Originally by: Sheykal

---

I would agree with your number 1 reason, if it was just that, junk. But its not anymore. It has value, which is why loot is protected.

And you can solve this without having to flag a salvager. You simply make wreckage unsalvagable to players other then the one that created it, but only for 10 minutes or so, in which time it would be 'released' for public salvage. A simple bloody solution and you solve the frustrating problem of people salvaging every kill you make, before you can even work on it.

---

Originally by: Agent Li

---

Transparent attempt to hide the fact that I'm a supporter of griefing via salvage stealing.

---

Originally by: Agent Li

---

Originally by: Xaen

---

Originally by: Agent Li

---

Transparent attempt to hide the fact that I'm a supporter of griefing via salvage stealing.

---

There, fixed that for ya.

Invading someone's mission and salvaging their cans without their express consent is stealing and griefing.

Those who genuinely just want salvage and are not seeking to cause other players grief either ask permission or wait until the mission runner moves on before they start salvaging.

Apparently not, because scanning down mission runners and taking their stuff and attacking them is apparently a game mechanic.

I want to salvage the ship you're driving. How am I supposed to salvage it while it's still flyable?
Period.

---

---

Originally by: Kuar Z'thain

---

Originally by: Xaen

---

BIG WORDS!!

---

No one said it wasn't stealing or griefing. What we're trying to say is that it is an intended game mechanic and that you should deal with it in that manner, not try to treat it as an exploit or bug.

---

Originally by: Kuar Z'thain

---

Originally by: Xaen

---

Originally by: Kuar Z'thain

---

Originally by: Xaen

---

BIG WORDS!!

---

No one said it wasn't stealing or griefing. What we're trying to say is that it is an intended game mechanic and that you should deal with it in that manner, not try to treat it as an exploit or bug.

---

If we agree it's griefing, then it's petitionable (as griefing is expressly forbidden). If it's petitionable, the ToS violator is subject to punishment and should cease or be banned.

---

Please enlighten us, where is this mentioned in the EULA/ToS?

---

Originally by: Kuar Z'thain

---

Oh and btw, griefing is not harassment.

---

Originally by: Agent Li

---

Originally by: Xaen

---

Originally by: Kuar Z'thain

---

Originally by: Xaen

---

BIG WORDS!!

---

No one said it wasn't stealing or griefing. What we're trying to say is that it is an intended game mechanic and that you should deal with it in that manner, not try to treat it as an exploit or bug.

---

If we agree it's griefing, then it's petitionable (as griefing is expressly forbidden). If it's petitionable, the ToS violator is subject to punishment and should cease or be banned.

---

Odd how blowing up mission runners and taking their loot isn't getting petitioned.

Yeah, if I did it to the same person, day in and day out, making their life a living hell, that's griefing...

If I scan down mission runners in low sec, come down, take their loot and salvage their wrecks (and blow the mission runners up), that's not griefing.

In high sec, CONCORD can show up - but the mission runner can still shoot at me if I take the loot (which I would, since their wreck will contain more loot and more salvage than most NPC wrecks). That's still not griefing.

---

Originally by: Kuar Z'thain

---

Well, by that logic then its not griefing if there is some gain for the interloper. So I retract my previous statement

Petition what you consider griefing and just leave this to the GMs.

Unless someone can ring the Wrangler Bell and have him clear this up.

---

Originally by: Kuar Z'thain

---

I don't agree with you that there is contradiction in that statement you referred to.

---

Originally by: CCP

---

An example of grief play would be the so called "Can baiting" in starter systems. An experienced player drops a cargo container with some items in front of a station in a starter system and waits for a new player to take from it. The new player is flagged and promptly attacked and killed by the owner of the container. Doing the same in starter tutorial complexes is also considered grief play and will not be tolerated.

---

Originally by: CCP

---

A grief player, or "griefer," is a player who devotes much of his time to making othersÆ lives miserable, in a large part deriving his enjoyment of the game from these activities while he does not profit from it in any way.

---

Originally by: Kuar Z'thain

---

It's not a lack of reading comprehension to disagree with you.

---

Originally by: Cailais

---

Series of straw man arguments

---

Originally by: Cailais

---

Originally by: Xaen

---

Originally by: Cailais

---

Series of straw man arguments

---

Bunk.

---

Nice troll. Unfortunately your detailed, erudite, reasoned response full of carefully considered and logical argument consisted of a highly edited (and may I say rather cliche quote) and only one word.

On that basis, I think I'll claim the field Sir.

Better luck next time

C.

---

Originally by: Ki An

---

Originally by: Xaen

---

[

Originally by: CCP

---

A grief player, or "griefer," is a player who devotes much of his time to making othersÆ lives miserable, in a large part deriving his enjoyment of the game from these activities while he does not profit from it in any way.

---

Yet it is most definitely still griefing. Thus whether or not an action is considered griefing is up to the GMs, documented specific cases cannot and do not cover all forms of griefing. If you need it to be spelled out for you for each specific case, expect to get warned, suspended, or banned.

---

What? You quote CCP's defenition of griefing, and then you say "but they're wrong because this is so griefing, and you still think you have a good argument?

---

Originally by: Ki An

---

Originally by: Xaen

---

That sound you hear is my point flying over your head. I reiterated once already. Not doing it again.

---

So, your point, elegantly disguised, was that we shouldn't take what CCP has written in the EULA or TOS as granted, and instead we should let the GM's make the decisions? Is that right?

---

Originally by: Ki An

---

Then I would like to pose you the question: Have you ever had a petition about someone 'stealing' your wrecks answered with a positive outcome for you?

---