yes, that is your job.

to play eve we have to agree to terms/conditons of use blah blah.

if you're not going to tell us what the T&Cs are, how are we meant to follow them?

You guys are far too creative and way too clever for us to have a black and white, do or die policy. There needs to be some flexibility when dealing with edge cases and oddball situations that come up.

that's not ambiguous in the slightest. it simply says nothing. CCP want their cake and eat it.

I'll elaborate later, i have to get ready for work.

My point is that subjectivity allows for, and encourages personal bias.

And the GM staff are carebear friendly, and it shows.

My name.... this is also a matter.

If that was even remotely likely to be what happens, there'd be about 6 people subbed right now since the other 299,994 would have been banned.

Could you and your lickspittle Kaarous at least try to come up with something close to plausible to cry over. It's not that I don't like your tears. It's just that they're not as tasty when they're so easy to harvest.

Mr Epeen

Eve is not a game for the faint hearted. It's a game that will chew you up and spit you out in the blink of an eye if you even think about letting your guard down or becoming complacent.

...

The entire design is based around being harsh, vicious, relentless, hostile and cold. It's about action and reaction, and the story that unfolds as you experience these two things.

...

EVE is designed to be harsh, it's designed to be challenging, and it's designed to be so deep and complex that it should fascinate and terrify you at the same time.

'Real life' harassment can't even occur unless you know who the hell is on the other side of the EVE account.

Anything that occurred between Ero 1 and Sohkar happened behind the veil of internet anonymity - by definition 'not real life'.

They told you to use your brain... Use it if you have one.

Don't lure victims to TS = No chance of undue torment and distress.

Sounds simple to me. Keep it 100% in-game.

So you could say CCP used their brain and you we're unsure and asked for clarification but they said from the beginning 'lol,no - use your brain and human decency"

I don't know why you are hanging up on that statement?
She's just stating that if you dont lure your victim onto a TS you can't be penealized for it. She never ever stated that you should not use TS. Thats an important point you and your friends try to...well..'overlook'...

Meh, my guess is she lives in Australia. $30 is a pretty standard minimum wage for a casual fast-food employee in their early to mid 20s who's worked for at least 24 months in the same job.

Here's the thing.

You (like everyone else posting) have no idea why the bans were done. You are simply speculating to push your agenda.

Mr Epeen

I must assume that here are a lot of griefer tears.
No one playing EvE at EvE's sake, is in any danger of being hit by the ban hammer.

What actual outcome are you looking for? A compendium of everything that may or may not be said?

Why do you continue to play and financially support a company that allows such things?

In the light of a flood of propaganda, your posts are based on FUD!
F ear
U n certainty
D oubt

Times change CCP adapts, so do you, or leave.
CCP leaves intentionaly no exact line, but expects to have some decency.
Seeing what was happening until now, i have noticed one thing:
CCP is not using the ban-hammer excessivly, so i am willing to assume, those bans where reasonable.

Whom do i trust more?
Griefers or CCP?

This event made my morning. Thank God CCP finally took out some of the trash.

Well it's general, but it's also their prerogative. If in doubt err on the side of caution, or, well, no one is forcing you to stick around.

I had some sympathy with the Ero1 thing as there was a lot of hysteria and run up to the actual ban, but these seem to be bans come out of their internal process, presumably working in a similar same that is has for years (doubt these were the first to be banned for being scummers). Are we going through this for every ban now?

I had to stop at the fourth page because of the tears rolling out of my monitor. My cup runneth over.

Top tears so far from the following characters making multiple posts. In no particular order:

Remiel Pollard
Kaarous Aldurald
Sabriz Adoudel
CALDARI CITIZEN 14330909 Uranus Shrugged
Solecist Project
Crumplecorn
Rabe Raptor
Anal Canal
Sibyyl

I will continue to add more names on the list as they appear.

Well it's possible they could all be innocent.

It also seems that it's very easy to whine about being banned rather than using a shred of common sense to maintain the most basic level of decency and etiquette when interacting with people in EVE.

Yes, EVE is designed to be harsh and unforgiving, but there's a blatant difference between that and outright harassment.

Those people who're saying that the lines are blurred and they don't understand the definition of harassment are looking for clarification so that they know how much they can bend the rules and push the boundaries before we'll take action, with a view to using any statement we make as ammunition for an appeal should they fall foul of the rules and be slapped with account action.

Sorry, but my original statement still stands. CCP will use best judgement on a case by case basis to ensure that real life harassment is kept out of EVE Online.

You can be happy all you want for some bonus room dudes getting banned; I imagine a lot of people wanted them gone. The measure of fuss that's going on over the blanket bans for "real life harassment" is that many of the players who were banned had nothing to do with it and were banned anyways (without warning).

Actually the Teamspeak in question is a hangout for all sorts of players, many who have nothing to do with any of the bonus room or CODE or any of it. Some random null guys got banned, some random FW guys got banned.. lol

CCP won't respond to it either.

Change: introduce even lower threshold for bans due to griefing
Result: Healthier gaming experience in high-sec for players

Stuff like bumping orca's/freighters/miners for hours straight
Stuff like shooting new players in velators repeatedly just for lols
Stuff like deliberately stealing mission items from players' missions

All of this and more is griefing. All of this must end.

There are other activities that are probably not ok. Activities tinged with sadism. Like using the sunk cost fallacy to convince a player to lose all their sp. That stuff can be avoided with common sense, and common decency.

He never petitioned Erotica 1, does not believe Erotica 1 should be banned, and comes out and says that he should technically be banned for the things he said himself while raging at E1 and his associates if the recording is considered legit evidence for TOS violations.

Sohkar rejects the claims that he was tortured. He got angry. He points out that after Ripard's blog post, he tried to reach out and talk to Ripard and sent him an eve-mail. Ripard has still not responded to him after several days.

Falcon stated simply and effectively what to do. He didn't say stay away from carebears. He didn't say to stop bumping the **** out of freighters. He said don't take the game into the real world. You, of all people, should understand the consequences of that.

So give it a rest people. Stop being obtuse and willfully ignorant of what CCP is stating when you know full well where the fuzzy gray line is. If you honestly can't figure it out, then you are too stupid to be a part of this community anyway and deserve the ban you will eventually get.

Even when CCP does very clearly draw a line in the sand; Erotica 1 for example, a vocal minority are still not satisfied and argue that either there should be no line in the sand because this is, Eve Online and it meant to be 'ard innit' or they see the line and argue that it is is the wrong place.

Once again, I put it to those who want 'clarification' come up with a workable proposal CCP and the player base can get behind.

Most of this thread is just like three year kids kids saying, 'yeah but' to everything their parents say.

Put up. or shut up.

What would you like to see C: changed, specifically, and what do you think the end R: result would be? Make it a one liner and then support it afterwards IF you feel that is needed.

m

My point is that many posters in this thread want CCP to be more explicit about what is and what is not beyond the pale, but even when CCP do draw a very clear line in the sand, some folk are still not happy.

Dear Sibyyl, instead of whinging, why don't you draw up a set of 'clear lines' that cover all possible circumstances and send them to CCP, they will be most grateful for your help I am sure.