PvP playstyle. But we're not, because we actually play Eve fully expecting them, and are prepared for them.

As for the forums being hostile, the forums are part of the metagame, which is as important and as much part of the game as flying a spaceship or trading your way to billions. The forums are a PvP environment, although here it's a battle of words and wits, and some people are woefully equipped with either.

To the OP - as you can see I reliably got the accused archetype to reply negatively to my post, literally within minutes. Now we wait for the lock...

Also @ the OP, if you go to the thread Collisions, you'll see many great examples of angry and arrogant posters tearing up a thread that is a legitimate idea. You can see that anyone that agrees with the OP is hammered immediately, even by people tearing apart grammar. This is how the few try to control the many. These people you take issue with are actually worse than trolls, because they successfully set the agenda for these forums by suppressing any and all new ideas. They justify their bias and hatred by simply dismissing all they disagree with as "stupid." I doubt it would be appropriate for me to suggest other forums, but in my opinion the "official" forums attract the worst behavior, perhaps because that's where the sociopaths attempt to control the Devs and thereby enforce their game narrative. You are correct that a new player has virtually no chance in constructive feedback on these forums.

16. Redundant and re-posted threads will be locked.

As a courtesy to other forum users, please search to see if there is a thread already open on the topic you wish to discuss. If so, please place your comments there instead. Multiple threads on the same subject clutter up the forums needlessly, causing good feedback and ideas to be lost. Please keep discussions regarding a topic to a single thread.

Perhaps, but it's also possible that the strong language used in forums arises because most of what we take for granted in communication is lost in the instant written reply.

Tone, inflection, expression and body language which can make even a single word have different meaning or emphasis are all absent here.

As a result, the strength purely of the words written has to convey so much more.

While it seems that writers are rude and negative, I often put it down to them trying to get across a view that in other forms of communication they would be able to convey more simply and in a manner that we all use every day.

It's easy to interpret these replies as anger and negativity because as the reader, the interpretation is totally up to us without any other visual or auditory clues about the actual tone intended.

The reality from the writers perspective could be totally different, which I think we all need to recognize when we read posts in the forum.

The execution is the same, in game and out of game.

The person playing that other character, however, is as real as you are.

As you have pointed out, none of the ingame assets are "real".
Ergo, what you do to unreal objects is immaterial, and infact the only element of consequence that is real, is what you are doing, via the game, to another real person.

THAT is real. Because it occurs between two real people, even though the context in which it occurs, is unreal.

Do you understand what I am saying?

They don't know. They don't know for certain how people in IRL will react either.
I'm not sure why you bring this up though. Can you specify what point you are raising with this?


I agree, but again, I'm not sure why you raise this point, or what your point really is.

Who is assuming you should ask people if they mind you blowing up their **** before doing so?



Just my 2 cents, but stealing is the act of willfully taking from another person their property which does not rightfully (in whichever form) belong to you. I think you are mixing terms here. Are you trying to argue that it is not stealing if the person from whom you take it does not think of you as a thief for taking it from them? Cos if so, that makes no sense. That would just mean they dont care if you steal from them. Doesn't make it any less of theft, though.

I was right though right? That's what your objective was? The whole:

CCP OWNS IT ALL

angle?

Also, I've seen no where in the EULA that I may not apply my moral beliefs onto actions taken by people within EVE.

So that means, according to CCP, I'm allowed to believe that people who do bad things in game are bad people out.

and I must say, Much respect for you coming back and continuing to talk with me after I completely blew your attempt to technicality bash me into a back peddling "but if i mean" stance.

Most people would've just faded away. +1 im going to like you.

The nature of responsibility is the following. Ideally, an individual is only responsible for matters which are under their direct control to affect. One cannot, ideally, be held responsible for something that you have no means of control over. For example: I am not responsible for how right now somewhere in a rural town in China, a small girl is crying because her brother stole her candy. Nor am I responsible for how someone in-game just now had their stuff blown up by another player seconds before down-time.

So in relation to your question, the person who blows up another persons ship, is responsible for that act, but not for how the other person reacts to that. That is beyond their capacity to control and is instead in the area of responsibility and control of the person who's stuff gets blown up.

However, with the way our society and social interaction is structured (ie: how we humans behave as social animals), people are held responsible for the (admittedly) uncontrollable but reasonably expectable human consequences of their actions. If someone steals from another person IRL, there is often recourse to sue also for emotional damages. (Though the person enacting the theft cannot be held responsible for how the victim reacts, it is reasonably expected that the emotional damage is resultant from the act.) Thats also why mentally unsound individuals are tried differently, because it is seen as "unfair" to try them as having been reasonably capable of anticipating that their theft would not only cause the physical loss of property to the other person, but also "humanly" cause them suffering in a way that is considered against societal standards and which is sanctioned against.

Its a quandary, and there is no clear cut answer. Human social interaction, and how we structure our society and its rules, are full of contradictions and inconsistencies like this.

TLDR: No, the perpetrator can only be held responsible for their own act, not for how the victim reacts. This because the perpetrator only has control over the former but not the latter. The perpetrator can however, reasonably, (if of sound mental state) be held to have been aware that his act is likely to cause suffering on the part of the victim. This is considered implicit as part of his choice to commit that act. That they are aware that as a result of their act, another will suffer, and knowing that, they choose that act regardless.

I agree entirely. That would indeed be a far truer, more consistent and morally "fair" attitude towards responsibility.

Unfortunately, people on both sides of the issue, both perpetrator and victim, ingame and out of it, LOVE to shirk personal responsibility whenever and however they can.

If someone steals from another person IRL, there is often recourse to sue also for emotional damages.

Dude, did you really just link something from WnD ( a seriously crackpot right wing site that makes all of us of that particular political orientation look like raving lunatics) as proof of something?

That's like trying to prove something by linking a National Enquirer or Onion article. Hell, the Onion would be a more credible source.

To everyone else, do people like this know they're batshit crazy or is it just us?

EVE is different from every other game if you parse it fine enough, yet you do compare it to other games.

At some point though, a game is a game is a game.

Ok, that's it, thread's twitching less than the revamp POS thread.

Go home people, sort out your life, and decide if you actually want to log in again. If all you want to do is sit around proclaiming your personal superiority to others, then this is not the place for you. The game is not always happy, not always fun. You signed up knowing of the stories told of theft, sabotaging, awoxing, and grand plots, and now want the game to change because you find yourself disliking those same draws. There are MMO's with will allow you perfectly safe solo play. This is not one of them.

Frankly, this thread cannot be locked fast enough. What started out as a whiny rant and appeal for pity turned into a pit of abuse and trolling, got purged of 75% of the posts, then has rapidly skyrocketed back up to a posting frequency and shitslinging pace far beyond that of previous.


Help me ISD whoeverthefuckison, you're my only hope.

Manhattan is 6,500km away. I'm game for some goo.

I'm sorry, I did miss it in your cluster of wall-of-text pyramid postings. I'll have to check better for the name "Eternum" next time.




Now that we have established that you do think that such individuals play eve, would we expect their interactions in game to reflect such nature or should we expect their behavior to be more or less benign?

Then we're back to meaninglessly broad categorisations.

No we are not, it is a simple question. Do you feel that a sadist playing eve would be drawn to certain types of activities in EVE over others? Or do you feel that their tenancies/desires/whatever would not compel them in this digital environment?

Potential Tippa alt #1, i am asking someone who has a long history of having an opinion on everything under the sun what their opinion is regarding this question. I have one and Tippa has one. I am asking him for his opinion.

So allow me to paraphrase your skillful dodging of the question. You seem to hold the opinion that if a sadist had a strong enough of a compulsion defining them as a sadist they would forgo eve all together. Thus they will have little to no interest in EVE?


Thus we should not expect to see them in game?

What about "part-time" sadists? People that have a lesser compulsion or inability to enact their desires in their real life? Is it possible they might play eve? In your opinion that is.

I'm asking you: do they?

You did not speak to the potential online habits of people who have lesser sadist-type drives. Or whether or not such tenancies might, in your opinion, play a role in their career paths in EVE Online.

You only asked me if I thought that they existed or not, in a rather transparent attempt to deflect my question.

I guess your google skills cannot compare to actual reading and educating yourself on something, hmm? Oh well, there is always next time.

Perhaps if you had read the link that made you look stupid in full, you would better understand the difference.

And now we have Tippa refusing to answer because he/she does not want to go on the interwebs record that common people with sadist-like tendencies can be playing eve. To do so would give a great deal of fodder to those who have held an opposing stance throughout this entire thread.

However where he thinks I am going with it is not really where I am going. But he has helped prove an equally as important of a point all on his own without me having to conclude anything.






On that note I will follow suit and alter my train of thought some...


The article I linked goes as far as to describes tendencies that we see here on the forums and in game all of the time. Not just in EVE mind you but the Internet in general. I didn't say those things either, I did not make them up, a professor of psychology performing a study made those statements.

To suggest that EVE is somehow immune to such things verses the rest of the Internet can only be a self-serving fallacy.