Stream sniped and griefed while showing a newbie how to fly

[Lngjohnsilver1]

Out of interest...FDev produced a thread on their definition of harassment following the Mobius Incident. Does anyone know if:

a) A case has been lodged with FDev on the basis of that definition
b) If the case was investigated
c) if the investigation was undertaken, what possible options for correction were provided
d) if anyone was banned as a result of a case of harassment being found to be proven

 

[Fendalton]

lmao. What a crackup.

 

[SnowyNI]

I see all the kbwarriors are out in force, bet their mothers are so proud, well, up until the point where they killed them with an axe!

 

[MahdDogg]

How much time is required, and how much skill? Who should determine that? It's a mess. I call it as I see it. I know what a sadist is, and I don't need a degree to say it.

https://psychcentral.com/lib/what-is-psychological-assessment/ this gives you an outline of how psyche assessments should be undertaken. In the UK it is determined by the British Psychological Society.

The "I call it as I see it" attitude should have been ejected during your . Your coffee house psychology is showing.

 

[space pilot]

https://psychcentral.com/lib/what-is-psychological-assessment/ this gives you an outline of how psyche assessments should be undertaken. In the UK it is determined by the British Psychological Society.

The "I call it as I see it" attitude should have been ejected during your . Your coffee house psychology is showing.

I don't really subscribe to traditional psychology or psychiatry, and I said I didn't study this kind of thing in school. I'm not invoking my official education as authority which should automatically supercede anyone else's opinion. However, I've studied people intensively for a long time.

It's simply unfortunate that the word that means what I mean is often attached to a diagnosis. I neither know nor care if someone I call a sociopath has been or would be diagnosed as one by someone with the institutional/legal authority to do so. I mean someone who experiences no compassion. Plenty of people were that before the word "sociopath" or the word "psychology" were invented. It's a characteristic. Being able to tell if someone has such a characteristic doesn't necessarily require a formal assessment.

And I consider habitual ganking, with no apparent ingame monetary or political motivation behind it, to be potential evidence someone experiences no compassion, or is a sociopath. If there's another word that means the same thing without the baggage, I might use that instead.

 

[ryan_m]

Out of interest...FDev produced a thread on their definition of harassment following the Mobius Incident. Does anyone know if:

a) A case has been lodged with FDev on the basis of that definition
b) If the case was investigated
c) if the investigation was undertaken, what possible options for correction were provided
d) if anyone was banned as a result of a case of harassment being found to be proven

Based on FDev's definition, none of what was done to OP falls under that criteria. If you are in Open, you are fair game. As far as I know, not a single player has been banned or even "punished" for killing anyone in open as long as it wasn't done through a literal exploit.

 

[tomeagles]

Wait so lemme get this straight

Player A takes Player B into open for some tutoring. but doesnt warn Player A that in open anything goes, and stream sniping can and will happen if someone is in the mood to do so.

Player B then promptly gets blown up and Player A comes whining on the forums about it, only person who has the right to whine or be of would be Player B, because his numpty Tutor a)Didnt create a Pvt Group which is much safer, b) warn Player B to either not stream or set a decent delay on it so that it would be more difficult to track them or get them both to move round some local systems to make it even harder.

Then 12 Pages later we are talking about sociopaths etc.

Seems like Player A needs to git gud at tutoring

 

[Ian Skippy]

I don't really subscribe to traditional psychology or psychiatry, and I said I didn't study this kind of thing in school. I'm not invoking my official education as authority which should automatically supercede anyone else's opinion. However, I've studied people intensively for a long time.

It's simply unfortunate that the word that means what I mean is often attached to a diagnosis. I neither know nor care if someone I call a sociopath has been or would be diagnosed as one by someone with the institutional/legal authority to do so. I mean someone who experiences no compassion. Plenty of people were that before the word "sociopath" or the word "psychology" were invented. It's a characteristic. Being able to tell if someone has such a characteristic doesn't necessarily require a formal assessment.

And I consider habitual ganking, with no apparent ingame monetary or political motivation behind it, to be potential evidence someone experiences no compassion, or is a sociopath. If there's another word that means the same thing without the baggage, I might use that instead.

You cant first barge in waving a in psychology around, start brandishing clinical terms despite not having a clinical background, then become PsychoTrump by stating 'you just tell it like you see it', dismissing 'traditional psychology' completely and ending with the spooky 'but I've studied people people intensively for a long time' stuff. If you really think you are able to determine if people 'can experience compassion' based on a rumour you heared about an incident in a computer game I'd go back to your former university and demand a refund.

So do everyone a favor and cut that nonsense and just say "I dont like gankers", which is fine. All that window-dressing is comically pointless at best and probably insulting to people who actually learned something during their psychology courses.

- - - Updated - - -

Wait so lemme get this straight

Player A takes Player B into open for some tutoring. but doesnt warn Player A that in open anything goes, and stream sniping can and will happen if someone is in the mood to do so.

Player B then promptly gets blown up and Player A comes whining on the forums about it, only person who has the right to whine or be of would be Player B, because his numpty Tutor a)Didnt create a Pvt Group which is much safer, b) warn Player B to either not stream or set a decent delay on it so that it would be more difficult to track them or get them both to move round some local systems to make it even harder.

Then 12 Pages later we are talking about sociopaths etc.

Seems like Player A needs to git gud at tutoring

Some days ago I ran into the OP hovering around an engineering based in a tooled-up ship, being wanted. [haha]

 

[Duane Dibbley]

....ending with the spooky 'but I've studied people people intensively for a long time' stuff.

I think you mean 'creepy'!...unless you are implying there is some paranormal activity going on!

[haha] He'd have gotten away with it too, if it wasn't for that pesky Sleutelbos!

I always enjoy your passive aggressive idiocy!

 

[space pilot]

You cant first barge in waving a in psychology around, start brandishing clinical terms despite not having a clinical background, then become PsychoTrump by stating 'you just tell it like you see it', dismissing 'traditional psychology' completely and ending with the spooky 'but I've studied people people intensively for a long time' stuff. If you really think you are able to determine if people 'can experience compassion' based on a rumour you heared about an incident in a computer game I'd go back to your former university and demand a refund.

So do everyone a favor and cut that nonsense and just say "I dont like gankers", which is fine. All that window-dressing is comically pointless at best and probably insulting to people who actually learned something during their psychology courses.

Nice guy. That someone in a high-powered ship, possibly in a group, ambushes weak and lightly armed ships for entertainment doesn't necessarily mean they don't experience compassion (sociopathic). But it makes it more likely than if they don't do that. Is it really reading someone's mind to decide their favorite color is blue, if they have a blue shirt, a blue bicycle, and say "I really like the color blue." They could be pretending, but would you say it's just as likely their favorite color is red? I wouldn't put money on it.

Closer to the issue at hand, if you saw a kid in his early teens poking a cat in a cage with a stick, the cat obviously having a bad time, would it be reading his mind to assume something about his character, until you have new evidence to the contrary? I don't think so. It's not mindreading, it's comparing the actions of a lot of people over a long time and using inductive reasoning. E.g. "Most people seem to care to a degree about the emotions of others. However, everyone I've ever seen poking a cat in a cage with a stick doesn't seem to care about the emotions of anyone or anything else. Therefore, there is evidence that poking a cat in a cage with a stick implies a person doesn't experience compassion."

That I have studied people intensively for a long time is a fact, and relevant, and if I ignored that, and that I'm smart, I wouldn't be able to offer much insight, which is what I'm doing. Not to everyone (especially not gankers themselves), but maybe their victims. My degree is barely relevant, as I've always said (save for incidental exposure to the subject matter in broad classes); here's how it came up, emphasis added:

It's telling you assume I'm a griefer/ganker/Death Camp Kommandant because I find your coffee shop psychology over a computer game hillarious and cringeworthy to read.

If it means anything I have a in cognitive psychology. It shouldn't though, as what I studied doesn't really relate to anything I've said here...

 

[Ian Skippy]

I think you mean 'creepy'!...unless you are implying there is some paranormal activity going on!

Huh. Learn something new every day!

Nice guy. That someone in a high-powered ship, possibly in a group, ambushes weak and lightly armed ships for entertainment doesn't necessarily mean they don't experience compassion (sociopathic). But it makes it more likely than if they don't do that. Is it really reading someone's mind to decide their favorite color is blue, if they have a blue shirt, a blue bicycle, and say "I really like the color blue." They could be pretending, but would you say it's just as likely their favorite color is red? I wouldn't put money on it.

Closer to the issue at hand, if you saw a kid in his early teens poking a cat in a cage with a stick, the cat obviously having a bad time, would it be reading his mind to assume something about his character, until you have new evidence to the contrary? I don't think so. It's not mindreading, it's comparing the actions of a lot of people over a long time and using inductive reasoning. E.g. "Most people seem to care to a degree about the emotions of others. However, everyone I've ever seen poking a cat in a cage with a stick doesn't seem to care about the emotions of anyone or anything else. Therefore, there is evidence that poking a cat in a cage with a stick implies a person doesn't experience compassion."

That I have studied people intensively for a long time is a fact, and relevant, and if I ignored that, and that I'm smart, I wouldn't be able to offer much insight, which is what I'm doing. Not to everyone (especially not gankers themselves), but maybe their victims. My degree is barely relevant, as I've always said (save for incidental exposure to the subject matter in broad classes); here's how it came up, emphasis added:

The problem is that you dont seem to be able to distinguish between poking caged animals and shooting space ships in a computer game heavily advertised as a shooting-spaceships-game. I'd advice against calling yourself smart btw, unless you are trying to win a Donald-imitation award. But anyway, can you tell us more about how you studied 'people intensively for a long time'?

 

[space pilot]

The problem is that you dont seem to be able to distinguish between poking caged animals and shooting space ships in a computer game heavily advertised as a shooting-spaceships-game.

Did I say they were equivalent? I said closer, because they both involve causing discontentment.

I'd advice against calling yourself smart btw, unless you are trying to win a Donald-imitation award.

Thanks! Let's go take IQ tests together.

But anyway, can you tell us more about how you studied 'people intensively for a long time'?

Only after we become good friends.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Did I say they were equivalent? I said closer, because they both involve causing discontentment.

Only after we become good friends.

1) The thing is that 'hurting animals' is a well-known pattern of behavior strongly associated with antisocial personality disorder. Playing a computer game differently than you personally like is not. See the difference? There is nothing whatsoever connecting them, other than your personal desire to label people you've never met with terms you dont understand based on an irrelevant background and the idea that you are 'smart' and 'studied people intensively'.

2) Except for referencing an irrelevant educational background, saying you are smart and have 'studied people intensively' without explaining it, you've got nothing. I've seen how you keep going back and forth page after page in every discussion, so this will be the last post. Feel welcome to end it with something really smart.

 

[Goose4291]

1) The thing is that 'hurting animals' is a well-known pattern of behavior strongly associated with antisocial personality disorder. Playing a computer game differently than you personally like is not. See the difference? There is nothing whatsoever connecting them, other than your personal desire to label people you've never met with terms you dont understand based on an irrelevant background and the idea that you are 'smart' and 'studied people intensively'.

2) Except for referencing an irrelevant educational background, saying you are smart and have 'studied people intensively' without explaining it, you've got nothing. I've seen how you keep going back and forth page after page in every discussion, so this will be the last post. Feel welcome to end it with something really smart.

 

[space pilot]

1) The thing is that 'hurting animals' is a well-known pattern of behavior strongly associated with antisocial personality disorder. Playing a computer game differently than you personally like is not. See the difference? There is nothing whatsoever connecting them, other than your personal desire to label people you've never met with terms you dont understand based on an irrelevant background and the idea that you are 'smart' and 'studied people intensively'.

Saying there's nothing connecting them doesn't make it true. It sounds like propaganda. The ingame action I described, which is much more specific than your absurdly general "playing a computer game differently", does involve causing discontentment, essentially every time. Alternative motives are dubious, so the onus is on the participant to demonstrate they're doing it for other reasons, not on the victim, or me. But on the contrary; I've seen gankers post about how they like causing distress. I don't recall seeing the opposite.

...Feel welcome to end it with something really smart.

If you've been following my posts closely, you must have noticed that I still post about the issue at hand when my opposition resorts to pictures of guys laughing and nonsensical ad hominem attacks, as if those were arguments. It must be infuriating.

- - - Updated - - -

[pic]

Haha, speak of the devil.

 

[slum]

But it makes it more likely than if they don't do that.

What have you based on? A hunch? Was there a study that found that people who are "mean" in games are more likely to be sociopathic? I assume this was conducted along the study that found that people who play violent video games are more likely to be violent in their personal lives.

Closer to the issue at hand, if you saw a kid in his early teens poking a cat in a cage with a stick, the cat obviously having a bad time, would it be reading his mind to assume something about his character, until you have new evidence to the contrary?

Conflating video games with real life is an issue but not the one at hand.

I said closer, because they both involve causing discontentment.

How is causing discontentment related to sociopathic behaviors? You can cause discontentment in a child by denying them sweets. You ought to be more specific.

 

[Goose4291]

If you've been following my posts closely, you must have noticed that I still post about the issue at hand when my opposition resorts to pictures of guys laughing and nonsensical ad hominem attacks, as if those were arguments. It must be infuriating.

Emphasis to underline my original point and why Im not being dragged into a serious debate over e-spaceships, but would rather keep it lighthearted.

It's telling you assume I'm a griefer/ganker/Death Camp Kommandant because I find your coffee shop psychology over a computer game hillarious and cringeworthy to read.

 

[space pilot]

Emphasis to underline my original point and why Im not being dragged into a serious debate over e-spaceships, but would rather keep it lighthearted.

Hilarious and cringeworthy? You're welcome, and I apologize.

 

[Morbad]

Alternative motives are dubious, so the onus is on the participant to demonstrate they're doing it for other reasons, not on the victim, or me.

I complete disagree.

 

[Kaltern]

And this entire thread explains pretty much everything wrong with this game.

Using game mechanics/rules/"Role playing" to justify killing players just because you can = ganking. And idiotic.

I love the attitude of those who defend it. Never a good reason given, just 'well the game allows it, so I can'.

Good job Frontier. Good job. Like I said in my other thread.. it's becoming more and more like Eve every day.