| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Fractal Muse
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
1
   |
Posted - 2012.03.26 17:01:00 -
[1] - Quote
Karadion wrote:
I did not pick the outcome or their threat therefore I am not responsible. These people make those choices out of their own doing. Say the bank does a foreclosure on your house and you threaten to kill yourself because you failed to pay your mortgage, why is it the bank's fault? Are you saying that the bank should just back off and let the person keep his home because his life is a good bargaining chip against anyone? "Sorry, Todd. I'm leaving you." "You turbonigger *****, I'm going to kill myself if you leave". My friend had her boyfriend did that to her and I told her to leave anyways. She's not responsible no differently than I am responsible for some douchebag that threatens to kill themselves because I scammed them out of their possessions.
There is a significant difference in the two scenarios.
To put them into alignment, in your example, the bank would actively be taunting the person who feels upset over the foreclosure.
So, after the bank does the foreclosure and you threaten to kill yourself the bank comes back to you and starts telling you that you should. Then, the bank actively enlists the 'support' of other banks and other institutions to all send 'encouragement' to you to kill yourself.
In your friend's situation, it is the same thing, you did not start messaging the ex-boyfriend with messages to 'go ahead and kill yourself' instead you supported your friend in their decision to leave without further disturbing the ex.
The line that got crossed isn't so much that someone claimed that they would kill themselves it is the active encouragement to do so and the soliciting of others to encourage it as well.
|
Fractal Muse
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 21:21:00 -
[2] - Quote
I watched the thing and the statements that were made.
The comment that The Mittani made about seeking out the player to have him kill himself is the issue.
The Mittani suggested the idea without prompting.
The Mittani wrote:"Incidentally guys, if you want to make the guy kill himself his name is The Wis. It's "T" "H" "E" "Space" "W" "I" "S"
He has his own corp. Find him."
(link to source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=E7Ki91U-mBE#t=4320s)
What should happen is the question.
If The Mittani was just like any other EVE player then CCP wouldn't need to do much more than it is. Say that the forum was uncensored and the views of its participants were their own and not those of CCP. Due to the comment being made CCP was going to initiate its Suicide Watch protocol and monitor the situation carefully.
As CCP I would add the following course of action as well: Give the player in question a name change should the player desire such.
But, The Mittani isn't any other EVE player. He is an elected representative of the playerbase and the chairman of the CSM.
As a member of the CSM he needs to adhere to a fairly broad and lenient manner of behaviour as laid out in the CSM documentation:
Quote:Candidates are expected to be active on the CSM forums and participate in the discussion of topics. They are also expected to adhere to the EULA/TOS and carry themselves in a manner that sets an example for other players to follow.
The question facing CCP is this, did what The Mittani say in this situation adhere to the EULA/TOS and did he carry himself in a manner that sets an example for other players to follow.
If there is a further agreement that CSM representatives must sign from CCP about their behaviour then that would need to be examined as well by CCP.
The latter part of this question is simple, yes, of course he carried himself in a manner that is an example for others to follow. The example is not stipulated to be bad or good, therefore, simply by being him he is fulfilling that requirement.
So, the question boils down to this: Does The Mittani's behaviour break the EULA or TOS in any manner? Please note, the conditions of the CSM does not limit this behaviour to be within EVE. There is nothing in the documentation that explicitly states that the TOS and EULA need to be adhered to solely within the EVE environment. And, even if it did, one could argue that being at the Fanfast in a sanctioned CCP event would be part of the EVE environment therefore he would need to operate within that framework of behaviour.
If encouraging other players to seek out someone for the purposes of them committing suicide is against either the EULA or TOS of the game then CCP has to remove The Mittani from office.
If the EULA or TOS were not broken by this then CCP doesn't have to do anything.
The Mittani may have broken local 'cyber bullying' laws or similar legislation but since I am not a legal expert I couldn't tell you if he did or not.
I do feel that what he said was not professional or a good depiction of what an EVE player is but, unfortunately, his statements are clearly supported by many EVE players as well. So, perhaps he is properly representing a percentage of the game's population.
I wouldn't support what he said and I would condemn the statement fully. I feel it is reprehensible and disgusting. I feel that it betrays a lack of morality and maturity but that is my own opinion. I consider it to be akin to an attempt to incite people to try and kill another human being.
But, the matter is up for CCP to decide if they feel that The Mittani adheres to their code of conduct and if so they can leave him in place while shaking their heads at the negative press he has given the game. The Mittani is under no obligation to do anything in terms of an apology or stepping down. |
Fractal Muse
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 23:14:00 -
[3] - Quote
Voith wrote:
If you blow up my internet space ship, can I threaten suicide and get you banned too?
No.
But, if he blows up your ship and you threaten suicide then he attempts to get you to commit suicide and encourages others to harass you to commit suicide as well, yes, he should be banned if that is against the EULA/TOS of EVE Online.
|
Fractal Muse
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 23:22:00 -
[4] - Quote
Professor Alphane wrote:
No excuse it was a prepared speech and his intent was always clear...
Apology or not CCP MUST perma ban
While I found the comments to be reprehensible he did not say it as part of his "prepared" speech but blurted it out during the question and answer phase.
|
Fractal Muse
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 23:31:00 -
[5] - Quote
Professor Alphane wrote:
He had a presetation of the mail . he just knocked that up for lulz pissed on Icelandic grog did he?
That was an example of the mail that Goon's get.
He didn't do anything other than read the mail. He didn't editorialize it or provide a commentary at that time to suggest that the person should pursue any course of action in regards to the mail itself. He read a couple of other mails out loud as well.
It is clear that he didn't have a planned intent to encourage everyone to have this person commit suicide.
His comment to that end was during the question and answer phase. As such it was reactionary / spur of the moment and not planned as such. |
Fractal Muse
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 23:50:00 -
[6] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:
No but the slide of the mail was
For me the issue at the heart of this is whether or not the comments made by The Mittani after the presentation during the Question and Answer phase constituted a breach of conduct in some manner. If it did, then he should be removed from the CSM.
Is the issue for you that he read out loud a series of mails that the Goons received over the past year?
If so, why focus on one of the mail messages in particular? |
| |
|