EVE Search - Leave it to Goonswarm...

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Corporation, Alliance and Organization Discussions

Leave it to Goonswarm...

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Sophia Truthspeaker Amarr THE INTERNET.	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:29:00 - [61] Originally by: Devian 666 We're just retreating to fortress delve. Its not retreating! Its called 'strategic corrections of the front lines'. Retreating is negativ and bad and lossy, strategic is clever and corrections good. _________ The truth is out there
Venomire Amarr GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:34:00 - [62] Originally by: Avon So, are you saying that when you took the regions BoB left behind you were beating us, and therefore by the same token you are currently being beaten? I thought you controlled our game, and thus defined what was victory or defeat. Are you now relinquishing this claim?
Venomire Amarr GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:39:00 - [63] Keeping in mind that particular piece of propaganda was around in 06. Are you sure you wish to tread down this path Avon?
Doctor Penguin Amarr Shadow Command Tenth Legion	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:41:00 - [64] This thread is now about random whining from and about everybody involved in 0.0 combat. Oh wait. ________________________________________________
Hanabi Kazan Gallente GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:48:00 - [65] Originally by: Avon So, are you saying that when you took the regions BoB left behind you were beating us, and therefore by the same token you are currently being beaten? yeah youre right its the same. bob abandoned the south to move to delve, and we also abandoned the south to move to delve. sorry you might not get that here I translated: GOKU OTAKU SUKEBE GAIJIN LOLICON HENTAI DESU DESU
Doctor Penguin Amarr Shadow Command Tenth Legion	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:51:00 - [66] Point proven.
Karlemgne Minmatar Tides Of War	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:02:00 - [67] Edited by: Karlemgne on 08/02/2009 23:03:18 Edited by: Karlemgne on 08/02/2009 23:02:46 Originally by: Mihyang Edited by: Mihyang on 08/02/2009 20:50:06 Originally by: Karlemgne Please for the love of god figure out what words mean before you use them. Kthnxsbye. -Karl Point of order! You can exploit your relationship with a GM to cheat. Let's not argue semantics. Sure you can. Unfortunately, the way we are using exploit here has a specific context. A context that is unique to the developers and players of video games. So on the one hand, arguing that someone "exploited" game mechanics in the destruction of bob (using director roles of holding corps in unintended ways) is using the word "exploited" correct, given the context. Please don't think I'm taking a normative stand here, because I truly don't give a flying **** about this particular "event" in eve's history. On the other hand, saying that someone "exploited" by getting a developer to use a game client whose intended use is to spawn things is not using the word correctly, given the context. The former scenario is "exploiting" (potentially) and the latter is just plain cheating. As for arguing semantics... I think they are important so I will, but thanks for the suggestion. -Karlemgne
Sophia Truthspeaker Amarr THE INTERNET.	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:20:00 - [68] Originally by: Karlemgne [So on the one hand, arguing that someone "exploited" game mechanics in the destruction of bob (using director roles of holding corps in unintended ways) is using the word "exploited" correct, given the context. It is going further than that. I bet lots of stuff happening now in eve were never intended by the devs. Still players found a way, and it made good and great additions. So an exploit is, what ccp says it is. Generally it has to screw with the balances in the game or circumwent intended facts (pos bowling vs ships safe in pos). Would it been an exploit if one or several spies undermine moral of corps until they leave alliance by themself? Either way, I don't think the word exploit is the right here. Not sure what the right word is, loophole is too close to exploit really, game mechanic a bit too soft perhaps. How about legal but questionable action? ^^
Static Kinetics Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:20:00 - [69] oh yes please keep feeding me pubbie tears yes
Sophia Truthspeaker Amarr THE INTERNET.	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:23:00 - [70] Originally by: Static Kinetics oh yes please keep feeding me pubbie tears yes Why would I cry? Good chance to see both goons and bob die. Haven't had that much fun since a long time ago.

Static Kinetics Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:25:00 - [71] Originally by: Sophia Truthspeaker Originally by: Static Kinetics oh yes please keep feeding me pubbie tears yes Why would I cry? Good chance to see both goons and bob die. Haven't had that much fun since a long time ago. i was referring to the OP i actually like your posts. you make me fuzzy inside
Devian 666 Gallente Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.08 23:57:00 - [72] Originally by: Karlemgne Sure you can. Unfortunately, the way we are using exploit here has a specific context. A context that is unique to the developers and players of video games. So on the one hand, arguing that someone "exploited" game mechanics in the destruction of bob (using director roles of holding corps in unintended ways) is using the word "exploited" correct, given the context. Please don't think I'm taking a normative stand here, because I truly don't give a flying **** about this particular "event" in eve's history. On the other hand, saying that someone "exploited" by getting a developer to use a game client whose intended use is to spawn things is not using the word correctly, given the context. The former scenario is "exploiting" (potentially) and the latter is just plain cheating. As for arguing semantics... I think they are important so I will, but thanks for the suggestion. -Karlemgne Quoting the worst poster from C&P. http://obeythekitten.com/
portney Minmatar The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:40:00 - [73] Originally by: George Clinton Originally by: Doosh Bagge ...to detonate the biggest game mechanics exploit in Eve history, and then launch an onslaught of "BoB Cheated!" threads. using a turncoating director in the executor corp to disband an alliance isn't an exploit within the current game mechanics, no matter how hard you want it to be. now, using a game developer that's in your alliance, who made himself known to you, who leads your capital fleet oh so coincidentally, to spawn you tech 2 blueprints when it isn't possible to receive tech 2 blueprints outside of a lottery system that hasn't given away anything good in a real long time - that is exploiting. you are a shill and you are probably a molle alt and the Quote: mothership has a long memory when it comes to people stealing the funk. wtb Wyvern
Karlemgne Minmatar Tides Of War	Posted - 2009.02.09 01:00:00 - [74] Edited by: Karlemgne on 09/02/2009 01:03:40 Edited by: Karlemgne on 09/02/2009 01:00:24 Originally by: Devian 666 Originally by: Karlemgne Sure you can. Unfortunately, the way we are using exploit here has a specific context. A context that is unique to the developers and players of video games. So on the one hand, arguing that someone "exploited" game mechanics in the destruction of bob (using director roles of holding corps in unintended ways) is using the word "exploited" correct, given the context. Please don't think I'm taking a normative stand here, because I truly don't give a flying **** about this particular "event" in eve's history. On the other hand, saying that someone "exploited" by getting a developer to use a game client whose intended use is to spawn things is not using the word correctly, given the context. The former scenario is "exploiting" (potentially) and the latter is just plain cheating. As for arguing semantics... I think they are important so I will, but thanks for the suggestion. -Karlemgne Quoting the worst poster from C&P. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem *edit excerpt from the link for those too lazy to follow. "An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the source making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject." You just pwnd your own face. A tip of my hat to you. On a related note, I rarely ever post in C&P anymore, I'm mostly a general channel guy these days. I am, however, tickled to know that I made such an impression on you over there, that you remember me two years on. For my part I have no idea who you are, other than I recognize your alliance tag. Cheers, -Karlemgne
Karlemgne Minmatar Tides Of War	Posted - 2009.02.09 01:18:00 - [75] Edited by: Karlemgne on 09/02/2009 01:20:27 Originally by: Sophia Truthspeaker So an exploit is, what ccp says it is. Generally it has to screw with the balances in the game or circumwent intended facts (pos bowling vs ships safe in pos). I agree with you. In the final analysis what is an exploit ultimately boils down to what the makers of the video game say an exploit is. Having said that, its sometimes useful for us to argue our cases as to what you and I think are things being exploited, because that might have an impact on what CCP (or any game developer) ultimately decides is an exploit. Quote: Would it been an exploit if one or several spies undermine moral of corps until they leave alliance by themself? Personally, I would say, in eve, no. Some might disagree; however, don't take what I said as an indication I think an exploit actually was utilized in this case. My interest in this really was purely semantic. My only point is that the OP is entitled to use "exploit" while trying to argue that what happened was an unintended use of a game mechanic, while the Goonie poster was not. The T20 incident was just plain cheating, which by the way, I think is infinitely worse than exploiting something in game. Quote: Either way, I don't think the word exploit is the right here. Not sure what the right word is, loophole is too close to exploit really, game mechanic a bit too soft perhaps. How about legal but questionable action? ^^ Yeah... I dunno. Ultimately that's up for CCP to decide. My personal feelings, without taking sides (seriously guys) is that the "destruction" of an alliance in such a circumstance is FAR to easy. I think going forward that CCP should probably rethink alliance mechanics and ensure that something like this doesn't happen again. Just my 2 cents. -Karlemgne
Illiya Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.09 01:35:00 - [76] Originally by: Generally Whingeypops TBH if Goons don't manage to kick BoB out of Delve after paying a director that much r/l money to disband the alliance and dropping all jammers etc I'd be gobsmacked. I think the fun bit will come when BoB try to take it back. this post hasn't gotten enough attention, +rep Sig removed, inappropriate content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Mitnal
Devian 666 Gallente Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.09 02:00:00 - [77] Originally by: Karlemgne You just pwnd your own face. Thank you for providing evidence to support my claim. http://obeythekitten.com/
Devian 666 Gallente Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.09 02:01:00 - [78] Originally by: Karlemgne My personal feelings, without taking sides (seriously guys) is that the "destruction" of an alliance in such a circumstance is FAR to easy. You have been biased against GoonSwarm for "two years". Please explain how you are not taking sides. http://obeythekitten.com/
Karlemgne Minmatar Tides Of War	Posted - 2009.02.09 02:30:00 - [79] Originally by: Devian 666 Originally by: Karlemgne You just pwnd your own face. Thank you for providing evidence to support my claim. I actually supported that claim, and sourced it. Your mind handles logic in interesting ways, my friend.
Karlemgne Minmatar Tides Of War	Posted - 2009.02.09 02:43:00 - [80] Edited by: Karlemgne on 09/02/2009 02:46:55 Edited by: Karlemgne on 09/02/2009 02:44:26 Originally by: Devian 666 Originally by: Karlemgne My personal feelings, without taking sides (seriously guys) is that the "destruction" of an alliance in such a circumstance is FAR to easy. You have been biased against GoonSwarm for "two years". Please explain how you are not taking sides. Number one, I have not been "biased against goonswarm for two years." In fact, if you were to bother to search through all of my posts I'm sure you'd find that I was a vocal supporter of goonswarm during the T20 incident, I was a vocal supporter of goonswarm during the war against BoB that followed, and I was a vocal supporter of goonswarm for some time after that. I ceased being a vocal supporter of goonswarm when the whole ISD threadnaught appeared. I thought, and still think, that calculated metagaming aimed directly at harming the game I love (and the company that makes said game,) originating from a third party website community, is unacceptable. It is also true that I vocally spoke out on the behalf of the people whom Goonswarm "scammed" during the initial bob war. Seriously, getting people who wanted to commit themselves to helping take down BoB to cyno out their capitals to your outposts, then blowing them up, was a great way to alienate me and others. I've also had some minor altercations with goonies on the forums who like to resort to insults based on religion, ethnicity, and sexual orientation. Just because I disagreed with Goonies on these issues, while supporting the initial war against BoB, should not lead you to conclude that I am either "for" Goonswarm or "against" Goonswarm in regards to the issue being discussed. Furthermore, even if you conclude, and this is important, that I have always been "against" Goonswarm, there is no logical connection between my past opinions and the opinions I have offered here in this thread. You must base your conclusion ONLY on what I've said here. Now going back, how is it possible to construe ANYTHING I've said to be either pro-goonie or anti-goonie? Or even pro-BoB or anti-BoB? You can't. The only thing I ever argued here was about how to use the word "exploit." I also mentioned that the T20 incident was pure cheating, and cheating is always worse than simply exploiting game mechanics. -Karlemgne

Devian 666 Gallente Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.09 02:51:00 - [81] I am sorry to hear that goons have offended you. I can assure you that this should have never occured. It's unheard of. T20 is outside of game mechanics and is GM cheating. Everyone gets annoyed about things like that. Scamming and disbanding alliances are legitimate in-game mechanics and have been legitimate for a long time. If you do not like these mechanics you should not support a game that treats them as fair play. You should be attacking CCP instead of GoonSwarm as they are the entity that you have an issue with. http://obeythekitten.com/
Ai Zian Caldari Ordo Ministorum	Posted - 2009.02.09 03:03:00 - [82] Originally by: Hanabi Kazan Originally by: Avon So, are you saying that when you took the regions BoB left behind you were beating us, and therefore by the same token you are currently being beaten? yeah youre right its the same. bob abandoned the south to move to delve, and we also abandoned the south to move to delve. sorry you might not get that here I translated: GOKU OTAKU SUKEBE GAIJIN LOLICON HENTAI DESU DESU Needs moar Desu.
FredFred Burger Caldari Council of Human Urban Meatshield Paratroopers	Posted - 2009.02.09 03:10:00 - [83] Originally by: Lady Lard kenny you need to calm down I thought they killed Kenny a long time ago...
Karlemgne Minmatar Tides Of War	Posted - 2009.02.09 03:13:00 - [84] Originally by: Devian 666 I am sorry to hear that goons have offended you. I can assure you that this should have never occured. It's unheard of. Cough. Cough. I will give you guys one thing, you are often funny as hell. Quote: T20 is outside of game mechanics and is GM cheating. As I've said also. That was a very unfortunate incident. Quote: Scamming and disbanding alliances are legitimate in-game mechanics and have been legitimate for a long time. Well, lets face it, what is allowed or not allowed, exploit or not an exploit, they all ultimately boil down to what CCP says they are. But that's neither here nor there. In reference to disbanding the alliance, I never made a comment as to whether or not I thought it was an exploit or not. I simply said the OP was entitled, given the definition of "exploit" in the context of video gaming, to try and argue that disbanding the alliance in such a manner was an exploit. There is a not so subtle distinction here. I'll just assume you're smart enough to see it. Regarding scamming. I have never argued here, nor anywhere else, that scamming should not be allowed, that it was not part of the game, or that goonswarm broke any "rules" in the implementation of a scam. What I argued was, and this is old news, that Goonswarms policy of scamming people who wanted to participate in the just struggle against BoB was unethical. Essentially I argued that those who carried out these scams were bad people, and that Goonswarm, as an organization, was morally suspect for allowing said scams to continue. This has nothing to do with eve as a game, it has to do with the people playing the game, at least when it comes to my understanding of their in-game avatars (which is importantly distinct from the people behind said avatars). Regardless, I was never attacking Goonswarm here, on these forums, until you decided to be childish and pick a fight. And I still don't think I'm attacking Goonswarm, simply explicating my position put forward on another forum, over a year ago, because you decided to misrepresent it here. -Karlemgne
Devian 666 Gallente Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.09 03:25:00 - [85] There is the issue of the mechanics of disbanding an alliance. I feel this is discussion better suited to features and ideas. There is the other issue of why BoB security was so lax in tinfoil but that's their internal issue. Originally by: Karlemgne Essentially I argued that those who carried out these scams were bad people, and that Goonswarm, as an organization, was morally suspect for allowing said scams to continue. This has nothing to do with eve as a game, it has to do with the people playing the game, at least when it comes to my understanding of their in-game avatars (which is importantly distinct from the people behind said avatars). This is your issue. You assign morals to in-game entities and decide if they are "bad people". You are welcome to roleplay this issue, but this is definitely a bias against GoonSwarm as scamming is an entirely ethical profession.
Karlemgne Minmatar Tides Of War	Posted - 2009.02.09 04:05:00 - [86] Originally by: Devian 666 There is the issue of the mechanics of disbanding an alliance. I feel this is discussion better suited to features and ideas. Tell that to the original poster. Not that it isn't the case, that there is a goon thread complaining about sovereignty mechanics right over there . So forgive me if I don't take your suggestion to be anything other than intentionally trying to troll me. Quote: There is the other issue of why BoB security was so lax in tinfoil but that's their internal issue. Well hell. Can you tell me then, what exactly is the purpose of CAOD? Quote: This is your issue. You assign morals to in-game entities and decide if they are "bad people". You are welcome to roleplay this issue, but this is definitely a bias against GoonSwarm as scamming is an entirely ethical profession. First, I made it clear that I understand the difference between in-game behavior and real life behavior. So that's a non-issue. Nonetheless, it is still possible to make ethical claims about peoples actions as avatars, and organizations as in-game entities. You act like this is strange, again I will gesture to the entire CAOD forums and almost everything Goonswarm has ever complained about vis-a-vis BoB. Please, though, rest assured, my ethical judgments are not entirely limited to Goonswarm. Additionally, any support Goonswarm hopes to obtain from the greater eve community in regards to their position with BoB has to appeal to ethical claims. -Karlemgne
HostageTaker Gallente Black Nova Corp KenZoku	Posted - 2009.02.09 05:41:00 - [87] Originally by: Avon Originally by: Venomire We're doing more damage to our Sov then -A- and Friedns are. We're dismantling our own space and moving, or did you miss that leaked post from Darius, where he announced we're leaving the South and moving into Delve? ET will certainly meet his time table of getting us out of Feyth within a year, but only because we're helping. That's odd, cause like when we abandoned regions that was like some epic victory for you when you took them. That is almost like double standards, or something. Avon what's this thread about?
Sworn Absent Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.09 05:46:00 - [88] Originally by: Karlemgne A bunch of bad posts -Karlemgne Stop it. Just stop it. You've vomited more words in this thread than everyone else put together and still haven't said anything interesting or insightful.
Devian 666 Gallente Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.09 05:50:00 - [89] Originally by: Karlemgne Originally by: Devian 666 There is the issue of the mechanics of disbanding an alliance. I feel this is discussion better suited to features and ideas. Tell that to the original poster. Not that it isn't the case, that there is a goon thread complaining about sovereignty mechanics right over there . So forgive me if I don't take your suggestion to be anything other than intentionally trying to troll me. That's the only bit that isn't a troll. If people want to deeply discuss the nitty-gritty mechanics and have a discussion of what they should be features and ideas is a good place to do that. BoB's terrible internal security is worth discussing here, along with their horrible internal culture. They make goons complaining about the sweat under their man boobs sound desirable. However, their choice of director in charge of counter intelligence shows that they do have a sense of humour. http://obeythekitten.com/
Karlemgne Minmatar Tides Of War	Posted - 2009.02.09 07:19:00 - [90] Originally by: Sworn Absent Edited by: Sworn Absent on 09/02/2009 05:47:56 Edited by: Sworn Absent on 09/02/2009 05:47:41 Originally by: Karlemgne A bunch of bad posts -Karlemgne Stop it. Just stop it. You've vomited more words in this thread than everyone else put together and still haven't said anything interesting or insightful. Devian, backup has arrived! Fear not! Perhaps personal insults offered in the place of logical argumentation cancel each other out. Is the idea that two ad hominems multiply together to form valid arguments out of logical fallacies? Sort of like two negative numbers make a positive? Quote: No one cares about the petty semantics of some stupid slap fight between you and devian666 Well first of all, empirical evidence seems to contradict you. I've had a number of responses directly related to my "petty" semantics. What is more, isn't funny that you care so little about this, or the "slap fight" that your member started, that you felt so compelled to waste your life responding to it. Look,kids, I know you guys thrive off of picking fights on interweb forums and all, but this whole thing has gotten a TAD bit trolly and ridiculous. I've made my point, demonstrated that "exploiting" isn't what BoB and T20 did (that's cheating), and then defended myself from Devian's ridiculousness. Seriously, Devian, I don't remember you, BUT I can understand why you thought I am "biased" against Goonswarm. If you troll this well, and always conversed with me this comparatively I suppose I would seem to dislike Goonswarm; however, me being able to use logic, and you failing to have the capacity for logical argumentation, does not actually mean I am "biased" against your alliance. Have fun storming the castle. -Karlemgne



Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.