tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post8887834029852121287..comments2024-02-27T14:44:07.868+01:00Comments on Greedy goblin: CCP can't solve this for usGevlonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07072766785893313616noreply@blogger.comBlogger40125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-14334551961963583452014-04-10T20:12:03.120+02:002014-04-10T20:12:03.120+02:00Jester was dead right.
Even if CCP can't cure...Jester was dead right.<br /><br />Even if CCP can't cure the world of scumminess, what they can and should do is to push the scuminess as far as they can away from their game.<br />It is in their interest to do so.<br /><br />Your argument in this post is not convincing.<br />It will be of little help to EVE online new/vulnerable players that someone is exacting revenge on the scumbags after they got their taste of harassement.<br />Doesn't slow them on their way out of the community one tiny bit.<br /><br />I strongly commend you on your efforts against Goons but your self-promoting tendencies are achieving little except making it harder to apreciate your crusade.<br /><br />As for the "stupid deserves to be treated badly" point, I'd say it's a pretty shallow reading of what is at stake.<br />Goons could just as easily use it to justify their stranglehold on the whole game.<br /><br />Regardless of what vulnerable players deserves or not, in a game context, the question is about what make sense to provide them as gaming experience.<br /><br />"Your stupidity will be punished" is not a very good marketing slogan.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-44914305576999454992014-03-28T18:05:51.763+01:002014-03-28T18:05:51.763+01:00@arrendis
"Since a PLEX merely pushes back t...@arrendis<br /><br />"Since a PLEX merely pushes back the next time your account is billed, every PLEX'd account is technically a 'paid' account. How would you change this? Tell people they can't PLEX all of the accounts on the same credit card? This might penalize married couples who both play, and use a jointly-held card to simplify their own bill tracking."<br /><br />That's technically incorrect, and let's take myself as an example. Only one of my accounts has a credit card registered, all the other ones have been activated with plex so CCP can't say who's the real owner of that account with certainty, as even when they can use th IP address to correlate those accounts, it will be impossible to do with people that is behind a NAT, as most of the subscribers of cable networks are. <br /><br />If when activating an account with plex I was forced to:<br /><br />A: Enter a valid credit card for the account, even if I plex it all the time.<br /><br />B: Relate my plexed account to my account that has a registered credit card.<br /><br />Then I couldn't be an anonymous player, and in the case of a ban being applied to me, I can definitely be terminated and the only way to come back is registering another credit card. Once I've been an asshole enough times, I'll run out of CCs and then terminated from the game for good.<br /><br />To make it clear, I'm not implying that you have to pay with a credit card at least one of your accounts, no way, you can plex all you want, but you need to have a registered CC in at least one of your accounts and all the non cc accounts have to be related to it.<br /><br />That solution is pretty simple and easy as pie to implement, it basically means adding 2 fields to your database.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00757745782916936761noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-42292468669911572392014-03-28T09:44:37.270+01:002014-03-28T09:44:37.270+01:00No specific names, but go to the Anti-Ganking chan...No specific names, but go to the Anti-Ganking channel, and that's pretty much their goal in life is to track and stop new order, not to mention all of the miners who actively do the same without being in the channel.<br /><br />If you really think it's doable, put your money where your moth is. I honestly don't think you'd be able to impact a group like new order, since they aren't an organisation as such, they are an idea. You might b able to impact some individual pilots, but to impact enough to make a change would take you and a lot of followers considerable amounts of time and effort.Lucas Kellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03969897349629783605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-47815256192742142672014-03-28T08:53:31.590+01:002014-03-28T08:53:31.590+01:00My hands are full with Goons and their servants.
...My hands are full with Goons and their servants.<br /><br />And no, no one tried it. Or do you have a name of anyone trying it?Gevlonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07072766785893313616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-23928400342046997782014-03-28T08:30:59.634+01:002014-03-28T08:30:59.634+01:00"CODE could be defeated by a single guy in a ..."CODE could be defeated by a single guy in a Falcon"<br />Go on then, defeat them. Hundreds have tried and failed.Lucas Kellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03969897349629783605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-64950572741235780082014-03-28T05:37:07.440+01:002014-03-28T05:37:07.440+01:00@Lucas: CODE could be defeated by a single guy in ...@Lucas: CODE could be defeated by a single guy in a Falcon. They suicide gank as a group, so a they can't outrun or out-AFK a white knight like I did as a solo player.<br /><br />@Anonymous: while they can technically ban anyone, if they do it, they can lose lot of customers. The clear line is needed so everyone can be sure that he won't find his account banned for no reason.Gevlonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07072766785893313616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-11125952395130991862014-03-28T01:30:11.185+01:002014-03-28T01:30:11.185+01:00Problem: If a change to the rules is indeed necess...<i>Problem: If a change to the rules is indeed necessary, what rules can be introduced that effectively ban "bonus room" scams without negatively impacting other areas of the game? In order for any change to be effective, the problem must be adequately defined.</i><br /><br />A change of rules is actually not necessary - CCP can ban anyone, for anything they wish, at any time.<br /><br />And in this case I think if you took a straw poll of eve players they would be supportive of this banning.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-51465476050090417312014-03-28T01:05:23.356+01:002014-03-28T01:05:23.356+01:00@Gevlon
"on the other hand "I don't ...@Gevlon<br />"on the other hand "I don't like him" is completely acceptable reason to start camping his alliance until he is fired."<br />Isn't he in CODE? I'd be very surprised if they would ever do anything about that. Most of their actual chars are in NPC corps, so effectively untouchable. And E1 is pretty much their financial fountain.Lucas Kellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03969897349629783605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-79528266909281496012014-03-28T00:58:48.366+01:002014-03-28T00:58:48.366+01:00"The real issue here is that there's a te..."The real issue here is that there's a terrible human being that is part of a community. The majority of the community, if polled, would probably agree that he should NOT be a part of the community."<br />I would very much doubt that<br /><br />"To those that then ask, "Where is the line?" There's no clear line. But certainly we can agree these particular actions are reprehensible and shouldn't be allowed to be associated with a game we all enjoy?"<br />We obviously don't all agree hence the discussion about it. And there has to be a clear line. If there can;t be then noone can get placed either side of it. Who want to play a game where the rules are such that at any random point you may get banned because someone you are playing against didn't like it, and that was arbitrarily decided as "the line" on that occasion?<br /><br />In this instance, E1 has not broken the EULA, and so shouldn't be banned regardless of what the outcome is. You shouldn't get retroactively punished for new rules. That sad, the outcome probably should be a solid ruling one way or the other to state clearly if this is to be allowed to continue or stopped.Lucas Kellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03969897349629783605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-20641439411065551362014-03-28T00:14:55.952+01:002014-03-28T00:14:55.952+01:00@Satori
Feel free to pay for their destruction, a...@Satori<br /><br />Feel free to pay for their destruction, as Gevlon suggests.<br /><br />I'm not sure a wardec is wise, or necessary though, considering their typical sec status.Tor Normannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-85145130064070510922014-03-27T22:19:58.348+01:002014-03-27T22:19:58.348+01:00I would make it mandatory to have a payed account ...<i>I would make it mandatory to have a payed account in order to have plexed accounts</i><br /><br />Since a PLEX merely pushes back the next time your account is billed, every PLEX'd account <i>is</i> technically a 'paid' account. How would you change this? Tell people they can't PLEX all of the accounts on the same credit card? This might penalize married couples who both play, and use a jointly-held card to simplify their own bill tracking.<br /><br />Nor can you know that every account someone has uses the same identifying information - I could have two different cards, with two different addresses and accounts. How can you tell this is the same physical player?<br /><br />It opens a nightmare scenario. And that's without even getting into 'I pay for a year of game-time up front. Am I not allowed to PLEX during the last month of that? Can I PLEX all but one of my accounts, throwing my billing schedule out of synch?'<br /><br />Headaches, headaches, headaches. CCP won't make that mistake - PLEX have the advantage of making things <i>easier</i> for people who're space-rich, and not so RL-rich. Reducing the usefulness of a PLEX is never going to be something CCP wants to do.Arrendisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-75084151765604091522014-03-27T19:32:08.669+01:002014-03-27T19:32:08.669+01:00I think we need a double approach to this situatio...I think we need a double approach to this situation. As Gevlon suggests, we need to hit people and alliances that are related to this scumbag with everything we have. If James315 keeps on posting E1's tales on the miner bumping site, then the New order should be hit. Whatever alliance and corp he is related to should be hit too.<br /><br />But also, we need CCP to make changes that allows disgusting people like this to be removed forever from the game. His assets should be frozen, his main and alts banned. his acomplices and associates should have the same fate. <br /><br />CCP needs to make changes to the game for this to be possible. Thinking as a developer, I would make it mandatory to have a payed account in order to have plexed accounts. Having this relation, it will be very simple to get someone and all of his alts removed from the eve community.<br /><br />In the meantime, I would love to see the lemmings wardec the new order until all posts about E1 are removed from their web page.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00757745782916936761noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-64482511708594572612014-03-27T16:19:20.665+01:002014-03-27T16:19:20.665+01:00Gevlon:
If the alliance hops on comms with him and...Gevlon:<br /><i>If the alliance hops on comms with him and listen to his filth, it needs just one decent man in the alliance who records the coms, screenshot the list of people on comms and send it to the Avengers</i><br /><br />That's a big 'if'. After all, this guy knows who his friends are - his direct, complicit, enabling friends. Those are the only people he'll allow directly on comms while he's doing this. It needs to be a comm system he controls - or like-minded people control, after all, or he couldn't get the victims in during the scam.<br /><br />And it's very likely that the people who don't stand for this sort of thing already have nothing to do with him. Maybe they haven't all left his alliance, but he's probably not in a corp with many of them.<br /><br />Also, another important difference between NOHO and these guys, re: songs?<br /><br />NOHO does it as a way to have fun <i>with</i> people - if you prefer to fight, they'll fight, if you prefer to be social and sing and chat, they love it.<br /><br />They're not doing it out of <i>malice</i>. It's not 'let's fucking humiliate this guy and laugh about it later'. If you sing for them, you're a good sport, and they'll do the EVE equivalent of buying you a pint at a pub (hell, if you run into them at Fanfest or EVE Vegas, they might do <i>that</i>, too).Arrendisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-87113909343551198972014-03-27T16:16:22.557+01:002014-03-27T16:16:22.557+01:00"@Jean-Mira: so if Erotica 1 would honor his ..."@Jean-Mira: so if Erotica 1 would honor his ransom too (pay the bonus round as promised), would that be OK too?"<br /><br />No that's a fallacy, because A=>B doesn't imply B=>A. I only need to provide one counter-example to show they are not the same. But eliminating it doesn't show they are the same.<br /><br />"Prank" is a politically correct term for "harassment".<br /><br />That's an invalid generalization. Don't know about your experiences, but there are pranks that don't involve harassment. Which are even funny for the victim, too.<br /><br />Whether NOHO's ransom is considered harmless enough or harassment probably lies in the eye of the beholder and the context. I didn't got the impression RvB felt harassed by having to provide a song in order to get access to your WH. Probably not being able to enter beforehand made them feel more harassed.<br /><br />Long story short, if you are only willing to give a drive-by answer using killer phrases, I prefer no answer at all.Jean-Miranoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-19465674521783901092014-03-27T16:14:54.151+01:002014-03-27T16:14:54.151+01:00Agreed. That's what this game is all about, a...Agreed. That's what this game is all about, after all. Player-driven conflict.Tor Normannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-84396361107039646112014-03-27T15:40:43.174+01:002014-03-27T15:40:43.174+01:00@Tor Norman: on the other hand "I don't l...@Tor Norman: on the other hand "I don't like him" is completely acceptable reason to start camping his alliance until he is fired.Gevlonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07072766785893313616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-88463865804462210872014-03-27T15:37:18.736+01:002014-03-27T15:37:18.736+01:00@ Anon 14:17
"The real issue here is that th...@ Anon 14:17<br /><br />"The real issue here is that there's a terrible human being that is part of a community. The majority of the community, if polled, would probably agree that he should NOT be a part of the community."<br /><br />The problem is you cannot ban a player simply because people don't like him. There needs to be a breach of the game's rules. If there's sufficient agreement that the rules are inadequate for dealing with a new situation, such as the bonus room, then the rules need to be update as appropriate.<br /><br />Problem: If a change to the rules is indeed necessary, what rules can be introduced that effectively ban "bonus room" scams without negatively impacting other areas of the game? In order for any change to be effective, the problem must be adequately defined.<br /><br />This is a major hurdle that those who want Erotica 1 banned must face and unfortunately, "I don't like him" is not an acceptable definiation of the problem.Tor Normannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-78996792598461315822014-03-27T14:17:47.434+01:002014-03-27T14:17:47.434+01:00@Anthony: this isn't about the scam. This is...@Anthony: this isn't about the scam. This is what happened *after* the scam, after E1 got the poor sap's isk. That's where the problem is. Even the goons couldn't put up with E1's antics and banned him. (Gevlon, what alliance exactly are we supposed to fight?)<br /><br />People who can't distinquish the problem between the scam and what happened after the scam are either not thinking very clearly or intentionally obscuring the issueLouis Robichaudhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02426040562395622140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-22361824586598997692014-03-27T14:17:26.348+01:002014-03-27T14:17:26.348+01:00The real issue here is that there's a terrible...The real issue here is that there's a terrible human being that is part of a community. The majority of the community, if polled, would probably agree that he should NOT be a part of the community.<br /><br />In game actions will not remove him from the community. He should be removed from the community for the good of the community and the game. The place to start that is removing him from the game permanently. Only CCP can do that.<br /><br />To those that then ask, "Where is the line?" There's no clear line. But certainly we can agree these particular actions are reprehensible and shouldn't be allowed to be associated with a game we all enjoy?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-22944429872058194442014-03-27T13:59:28.947+01:002014-03-27T13:59:28.947+01:00I'm a bit puzzled - people are using "thi...I'm a bit puzzled - people are using "this is Eve" as an excuse for Erotica's subhuman scuminess.<br /><br />Why isn't "this is Eve" enough reason to not get upset about the rather modest verbal kicking he's getting. And a private individual calling for another private individual to be banned is surely just part of the meta - not something to get wound up about and not especially unusual. [Red]Calintornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-17513260132264086692014-03-27T13:30:39.384+01:002014-03-27T13:30:39.384+01:00@Anonymous: honoring or not honoring the ransom is...@Anonymous: honoring or not honoring the ransom is in-game thing and both are officially valid in the game. So two actions (E1 wanting a song and NOHO wanting a song) are equal if their only difference is something that are deemed equally right.<br /><br /><br />No, honouring something is distinctly a metagame construct once it leaves the game. There is a social contract which is formed - you are ceasing to "play a character in a game" and moving towards a real world payment for an in game outcome. Honouring such a deal is distinct from not honouring it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-27375850005377273752014-03-27T09:33:23.338+01:002014-03-27T09:33:23.338+01:00@Nightgerbil: taking the money of the stupid is co...@Nightgerbil: taking the money of the stupid is completely OK. Toying with him and humiliating him is not OK. You should teach the dumb AFTER you took his items.<br /><br />@Anonymous: honoring or not honoring the ransom is in-game thing and both are officially valid in the game. So two actions (E1 wanting a song and NOHO wanting a song) are equal if their only difference is something that are deemed equally right.Gevlonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07072766785893313616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-66707603599186384732014-03-27T09:33:22.669+01:002014-03-27T09:33:22.669+01:00@Nightgerbil: taking the money of the stupid is co...@Nightgerbil: taking the money of the stupid is completely OK. Toying with him and humiliating him is not OK. You should teach the dumb AFTER you took his items.<br /><br />@Anonymous: honoring or not honoring the ransom is in-game thing and both are officially valid in the game. So two actions (E1 wanting a song and NOHO wanting a song) are equal if their only difference is something that are deemed equally right.Gevlonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07072766785893313616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-18754994911066121682014-03-27T09:26:48.770+01:002014-03-27T09:26:48.770+01:00for me personally there is one thing... ...lets ta...for me personally there is one thing... ...lets take it to a RL-kind-of:<br />You officially win some Money. Kind of a Big one. You are contracted, that you can multiply your Winnings by 5, everyting you have to do is follow some stranger to a conference room and:<br />- Give a full all your Belongings <br />- Sign a Contract to transfer all your Disposable Belongings<br />- Realise all your Bank assets, Stocks, ...<br /><br />Two things are horrible here. Two things must be fought to end this behaviour. a) E1 b) stupidity both is a community-task.<br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-68505334355742232592014-03-27T09:20:59.873+01:002014-03-27T09:20:59.873+01:00It is hardly a secret who is in those comms, there...It is hardly a secret who is in those comms, there are plenty of eve-mails about with names and chatlogs, especially for the more notorious ones (The mayonnaise incident for example)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com