News Support update - Reiteration of player harassment rules

[Red Anders]

A simple solution would be to just send out wings of bounty hunter npc's, who want to interdict and kill people with "substantial bounties".. just make the game kill them for being silly...

An even simpler one for most people would be for them to simply not act like anti-social people, it's actually quite sad that FD have to do anything at all to prevent that.

This whole thread illustrates whats wrong with trying enforce morals. Zac made a statement and even though what he said is there in text you have 99 different interpretations on what he even said. This is just stupid.

It doesn't matter though. You can't stop people from being stupid unfortunately but I'm as sure as I can be that very few of the players who are saying they won't be able to deploy hardpoints within three systems of another player for fear of getting banned will realise over time just how ludicrously melodramatic they are actually being, hopefully when they continue to enjoy the game in the way they always have with no threat whatsoever of any action being taken to stop them.

It's abundantly clear what this announcement is about from the specific group and actions which are cited as prompting it. People can continue to work themselves up into a self-righteous fury about it if they want, it's no skin off my nose either way, but I'd be embarassed to have written some of the hyperbolic nonsense in this thread.

 

[DanaM]

The reality is that the target of Zac's post and the official stance is a tiny minority of PvPers who set out to screw with real-life people or events with the intent of ruining their fun, for out-of-game reasons. A tiny minority who get their lulz specifically and openly from "mining salt" or "tears"--in other words, from inflicting distress on other real-life human beings and laughing at them when they get upset. When you strip away the cute euphemisms, it's abhorrent, abusive behavior that no society tolerates--or should.

And no "community" worth the name tolerates it.

 

[Sole Hunter]

You are basically saying people can't join open to do other stuff then PvP, they can't use open to meet random people and interact with including everything PvE and PvP that might happen, and simply dislike those people that soly run around blowing people up so they can mark a kill, and enjoy knowing that their victim will lose something?

They are not moderating "intent" they are moderating actions, if your action is harassing other people, your action has no in game reason, or no in game gain, which is pretty easy to figure out, then they can act on your actions...so yeah, they aren't moderating on 'intent'
And going into a group, joining it to specifically disrupt it, is an action, that SDC did..

And sorry, but no one is harassing you, gathering you are part of SDC, but guess what you started it, now you are upset with the consequences to your actions? sorry, but that's not harassment, that's consequences, throwing around care bear and similar as people seem to do because you are upset that people that people reacted to what you did? because you underestimated the beehive? sorry....but that is not harassment.

You punched a beehive, you are getting stung, don't punch beehives?

How do you prove whether or not I am harassing someone or if my actions are malicious if all I am doing is killing that person?

Answer : You can't, that statement is flawed, hypocritical and goes against what is allowed in terms of game mechanics.

If I join a private group and they are doing charity or what ever the *eck and kill players in there you can't ban on the ground of malicious morality if ALL I did was using legitimate intended game mechanics.

if they do, I guarantee you the refund will be quick and fast.

Zac, your post disturbs me greatly.

This ^^

 

[Fyrd Judge]

How do you prove whether or not I am harassing someone if I keep interdicting and killing that person for malicious intend?

Answer : You can't, that statement is flawed, hypocritical and goes against what is allowed in terms game mechanics.

Exactly, and the FD statement reiterates, if you want to blow the crap out of some one and turn them in to space fodder with out warning, with out saying a word to that person in chat, you can. This is why FD call ED a "Cut throat Galaxy".

 

[Chance-]

At this point this thread has become a poop(?) throwing fest so we can all stop now and agree to disagree. One side believes that you can moderate on intent and the other does not. We are all saying that in a roundabout manner and it's just a repetitive mess at this point.

 

[xondk]

If I join a private group and they are doing charity or what ever the *eck and kill players in there you can't ban on the ground of malicious morality if ALL I did was using legitimate intended game mechanics.

if they do, I guarantee you the refund will be quick and fast.

1) no one is banning based on "malicious morality" heck there's been no talk about bans or similar from frontier, what they do is their choice, but people are being banned for their actions, and its been made exceedingly clear what is not allowed, so yeah, if your actions are judged by frontier to be harassment, or griefing, then they will act appropriately, all this talk about them basing it around morals and such seems to be just trying to talk around the subject, when caught doing something that you are not allowed to do.

2) No, there is absolutely and utterly no way people qualify for a refund if they are judged to be breaking the rules of a game that they bought and agreed to obey the rules of, they broke the rules, they are not entitled to any refund, they chose the actions to do they did, if they get 'banned' if that even happens, but it is a consequence for their actions, they could not have done said actions that they were made clear were not allowed. And people can threaten to sue all they want, there is absolutely no legal grounds for doing so, as said previously if there were it would have happened already as this action is not unique to Elite in any way, and replies. Like yours, are seen before many times over.

So yeah....you will be judged based on your actions, if your actions indicate that you are doing something with no possible in-game reason or gain from those actions, then the gain/reason is based outside the game. There are very few reasons based outside the game that could motivate actions that are not permitted, very very few, but harassment and griefing are some of them, if you do what others have done in the past to harass, if you do the same actions they have done, then yeah you are going to get judged in the same way.

But again, there's been no talk from frontier about banning, there's been said consequences what those consequences are, we do not know, we do know however that shadow banning does exist.

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

At this point this thread has become a poop(?) throwing fest so we can all stop now and agree to disagree. One side believes that you can moderate on intent and the other does not. We are all saying that in a roundabout manner and it's just a repetitive mess at this point.

Nope, no one has stated that they are moderating intent, therein lies the problem, maybe people should stop stating that when that's not what has been stated? actions, are being moderated. and you can claim intent left right and center, but if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, flies like a duck, chances are its a duck and its going to end up a roasted duck for dinner.


But yeah, it seems like what's happened in the past, any talk about handling people that clearly break rules, is going to get shouted up and muddled up so much that moderators and such step in, and said people are going to walk away thinking that's a victory for them, but...its not, seen before, happening here again, will happen in the future, it is..nothing new. Seen repeatedly over years of internet and gaming.

 

[Kermit Laphroaig]

Hi ho, Kermit Laphroaig here. Diamond Frogs leader, coffee drinker.

Y'know, this policy here doesn't actually apply to my group, as we usually stick to open. We've never saw fit to crash other people's private groups, and our attempts to find some meta way into everyone's Solo Mode was less than successful. Best we could come up with is a daily submission to universal GalNET stating how really very disappointed I am with all of you.

But I digress.

I can't say I personally understand people who DON'T play in Open. I employ a large team whose main purpose is to remind me such players are technically 'people' and not some kind of ghostly spirits that do nothing but plague the Background Sim while offering nothing useful in return, except tears and high pitched droning on quality web forums such as this one.

But people is peoples, as some weird old guy told me once, and I would like to endorse FDEV's plan. Here's some thoughts on it

Don't Crash Other People's Private Groups
There's no point to begin with, and it's not a clever achievement if you manage to pull it off. Mobius is like, 19,000 players and they produce a keening sound not unlike Snoopy singing at the end of "A Charlie Brown Christmas". It's annoying, but understandable.

Anyone in Open Mode is Fair Game, BUT
... that does NOT mean be terrified everyone is going to gank you. If a Diamond Frog ganks you, it's likely it's because someone put a price on your head, or we thought it'd be really really funny. But sometimes we are just lonely and need someone to talk to. Someone that understands. With one notable exception, Diamond Frogs generally do not want kill everyone they see in Open. And even if we do, remember the math-magical words "I CAN PAY YOU MORE MONEY" which is like a circuit breaker to a true mercenary. But it is a poor idea not to follow through, so think twice about high waking and grab your space-cheque book instead.

Restricting PvP is Worse Than "Non-Consensual PvP"
Putting rules on anything is a slippery slope. Rather than allow people to run an honest business, albeit one that involves murder-on-demand, enforcing PvE is pretty much the death of fair play. Doing certain actions in Open or Solo have the same repercussions, but Open players have no way to prevent Solo players from doing anything, and this is already in a game that accurately scales the vastness of Outer Space. The fairness or unfairness of this is a topic for another thread, but it is unfairness that most Private and Solo players don't realize they are endorsing when they try and hobble Open behavior.

Ed Lewis is Secretly a Diamond Frog Spy
Nah, not really, just wanted to see if you were reading any of this. Technically he never refused our making him an honorary Frog, and any additional murders of him will be met with horrible shrapnelly death. Good luck going to the Core, Ed, please say hi to the Queen of Sag A* for me!

Don't Let Yourself Feel Powerless
Open Mode is nothing to be afraid of. There's those who are willing to fight for you, for a price. There's plenty of us who don't mind giving out free samples of Truth and Justice. The Diamond Frogs can have your back for affordable rates. Don't be afraid of the game. Own it. Let us help you make the payments.

 

[AJW]

At this point this thread has become a poop(?) throwing fest so we can all stop now and agree to disagree. One side believes that you can moderate on intent and the other does not. We are all saying that in a roundabout manner and it's just a repetitive mess at this point.

Frankly, what 'one side or the other' says is irrelevant. FD have made it clear what they intend to do, and nothing said here is going to make an iota of difference.

 

[Kermit Laphroaig]

Frankly, what 'one side or the other' says is irrelevant. FD have made it clear what they intend to do, and nothing said here is going to make an iota of difference.

Okay, so that's one vote for "Let's all just play Space Station 13 instead"

 

[Red Anders]

At this point this thread has become a poop(?) throwing fest so we can all stop now and agree to disagree. One side believes that you can moderate on intent and the other does not. We are all saying that in a roundabout manner and it's just a repetitive mess at this point.

That's probably the most sensible post in the thread. Well, apart from one of mine obviously. Nothing is going to be resolved here, or anywhere else, until such time as this is tested and I'm sure that some of your brethren intend to do that so I guess we'll all find out how it shakes down soon enough.

 

[Nerf Buck]

A simple solution would be to just send out wings of bounty hunter npc's, who want to interdict and kill people with "substantial bounties".. just make the game kill them for being silly...

Fly safe out there

Even simpler would be to IP ban and close the accounts of the very worst offenders who continue the behaviour. They're easy to identify and are usually quick to publicise their lulz. Other games ban for less and it works nicely. This is a handful of players that have a disproportionate effect on the whole. So ban the worst in periodic housekeeping and the game will carry on just fine. They've had their warning, from now on the banhammer should be swinging and ready to fall.

 

[DoctorTrauma]

This whole thread illustrates whats wrong with trying enforce morals. Zac made a statement and even though what he said is there in text you have 99 different interpretations on what he even said. This is just stupid.

Bravo Kinmob. Well, after playing this game almost a year I have watched it go down hill month after month. The PvP community marginalized more and more. And this PC nonsense will probably be the nail in the coffin. You will in fact have a Solo mode and Open mode that are identical. A game with the word "Dangerous" in it reduced to a PC police state with people being banned for "hurt feelings" Check your records and see how many times I have bought this game for friends (many). That support for this game ends with this nonsense.

 

[Nerf Buck]

How do you prove whether or not I am harassing someone or if my actions are malicious if all I am doing is killing that person?

Your video streams make that decision pretty easy cmdr. Best of luck when support get around to you. Might be time to ease off the public naming of your victims as you've done before. Fly safe.

 

[Chance-]

Bravo Kinmob. Well, after playing this game almost a year I have watched it go down hill month after month. The PvP community marginalized more and more. And this PC nonsense will probably be the nail in the coffin. You will in fact have a Solo mode and Open mode that are identical. A game with the word "Dangerous" in it reduced to a PC police state with people being banned for "hurt feelings" Check your records and see how many times I have bought this game for friends (many). That support for this game ends with this nonsense.

The people that state that our support and sales mean nothing have no idea how much you've done for them. Not a big surprise.

 

[Sole Hunter]

Your video streams make that decision pretty easy cmdr. Best of luck when support get around to you. Might be time to ease off the public naming of your victims as you've done before. Fly safe.

Of course let's ban that person by reviewing video evidence without getting the side of the story from the said individual in question.

''hello sir would you like to engage in some consensual PVP if so please sign this form before I blow up your ship or I risk of getting banned.''

anyway this game will be dead by next year if we need to have these kinds of debate everyday.

 

[1337hax0r]

I am not sure why they just don't get rid of players having the ability to shoot each other, it would fix the game, I wish frontier would stop being cats (it wouldn't let me say the p word that means cats) instead of tryng to please everyone. Premium beta backer with 2 accounts and I won't be spending anymore money on this product or any other product they release.

 

[inkmmo]

How do you prove whether or not I am harassing someone or if my actions are malicious if all I am doing is killing that person?

Answer : You can't, that statement is flawed, hypocritical and goes against what is allowed in terms of game mechanics.

If I join a private group and they are doing charity or what ever the *eck and kill players in there you can't ban on the ground of malicious morality if ALL I did was using legitimate intended game mechanics.

if they do, I guarantee you my bank will hear back from me and the refund will be quick and fast.

Bring forth the popcorns!

You obviously haven't read EULA. EULA section 7.3.1 explicitly says that you are not allowed to do certain things (exactly what Zac wrote about) in the game and in EULA section 8.1 says that Frontier have right to ban you from the game if you don't comply to the EULA agreement. In other words - your threats about refund are ridiculous.

 

[Oldric]

I'm with AA who are mortal enemies with SDC and can not remember the last time I attacked a player who was not wanted so this has nothing to do with with defending my own actions.

"look at the OP from FDev, it doesn't get any clearer."

I could hardly make it less clear if I tried. Frontier have set this up to be so vague that they can pretty much just decide to take action against whoever if they prove to unpopular with the community or some subset of the community.

Does seem that SDC players have taken this all very personally. The examples given in the OP do seem to describe their actions. Actions which have upset many customers, generated negative feedback which could be affecting the game financially. Will players have to be banned to remove any vagueness?

 

[DanaM]

Does seem that SDC players have taken this all very personally. The examples given in the OP do seem to describe their actions. Actions which have upset many customers, generated negative feedback which could be affecting the game financially. Will players have to be banned to remove any vagueness?

Consider this situation: you're running a business. A group of your customers get together and state that their intention is to interfere with other customers using your product. They do, in fact, take action which tends to discourage new and potential customers. What do you do?

When this happens in other business areas, the people interfering with business get shown the door right quick. Simple economics. Income from griefers doesn't offset the losses from missed new sales. What did SDC and company think was going to happen?! The only thing that's odd is that Frontier waited as long as they have and haven't really DONE anything yet.

 

[Grumpy181155]

Hi ho, Kermit Laphroaig here. Diamond Frogs leader, coffee drinker.
......
Restricting PvP is Worse Than "Non-Consensual PvP"
Putting rules on anything is a slippery slope. Rather than allow people to run an honest business, albeit one that involves murder-on-demand, enforcing PvE is pretty much the death of fair play. Doing certain actions in Open or Solo have the same repercussions, but Open players have no way to prevent Solo players from doing anything, and this is already in a game that accurately scales the vastness of Outer Space. The fairness or unfairness of this is a topic for another thread, but it is unfairness that most Private and Solo players don't realize they are endorsing when they try and hobble Open behavior..

Mr Laphroig, A well written post sir and one that I agree with and would support especially this call that non-Open players should not attempt to moderate what happens in Open. I need to say that I am one of those guys that usually ghosts around playing with myself, so to speak, but I believe that this galaxy is big enough for all of us to play in and enjoy the way that we each want to. I have always had the opinion that in Open anything goes and when we make the choice of which mode to play then we should accept the consequence both good and bad without moaning and crying about it.