DoW 71: Goblins and Pitchforks

“Let’s go ahead and have you read that again.”

Poll Results: How closely do you follow the New Eden Open?

EVE News: Nexus Fleet fold into Nulli Secunda after so recently splitting to form their own coalition, Threadnotica 1 and the Bonus Room (note, episode recorded before CCP’s banning of Erotica 1 and subsequent GM postings)

Contract Wrap Up: Goblin’s Crusade (aka RvBee)

This Week In Mercs: Darwin’s Lemmings refashions itself into Marmite Collective’s training alliance

CSM Corner: Refining reform dev blog, Ali Aras gives an update on her CSM campaign, and Alek gives a preview of upcoming CSM9 Issue panels

-New T-shirt and poster designs in the store!

19 thoughts on “DoW 71: Goblins and Pitchforks

  1. Good ‘devils advocate’ turtle / alek. The ‘Line” is different to every person in every context but thats what the game is. Ali every argument you have doesnt hold up when talking about things like hell camps and others. Just cause it takes place at higher levels with corps and alliances they are essentially the same thing. Its not harassment when the person willingly engaged with erotica and continued further and further. And if thats the case the bounty system is harassment? And the corp war system is harassment? Everytime there is conflict in the game… one side doesnt have fun. I agree with turtle and alek this is hugely over drawn. Is phsycotic monk a harasser cause he ‘safaris’, he’s a hero for the side of the game that finds that playstyle fun, but hated by any corp he safari’s in. and if the people ‘harassed’ used their brain for a second this wouldnt be a problem.

    • To be honest, I can see both sides of the argument and I realize that if you showed this to anyone outside of EVE, 99.9% of the time you would get a negative reaction. Obviously it’s not something I would personally do to anyone IRL or in-game, but with that being said, EVE’s social sphere is really just a microcosm of the internet in general; it’s in no way immune from common problems like scams, trolling, grief, etc. The relatively minute size of EVE plus its extremely cut-throat nature brings out both extremes in people I guess. But for every one Ero1, I could find you five Sindels. So I honestly feel like it was blown a little out of proportion, given the macroscopic view of events.

      • I completely agree with you turtle. I wrote my first post and this one from my desk at work so I am trying to be brief lol. But yes its totally blown out of proportion, especially given the main thing is the ‘victim’ as Alek stated well is a consenting adult and he made free will decisions to stay there an take it. We allow and champion things like alliance / corp level infiltrations that steal or disband things that whole groups of people work for, and have been in teamspeak with the thief for most likely along time to earn trust before their deceit. In eve trust and common sense is a resource more valuable than isk. And with the meta of the game this happens all the time on much grander scales (hellcamp is excellent example, as the entire purpose is to make the lives miserable of the people whose main eve goods are trapped in that station all while shitting up local to make the people their not want to even log into the game). If you get scammed you get scammed… if your dumb enough to agree to self humiliation for a videogame…. (not to mention the guys assets could probably be recouped with a plex or two)

  2. Oh, and that bounty against Xander would be from High Drag Podcast, not Cap Stable…tyvm. Plus, we were in full cooperation when this “bit o’ content” was unleashed.

    Both consenting parties. Start to finish.

  3. I have never felt the need to comment on any podcast before but halfway through I just had to stop listening. Everyone except Ali who is seeming to have trouble communicating how this issue is wrong, is just on the wrong side of this issue. I suggest you all listen to the Cap Booster episode 10 which more clearly talks about this issue and why it was wrong and why it is hard for people to step away after the bad decision they made.

    • I do not agree with Ripard Teg’s characterization of what happened as “evil,” “torture,” or abuse on the level of domestic violence.

      I nearly stopped listening to Cap Stable’s Ripard interview/snow job but kept at it to see how far it would go. Didn’t expect it to go to comparisons to Nobel Peace Prize winners, so I guess that was worth.

      • Nobody has made the claim that what Erotica 1 did was abuse on the level of real-life violence. However, there are obvious parallels, including the overused victim blaming excuses used to defend perpetrators of violence which you have adopted for your defense of Erotica 1.

  4. Given that E1 is a scumbaggy sort, the one bad precedent this puts forth is the image that if a CSM member gets pissed off at you they can get you banned. The level of hyperbole, and lets be honest, even when the “victim” asked for this to go away, those with an axe to grind ignored him and kept up with what they wanted which was to set an example. Bad Precedent.

  5. I have a mixed reaction to this whole ordeal. Does the guy deserve to lose his stuff after willingly contracting it over? Yes. However I also think that trolling him for 2 hours is a bit excessive. I also don’t feel that the whole racist/homophobic accusations are very valid, as we all tend to say extreme things when we get angry. I doubt anyone (especially anyone on the internet) could say that they have never said something purely out of rage with the sole intention of offending or hurting someone.

    I think the point where one could ‘draw the line’ is using 3rd party assets to force people into doing something. Or if you are, do what every single call center in the world does and forewarn them that if they join they will be recorded and they can leave at any time, but lose whatever is at risk. Sort of a cover-your-ass technique. If they join, they’re consenting to be recorded and therefore consenting to whatever happens there. It’s that simple.

    I understand the arguments from both sides of the story. The guy deserved to lose what he lost because he willingly handed it over. However I also think it would’ve been in Ero1’s best interests to just stop when the guy flipped out and say “sorry. You lost the bonus round.”, kick him and tell him to stfu and start over. Life is that way. It sucks and then you get screwed and there’s nothing you can do but deal with it.

    • “forewarn them that if they join they will be recorded and they can leave at any time, but lose whatever is at risk”

      just to be clear, Ero did do this

    • ” If they join, they’re consenting to be recorded and therefore consenting to whatever happens there.”

      No. When you walk into a Walmart, you consent to being recorded by their security cameras. But just because you consent to being recorded does not mean that you consent to “whatever happens there”.

      • There are a lot more variables in that case. Of course if you walk into Walmart you’re not consenting to be stabbed by a psychopath, but there’s nothing you can do if the employees would choose to follow you around and constantly make suggestions and ask you questions.

        Have you ever been into a Best Buy? I was looking at console games and was asked if I needed any suggestions or help 5 times within 15 minutes, three times by the same person. They only stopped when I finally snapped at them and told them if I needed help I’d ask for it. And I’m sure the only reason that they stopped vs someone on the internet not stopping is the presence of anonymity.

        The point I’m trying to get is there should be a level of expected behaviour that you’re consenting to participate in. The rules of the bonus round were explained and he went along with every step of them. He could have backed out at any time and even HE said that. The entire episode was blown out of proportion because this time a CSM member got a hold of the recording.

        Go youtube ‘WoW Rage’ or ‘Who stole my cloudsong’. There’s rage videos/recordings for everything out there. People – especially on the internet – overreact to losing things. Especially when it is their fault and they want to shift the blame to someone else.

        Just like everything in life, there are certain expectations and warnings you should be aware of when going into situations. If you don’t and you end up in a situation you’re not in favour of, it’s your fault. Use your best judgement. What would you rather do: Buy blu-rays from some shady person in an alley in NYC or from a retailer?

  6. I fail see the difference between the E1 situation and the more commonly occuring “singing hostage” scenario. It’s an exchange of out-of-game humiliation to get some in-game asset back, that has already been lost through legitimate gameplay, be it PvP or scamming (if we can agree that scamming is a legitimate gameplay).
    In my mind it would be a case of inconsequent reasoning to condem one and not the other. “But I find it fun when people sing, and I don’t mind much doing it myself” is not a good argument when trying to “draw the line”.

  7. DNS Black on Podside has a good take on this also. I suggest listening to this. CCP makes a product and has an obligatuon to protect it when it feels it has been threatened by behavior which it does not wish to be associated with it’s game. It has the right to refuse service to it’s subscribers just as you have the right to not play the game. Just as I live in the US and have freedom of speech and can speak my mind, it does not mean I can do so without repercussions. The sandbox does not mean you can do as you please without repercusion from other players or CCP.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *