EVE Search - Jester Trek Latest Blog

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Jester Trek Latest Blog

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 3 post(s)
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 7	Posted - 2014.03.25 11:55:00 - [1] - Quote Salvos Rhoska wrote: Just seize the accounts and ban him. I mean honestly, I can appreciate some "for teh lols" as much as the next guy, but if you play that recording to any reasonably sensible people in a room, or for example outloud at the next Fanfest for the combined community represented there, I think the majority will most certainly agree that this is crossing the line too far. Here is the recording linked in the blog: https://soundcloud.com/kalorned/erotica1bonusroom_sohkar Much as I hate to agree with Salvos, he's absolutely 100% on the money here. This bonus room concept is absolutely reprehensible in every way that you look at it. "Emergent Gameplay" is used to justify a lot of things in this game, but this goes far beyond the pale. If CCP don't do anything about this, then they are condoning this kind of behaviour as being acceptable (and this incident, which I imagine is only one of many such diversions by Erotica1, makes the little drunken outburst by Mittens look like kindergarten mischief by comparison), then some players may well start to think about heading away to pastures new. If this gets out into the wider media, which it has every chance of doing, then we are all tarred with the same vile brush.
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 9	Posted - 2014.03.25 12:29:00 - [2] - Quote Malcanis wrote: Prince Kobol wrote: Here is Jesters latest Blog http://jestertrek.blogspot.com.au/2014/03/the-bonus-round.html As 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 now, before it gets out of hand, and in a much more reasonable way, is bad for business.
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 9	Posted - 2014.03.25 12:34:00 - [3] - Quote 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.html As 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.
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 11	Posted - 2014.03.25 12:41:00 - [4] - Quote 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).
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 13	Posted - 2014.03.25 12:50:00 - [5] - Quote Freedom of speech means that you can say what you like, to whomever you like, about whatsoever you like. However, with that freedom comes the responsibility to accept the consequences of saying those things. In any case, it doesn't really matter what we say here. Those on Macanis' side of the fence will not change their position. Those of us on Ripard's side of the fence will not change ours. However, CCP have been put in an awkward position here. Whatever they decide to do, even if it is to do nothing, will upset one side of that fence. They simply have to make the choice that is best for business.
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 13	Posted - 2014.03.25 12:57:00 - [6] - Quote Tuscor wrote: Malcanis is right I think, although his way of arguing is very confontational and adversarial CCP shouldn't just ban Erotica. MAYBE they should carefully assess how much they want that kind of behaviour associated with thier game (and it is associated, abviously, despite the offending behaviour occurring out of game). And then MAYBE they should change the rules to make identifying victims for this kind of behaviour ingame and then using ingame activities (scamming and contracting their stuff) as part of the tormenting behaviour against the rules. This is just an idea - it would probably be very hard to draft properly into the TOS and it may be deemed too subjective. But rules can be changed. Those of us that come from common law jurisdictions know that the laws constantly change to reflect society's expectations and changing views on things - homosexuality was once against the law in the UK - now its not... it is currently legal to use certain tax loopholes involving the channel islands and trusts... the UK government is changing the law becuase they dont like it... Its currently arguably within the rules but maybe it shouldnt be... Of all the arguments made on this thread so far, this is by far the best in my opinion. Reasonable, thoughtful and with a view to the wider Eve community as well as the wider community as a whole. I really wish I'd thought of it first...
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 13	Posted - 2014.03.25 13:14:00 - [7] - Quote Malcanis wrote: 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. So has Ripard Teg. Does that make your opinions any more valid? Does that make Ripard's any more valid? The answer is 'no' to both questions. However, this thread has begun the inevitable descent into personal attacks. As CCP Falcon warned, chances of a lock increasing...
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 14	Posted - 2014.03.25 13:27:00 - [8] - Quote On one side we have those who want Erotica1 and his cronies buried in a digital shallow grave. On the other side, we have those wishing to hoist Erotic1 up on their shoulders as a hero to freedom. Perhaps, just perhaps, there's a middle ground? Where we can discuss the underlying issue, rather than this single incident? We're all adults, and dealing with the issue of 'potential' cyber bullying is very much an adult issue. So how about we all get off our respective soapboxes, myself included, and start discussing, as adults, this issue and the ramifications that any potential decisions and actions taken regarding the "emergent gameplay" vs "cyber-bullying" debate?
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 22	Posted - 2014.03.25 15:46:00 - [9] - Quote Perhaps this discussion shouldn't be about a single incident, in this case Erotica1's bonus room, but rather about the questions that cut to the heart of the matter. Questions such as (but not limited to): 1. At what point does 'emergent gameplay' become 'cyber-bullying? 2. If such a point is established what could, and indeed what should, CCP do about it? 3. If people are found to be committing cyber-bullying, either within Eve or associated with Eve (as in the 'bonus room' case) what sanctions, if any, are appropriate? 4. Is there a role for the CSM in all this (especially since two of it's current members are quite vocal on this particular issue)? 5. Can some of the thoughts and ideas discussed in this thread be used by the CSM and CCP to try and find a common ground compromise? Compromise seems to be the way forward: a resolution that many may not be happy with, but that everyone can at least live with? I think that Eve will be a better game and experience for everyone if we can actually enter into a civilised, and most importantly, productive, dialogue.
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 35	Posted - 2014.03.25 19:07:00 - [10] - Quote Dave Stark wrote: Jayem See wrote: Quote: then he should have removed himself from the situation I agree - but you have to remember some people don't react how you and I might. I think it was taken too far - a lot of people seem to feel the same. a person thinks homosexuals are an abomination and shouldn't exist - a lot of people seem to feel the same. a lot of people feeling the same doesn't make them correct, or worthy of acknowledgement. By the same logic, a lot of people believe in gay rights, sexual equality and racial equality; doesn't make them wrong either.

Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 42	Posted - 2014.03.25 21:23:00 - [11] - Quote Gogela wrote: Dave Stark wrote: Gogela wrote: I find all of this thoroughly entertaining. I can tell a lot of people haven't listened to the whole audio file. The end is the best part! you mean when the poor ikkle victim starts spewing racism and real life threats? i gotta admit, i lol'd at that. Well... yah exactly? Erotica 1's actions are "debateable" at best. That 'victim's' reaction was a clear EULA violation. If you really wanted to come down to brass tacks, that guy would be banned. Because of the circumstances it's being overlooked, but if you press on the rules, if you are even talking/writing about having having Erotica 1 banned, than you would absolutely have to ban the victim here. It's crystal clear to me... Much as I hate to break your little trollish bubble, but as has been noted many times by those coming to E1's defence, said verbal outburst by the victim happened OUTSIDE Eve. Therefore no EULA violation. You can't have it both ways...
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 44	Posted - 2014.03.25 21:31:00 - [12] - Quote Mr Epeen wrote: Ramona McCandless wrote: Xander Delacroix wrote: Much as I hate to break your little trollish bubble, but as has been noted many times by those coming to E1's defence, said verbal outburst by the victim happened OUTSIDE Eve. Therefore no EULA violation. You can't have it both ways... No you cant. Either they are both punished, or neither is. Or CCP takes it as a wake-up call to modify the TOS/EULA. Mr Epeen This. So much this.
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 44	Posted - 2014.03.25 21:33:00 - [13] - Quote Dave Stark wrote: Xander Delacroix wrote: Mr Epeen wrote: Ramona McCandless wrote: Xander Delacroix wrote: Much as I hate to break your little trollish bubble, but as has been noted many times by those coming to E1's defence, said verbal outburst by the victim happened OUTSIDE Eve. Therefore no EULA violation. You can't have it both ways... No you cant. Either they are both punished, or neither is. Or CCP takes it as a wake-up call to modify the TOS/EULA. Mr Epeen This. So much this. i must be missing something, what needs to be changed? Yes, very clearly you are. Bless.
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 46	Posted - 2014.03.25 21:45:00 - [14] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Batelle wrote: Malcolm from Marketing wrote: Erotica got that guys assets/isk in that recording, but instead of kicking him and moving on, decided instead to prolong his humiliation for his own and his hangers on amusements. The size of this thread is evidence enough that Erotica1 stood to gain more than just assets/isk. This thread alone is greater payout than the isk. And therein lies the problem at the heart of this issue. Every player who gets their jollies from the pain of others, whether due to scamming, ganking in game, or through public humiliation, are all contributing to the toxic environment that drives existing players out and keeps new players away. What happens when all the victims are gone and the trolls and griefers and tormentors turn on each other? Well, not a lot, because the plug would have been pulled long before that.
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 47	Posted - 2014.03.25 22:08:00 - [15] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Salvos Rhoska wrote: Dave Stark wrote: just going to point out that you've confirmed your stance that running a scam in a game that encourages scams, is to you, less acceptable than physical violence. I would laugh and applaud if someone kicked Erotica1 in the face at a Fanfest. Nothing illegal about laughing or applauding, nor is it against EULA. I would also laugh and applaud if Erotica1 was banned from the game. Again, nothing illegal about laughing or applauding, nor is it against EULA. Wouldn't you? Erotica 1 got someone to sing. You want someone to kick them in the face in RL. I wonder, which is worse... Oh God, I'm about to defend Salvos Rhoska... THIS is how bad this is. Still, here goes. Salvos did not say that he wanted someone to kick E1 in the face, just that he'd laugh and/or applaud 'if' someone did.
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 47	Posted - 2014.03.25 22:14:00 - [16] - Quote Mag's wrote: Xander Delacroix wrote: baltec1 wrote: Erotica 1 got someone to sing. You want someone to kick them in the face in RL. I wonder, which is worse... Oh God, I'm about to defend Salvos Rhoska... THIS is how bad this is. Still, here goes. Salvos did not say that he wanted someone to kick E1 in the face, just that he'd laugh and/or applaud 'if' someone did. So you're defending him in condoning RL violence? Not at all. I'm pretty sure all of the words I used were English and two syllables or less. I'd be happy to explain any that are beyond you.
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 52	Posted - 2014.03.25 22:28:00 - [17] - Quote Since the last two pages of this thread have drifted rather off topic. Here's a recap: 1. Erotica1 is a sad, morally reprehensible sadist who delighted in tormenting someone who clearly didn't know better. He continues to take perverse pleasure in trauma he caused then and furore he's causing now. 2. The victim of said abuse completely lost his cool and went beserk. Some people, mostly those grasping at straws to defend the erstwhile E1, are using some of that verbal diatribe to justify everything E1 did. They're misguided at best, complicit at worst. 3. CCP is being put into a "damned if they do, damned if they don't" scenario. Not good. Not good at all. 4. Salvos is a pain the posterior, and his comments regarding a hypothetical future roundkick-to-the-face scenario have not really helped except to derail the debate. However, much as it pains me to admit it, he's largely made some extremely valid points elsewhere in this thread. I think that pretty much covers it.
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 52	Posted - 2014.03.25 22:34:00 - [18] - Quote Snupe Doggur wrote: Csill Es wrote: CCP has an unique opportunity to distance themselves from these bottom feeders - Erotica1 and cohorts -, but only if they act fast. They really only need to act well in advance of some real-life tragedy related to the game. There is time for CCP to decide to ally with Erotica 1 (and there's a great marketing slogan right there) or to make it clear that they will not allow their game to be used as a cyberbullying tool. That much is very simple in this situation. This, oh so much this.
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 54	Posted - 2014.03.25 22:49:00 - [19] - Quote Salvos Rhoska wrote: baltec1 wrote: It is if you are laughing and applauding at someone being attacked on the street. If its someone who I know has spent 2hrs tormenting a victim and his wife to the point of breaking, for no other reason than to sadistically enjoy their suffering and to share their recording of it with "friends", yes, I will absolutely laugh and applaud. Salvos, you're really not helping yourself here... Mags, Baltec, Dave, Jenn et al: Stop the broken record already! We know that the victim used some bad words and slurs when, after two hours of torment, he finally snapped (losing his composure, temper and possible a few marbles). Does that make his use of said words excusable? No. Does it make his stream of invective understandable? Yes. Let's move on shall we? The words the victim used, or the threats, empty or otherwise, made towards E1 were made after 2 hours of systematic psychological and emotional abuse. Yes, they were bad words. We get it. Really.
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 55	Posted - 2014.03.25 22:57:00 - [20] - Quote Dave Stark wrote: Xander Delacroix wrote: Salvos Rhoska wrote: baltec1 wrote: It is if you are laughing and applauding at someone being attacked on the street. If its someone who I know has spent 2hrs tormenting a victim and his wife to the point of breaking, for no other reason than to sadistically enjoy their suffering and to share their recording of it with "friends", yes, I will absolutely laugh and applaud. Salvos, you're really not helping yourself here... Mags, Baltec, Dave, Jenn et al: Stop the broken record already! We know that the victim used some bad words and slurs when, after two hours of torment, he finally snapped (losing his composure, temper and possible a few marbles). Does that make his use of said words excusable? No. Does it make his stream of invective understandable? Yes. Let's move on shall we? The words the victim used, or the threats, empty or otherwise, made towards E1 were made after 2 hours of systematic psychological and emotional abuse. Yes, they were bad words. We get it. Really. then stop pretending that erotica is the biggest monster in the story when he did very little in comparison. "Very little in comparison"?! You seriously just said that? Did you miss the part about the two hours of systematic psychological and emotional abuse? Oh yes, of course you did.

Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 72	Posted - 2014.03.26 02:49:00 - [21] - Quote Mario Putzo wrote: Ripards blog post came after the Massively thing, and it is entirely a one sided oped about an opponent in the CSM race. This is clearly a propaganda piece meant to disenfranchise Erotica 1's CSM campaign. Shots have been fired. Do you think he cares about the "victim" he is capitalizing on an opportunity to sink a competitor because he is a weak CSM member and fears his seat will not be there next session. I'm pretty sure that Ripard Teg announced quite a while back that he's not rerunning for CSM this year. As for Erotica1 being an "opponent"? Well, that's not really the case since E1's campaign is a rehash of James315's campaign last year (which was a joke). So Erotica1's campaign is a rehash of a joke, by a joke (and a joke in extremely poor taste at that). As for disenfranchising E1's campaign? Well, looks like he's doing a fine and dandy job of that all by his lonesome.
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 72	Posted - 2014.03.26 02:59:00 - [22] - Quote Goldiiee wrote: I would think E1 would be more concerned with winning CSM than anything else, disclosing who he is and by extension where he lives might not be the brightest idea at this point and time. Oh, I don't think this is going to be a problem to be perfectly honest, Erotica1 may have the courage of his convictions now, but once the tank of his faceless and nameless anonymity is stripped away by the CSM electoral process, he has nothing to hide behind. Ergo, he will pull out of the election at the eleventh hour. Probably citing "cyber-bullying" as his justification... Oh the irony, the irony.
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 73	Posted - 2014.03.26 03:50:00 - [23] - Quote Xuixien wrote: Salvos Rhoska wrote: How many of you ***hats are actually associated with the "Bonus Room" torture? Louse "butbut proteshtin mah Bonus Room fappage" seem to be pouring out of the woodwork. Frankly all this reminds me of the Belgian Pedo-circle debacle. Bunch of perverts trying to protect and yet hide their activities all at once. Raise your hands now so you can be counted and banned later. The cancer of this seems to be wider than I had thought. Good thing Rip brought it to light. Raising my hand: I listen to and thoroughly enjoy listening to live Bonus Rounds and their recordings afterwards. I applaud your courage in admitting you have a problem. Perhaps one day you'll be able to look in a mirror and see a human being looking back at you. Sadly, I suspect that Erotica1 has a long way to go before he can do the same.
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 73	Posted - 2014.03.26 04:03:00 - [24] - Quote Sabriz Adoudel wrote: LUMINOUS SPIRIT wrote: And Teamspeak is now aware of this issue as well. Did you make threats of violence against them too, or do you only do that to EVE players? You're just a broken record today aren't you?
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 73	Posted - 2014.03.26 04:31:00 - [25] - Quote Unsuccessful At Everything wrote: Tear Jar wrote: I know right? We are easily going to get over 100 pages in under 24 hours. If this keeps up for a few days, the thread will be setting Eve records. This thread might last for DAYS? Ill get my paint shop monkeys making more sheep pictures. We are going to need them. The only reason this thread hasn't been locked before now is because it is an unreasonable hour of the morning in Iceland, and I suspect the ISDs are waiting for a dev to call time on this one. However, there hasn't really been an original argument or idea for about a thousand posts or so, just a degeneration of the debate into personal attacks and general trolling.
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 75	Posted - 2014.03.26 05:05:00 - [26] - Quote Having read every post in this thread (I've been very bored today) I've noticed a pattern developing. With a few exceptions, such as Malcanis and a few of the Goonies, almost every post decrying "racist and death threatening behaviour" has sounded remarkably similar... almost as if it was written by the same person, or by a small number of people. Interesting that.
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 75	Posted - 2014.03.26 05:17:00 - [27] - Quote This thread ceased being productive a looong time ago.
Xander Delacroix Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 75	Posted - 2014.03.26 05:21:00 - [28] - Quote Unsuccessful At Everything wrote: Xander Delacroix wrote: This thread ceased being productive a looong time ago. Page 1 to be exact... Yep, I agree totally, since that was when the defence of Erotica1's reprehensible behaviour began.