|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14284
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 12:14:00 -
[1] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:Here is Jesters latest Blog http://jestertrek.blogspot.com.au/2014/03/the-bonus-round.htmlAs you can probably tell it is to do with Erotica 1's bonus round. It is a very damning blog. I can only surmise that Jester has brought the subject up with CCP and was not happy with there response which thus led him to create this blog. (Many apologise if I am wrong) I would be very interested to hear what the community at large thinks and perhaps for Erotica and friends to refute the claims being made that they actually enjoy the pain and humiliation that they cause, especially to the man in the recording linked in Jesters Blog.
Is it CCP's responsibility to police out of game interaction between their players where no law has been broken?
If so, where does that responsibility end? Should they ban a player when his wife complains about him playing EVE instead of doing the chores?
If I hook up with another EVE player who happens to be from say Japan, should CCP have the right and duty to ban me if the GM involved disapproves of inter-racial relationships? What about homosexual relationships?
What if I encourage another player to log in to fleet and miss church on sunday?
Where exactly does CCP's "responsibility" end?
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14294
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 12:19:00 -
[2] - Quote
Tuscor wrote:Just ban Erotica1. The community does not need poisonous twats like that - and I for one am happy for the sandbox and 'emergent gameplay' to take second seat to cleaning the community of such filth.
People talk about gays in very similar terms to the ones you have used in your post.
Come to that, so have insane monogonadal austrian dictators.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14294
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 12:21:00 -
[3] - Quote
Hands up everyone who can see a problem with demanding the CCP ban people on the basis of "They haven't broken any game rules, and they haven't broken any laws, but I find them personally distasteful"
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14294
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 12:24:00 -
[4] - Quote
Tuscor wrote:Malcanis wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:Here is Jesters latest Blog http://jestertrek.blogspot.com.au/2014/03/the-bonus-round.htmlAs you can probably tell it is to do with Erotica 1's bonus round. It is a very damning blog. I can only surmise that Jester has brought the subject up with CCP and was not happy with there response which thus led him to create this blog. (Many apologise if I am wrong) I would be very interested to hear what the community at large thinks and perhaps for Erotica and friends to refute the claims being made that they actually enjoy the pain and humiliation that they cause, especially to the man in the recording linked in Jesters Blog. Is it CCP's responsibility to police out of game interaction between their players where no law has been broken? If so, where does that responsibility end? Should they ban a player when his wife complains about him playing EVE instead of doing the chores? If I hook up with another EVE player who happens to be from say Japan, should CCP have the right and duty to ban me if the GM involved disapproves of inter-racial relationships? What about homosexual relationships? What if I encourage another player to log in to fleet and miss church on sunday? Where exactly does CCP's "responsibility" end? CCP might just want to stop gross behaviours associated with their game. They have no responsiblity to maybe, and certainly no legal obligation but maybe they should do something anyway in this instance.
"Gays are gross. I demand people ban any player who admits to being gay. The community should cleaned of such filth" On what basis do CCP resist that demand?
Once being merely distasteful is suffficient reason to ban someone, then pretty quickly the only people left are the ones who haven't done anything to even briefly offend anyone.
"That guy killed my untanked Iteron full of compressed Crokite and A-type loot, AND HE ENJOYED IT! ban him!"
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14299
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 12:29:00 -
[5] - Quote
Tuscor wrote:Malcanis wrote:Tuscor wrote:Just ban Erotica1. The community does not need poisonous twats like that - and I for one am happy for the sandbox and 'emergent gameplay' to take second seat to cleaning the community of such filth. People talk about gays in very similar terms to the ones you have used in your post. Come to that, so have insane monogonadal austrian dictators. Sure, and for many years that was considered an acceptable way to treat/speak about homosexuals. That is thankfully changing. But dont try and compare this to homophobia, or german dictators for god's sake! Discriminating and vilifying minority groups is not the same as disliking and calling for action against a bullying sociopath...
Can you give me a reliable method of distinguishing them that doesn't boil down to "stuff that you personally dislike"?
I find brussels sprouts disgusting; just the thought of them makes me heave a little. Can I petition to get someone banned because they post recipes for them in local?
If not, then you're saying that only the things you find disgusting are a problem. Things I find disgusting and things evengelical christians find disgusting are just fine, however. Am I right?
Far simpler for CCP to not try and be 400,000 people's mom and stay the hell out of our out of game activities, don't you think?
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14299
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 12:30:00 -
[6] - Quote
Tuscor wrote:Malcanis wrote:Hands up everyone who can see a problem with demanding the CCP ban people on the basis of "They haven't broken any game rules, and they haven't broken any laws, but I find them personally distasteful"
... tentatively puts hand up ... but I still want Erotica to stop, or for the rules to be changed to make that kind of behaviour against the rules.
So do something about it. Publicise the scam. Interfere with his operations. Find out who his alts are and gank them. If you see someone talking to him in local, convo them with a warning. Anchor GSCs with a warning and a link to Jester's article.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14299
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 12:32:00 -
[7] - Quote
Xander Delacroix wrote:Malcanis wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:Here is Jesters latest Blog http://jestertrek.blogspot.com.au/2014/03/the-bonus-round.htmlAs you can probably tell it is to do with Erotica 1's bonus round. It is a very damning blog. I can only surmise that Jester has brought the subject up with CCP and was not happy with there response which thus led him to create this blog. (Many apologise if I am wrong) I would be very interested to hear what the community at large thinks and perhaps for Erotica and friends to refute the claims being made that they actually enjoy the pain and humiliation that they cause, especially to the man in the recording linked in Jesters Blog. Is it CCP's responsibility to police out of game interaction between their players where no law has been broken? If so, where does that responsibility end? Should they ban a player when his wife complains about him playing EVE instead of doing the chores? If I hook up with another EVE player who happens to be from say Japan, should CCP have the right and duty to ban me if the GM involved disapproves of inter-racial relationships? What about homosexual relationships? What if I encourage another player to log in to fleet and miss church on sunday? Where exactly does CCP's "responsibility" end? Malcanis, for someone who is on the CSM you seem to be seriously missing the big picture here. Even if your supposition is true that since this happened outside of Eve itself, and therefore isn't CCP's responsibility, it was instigated in-game and it involved in-game assets. However, the big picture here is not just the reality of the situation, but rather the perception of the reality. Eve is already considered by many prospective players as being a harsh and unforgiving environment; great for all the budding pirates who think they're ruthless and feared, not so great for bringing in new players (oh yeah, and bringing in subscribers to pay for things like development). If this news breaks it's way into wider social media, possibly going viral (which is entirely possible), then Eve suddenly appears to be an incredibly toxic environment. CCP would then be forced to defend themselves, not just to us, but to the world at large. Let's face it, CCP is a business. Bad media coverage and a toxic reputation is bad for business. This means they'll have no choice but to intervene in-game if they want their business to survive. This means much more stringent and harsh restrictions being put on what people in the sandbox can do, whether you like it or not. CCP not addressing this issue is bad for business.
So you'd be in favour of CCP banning people who start homosexual relationships after meeting through EVE if it looked like religious groups or the Russian government started making a fuss about it?
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14302
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 12:40:00 -
[8] - Quote
Xander Delacroix wrote:Malcanis wrote:Xander Delacroix wrote:Malcanis wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:Here is Jesters latest Blog http://jestertrek.blogspot.com.au/2014/03/the-bonus-round.htmlAs you can probably tell it is to do with Erotica 1's bonus round. It is a very damning blog. I can only surmise that Jester has brought the subject up with CCP and was not happy with there response which thus led him to create this blog. (Many apologise if I am wrong) I would be very interested to hear what the community at large thinks and perhaps for Erotica and friends to refute the claims being made that they actually enjoy the pain and humiliation that they cause, especially to the man in the recording linked in Jesters Blog. Is it CCP's responsibility to police out of game interaction between their players where no law has been broken? If so, where does that responsibility end? Should they ban a player when his wife complains about him playing EVE instead of doing the chores? If I hook up with another EVE player who happens to be from say Japan, should CCP have the right and duty to ban me if the GM involved disapproves of inter-racial relationships? What about homosexual relationships? What if I encourage another player to log in to fleet and miss church on sunday? Where exactly does CCP's "responsibility" end? Malcanis, for someone who is on the CSM you seem to be seriously missing the big picture here. Even if your supposition is true that since this happened outside of Eve itself, and therefore isn't CCP's responsibility, it was instigated in-game and it involved in-game assets. However, the big picture here is not just the reality of the situation, but rather the perception of the reality. Eve is already considered by many prospective players as being a harsh and unforgiving environment; great for all the budding pirates who think they're ruthless and feared, not so great for bringing in new players (oh yeah, and bringing in subscribers to pay for things like development). If this news breaks it's way into wider social media, possibly going viral (which is entirely possible), then Eve suddenly appears to be an incredibly toxic environment. CCP would then be forced to defend themselves, not just to us, but to the world at large. Let's face it, CCP is a business. Bad media coverage and a toxic reputation is bad for business. This means they'll have no choice but to intervene in-game if they want their business to survive. This means much more stringent and harsh restrictions being put on what people in the sandbox can do, whether you like it or not. CCP not addressing this issue is bad for business. So you'd be in favour of CCP banning people who start homosexual relationships after meeting through EVE if it looked like religious groups or the Russian government started making a fuss about it? Missing. The. Point. Entirely.
It's exactly the point. He's arguing that CCP should ban people who have broken no game rules or national laws purely on the basis of bad publicity to protect their cashflow.
"Let's face it, CCP is a business. Bad media coverage and a toxic reputation is bad for business."
Russia has an aggressively homophobic government right now. A large percentage of EVE's players are Russian. If the Russian government demands that CCP "cleanse the community of this filth" by banning gay players who have broken no rule or law, then what argument would apply to resist this demand?
Principles aren't tested by easy cases. They're tested by the unpleasant, distasteful, unsympathetic cases.
Do accused child rapists get a defense lawyer when they're tried in court? Yes they do, even though no one wants to defend them them. Supporting the child rapist's right to fair treatment and due process is MY guarantee of MY right to fair treatment if I should ever be accused of anything.
Personally I don't care much at all for what erotica1 does. But since he's very carefully stayed within the rules and he very carefully obeys the law, and most especially since no element of compulsion applies, then he's entitled to due process.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14307
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 12:47:00 -
[9] - Quote
Xander Delacroix wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Xander Delacroix wrote:
Missing. The. Point. Entirely.
You are, actually. The point he's making is that the slippery slope of arbitrary bannings for something "distasteful" is FAR worse than the supposed slippery slope of "cyber bullying" that Ripard Teg is trying to make the case for. What you call distasteful, I call morally reprehensible; but "tomahto-tomayto". Nevertheless, my point, if anyone bothered to read it, is that bad press leads to declining business leading to CCP losing money leading to Eve eventually going the way of so many other MMO's = no sandbox for Erotica1 and his ilk to indulge their "appetites" (oh and the rest of us losing out along the way too).
If an alliance FC loses his temper with his fleet and calls them "a bunch of useless faggots" on 3rd party comms should he be banned? I personally find homophobia deeply offensive and also provably dangerous.
Especially when the FCs in question are shooting at my alliance.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14307
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 12:49:00 -
[10] - Quote
Actually the gay thing is particularly dangerous because there are lots of people who find homosexuality disgusting and offensive, but also plenty who find homophobia the same. We could get everybody banned just by asking them if they hate gays or not.
1 Kings 12:11
|
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14307
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 12:54:00 -
[11] - Quote
Tuscor wrote:Malcanis is right I think, although his way of arguing is very confontational and adversarial
When I see calls for "mob justice" based on emotional reactions, I tend to confront them as an adversary, yes.
Sorry I'm not quite as smooth as Atticus Finch
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14307
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 12:55:00 -
[12] - Quote
Although we should perhaps remember that Finch lost that case...
Yeah I think I'll keep being confrontational.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14311
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 13:03:00 -
[13] - Quote
Malcolm from Marketing wrote:
Your counter arguments are empty of content and pathetic at best.
Your point out Erotica broke no rules or laws, your quite correct. What he has done can be likened to bringing the game into disrepute by going above and beyond to push the boundaries of whats acceptable in the name of emergent gameplay. CCP should consider very carefully if this is the type of behavior they want associated with their game as it's treading very dangerous grounds. Ignoring all that, it's simply a case of morals, ( ironic in a game such as EVE i know ) yes its a game, yes he was a willing participant but that still doesnt excuse what's happened and has happened many times previous.
CCP should remove ALL his assets over ALL his accounts and give him a temp ban. Thats the right course of action in this case, but of course thats not what your interested in is it.
I'll ask again. How could CCP resist religious groups or the Russian government if they demanded that CCP remove people who engage in "unacceptable" behaviour that "bring the game into disrepute"?
After all, "it's simply a case of morals", right?
As soon as CCP have conceded the right of any group to demand the removal of a player simply because they dislike what he does out of game, then they're wide open to every pressure group out there who thinks they have a duty to make sure you and I live our lives as they think we should.
"it's simply a case of morals"
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14315
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 13:11:00 -
[14] - Quote
Tyburn Stannis wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
I've mentioned this before, but I was actually stalked at one point by someone I "griefed" in a videogame. They sent me a link with a picture of my front door on it.
How do you feel about that?
[retracted] Obvious troll is obvious. Too slow. You wrote: "I feel you didn't take enough care to separate your online and real identities, and that you underestimated the effects of your actions. And that your case is a perfect example of how many people don't understand the "paper trail" they leave online. "
Unlike some, I have backed my opinions with my identity.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14321
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 13:16:00 -
[15] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:
You asked how I felt about it. I felt that if someone is taking photos of your home, you should probably be very careful how you treat them.
The above highlighted sentence is many times more morally reprehensible than anything any in-game scammer has ever done. There is never any justification for out of game threats, period.
Silly Jenn. It's prefectly OK to break the rules, and even the law, if it's done against bad people.
That's why we should go along with the mob and support erotica1 being banned
After all, what possible bad consequence could possibly result in fostering this attitude?
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14349
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 16:10:00 -
[16] - Quote
Faltharion Estidal wrote:Hey malcanis this one is just for you; The argumente of the gays has nothing to do with this conversation, way to use false cause hmmm? here's to avoid falacy's for your enjoyment: http://i.imgur.com/aEhOy.jpg?1.
Very well, then what argument would CCP use to resist such demands?
I'll wait.
And wait.
Oh dear, it turns out that just calling something a fallacy doesn't make it one and you have to be able to logically demonstrate why.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14349
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 16:14:00 -
[17] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:Malcanis wrote:Faltharion Estidal wrote:Hey malcanis this one is just for you; The argumente of the gays has nothing to do with this conversation, way to use false cause hmmm? here's to avoid falacy's for your enjoyment: http://i.imgur.com/aEhOy.jpg?1. Very well, then what argument would CCP use to resist such demands? I'll wait. And wait. Oh dear, it turns out that just calling something a fallacy doesn't make it one and you have to be able to logically demonstrate why. You know this is hardly true.
That's a fallacy.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14361
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 16:16:00 -
[18] - Quote
18 pages in and I'm still waiting for someone to tell me where they think CCP's responsibility to police our out of game actions ends.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14361
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 16:18:00 -
[19] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:Malcolm Shinhwa wrote:TigerXtrm wrote: Now imagine Erotica pulling this sort of bullsh*t on a 12 year old kid that is about as emotionally stable as a house made of sand and who may already be dealing with enough bullying in their real lives.
Erotica 1 is outrageously smart. I'm pretty sure he knows a 12yr old can't give the consent he asks for at the beginning of the audio recordings. Yes, yes you heard right.. Erotica 1 asks the "victim" for consent to record the whole thing. Which should be the end of the story if people were rational. Yes because a 12 year would never not just say yes.....
A minor can't give consent, no matter how much whatever they say sounds like it.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14361
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 16:20:00 -
[20] - Quote
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:Pak Narhoo wrote:
Where is the sticker that say's you cannot play this game EVE if you have mental problems? EVE is a GAME it means its meant to entertain.
The "people" involved in this didn't stop at scamming and kept going on and on and on and on in a real sociopathic way. Even when the victims wife asked them to give his stuff back they just rolled on in their despicable behavior.
What you write is not on trial here, not whether the guy should or not should have fallen for this scam but should we as a community say at some point this is enough. This has gone way too far?
Or would you rather say, gee, great job E1 &co. until someone gets driven over the edge kills him/herself, this ok behavior?
What's being said is, if you are not mentally stable enough to handle the environment of EVE online, you shouldn't play. Much like how I stayed away from FPS wargames when I was dealing with PTSD. I didn't insist the game be changed to suit my then emotional instability.
In fact the sticker he refers to is located on the bottem left corner of the login screen.
1 Kings 12:11
|
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14361
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 16:23:00 -
[21] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:Malcanis wrote:18 pages in and I'm still waiting for someone to tell me where they think CCP's responsibility to police our out of game actions ends.
Your completely right, CCP should take no action for anything that happens out of game. So tell everybody why CCP inform the police if somebody says they are going to commit suicide, after all it is not in the EULA or TOS and it is an action out of game which is completely out of their control. Would it be perhaps because morally and ethically it is the right thing to do?
Thanks. But.... That's where the line starts and I haven't heard anyone complaining about that, much like I haven't heard anyone complaining that Nelson Mandela was allowed a defence lawyer.
But where does it end?
At what point does CCP stop having the right to sanction us for out of game interactions. If I buy you a beer at fanfest, and it turns out to be one beer too many and you faceplant outside Nonni's, do I get a temp ban for that? No?
OK, what's the line then.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14366
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 16:26:00 -
[22] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
The day will come when someone is going to kill themselves because they got "griefed".
That day arrived years ago. There have been several incidents of murders occurring between MMO players due to ingame actions.
Fortunately EVE players seem to be rather level headed, polite and civilised in real life.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14366
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 16:30:00 -
[23] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:Malcanis wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:Malcanis wrote:18 pages in and I'm still waiting for someone to tell me where they think CCP's responsibility to police our out of game actions ends.
Your completely right, CCP should take no action for anything that happens out of game. So tell everybody why CCP inform the police if somebody says they are going to commit suicide, after all it is not in the EULA or TOS and it is an action out of game which is completely out of their control. Would it be perhaps because morally and ethically it is the right thing to do? Thanks. But.... That's where the line starts and I haven't heard anyone complaining about that, much like I haven't heard anyone complaining that Nelson Mandela was allowed a defence lawyer. But where does it end?At what point does CCP stop having the right to sanction us for out of game interactions. If I buy you a beer at fanfest, and it turns out to be one beer too many and you faceplant outside Nonni's, do I get a temp ban for that? No? OK, what's the line then. Again not everything is black and white, you have to take each occurrence / situation / event on its own merits.
So basically, there are literally no rules and the only determining factor is being "offensive" to you.
If I hook up with another EVE player and form a relationship with her, should I be banned if Prince Kobol thinks she's too young for me?
How about if our alliances fight and you are offended by some of my propoganda posts on a 3rd party site?
Seriously, if you can't see why arbitrary banning for "offending" people - especially in a game like EVE - wouldn't be a huge whirlwind of a shitstorm, I don't know what to say to you. This isn't just a slippery slope: it's a 4km Luge ride straight to hell.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14366
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 16:33:00 -
[24] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote: Erotica1, fighter for freedom and against Tyranny. Who in hell would have thought that LOL.
As I said before, it's not when the popular handsome hero is on trial that our dedication to justice is tested. It's when the unpopular, ugly, awful unpleasant defendant needs a fair hearing.
That's when we really see who cares about doing what's right.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14366
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 16:35:00 -
[25] - Quote
Drone 16 wrote:Malcanis wrote:Tuscor wrote:Just ban Erotica1. The community does not need poisonous twats like that - and I for one am happy for the sandbox and 'emergent gameplay' to take second seat to cleaning the community of such filth. People talk about gays in very similar terms to the ones you have used in your post. Come to that, so have insane monogonadal austrian dictators. What a ridiculous position to take. Why use your position in the community to stick up for an obvious piece of filth?
Plenty of people are happy to call homosexuals "obvious piece(s) of filth".
If CCP set a precedent that they'll ban someone who has broken no game rule or national law, but merely because some people think he's an "obvious piece of filth" then how do they deal with requests to ban gays? Interracial relationships? Ukranians? People who criticise the Scientologists?
"Er yucky" simply isn't a good enough reason.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14380
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 17:36:00 -
[26] - Quote
Malcolm from Marketing wrote:Malcanis wrote:18 pages in and I'm still waiting for someone to tell me where they think CCP's responsibility to police our out of game actions ends.
No player will participate in any out of game actions with the intent to cause emotional distress for their own enjoyment and gain. Hows that?
So if my girlfriend is an EVE player and I bang her sister, I'm banned?
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14382
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 17:47:00 -
[27] - Quote
Winchester Steele wrote: Why aren't you running for CSM again? The people of New Eden need guys like you on the CSM.
The consensus is that they don't deserve me.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14388
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 17:57:00 -
[28] - Quote
Nick Bete wrote:Malcanis wrote: Is it CCP's responsibility to police out of game interaction between their players where no law has been broken?
If so, where does that responsibility end? Should they ban a player when his wife complains about him playing EVE instead of doing the chores?
If I hook up with another EVE player who happens to be from say Japan, should CCP have the right and duty to ban me if the GM involved disapproves of inter-racial relationships? What about homosexual relationships?
What if I encourage another player to log in to fleet and miss church on sunday?
Where exactly does CCP's "responsibility" end?
It's not illegal for players to be intolerant and make racist or homophobic taunts in local chat or, to name their ships, corporations or characters with racial epithets yet, CCP chooses to take action against players who do so. So you tell me more about CCP's "responsibility" and where it begins and ends, please.
Those are in-game actions.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14388
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 17:57:00 -
[29] - Quote
Toshiro Ozuwara wrote:CCP is only going to intervene if it blows up like The Mittani thing. This soundcloud being heard by the wider world about their game is going to be very embarrassing.
So if this really bothers you, get it out to the greater gaming press and larger gaming community.
So what you're saying is that you don't care what damage is caused to CCP or EVE as long as you can get someone you don't like banned.
Wow.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14388
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 18:01:00 -
[30] - Quote
Toshiro Ozuwara wrote:Malcanis wrote:So what you're saying is that you don't care what damage is caused to CCP or EVE as long as you can get someone you don't like banned. That's not at all what I said.
I'm afraid it is.
What you meant? Maybe not. But it's the logical consequence of what you said.
1 Kings 12:11
|
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14395
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 18:08:00 -
[31] - Quote
Anslo wrote:Malcanis wrote:Jenn aSide wrote: Erotica1, fighter for freedom and against Tyranny. Who in hell would have thought that LOL.
As I said before, it's not when the popular handsome hero is on trial that our dedication to justice is tested. It's when the unpopular, ugly, awful unpleasant defendant needs a fair hearing. That's when we really see who cares about doing what's right. It should speak volumes about the community's state when a CSM candidate is defending these kind of actions.
I'm not defending what erotica1 does
I'm defending his right to fair treatment and due process according to the rules.
I'm sorry you're unable to see the difference, but the difference is there nonetheless. I sincerely hope that you never have the occasion to experience it in reality.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14395
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 18:09:00 -
[32] - Quote
Toshiro Ozuwara wrote:Malcanis wrote:Toshiro Ozuwara wrote:That's not at all what I said.
I'm afraid it is. What you meant? Maybe not. But it's the logical consequence of what you said. No, it's really not what I said. You're welcome to quote me to substantiate your claim. What is interesting though is how you're running interference for Erotica1.
Did you or did you not advocate whipping up a damaging media shitstorm?
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14402
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 18:29:00 -
[33] - Quote
Toshiro Ozuwara wrote:Malcanis wrote:Did you or did you not advocate whipping up a damaging media shitstorm? Damaging to whom? If the content is as benign as you would have us believe, then there will be no shitstorm.
Where do I support or even defend what erotica1 does
Do you understand that there's a middle ground between the lynch mob and unconditional support?
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14407
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 18:37:00 -
[34] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:31 pages? damn having a job really means i miss out on all the fun.
people still mad that dumb people are dumb, and some one took advantage of it. like every day both in and out of the game?
if so, i'm not sure why this has really got to 31 pages since there's not really much of a story here other than "dumb people be dumb, and people profit from it".
The mob demands blood
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14438
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 19:50:00 -
[35] - Quote
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yp_l5ntikaU
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14447
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 21:19:00 -
[36] - Quote
Malcolm from Marketing wrote:Sirinda wrote:I am appaled at what he's doing, but I also get Malcanis' point of view, if it is the one I think it is.
Basically, you can't punish somebody who hasn't broken any rules, and doing so in spite of it would create a dangerous precedent. In that regard, CCP's hands are more or less tied unless they want to invoke their TOS' arbitrary savior clause.
What a lot of people on the pages 1-5 are apparently forgetting is the fact CCP created those rules; there is no reason they couldn't adapt them to the situation. Failure to do so would border on criminal negligence, IMHO. Ive said it multiple times to multiple people in this thread. The Mittani + Fan fest. It happened, he broke no rules, yet he got a temp ban and was forced from his position. That was the right thing to do in that situation, its also my opinion that Erotica should have all his assets/isk removed and also receive a ban, but i have morals so i guess im in the minority.
He was also in a CCP run event. Functionally within CCP's area of responsibility.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14559
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 20:58:00 -
[37] - Quote
Just to inject some factual information:
1) CCP have taken notice of the the issue. 2) So have the CSM. 3) I personally I am very content with the direction the resultant discussion took. All my concerns were dealt with, and the CSM has a unified position.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14559
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 21:05:00 -
[38] - Quote
Xuixien wrote:Malcanis wrote:Just to inject some factual information:
1) CCP have taken notice of the the issue. 2) So have the CSM. 3) I personally I am very content with the direction the resultant discussion took. All my concerns were dealt with, and the CSM has a unified position.
So nothing will be done to Erotica 1 then, except maybe a slap on the wrist and possibly some revision of the EULA.
You could make that interpretation
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14570
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 21:12:00 -
[39] - Quote
arabella blood wrote:Malcanis wrote:Xuixien wrote:Malcanis wrote:Just to inject some factual information:
1) CCP have taken notice of the the issue. 2) So have the CSM. 3) I personally I am very content with the direction the resultant discussion took. All my concerns were dealt with, and the CSM has a unified position.
So nothing will be done to Erotica 1 then, except maybe a slap on the wrist and possibly some revision of the EULA. You could make that interpretation Can you stop talking in codes and with a politicians tounge??
I could.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14570
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 21:14:00 -
[40] - Quote
Doc Fury wrote:Xuixien wrote: He's on the CSM. Of course he's a politician and will speak like one.
You just need to learn how to speak Politicianese.
Whatever they say, the opposite is true. Oh, wait, that's my Malcanis filter.
I love you.
1 Kings 12:11
|
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14570
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 21:15:00 -
[41] - Quote
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
will you?
I will.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
14585
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 22:35:00 -
[42] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:Just shut down the servers ban everyone.
WHO TOLD YOU?
1 Kings 12:11
|
|
|
|