For one, I'm not breaking the rules. For another, no valid reason was provided. I was providing information to the playerbase and highlighting CCP's inconsistency. Finally, given that CCP is practicing double standards now, what rules?

Then you should file a ******* petition and not post in some random thread. If you already did that and the answer wasn't to your liking, you can escalate the petition to a senior GM. If the answer is still not to your liking: I can help you find the "Cancel subscription" button if you are not smart enough to find it.

Then you should file a ******* petition and not post in some random thread. If you already did that and the answer wasn't to your liking, you can escalate the petition to a senior GM. If the answer is still not to your liking: I can help you find the "Cancel subscription" button if you are not smart enough to find it.

Where did CCP say that Erotica 1 was banned because of the TS recordings?

For one, I'm not breaking the rules. For another, no valid reason was provided. I was providing information to the playerbase and highlighting CCP's inconsistency. Finally, given that CCP is practicing double standards now, what rules?

Why so angry? A fellow player got threatened, harssed and bullied and you (in a thread about An Announcement Regarding Real Life Harassment no less) keep pushing him for an emotional reaction.

Stop it.

Ctrl-C + Ctrl-V = leet debating skills

They didn't, they never do. But given the publicity, this was bound to become public knowledge whether they announced it or not.

Where did Erotica 1 say he got banned because of the TS recordings?

Where did Erotica 1 say he got banned because of the TS recordings?

Why do idiots repeat questions they already have answers to? You and Salvos, together, might actually make half a brain cell.

Does that mean you don't actually know why Erotica 1 got banned? If you do, feel free to link a post (here or on minerbumping.com) by him stating why he got banned.

He got banned because CCP was reacting to the carebear morality patrol instead of actually moderating

Proof and citation needed.

Naturally, you ignored the part of my post that mattered.

You have not proved why Erotica1 was banned, anywhere.

None of your posts have provided any such evidence or proof.

If he was going to be banned over the sohkar incident, why now instead of when it was first made public knowledge in February? That's the part that matters, Salvos, the part you are selectively ignoring. As you so often do with reasoning that tramples your 'intellect'.

That's the part that matters, Salvos, the part you are selectively ignoring.

Explain your earlier comments in this thread:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4405578#post4405578
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4405639#post4405639
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4405738#post4405738

In all of these you claim that nobody knows the reasons for actions that CCP takes, because they do not discuss how they enact their policy on the part of individual players.

Are you going back on your word now?

Are you now claiming to KNOW why Erotica1 was banned, AGAINST what you have said in these earlier posts?

If so, where is your evidence or proof to support your claims of why Erotica1 was banned?

You are doubletalking and falling on your own sword.

That in addition to already claiming you are leaving, and deliberately and repeatedly disputing a Devs locking of the thread in which you announced it, even though he provided 3 legitimate reasons for doing so.

SLAM DUNK
SIT DOWN, SON!

Do you know what deductive reasoning is? No?

Then you didn't slam dunk ****.

You're right, I can't prove it.

But what's the alternative explanation?

Rekt.

Leave as you said you would, while you have even a single shred of dignity or credibility left.

Do you have evidence that CCP had knowledge of this incident back in february? Do you have evidence that CCP didn't do anything prior to the announcement yesterday? Could it be that CCP asked the opinions of the CSM prior to acting?

Personally, 2 would make the most sense, since it's the way most things work. If you hate someone on Facebook and you harass them on twitter, Facebook don't take action against you.

Edit: And note: it's not that it has to 100% cover every nuance of a situation. It just has to cover more than generically saying "don;t harass people", as that's a subjective measure.

While the content of online interactions between players cannot realistically be gated within our game worlds, CCP strongly disapproves of clear and extraordinary levels of real life harassment against our players in the outside world

It was made a matter of public record on minerbumping.com and posted to these very forums back in February to mixed reactions.

...sociopaths of this game...

I take that as a "No" then. Case closed.