FD promoting griefing?

[Bostlabs]

Hmm... Actions have consequences.
So the guy got chased out of Redit and had to clear save and start anew. I'd say his peers didn't care for his actions.
Perhaps a bit too much on the harsh side, but that is the thing about consequences. Sometimes they hurt.

I dare say, he'll think twice next time.

Happy Friday everyone!

 

[NeilF]

You have spent nine pages explaining why you don't like something. Great. Duly noted.

This has zero bearing on whether something is news. You can argue morals until you are blue in the face. It's irrelevant to the nature of whether something should or should not be a news item. Zero.

Nine pages protelyzing morals as some justification for a single event. Is FD promoting griefing? No.

It was my thread, with my thoughts, so when asked about my views, what else do you expect me to reply with? An economic breakdown of Czechoslovakian shoe manufacturing?

In short, your final two letters were all that are required... Nothing of the preceeding show boating. Indeed, if you find my comments or the thread that "irrelevant," ignore it.

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

I don't think the wording of my post was the problem. The individual has knowingly committed an in game act similar to that of a criminal (in game). Therefore being hunted down mercilessly (IN GAME) is not griefing. It's a bit of a moronic move to attack someone who rescues people. There should be some sort of consequence for that. Maybe a space police clan or something?

I guess you are going for the "blue in the face option"... have fun

 

[NeilF]

Hmm... Actions have consequences.
So the guy got chased out of Redit and had to clear save and start anew. I'd say his peers didn't care for his actions.
Perhaps a bit too much on the harsh side, but that is the thing about consequences. Sometimes they hurt.

I dare say, he'll think twice next time.

Happy Friday everyone!

Let's be frank.. Nothing that happened outside the game on this matter - having only just found out the scale of what happened - was right.

It was a "questionable" attack in a grey area of the game... It should have ended there. The fact that (many) people find it distasteful is besides the point... Especially when - as folks are quite rightly pointing out - it's not against any rules at all.

I don't think the wording of my post was the problem. The individual has knowingly committed an in game act similar to that of a criminal (in game). Therefore being hunted down mercilessly (IN GAME) is not griefing. It's a bit of a moronic move to attack someone who rescues people. There should be some sort of consequence for that. Maybe a space police clan or something?

I almost replied back as I read your original post as implying "out of game"... But at the last second I realised you meant in game

It's shame of course ingame bounty hunting doesn't really work that well, as Brumster was trying to highlight I believe? - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=262502&page=7&p=4058272#post4058272 We can only imagine what might be possible if OPEN was the only option

ps: There was the suggestion that Pilot Federation destruction should mean OPEN only for a while... I like that idea!

 

[Becks]

I don't think the wording of my post was the problem. The individual has knowingly committed an in game act similar to that of a criminal (in game). Therefore being hunted down mercilessly (IN GAME) is not griefing. It's a bit of a moronic move to attack someone who rescues people. There should be some sort of consequence for that. Maybe a space police clan or something?

Being hunted down in the game is not the problem.

Receiving punishment for killing a player, whoever is irrelevant, is not the problem, too.

But this "until he finds the game unplayable" is basically a call to harass somebody out of the game. Absolute overkill for one destructed ship.

It's funny how the people who are crying the loudest about such incidents are absolutely uninvolved 99% of the time.

 

[White Shark]

Also to add, I don't think one gamer attacking another gamer is griefing at all. This is a space game with lasers afterall. But the person who is attacking another person should have a justifiable reason for doing so. If the target is wanted, fine! If the attacker is a pirate who is attacking an innocent for their cargo, also fine! But then, that person playing "pirate" is free game to be attacked by others. That's all I'm trying to get across. I love this game and the community. I'm not trying to start arguments, I promise you.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

But this "until he finds the game unplayable" is basically a call to harass somebody out of the game. Absolute overkill for one destructed ship.

Fair point. It depends on his motives. If the attacker felt this was going to be a funny way to harm or annoy the Fuel Rats, then he should be treated as a fugitive and shot on sight. He could always play solo anyway so it's not like I'm saying he should be banned from the game. But ok, maybe I was harsh.

 

[Comrade Error]

Being hunted down in the game is not the problem.

Receiving punishment for killing a player, whoever is irrelevant, is not the problem, too.

But this "until he finds the game unplayable" is basically a call to harass somebody out of the game. Absolute overkill for one destructed ship.

It's funny how the people who are crying the loudest about such incidents are absolutely uninvolved 99% of the time.

I wonder what would happen if I mentioned that I killed a fuel rat aswell once.. and took one hostage.

Ups. [knocked out]

 

[Becks]

I wonder what would happen if I mentioned that I killed a fuel rat aswell once.. and took one hostage.

Ups. [knocked out]

Was that during on Black Friday last year? I think I remember someone joining the IRC and demanding cheese for hostages ...

 

[Soliluna]

snip

In non-anarchy systems I think the responses are, at the moment, adequate - particularly as they are tied to reputation somewhat. If the faction likes you you are more likely to get a security response.

In anarchy systems, it's like a frontier (no pun intended). It's supposed to be an extremely dangerous place. I think forcing dangerous and murderous players into these Frontier systems would be enough punishment.

I can't disagree with gameplay being moved forward.

 

[kofeyh]

It was my thread, with my thoughts, so when asked about my views, what else do you expect me to reply with?

You asked a question; I answered it based on the events, based on GalNet being a news source, that a single event is no more greifing than putting my socks on inside out, and why your moral compass isn't really relevant for what GalNet decides to publish.

I'm sorry you don't like my answer. And I am saddened that you believe topical events within the ED universe should be censured in such a fashion, if they offend your sensibilities. But I am afraid that just because one does not like a thing, that does not mean one should not report on the thing.

I neither agree with your initial assessment on the event being griefing (arguably the massive backlash actually is) nor do I agree that frontier are sponsoring it.

Sorry.

That the thread has basically descended into the same tired PVP vs PVE debate that doesn't have the good grace to just die already, also isn't lost on me at all.

 

[White Shark]

I almost replied back as I read your original post as implying "out of game"... But at the last second I realised you meant in game

It's shame of course ingame bounty hunting doesn't really work that well, as Brumster was trying to highlight I believe? - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=262502&page=7&p=4058272#post4058272 We can only imagine what might be possible if OPEN was the only option

ps: There was the suggestion that Pilot Federation destruction should mean OPEN only for a while... I like that idea!

Yes yes, by the looks of it, some people thought I was implying consequences outside of the game!! The thought didn't even cross my mind as it is utterly ridiculous. This is a game! I'm referring to everything in game! But I like that idea too, of some sort of system where they are shown up as being a criminal or hostile player or something. But I think a space police clan would be a cool idea.

 

[Jockey79]

If you blow up a fuel rat, your story appears on the front of GalNet/Launcher?

Wouldn't ignoring it have been the better course of action?

Disclaimer: Not read the thread - so if this has been said, feel free to ignore it.

So by your logic, The Sun, The Mirror, The Daily Mail (this list can go on a bit, so lets fast forward past all well known UK newspapers/ new outlets and say "all newspapers and news outlets") are promoting crime/ terrorism/ immoral behaviour then?

So today, The Times promotes women ganging up on Johnson, The Metro promotes banning places showing the EU games, The Mirror promotes people trying to trespass on the England coach, The Daily Mail has Sir Philip Green on the front cover - so they must promote shifty business practices that ruins lives.

Also, using your logic, when news outlets say "Terror attack"... they must recruiting for more terrorists! :shock:

Come on, get a grip - GalNet is supposed to be a news outlet for in game news.
Treat it like you do the BBC, ITV, Sky News etc....

(It's true, common sense isn't so common )

 

[Becks]

Disclaimer: Not read the thread - so if this has been said, feel free to ignore it.

So by your logic, The Sun, The Mirror, The Daily Mail (this list can go on a bit, so lets fast forward past all well known UK newspapers/ new outlets and say "all newspapers and news outlets") are promoting crime/ terrorism/ immoral behaviour then?

So today, The Times promotes women ganging up on Johnson, The Metro promotes banning places showing the EU games, The Mirror promotes people trying to trespass on the England coach, The Daily Mail has Sir Philip Green on the front cover - so they must promote shifty business practices that ruins lives.

Also, using your logic, when news outlets say "Terror attack"... they must recruiting for more terrorists! :shock:

Come on, get a grip - GalNet is supposed to be a news outlet for in game news.
Treat it like you do the BBC, ITV, Sky News etc....

(It's true, common sense isn't so common )

That's a pretty bad comparison ...

Just ask yourself why terrorists started doing what they do ^^

 

[Comrade Error]

Was that during on Black Friday last year? I think I remember someone joining the IRC and demanding cheese for hostages ...

Maybe. [big grin]

Sorry for the disturbing, wasn't quite as much traffic on Xbox.

 

[kofeyh]

In anarchy systems, it's like a frontier (no pun intended). It's supposed to be an extremely dangerous place. I think forcing dangerous and murderous players into these Frontier systems would be enough punishment.

So if one is in an anarchy system, one has free reign to burn a fuel rat, because it's a "dangerous place" full of "murderous players"? You do understand that virtually every non-populated system, from SOL to Beagle Point, is anarchy..

I don't even.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

That's a pretty bad comparison ...

Just ask yourself why terrorists started doing what they do ^^

And I believe this is about the point where the conversation goes full godwin, in a pretty clumsy attempt to try and make a point.

 

[NeilF]

You asked a question; I answered it based on the events, based on GalNet being a news source, that a single event is no more greifing than putting my socks on inside out, and why your moral compass isn't really relevant for what GalNet decides to publish.

I'm sorry you don't like my answer. And I am saddened that you believe topical events within the ED universe should be censured in such a fashion, if they offend your sensibilities. But I am afraid that just because one does not like a thing, that does not mean one should not report on the thing.

I neither agree with your initial assessment on the event being griefing (arguably the massive backlash actually is) nor do I agree that frontier are sponsoring it.

Sorry.

That's fine.. No apology required.

That the thread has basically descended into the same tired PVP vs PVE debate that doesn't have the good grace to just die already, also isn't lost on me at all.

Well, it'll be interesting to see if/what FD do with their proposed Crime & Punishment revamp especially around Pilot Federation destruction.

 

[Jockey79]

That's a pretty bad comparison ...

Just ask yourself why terrorists started doing what they do ^^

Point <------ massive gap -----> You

The OP accused GalNet of "promoting griefing" because they reported a news worthy story.
My point, that you blatantly missed or ignored, the same can be said about all of our modern day news outlets if we apply the same logic.

If reporting news = promoting the content for others to copy; then Rupert Murdoch, Sky News, the BBC and so on have a lot to answer for, promoting crime / terrorism and so on, on an hourly basis no less.

GalNet is our news source and should be treated as such.
It is not an avenue for FD to encourage or discourage any in game behaviour.

 

[NeilF]

So if one is in an anarchy system, one has free reign to burn a fuel rat, because it's a "dangerous place" full of "murderous players"? You do understand that virtually every non-populated system, from SOL to Beagle Point, is anarchy..

I don't even.

Of course, even in the Wild West, a dangerous place, murderous individuals were made accountable for their actions... Some might say, that's not the case in ED. But then, given the limited mechanics at the moment, if penalties are implemented, how on earth do you allow concensual PvP (eg: for fun) to take place? I still think dedicated zones/arena for PvP would be nice, and possibly an answer to that issue

 

[kofeyh]

Well, it'll be interesting to see if/what FD do with their proposed Crime & Punishment revamp especially around Pilot Federation destruction.

Yep. Which doesn't have anything to do with the topic you raised. Hijacking your own thread to start yet another PVE vs PVP debate. I absolutely didn't see that coming a mile away.

*cough*

Fly Safe, CMDR.

 

[MacAllister]

.... The fact that (many) people find it distasteful is besides the point....

This quote I will have to disagree with. I believe one of the reasons this article was posted was how distasteful the actions of this Commander was to the the Community at large.

Here is a game where player vs player aggression is so lightly punished that it has become one of its selling points by a large portion of the community. Anyone can attack anyone for any or no reason and get away with it. And yet there is a player based line of morality that the FDevs had no part in creating, that was defined and defended solely by the player base and is supported by almost everyone in the game.

When the FDevs saw the reaction of its player base to what was in reality a simple act of aggression, blow up into what it did. Reporting it was their way of showing this community has a level of morality, in spite of the image of anarchy this game has been trying to portray.

To have a community created line of morality in a lawless system gives is something I hope gets reported more often.