Slave Carriers Update

[Hellrider]

XD
Yesss...they asked about their age, and did it only because they were kids. Not because they just wanted troll someone.
It isn't accident.
Absolutely.
Any proof? Screens from discords? Something?
PS:manipulate kids on private- discord? In article we can read, that 10yo sister was smart enough to not agree on this offer.
btw, omg, Elite rly has PEGI 7 XDDD

 

[Ethaidan]

The distinction Frontier has made is this: If you like, and with no further justification, you can pull a noob out of supercruise and blow him up along with all the meta-alloy he was taking to Farseer. However, if you entice a noob into a position where he believes he must blow himself up, then you are out-of-line and no longer deserve to enjoy the game you paid for and have poured countless hours into.

No they didn't. You and everyone else on this forum have no idea why Frontier made the decision they did. The only things we 'know' are:

1. A group of Xbox Cmdrs conned a bunch of new Cmdrs into jumping on a carrier, fitting out gimped mining ships (provided by the Carrier group), taught them how to mine, then refused to return them to civilisation, or share any knowledge of how to get back.

2. This involved the use of a private Discord server which has been censured.

3. After looking into the events and actions, some players lost assets and were shadow banned - using a generic TOS clause which could be applied pretty broadly if Frontier deemed it necessary.

None of us know any specific or relevant details that might shed some light on this decision. Aside perhaps from the Pilot's interview, but then that didn't really shower the interviewee in glory. Unless of course, some of the brand new forum members who joined just to shout foul are members of this Xbox group, or friends of them?

 

[Scoob101]

That's a concern in principle, even for someone like me who is personally never likely to indulge in gameplay like this, because it's pretty much unprecedented within the context of the game and raises questions about where the line is drawn and exactly which side of it a player might find themselves on in any given situation.

I personally I don't think that there is much cause to be concerned about future "arbitrary and profoundly unfair" interventions from Frontier because:

• As far as I can tell, the only reason Frontier intervened, in this case, is becuase the specific player activity garnered bad press.
• That bad press being focused around new players making the PR situation somewhat more acute than it otherwise would be
• One of the main reasons (and again, this is just my conjecture) it garnered that press coverage was that it was a genuinely interesting and noteworthy example of emergent gameplay.
• All this is happening in front of the backdrop of Frontier preparing to release probably the last major expansion to the (current iteration of the) game, and they don't want people to be put off buying Frontiers games and expansions.

So yes, a precedent has been set here, but for a pretty unique example. Frontier has clearly demonstrated they are prepared to roll their sleeves up and get involved, but that shouldn't be a surprise, that's what terms of service are there for. And whilst I`m sure they would choose to "draw the line" wherever they please (should they think their corporate interests were threatened in future), the chances of that actually happening really are tiny.

I dont belive It's plausible that any of this translates into some kind of new moderation environment where players have to fear for repercussions from frontier becuase of more established "anti-social" activity such as PvP, Pirating, Griefing, and the like, becuase they are simply not in the same league as this particular - unique - event. Those other activities have been normalised and nobody is going to be writing unflattering pieces in the press about them.

 

[Starshot_Jigawatts]

For me it is not attacking but argueing, that is how a discussion works.
This incident teached the involved "slaves" a lesson about real life in a game: Don´t trust strangers; if something is suspicious, ask other people (Dad, where are you?) or gather informations via google, forums etc.. No money was lost, no real harm was done. This is a story, they can tell their friends later on.


I think, that is the main point between you and some others. We don´t see it as slavery for all the reasons already written down. For you, everybody who argues against FDEVs sanction or your interpretation of this event is supporting slavery, so it sounds to me from what you have said.



I saw the interview too and thought that the guy is an (insert rude word of your own choice). But that is not a reason to punish him like FDEV did possibly.


No, it is not! We are at the start again. I don´t like slave traders, I don´t like Mamba pilots (only an example), I don´t like pilots in the system chat, that only babble nonsense.
It is not you, it is not me, it is the community. We should be careful, what of our whishes shoud be fullfilled, I think that is the concern of many people here.

It's hard to have an entirely meaningful discussion with those who don't believe there should be any ethical framework at all in how players conduct themselves within a video game in regards to other players. Which seems to be the main assertion by the more vocal people in outrage that these guys were punished by FDEV. The fact that so many conflate NPC slave commodities with actual real live human being players who were taken advantage of by this guy, is truly the most apathetic justification for bad behavior I've seen in a while.

I get what you are saying about the game, the classic slippery slope argument. But this was SUCH an edge-case and so extreme in nature, I really don't think FDEV is signalling some new broad crackdown on 'emergent gameplay'. I just don't see it, but maybe I'm wrong. Time will tell.

You opened with a statement about learning life lessons. Well, maybe the slaver has now learned one too? No money was lost, no real harm was done to him either right? So he was banned to solo and lost a Fleet Carrier. Meh, it's just pixels right?? It's just a game. So that argument goes both ways I think. Surely we can't place the burden of all this entirely on the victims can we?

 

[Scoob101]

No money was lost, no real harm was done.

You are forgetting reputational damage to Frontier - which is almost certainly what all this is about.

I get what you are saying about the game, the classic slippery slope argument. But this was SUCH an edge-case and so extreme in nature, I really don't think FDEV is signalling some new broad crackdown on 'emergent gameplay'. I just don't see it, but maybe I'm wrong. Time will tell.

Frontier don't give two hoots what anyone does in-game. Until it materially affects them. That's why this example is different.

 

[LeoBartlet]

You are forgetting reputational damage to Frontier - which is almost certainly what all this is about.

Yea I've seen that mentioned a few times by others. Who exactly do you think will be turned off buying the game or its expansions for a space based shooter with drug references, slavery (npc) and an overall pretty dystopian narrative?

 

[Vetinari]

XD
Yesss...they asked about their age, and did it only because they were kids. Not because they just wanted troll someone.
It isn't accident.
Absolutely.
Any proof? Screens from discords? Something?
PS:manipulate kids on private- discord? In article we can read, that 10yo sister was smart enough to not agree on this offer.
btw, omg, Elite rly has PEGI 7 XDDD

I havent seen anybody complaining they have been banned for only targeting adults in the same way. I have seen a GalNet article that could reasonably be assumed to be aimed at said adults as a response to that. So wither there were only 2 people doing it or the others only targeted adults, or theyre all keeping quiet about their bans, or they got away with it, or they dont have friends to publicise their case.

P.S. I never mentioned nazis. Its sinister enough that 2 adults steer 2 children onto a private discord server away from public view or XB moderation. I said what the 'drama' is about. I never even said any of it is factual. We have no accurate sources. Just 2 people who 'wanted to troll someone' giving a story.

 

[Scoob101]

Yea I've seen that mentioned a few times by others. Who exactly do you think will be turned off buying the game or its expansions for a space based shooter with drug references, slavery (npc) and an overall pretty dystopian narrative?

Whatever you or I think about that doesn't really matter; Frontier don't seem like their game being represented in a poor light in the gaming press. Which of course is no surprise to anyone.

 

[Red Anders]

Its coz 2 adults (defined as legally responsible for their decisions not defined as mature) who have signed a legal agreement not to exploit or bully other players targeted 2 children (legally defined as not being capable to make decisions) on the internet in a 7+ game and then steered them towards a private discord server and manipulated them both in game an out knowing they had no immediate adult supervision.

Those are the two kids who didn't fall for the slavers right? The kid and his 10 year old sister who noped out, didn't in fact get enslaved and didn't lose out at all? I'm just checking that you've got the story straight here - those are the facts as reported by the original article. The players who lost out were either the most verbose 10 year olds I've come across or were considerably older.

I've also seen nothing to suggest that they 'targetted' those kids. Can you let me know how they did that and what information they used to identify that the kids were in fact kids when the initial contact was made? Genuinely, unless the answer is 'watch a one hour youtube video' because seriously no - I do not have that kind of time to devote to this. A couple of lines of text will do fine if you can spare the time yourself.

To be clear, I've already said that there are endless things wrong with the whole scenario, starting with 'who on earth lets their two pre-teen kids play this game (hell any game) unsupervised, why on earth did they also have access to discord (!) and generally what in God's name were their parents thinking?' And no that's not 'victim blaming' it's an entirely reasonable question to ask of their primary caregiver who as you noted, has the legal responsibility for their wellbeing since they are literally the adults in the room. Or well, seemingly not in the room in this case.

 

[LeoBartlet]

Whatever you or I think about that doesn't really matter; Frontier don't seem like their game being represented in a poor light in the gaming press. Which of course is no surprise to anyone.

That wasn't what I asked.

 

[Scoob101]

That wasn't what I asked.

What I was trying to point out is that questions or considerations relating to the lore of the game are wholly irrelevant to Frontiers reaction to whats happened.

 

[LeoBartlet]

What I was trying to point out is that questions or considerations relating to the lore of the game are wholly irrelevant to Frontiers reaction to whats happened.

Nice but I wasn't asking a question about the lore I asked who do you think will be turned off buying the game.

 

[Vetinari]

The 7yo was fooled, the 10yo after being in Discord for a while went and got Daddy so was obviously fooled at first until something happened. Probably why most countries if not all and the UN agree that a 10yo is not capable of making decisions and must be protected by law. Either way its the actions of the 2 adults who are responsible.

generally what in God's name were their parents thinking?'

too much trust or belief that tech is safe or not understanding how easy it is for a predator to target children in games and lead them to private servers, or, just not realising how bad some people are and what lengths they will go to is why parents dont realise the dangers, the kids are in the room how much danger can they be in?

Nice but I wasn't asking a question about the lore I asked who do you think will be turned off buying the game.

Parents mostly if theyd done nothing, gankers and griefers coz they have done something.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Maybe ED needs one of these:

I.e. don't let them play without you being there with them.

 

[Red Anders]

It's hard to have an entirely meaningful discussion with those who don't believe there should be any ethical framework at all in how players conduct themselves within a video game in regards to other players. Which seems to be the main assertion by the more vocal people in outrage that these guys were punished by FDEV.

I'm not sure who you're talking about there but I sincerely hope it's not me. Simply making the same continually false accusation about my stance on that but bottling out of using my name doesn't make you look any more noble you know. Just saying. Like I said before, you really shouldn't look to extrapolate generalities when people have been talking about specifics.

 

[Scoob101]

Nice but I wasn't asking a question about the lore I asked who do you think will be turned off buying the game.

I haven't got a clue. The commercial implications could be zero, they could be greater than zero. All of which has nothing to do with Frontiers decision.

Frontier rather unsurprisingly is taking a conservative approach. Do you think you can persuade them otherwise?

EDIT:: You also need to remember that Frontier have shareholders.

 

[Rubbernuke]

I haven't got a clue. The commercial implications could be zero, they could be greater than zero. All of which has nothing to do with Frontiers decision.

Frontier rather unsurprisingly is taking a conservative approach. Do you think you can persuade them otherwise?

EDIT:: You also need to remember that Frontier have shareholders.

The thing is, FD want emergent gameplay but not emergent gameplay. They don't actually set boundaries until you walk over them which kind of dents the 'blaze your own trail' motto. Maybe "Blaze your own trail until we tell you thats wrong?".

 

[Sublime]

Every rebuy screen, in any event of your ship blowing up gives you the choice, I guess we get very focused on wanting our engineered, Gankatron 2000 back we just miss it but it is always there, to take the Sidey.

100% going to name a ship Gankatron 2000!

 

[Red Anders]

The 7yo was fooled, the 10yo after being in Discord for a while went and got Daddy so was obviously fooled at first until something happened. Probably why most countries if not all and the UN agree that a 10yo is not capable of making decisions and must be protected by law. Either way its the actions of the 2 adults who are responsible.

I also agree that a 10 year old and a 7 year old can't give informed consent. I think what we have a slightly different opinion on is which two adults were responsible because the first responsibility to my mind sits with the two that spawned them. That's obviously not to absolve the two perpetrators but there would have been no contact to worry about in the first place with correct parental supervision.

 

[Bigmaec]

So, I've been kind of out of this thread since it's getting too long to keep up with, so pardon me for posing and idiot question:

This allegedly racist content in a private Discord threat that everybody and their dog is talking about, and it's quite important to me as I wouldn't pee on an actual racist if his crotch was on fire, I'd be more likely to look around for a can of high octane gasoline, is there any actual proof of this? And Polygon/Kotaku clickbait "we heard from somebody who heard from somebody whose cousin third removed said that..." evidence doesn't count.

Screenshots? That sort of thing? Anybody? Bueller?

Obviously FD won't post screenshots or similar proof due to a) privacy and b) simply not to repeat the stuff for everyone to see on official FD media.
In the Pilot vid one of the guys allegedly admitted they are on watch though. No idea, didn't watch it.