Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |

Coffee Rocks
Thrall Nation Brave Collective
133
|
Posted - 2014.03.29 15:35:00 -
[1] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Please can you help the CSM by choosing which of the three courses of action the CSM should recommend to CCP as the way forward.
Choice: 2 (obviously)
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:Malcanis wrote: They stated their position yesterday. It boils down to: if you're too much of a dickbag to one of our customers then we don't want to do business with you.
So long as you confine your dickbaggery to reasonable limits, you're fine.
If the community feels itself unable to keep itself within reasonable limits, then the alternative is for CCP to explicitly define those limits and I doubt anyone would like the result of that, because that definition would have to cope with the most vulnerable and least resilient of CCP's customers.
Wow. I am speechless. You get to have a seat on the CSM, and you openly refer to paying customers and your fellow gamers as "Dickbags". Simply awful. I hope you are removed from the CSM soon. I don't want you representing the game I love.
Quite a while back I called Malcanis out for "stepping over the line (at the time) a bit much and his replies were starting to be 'too much sarcasm, and no help'". He considered what I had to say and I think he has reigned in since then.
This exchange is making me believe I may have misspoken. The fact is I'm surprised he hasn't called you worse by this point.
I'll put this simply: Malcanis is right. The Law of Unintended Consequences is in full effect with #1 - you may picture it being one way, but it will most certainly be the other. I left WoW years ago b/c I saw them trending harder into "easy mode"; I don't want CCP to ever feel it should go that direction.
Also, he's an elected official; NOT an employee of CCP. If you don't like how he talks to you, don't vote for him. However, I'd urge you to consider it doesn't matter how he talks to you in the end as long as he is doing his job on the council.
thecoffeerocks.blogspot.com Twitter: @thecoffeerocks |-áSteam: CoffeeRocks | thecoffeerocks.blogspot.com https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=327221 |

Coffee Rocks
Thrall Nation Brave Collective
134
|
Posted - 2014.03.29 15:39:00 -
[2] - Quote
Although, I should be saying this: I'd like more stringent enforcement of the forum rules... would that make it 1.95? Or 2? thecoffeerocks.blogspot.com Twitter: @thecoffeerocks |-áSteam: CoffeeRocks | thecoffeerocks.blogspot.com https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=327221 |

Coffee Rocks
Thrall Nation Brave Collective
134
|
Posted - 2014.03.29 15:42:00 -
[3] - Quote
Caljiav Ocanon wrote: We shouldn't need laws governing "clean air" (ie. clean air act). But we do.
I just wanted to add that the Republicans gutted the heart of the CAA out back in 2010-12. Along with portions of the Clean Water Act. A lot of it so you can enjoy fracking and "easier" (or no) pesky environmental regs to follow.
Food for thought.
P.S. I'm not trying to derail the discussion; this is one of those "think about it" comments.
thecoffeerocks.blogspot.com Twitter: @thecoffeerocks |-áSteam: CoffeeRocks | thecoffeerocks.blogspot.com https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=327221 |

Coffee Rocks
Thrall Nation Brave Collective
134
|
Posted - 2014.03.29 15:47:00 -
[4] - Quote
Altrue wrote:I'll pick 1.
Why? Because I don't see how talking badly to another player can be, in any situation, a positive thing.
Yes the 2 would be acceptable because we are adults and could probably moderate ourselves. But when we don't, and it happens, what do we gain from it? Nothing.
Judging by the number of people attracted by brave because of the stay classy rule, I'd say that I'm not the only one in favor of a ruthless gameplay environment, with measured human behaviour.
7o thecoffeerocks.blogspot.com Twitter: @thecoffeerocks |-áSteam: CoffeeRocks | thecoffeerocks.blogspot.com https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=327221 |
|
|