Boycotting community events

[GluttonyFang]

Thanks. I've posted a summary of my plight there.

You may check the post again, I've investigated the situation and provided additional information.

 

[KellyR]

They have a point, the Hutton Mug does break the rules as written due to the existence of Centauri Gun in the same system.
I don't believe scrap was chosen just to "deincentivize" piracy however as
1) the original entry stated "scrap" or other salvage, none of which is very valuable was was the first stated item
2) We voted on which rare good would be chosen, knowing it was to salvage scrap

So whilst FDev broke the rules of the competition by including it in the finalist to vote for, it was the community that vote for it, and I would say it won due to the absurd distance LOLs and not because of "lets stick it to pirates"

Conversely that only my take on that one point

Nope. It doesn't break the rules. The rules say should not. They do not say must not. Since the word 'should' is used instead of 'must' it is a guideline only.

 

[Schmack]

This thread is a little dated and we got enough related to the code right now. Can we let it drop?

Those minion pirates do open fire in any case right now though, which actually makes them worse than the human pirates, who you can sometimes negotiate with.

Yeah but you don't see many NPCs running covert scripts.

 

[leetd00d]

What exactly is the reason for a blockade? Just to appear in a Newsletter?

 

[Zieman]

What exactly is the reason for a blockade? Just to appear in a Newsletter?

The same reason for all griefers, seeking attention. Look mum, look mum, look mum, look mum! <crash> 'what have you done now you little twerp?!' *yay, mum looked at me*

 

[GluttonyFang]

Please explain what zero-sum gameplay pertains to attempting to stop the CG?

Taylor's definition for meaning of life and Utilitarianism, sorry I am really busy at the moment responding to multiple fronts.

Please explain what gameplay benefit you get by reducing the CG's success chance?

Somehow you believe materialistic gain is the sole benefit one should seek, that's worrying.

Because if there's no gameplay benefit, then you're going to have to admit that your benefit is the externalities, and those are going to revolve around and inevitably involve annoying people.

You don't seem to want to understand pleasure in an extrapolated sense.

Oh, you can quote authority? Good for you.
I'm more a fan of Rawls, obviously. But I'm actually making arguments, not throwing around big names. If you actually have a handle on that material you should have no trouble adapting useful arguments and pretending their your own thinking. Please, do.

If you insist, sure, but again, I am quite busy responding on multiple fronts.

Morals are repelling toward diversity while aesthetics wears the beauty of art that display reconciliation.

 

[LordPazuzu]

This Awesome!! Finally this galaxy is shaping as it should be, with real dangers like this pirate group "The Code". This kind of spicy is what makes MMOs games interesting, If you CMDRs don't like this attitude from this group of players, why not just make some wings with other players to take revenge or something from this group, its easy to do, you guys are even more; Come on and wings up and show that guys that you can defend the CGs from now.
This is just a game, just play it with some strategy, not just showing anger on the forums for nothing, just play the game.

 

[Kristov]

Gluttony, you need to recolor the eyes in your sig, they are not near brown enough...

I personally have no issue with the so called blockade in and of itself. The so called 'REASONING' behind it however...seriously...did someone really type that with a straight face? Do you keep a straight face when you refer to it? Honestly?

Yeah, didn't think so, and it's griefing, not grieving, grieving is what you do when you suffer a loss, griefing is what some people have been doing at Hutton Orbital, I won't say the Code was doing that directly, but since the SDC is just an extension of the Code, well, I think I'll let others draw their own inferences. THEY were going Solo/Group into Hutton, docking, getting repaired, and going into Open at Hutton and ramming people at sub100ms speeds inside the no-fire zone, no warnings, no demands, just killing people where they couldn't be fired upon, attacking ships who'd just made a .22 LY SC run and had 37% or less structural integrity left, which made them typically insta-kills when rammed. THAT is exploiting, that is what SDC were doing.

Code, they are running around in SC interdicting people and blasting them, sometimes with a warning, but that warning is coming AS they blow people away from what's been shown so far. That is pretty bad gamesmanship, but hey, it's Code, they are supposedly pirates(it says so on their website!), so that's to be expected I suppose. The reasoning they are giving for this, as I said, yeah, none of them are saying THAT with a straight face, it's pure rubbish and they know it, but hey, it's all RP! Pssst, Gluttony, you MIGHT want to watch some of those Code twitch streams sometime, not seeing a lot of that RP, just a lot of what seems like kids being bullies, but hey, what do I know right?

Do feel free to continue your harassment of the players in Open in the Alpha Centauri system, you guys aren't actually doing anything that's against any of the rules FD has, so you are perfectly within your game given rights to continue. Do be aware however, please, that you ARE making Code out to be a group of bullying little kids with this action. That is not an insult(man are you quick to jump on THAT one, what kind of pirate are you), it's a statement of the opinion of the majority concerning your actions, just in case it eluded you in all the posts about it so far.

Me, I don't care, I left Open when the SDC started their . I'll put up with blockades and pirates, but exploiters, nope, just switch to Solo and avoid them, since FD doesn't actually deal with them as they should. And after reading your meanderings..yeah..may stay in Solo or join Mobius, I deal with enough entitled little prats in my professional life, I see no reason in heaven nor hell to deal with you lot in my games.

 

[Moriarte]

I don't expect the apologists for the pirates to have a very firm grasp on ethical reasoning, or be able to articulate their moral reasoning very well. If they could, after all, they wouldn't be griefing people - would they?

You can play a victim card all you like. If I see you, I will shoot you down for no reason/any reason and will sleep well with it. To me it's just a silly game, one out of many where I cast aside "ethical reasoning" and experiment with role-playing different characters.

Now go ahead and try to paint some more labels on me from those books they told you to read.

 

[Eagle Eye]

1st mistakes from you lots: Assuming you can talk sense to Code members...

 

[GluttonyFang]

I don't even understand what that means. It seems that you think it sounds smart, which it doesn't. The way you respond to this topic is what I would characterize as "what a stupid person thinks smart sounds like."

Further evidence that you have no understanding of aesthetic education. I can run around praising mainstream moral all around, but that accomplishes and convinces very little on an intellectual plain.

Probably what you meant to say is something like "you're just trying to hold the moral high ground" or something like that. But I don't think you'd actually say that, because that's basically saying "Surly Badger is right" (in the moral sense, not in the sense of being correct about details)

Interpret however you like, refer to the line above.

Anyhow, yes, I do think I hold the moral high ground, here. I am actually bringing arguments and moral reasoning into play. And you're thrashing around and doing a very good impression of someone backing themself into a corner.

I don't have as much time as you do leisurely lecturing others about philosophy where one does not display much competence in said field. If you want to lean away from your bias slightly, that just might improve the situation.

If I were you, I would have started there long ago. You're probably much more effective battling against people who are not well-armed. Unfortunately, in a battle of wits, you can't just show up with overwhelming and unbalanced force. Poor you.

Unfortunately I believe I lack not in intellectual capacity, but rather the patience for persistent bias with no intention to consider the perspectives of others.

I have trouble parsing that, but it appears that you're saying that you warn people before you start bullying them, and that... what? Makes it OK somehow?

I have problem parsing your insistent strawman on RP of an advertised profession, see what I did there?

- - - Updated - - -

SDC is just an extension of the Code

And already into the gutter.

I will ignore that undisguised insult.

Also, what I'm referring to as insults aren't the public opinion of Code but some very obvious ad hominem.

 

[Vasious]

1st mistakes from you lots: Assuming you can talk sense to Code members...

Conversely, assuming people are mindlessly irrational & cannot be reasoned with, gives them licence to be so

 

[GluttonyFang]

This Awesome!! Finally this galaxy is shaping as it should be, with real dangers like this pirate group "The Code". This kind of spicy is what makes MMOs games interesting, If you CMDRs don't like this attitude from this group of players, why not just make some wings with other players to take revenge or something from this group, its easy to do, you guys are even more; Come on and wings up and show that guys that you can defend the CGs from now.
This is just a game, just play it with some strategy, not just showing anger on the forums for nothing, just play the game.

And I thought all hope was lost.

- - - Updated - - -

1st mistakes from you lots: Assuming you can talk sense to Code members...

I will just ignore that.

- - - Updated - - -

Conversely, assuming people are mindlessly irrational & cannot be reasoned with, gives them licence to be so

Thank you, some more hope restored.

 

[Apos]

101 on morals:

"Pirates have no morals, they destroy my CG"

*2 days later*

"What a bad CG that was...it paid close to nothing even though I had to travel for 90 minutes each trip to deliver scraps which also pay nothing. You know what, I'll go smuggle Slaves instead, not bothering with CGs ever again."

To which someone would reply:

"But it's just a game, they aren't real slaves."

And then that goes right back at you: "But it's just a game, they aren't stealing real money from you."

If you want to apply morals to digital goods which are part of the game and not linked to actual currency, at least be consistent about it.

Yes, pirates are immoral inside the RP of the game, thus your reaction to it should also revolve around the game's mechanics. Go ahead and shoot them, hunt them and make sure they don't pester other traders if you feel so inclined. I know I do.

 

[Surly_Badger]

The most common mistake made on forums such as this is to assume the person you are responding to is less educated than are you.

I made no such assumption at all. Excuse me if you feel I did.

I said that he could be part of a team, and as part of a team it was decided they would blockade this community event. If a group decided they would blockade a RES site so people could mine in peace, that would likely be seen as honor and chivalry and all that nonsense. It's still a blockade.

Yes, I understand that. You appear to be under the mistaken impression that a "team" is not a group of individuals that are moral agents. Or are you claiming that being part of a collective means that people are no longer responsible for making choices?

Edit: My quotation "just following orders" was not taken from your comment; it was taken from Heinrich Himmler's defense at Nuremberg. That argument didn't work particularly well then, and it still doesn't - because we acknowledge that when someone tells us to do something, if we are moral agents, we can say "no" and sometimes should say "no."

There's nothing immoral about a video game blockade. They aren't killing anyone in real life. Let's not drag Hitch out of the grave to discuss this.

I actually knew Hitch (though not well) and I suspect that his natural dislike of bullies and tyrants (except for when he was being a bully) would have extended to bullies in games, as well. But we can't know. And, since we can't know - maybe your threat to drag him out of the grave is both tasteless and an empty threat?

And, if you read for comprehension, I wasn't saying there was anything immoral about a video game blockade (although I will make that argument in a bit, below) I was saying that the individuals who were involved in the blockade made choices as moral agents and they do not have any reason to expect that they can simply dismiss the consequences of those choices because ... it's a game.

Now, the moral argument regarding the blockade: people participating in the CG invested hours of their lives - time that they cannot get back - in order to accomplish a goal. Their goal was not to "haul stuff to Hutton Orbital and get blown up" their goal was to "haul stuff to Hutton Orbital in pursuit of the community goal" When the pirates unilaterally decided to interfere with the players' goals, they were being unfair to those players; they were doing wrong. We can understand this with a simple thought-experiment: what would have happened if the pirates had asked the players "may I interfere with you?" The answer would have been "no" in most cases. Unilaterally involving yourself in someone else's existence in a negative way - whether in game or in real life - is annoying. It is wrong. Of course it is worse to actually blow someone up in actual reality. But that doesn't mean it's not still wrong in game.

With each of us being our own moral agent, every goal is self selected. Sure there's an easier way to gather and perform that goal, but I say so what? What rule exists that says only FD sanctioned goals can become part of the game play in Elite: Dangerous?

The question was whether there is valuable game-play. And I think you just acknowledged that there is not.
So, then what is valuable about interfering with the CG? The value appears to be causing suffering for other players. Is there another goal that you can explain?

Your argument is begging the question. What's repugnant about a blockade?

It's not begging the question. See above. I spelled out the moral argument. Game mechanics permit you to waste someone's time and effort and ruin their fun. That does not make it right to do so.

Game mechanics include everything they are using to perform this blockade. It's written in code by the developers of FD. I don't agree that it's repugnant, or perhaps you have a different definition for repugnant than most. Either way, you cannot prove something is wrong by calling it wrong, and tautologies don't work either.

Ah, the laws of physics permit people to fire bullets into eachother but that doesn't make it right.

I beg to differ. It's most certainly about the feelings of those being interdicted and shot. Those are the ones creating threads here. They are the ones who are being called victims. It's about their feelings. Again, you're begging the question by calling CODE "griefers".

I'm calling them "griefers" because I don't see any in-game value to what they did. They are deriving external value - the pleasure of unilaterally interfering with other peoples' gaming experience. That is what "griefers" do - they derive pleasure from interfering with other people's gaming and wasting their time, costing them effort, irritating them, etc. How is that different from what the pirates were doing?

It's a blockade. It has a purpose. It's not griefing for the sake of griefing, else they would do it everywhere all the time. That's a legitimate argument against your argument ad nauseum.

Considering you were - a few moments ago - trying to accuse me of relying on tautology, I'm afraid you need to back up your vigorous assertions above.
It has a purpose: what is that purpose?

No, I am not going to argue that rubbish.

You just spent the better part of a page trying to argue rubbish, and doing a fairly poor job of it. Please don't dismiss your efforts, though.

I believe everyone here as the freedom of choice.

I do, too! That's why I grant people moral agency and expect them to understand the impact of their choices on others.

What I will argue is that you are equivocating "griefing" with "blockade" simply because their actions cause grief. Guess what, Pirates cause grief as well, so does a long navigational chain of hops, so does lag, so does stuttering, so does the price of a module, so does server issues, etc...

Bugs and NPCs are not moral agents; they do not make a choice.

More to the point, the game support team actually recognize that if a bug causes you to lose your ship, you ought to be able to ask for it to be recovered. Interesting, if someone makes the choice to cost you your ship, that's just "game play" and the fact that they have wasted someone's time ... is somehow OK?

So it's not "griefing" just because it's unpleasant. If it was at Jameson, for example, no one would care. If CORE blocked entrance to Jameson Memorial by killing anyone who tried to go there, you'd just hop back over there and try again. Problem is you cannot even enter SOLO and try again because you don't want to spend over an hour in that grind called Super Cruise, and SOLO or OPEN it's the same distance. So no, your philosophical argument is moot and frankly out of place here.

Argument by assertion again?

I have highlighted the assertions you made just in the last paragraph, in blue. Obviously you're not going to complain about argument by assertion, it appears to be your primary strategy.

Until you can provide proof that an effective blockade is griefing, your argument fails before it gets off the ground.

I will repeat the argument again, since you apparently aren't very good at reading:
Now, the moral argument regarding the blockade: people participating in the CG invested hours of their lives - time that they cannot get back - in order to accomplish a goal. Their goal was not to "haul stuff to Hutton Orbital and get blown up" their goal was to "haul stuff to Hutton Orbital in pursuit of the community goal" When the pirates unilaterally decided to interfere with the players' goals, they were being unfair to those players; they were doing wrong. We can understand this with a simple thought-experiment: what would have happened if the pirates had asked the players "may I interfere with you?" The answer would have been "no" in most cases. Unilaterally involving yourself in someone else's existence in a negative way - whether in game or in real life - is annoying. It is wrong. Of course it is worse to actually blow someone up in actual reality. But that doesn't mean it's not still wrong in game.

Would you consider a blockade of a CG to be more abrasive than someone in a Clipper ramming people in stations just to see them die? How about scripters? Are they worse or better than a group who effectively blockades a community goal?

I'm not interested in trying to stack up a bunch of wrongs to decide which ones are worse. I don't engage in any of them. So I can simply look on anyone who does any of those things with appropriate contempt.

Why is it ok to kill me if I have an "enemy" tag but haven't engaged you but not if I'm doing something you want to prevent me from doing? With the enemy tag, I am not doing anything to affect your game, nothing at all. With a bounty on my head, I'm doing nothing to affect your game. Both times you could kill me and talk about it here and no one would raise an eyebrow. If you pull me from SC while I am hauling something to a station to change the status of said station, because you don't want that to happen, that's suddenly griefing because you don't like it.

Does that sound about right or did I need to have footnotes from Kant?

Kant? Really?

Actually, the categorical imperative argument is a more abstracted form of the argument I made for why blowing up people who weren't participating in a "pirate event" is wrong. Kant's categorical imperative would argue that one shouldn't do things like that because by doing so, one creates a world in which one has to live; a world in which people pointlessly destroy eachother for no benefit to anyone.

Go read your Kant, instead of just throwing authority names around. That wasn't even a nice try.

 

[Ralph Vargr]

Yeah but you don't see many NPCs running covert scripts.

Thank you. Duly +1'd.

 

[GluttonyFang]

Oh dear, fetch me my fainting couch; I believe you just tried to insult me.

That makes two of us, your point?

Please stop trying to have things just in the direction that's convenient for you.

I can say the same about you, but of course you wouldn't admit to it.

If insults actually bothered you, you wouldn't have just tried your little bit of sneery dismissiveness above. If respect actually concerned you, you would have engaged with me respectfully no matter if I was abusive, silly, or flat out playing the fool with you. But you're just adopting the "oooo me! I've been insulted!" pose - only not as flouncily as I do. Make up your mind how you want things, and stick with it. If you're going to trade in insults, embrace and accept them in return. If you're going to act like Miss Manners, stop being a griefer and be a courteous and helpful human being - like Miss Manners would.

You seem to be unable to separate the real life from the game. I tried and am still respecting you, just because your opinion is diverse or opposing to mine it doesn't make it any less important intrinsically. However, I will be discrediting your argument, not your character.

This is what I was referring to earlier when I described how borderline personalities are so good at convincing themselves that what they want is what is right. You've provided a fantastic case study for us all, right here, in plain view.

Please look in the mirror. Anyone can claim that anyone has BPD for being persistent and obstinate about their stand. You might as well call the majority of the judges, politicians and lawyers carriers of BPD. Ironically, I am studying to be the latter.

 

[joshman72nd]

tried to help was promtly killed by 7 code members...... guss ill just have to enable solo stealth mode!

you cant stop the solo grind ya can never stop us bwahahahahahhahaahhahha

 

[tafkabb]

Why don't you all organise yourselves and go out there and kill them? Post guards en route? Have volunteer escorts?
Invent, I dunno, the Guardian Angel Galactic Service™ "GAGS™"?
Travel in convoys because it's safer? That's what convoys are for.

It's dangerous out there. Play the game. Be dangerous.

 

[moonsword]

It seems as if you have not understand the freedom of players to do what they like. If they want to act as maniacs destroying others ships without reason, form yourself a fleet and hunt them down or write in the forum looking for revenge. But crying on the forum without any constructive ideas or thoughts do not bring us further....