Bob Lighthouse
Banned
Also, "groups" (ie PGs) are a red herring, obviously.
Modes To Corvette in narri that merced me and my buddy for literally no reason then killing us as we fled
- Thread starter Wesley_pipes_man
- Start date
Also, "groups" (ie PGs) are a red herring, obviously.
Point 1 of the e-mail highlights that there is at least a certain amount of subjective assessment in regards to FD's dealing with complaints.
As for "Rule violations" being explicit, the prohibition on harassment in the EULA does count on that score. It may not spell out every single possible breach, but the overall intent is clear.
Where the incident described by the OP of this thread is concerned, I would be inclined to say their specific case does not count as harassment. Ultimately though, if they (the OP) believe it does then it is down to FD to assess the validity of their case - not us. FD are ultimately the judge and jury where any inter-player complaints about behaviours in Open are concerned.
Last edited:
The allowed PvP in this game are those supported by the programming. Of course, there will be cultural considerations for actions taken in game, but as far as I’ve experienced the game doesn’t care and FDEV doesn’t care (or if they do, are unable to assert their will well enough for that care to matter).
Your turn!
EDIT.: Haha. Well done, Lighthouse.
Last edited:
Bob Lighthouse
Banned
Last edited:
Funny thing about this game, everyone is playing their own little version of it.
Sometimes their little version of it crosses somebody else's & the winning side instantly become griefers in the eyes of some.
Sometimes their little version of it crosses somebody else's & the winning side instantly become griefers in the eyes of some.
Goose4291
Banned
Hardly, case by case includes taking into consideration ALL the facts and circumstances, assessing said facts and circumstances is a subjective process - especially where cases regarding Harassment accusations are concerned.
As for burden-of-proof, it is irrelevant in the main to the point I have made. FD's adjudication process is not a court of trial by peers, it is more akin to an independent arbitration process. Whether it is truly independent in any given case would be hard to prove since they do not discuss how each case is assessed (c/f point 1 in the e-mail).
I think you’re wanting your cake and eating it too, rslg.
I see you talk pretty authoritatively about ganking and griefing and act as if you somehow know the EULA and TOS forwards and backwards. As far as FDEV is concerned they don’t seem willing or able to do anything about what you consider poor behavior in the game.
In fact, I’ve seen Lighthouse’s email sent to dozens of Commanders. Whatever FDEV considers griefing must have a bar so high I can’t think of ANYONE usually active in these debates (and this includes guys like Algomatic and PowderPanic) that truly fits the bill of ‘griefer!’ Gosh, I’ve flown with some most nefarious Commanders ever and we’ve never received so much as a slap on the wrist or a stern ‘tut tut.’
Looks to me the emperor, and rslg’s views especially, have no clothes.
I see you talk pretty authoritatively about ganking and griefing and act as if you somehow know the EULA and TOS forwards and backwards. As far as FDEV is concerned they don’t seem willing or able to do anything about what you consider poor behavior in the game.
In fact, I’ve seen Lighthouse’s email sent to dozens of Commanders. Whatever FDEV considers griefing must have a bar so high I can’t think of ANYONE usually active in these debates (and this includes guys like Algomatic and PowderPanic) that truly fits the bill of ‘griefer!’ Gosh, I’ve flown with some most nefarious Commanders ever and we’ve never received so much as a slap on the wrist or a stern ‘tut tut.’
Looks to me the emperor, and rslg’s views especially, have no clothes.
Last edited:
Bob Lighthouse
Banned
Baloney, one looks at the objective evidence, and burden of proof is critical to that application.
You are very confused about all of this.
I realize you think I am being hostile to you, but I actually am trying to help.
And if you decide to keep your misunderstandings to yourself, there woudn't be any nonsense to counter.
As I have already stated, it is a nigh on impossible thing to police properly. For now, ED does not require any given player to play in Open to enjoy any part of the game they have paid for. If FD ever do introduce Open constraints on gameplay features then they better be prepared to step up their moderating of PvP behaviours and be more draconian in their enforcement.
The other option would be to ensure there are non-Open locked alternatives to Open locked mechanics (comparable rewards - different mechanics perhaps).
Either way, FD are obligated by law to deal with any cases of genuine Harassment - on-line social media platforms are subject to the same obligations. Harassment can take many forms and does not require direct verbal or written communication to be considered Harassment. True griefing and certain patterns of habitual ganking could count as genuine Harassment depending on the precise circumstances for example.
Harassment is difficult but not impossible to prove unequivocally which is probably why FD stick to point 1 of the previously quoted e-mail so as to keep their methods of proof and assessment from being known to those that might wish to subvert or bypass them. Whether FD have the means to prove Harassment accusations is possibly debatable given the network architecture is peer-to-peer in nature. However, it is certainly possible for given players to maintain records and present hard proof to FD. If FD then did not act in the presence of such evidence, they would be on shaky ground.
The ONLY baloney and nonsense is that PvP in ED is somehow in a legal bubble and immune to accusations of Harassment.
The method or nature of proof regarding Harassment claims is moot where the overriding point that PvP in ED is not subject to reasonable constraints in regards to patterns of behaviour.
How on earth did we get onto this?
The OP was in a CG area (where piracy, opposition to the CG, PvP, ganking, griefing whatever you want to call it) with the intent on pirating others when he quite literally met Karma.
That isn't harrassment, that's legitimate PvP and with that, discovering that there are bigger more capable fish than you and your mate looking to hit a "poor, helpless trader".
That's it, nothing more, nothing less.
Goose4291
Banned
Indeed... you cant even be a white.hat bounty hunter without accusations of.being a.griefer these days :/
OOF Waffe PR
Banned
Can you provide an example of what you consider a harrasment?
Bob Lighthouse
Banned
OK!
Thank you for that.
That is helpful, in a way...
For all you people who have been misusing the term this week, THAT is a perfect example of a strawman!
I never claimed:
Everything else is just more obfuscation.
That is a very different case - true Bounty Hunting like true Piracy - should be immune to legitimate complaints about griefing (and on the most part Harassment). The wanted flag on the target in the case of Bounty Hunting, and cargo scans/demands in the case of Piracy should cover it.
The point I have made all along, is that it is up to us to report the cases directly to FD (or Microsoft in the case of Xbox) and let them deal with things as they deem appropriate. In the OP's case, if they feel there is a case for Griefiing or Harassment then it is down to them to report it and up to FD to judge the complaint.
What I object to is those that try to portray that anything goes where PvP is concerned which is obviously not the case - as I said before "reasonable restrictions" are there, and those restrictions should not need to be explained to anyone in this day and age.
OOF Waffe PR
Banned
You fail to answer my question for some reason. What actions in ED do you consider a harassment? It would be nice if you were more specific on your claims.
Some choose to play Open only for whatever reason, in such an environment you do not choose with whom you play - that is largely random and decided by the instancing logic. In larger PGs, harassment is also possible for similar reasons though FD do deal with such cases more seriously.
Personally, I have no intention of ever participating in Open and would recommend the same to anyone that feels FD does not do enough to regulate certain PvP behaviours. My opposition to certain patterns of PvP behaviour is not from fear as some would like to intimate I am sure, but more that from the perspective of myself (and some of the people I chose to play with) there is no good reason anyone should have to tolerate behaviours.
If you truly need harassment explained to you, then you are a lost cause.
Harassment is not something that can be easily delimited and parameterised into a nice tidy box (i.e. don't do X and you are clear), but there are some characteristics that are clear indicators of at least some cases of genuine harassment. The easiest and simplest way to explain it, is any pattern of personally targeted behaviours that cause an adverse emotional reaction in the targeted individual. Even that does not adequately cover all potential cases, but common sense in the main should keep anyone clear of any genuine and justified accusations. Harassment is a sticky wicket even in the real world.
Last edited: