OSI has gone too far -- permenently banned for a few words...
V
I'm sure that many (if not most) of you will find it as pathetic and in need
of attention as I have.
I was in Minoc the other day with my GM fisher when I suddenly realized that
3 SOSs had been stolen. I quickly found the grey and yelled GUARDS! but I
guess too much time had gone by -- nothing happened -- and my GM fisher
doesn't know how to fight, so there wasn't much I could do. So, I logged in
with my other character and baited the thief in Minoc. Of course he struck,
and instead of yelling GUARDS, I wanted to take him down myself with my
Katana of Vanq. (100 str, 100 dex, 25 int, 94 swords -- you know, a good Dex
Monkey). Of course the first flaw in UO is that you can't swing while the
guy is running, so here I am running this guy down (obviously who has 100
dex) with my horse and I'm not getting a single swing in even though I'm
right next to him. This lasted a good 60-120 seconds.
Next thing I know, he disappears. Hidden. Now I can't cast reveal, and
don't have detect hidden, so I start talking "come out you little fuckin'
thief... Daddy wants to play with you!" granted this language may offend
some, it's normally spoken -- besides, he deserved it -- that's exactly what
he was.
Nothing.
So, I decided to become more colorful and creative, so I said something that
was pretty nasty, and he popped out "hey! that's harassment! I'm going to
have you banned!"
WHACK -- WHACK -- dead.
The tactic sure worked. Of course what I said was very nasty (no need
posting it here as it would definitey offend people), however, it was merely
a tactic to bring the thief out, and it worked. Next thing I know, he's
telling me how he called a GM on me and how my account is going to be
banned. I shrugged it off, knowing that the whole thing was a joke of a
situation and that only a complete idiot would consider banning me for my
response to a thief. I was at the bank and had the vanq. kat in my hand and
he was about 8 spaces from me (he was far away). I told him that he got
what he deserved, and he always would from me.
So I put the kat in my backpack and cast recall, and right before I click on
my rune, I see that he just stole my 40K katana of vanq. Now many of you
who are reading this may be saying "what a moron! hahah!" Well I'll tell
you guys, this guy was GOOD. What he did was clicked on the sword in my
hand (from halfway off the screen), and the second I put it in my bag, he
ran by me at full speed without stopping and did a STEAL/LASTTARGET. I
didn't know one could do that... I yelled for guards, but as usual, nothing
happened as he was already gone... and hidden. Of course I couldn't find
him, and I wasn't going to use the 'nasty language' that I did before
because other people were around, so I just waited for him to return -- he
did, and I killed him with another Kat of Vanq. that I had, but not before
he banked the item.
He then came back and mocked me at how stupid I was, blah blah. It was a
learning lesson that's for sure... Believe it or not, I didn't mock or foul
him back. I actually had SOME respect for the guy being able to pull that
stunt off -- and was thankful it happened so I knew how well people could
steal -- and know what to look for.
Anyway, I try to log back onto my account two hours later, and BAM -- THIS
ACCOUNT HAS BEEN BLOCKED.
WTF? So I waited 2 days -- thinking it was some dumb 24 or 48 hour thing,
and still blocked. So I EMailed UO and they sent me back this bogus
response stating that a blocked account was permenent, and that people say
nasty things in the heat of emotion, and they need to make sure that the
rules are enforced, yadda yadda. Nothing specific telling me why I was
banned though (although I know it was from what I said).
So there you have it. My UO account with 3 characters, and needless to say
LOTS of stuff, has been permenently banned because one mocking thief
reported a nasty sentence that I used to bring him out of hiding. Nobody
else reported this, nor heard it... Just one other player (who everybody
hates, BTW).
Note that I've NEVER had a problem with OSI before, never any previous bans
or anything. OSI didn't even send me an EMail about being banned until I
EMailed them 2 days later.
Folks, it doesn't matter WHAT I said. That's what the language filter is
for - DUH. What matters is that OSI has gone too far by alllowing real-life
crimes of thievery and murder in their game, but then disallowing a
real-life response of foul language associated with such actions. This
player reported that I was 'harassing' him. Right. He just tried to steal
from my char (and stole 3 SOSs from another), and I ran him down.
Technically his mocking me after stealing my kat would fall into the same
category, but not being a whiner, I don't even consider reporting people --
it's part of the game.
So there you have it -- OSI will ban a clean account with no past history by
the report of one thieving, mocking player in relation to two sentences that
were said by the 'victim'. No warning, nothing -- just instant ban for
'life'.
OSI really screwed up on this one, and after seeing the ORC MEETS BORG
pictures of UO2, I wonder just what the hell is going on with the company
that pioneerd the MMORPG industry? It's obvious they're more concerned
about competing with the upcoming MMORPG world of Final Fantasy VIII than
keeping the Ultima tradition.
They sure don't have my support, and after this little display of their
mentality, they'll never get a penny from me again...
Dwight Fry
Sucker.
I'm not trying to be malicious. Seriously. But you played right into
this guys hand.
Thievery and murder are part of the game. As long as they are performed
in accordance with the rules, they will not disappear. Those same rules
also prohibit offensive language and harassment. You clearly were
banned for using offensive language (granted, the harassment is a bit
iffy) and he got away because he didn't break the rules. Get a new
account and watch your language.
Or never come back, there will always be another sucker.
Otara
>Folks, it doesn't matter WHAT I said. That's what the language filter is
>for - DUH. What matters is that OSI has gone too far by alllowing real-life
>crimes of thievery and murder in their game, but then disallowing a
>real-life response of foul language associated with such actions. This
>player reported that I was 'harassing' him. Right. He just tried to steal
>from my char (and stole 3 SOSs from another), and I ran him down.
>Technically his mocking me after stealing my kat would fall into the same
>category, but not being a whiner, I don't even consider reporting people --
>it's part of the game.
Not really, just hard to draw the line sometimes.
Tricky one overall, depends what you said for a start - sounds like it
was pretty yucky considered what you _are_ saying in this post.
And of course its not _really_ thievery or murder, because its a game,
whilst verbal harassment can be 'real' in UO and you even admit what
you said yourself was extremely offensive and that you were
deliberately using it in order to get the reaction you wanted.
I certainly would be worried at the idea of being banned simply on one
persons say so, but of course, we have no idea of what else OSI has
recorded against you - its really only your word that you used this
'tactic' for the first time - it looks a little to me like you've
possibly used it before.
Otara
Austin
wrote:
>On Sat, 26 Feb 2000 22:38:29 -0700, "V" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>Folks, it doesn't matter WHAT I said. That's what the language filter is
>>for - DUH. What matters is that OSI has gone too far by alllowing real-life
>>crimes of thievery and murder in their game, but then disallowing a
>>real-life response of foul language associated with such actions. This
>>player reported that I was 'harassing' him. Right. He just tried to steal
>>from my char (and stole 3 SOSs from another), and I ran him down.
>>Technically his mocking me after stealing my kat would fall into the same
>>category, but not being a whiner, I don't even consider reporting people --
>>it's part of the game.
>
>Not really, just hard to draw the line sometimes.
>
>Tricky one overall, depends what you said for a start - sounds like it
>was pretty yucky considered what you _are_ saying in this post.
>
>And of course its not _really_ thievery or murder, because its a game,
>whilst verbal harassment can be 'real' in UO and you even admit what
>you said yourself was extremely offensive and that you were
>deliberately using it in order to get the reaction you wanted.
>
>I certainly would be worried at the idea of being banned simply on one
>persons say so, but of course, we have no idea of what else OSI has
>recorded against you - its really only your word that you used this
>'tactic' for the first time - it looks a little to me like you've
>possibly used it before.
>
>Otara
>
>
He wasnt banned on one persons say so. When a harrassment complaint is
made, he journal is clipped and sent. So OSI has a record of exactly
what he said. He was banned justly, im guessing racial slurs, or
perhaps sexual slurs.
HangUP75
They say that they want this game to be like "Real Life", you just cant call
guards on someone that attacks you in town and BAM 2 seconds later your dead.
And like what he said if this game is so real life then why cant you say
language that you hear every day.
There is a rating on the box for a reason.
*not that i believe in that stuff anyway*
But this game isnt real life at all, in fact the only thing real about this
game is the infractions like what happened in this case
The dictionary definition of Harassment is: To make repeated attacks on
(someone or something) well he said three things and i dont no if i can call
that harassment especially if he deserved it because people work hard for what
they do and REAL LIFE EMOTIONS get in the way or are said i say that words are
just things nothing more people say things so whocares if it makes you that mad
then say something back, well i say if OSI wants to ban people for something
that happens in REAL LIFE Then FU*K OSI
ISAM of LS
Otara
>
>He wasnt banned on one persons say so. When a harrassment complaint is
>made, he journal is clipped and sent. So OSI has a record of exactly
>what he said. He was banned justly, im guessing racial slurs, or
>perhaps sexual slurs.
Nice - ta Austin,
Otara
V
you feel about playing a game that can take hundreds, or thousands of hours
of work, only to have it all lost because somebody elses' whiny opinion was
able to shut your account down? Of course we could all walk on eggshells
(and many of you do), but is that what you really want? Besides, if the
game is designed to allow role-playing, why should we be limited to how we
role-play? You really think if somebody stole from you back in the 14th
century that you'd just speak politely to them?
If you're caught speeding (and most of you reading this have sped, which is
against the law), do they impound your car for life? Nope, they write you a
ticket and then impound your car only after X number of tickets.
Granted harassment is an issue -- I can see somebody following another,
getting in the way of their gameplay, and making the game misreable -- but
to steal from somebody and then report their response to taking away from
their work, and then be able to report and shut their account down?
Folks, stealking is part of the game, but at the same time, when you steal
from somebody you steal their time and effort. God forbid that somebody
gets upset when their time and effort into something is taken away. God
forbit they use words to express their response to those actions.
If it can happen to me, it can happen to any of you (oops, except those who
NEVER break any of the rules). Any of you who use four letter words at any
time (and many of you do, or have at one point or another), or have had a
single emotional moment where you said something that might 'offend'
another, or be considered harassment -- you're just as much at risk.
Just for note, I never used the tactic from my original post, nor said
anything close to what I did to anyone else ever in the game (it's great how
some people assume things).
I don't question my direct actions, I question the overall big picture
that's being painted here by OSI. The ability to take time and effort from
their customers without warning, based on a single complaint by another
customer. Their new logo should be "We create worlds of fantasy and
conditions, and by god, if you break the rules, you're OUT."
Granted it's their 'world', I can't cry a river saying "it's not fair!" but
I can say "why would I want to play in a world where people who are offended
at mere words are capable of bringing down another players hard work?"
Taking a look at the bigger picture, I think this is a serious issue.
V
him. I didn't continue saying the things I did. After that, the language I
used at the bank when I saw him next was pretty much standard since he
wouldn't leave me alone after I had killed him -- he came up and gave me the
"you're so lame, blah blah you're going to be banned for... blah blah" and
I replied with the typical "dude, you're a loser thief. you got what you
deserved -- go away."
My guess is some idiot GM at OSI saw that I replied to his "I'm going to get
you banned for what you said!" with a "yah right, whatever" and said "I'll
show him!"
It's obvious that one GM at OSI made this decision, and I'll be willing to
bet it was based on his opinion of offense at what I said rather than
'handling it properly' within the R&Rs (I've NEVER heard of anyone being
banned like this, and I know some people that make my language look like
flowers). I think it's a one person issue -- the GM at OSI didn't like what
he saw, so he banned me. Of course this takes us into the next 'ego
enforcement' realm (which, most commonly is seen in local law enforcement).
Something along the lines of "good thing you're not paid to enforce your
opinion, officer -- just the law!"
I'll never forget the police officer that made a couple follow him to a
counselor because they were on the way to get an abortion, and it went
against his very belief. He used his authority to stretch his hand outside
the law and force his opinion on another. Funny thing is that I ran into
this guy about 2 years before he pulled the 'pro life' stunt and he was a
complete loser then (kinda mental and scary). Made me wonder how he ever
got his job.
Trust me, people like this are at OSI (they're everywhere), and they can 'go
off their handle' just like other players -- except they have the ability to
steal your time and effort from you -- abuse their authority. I constantly
hear complains about how the GMs don't help, or are useless -- more players
hate GMs than find them helpful. Odd that the time they do choose to do
something is to take a power trip over somebody who might have said
something offensive to them. No EMail or warning or anything.
My favorite part is that OSI is still billing my account, even though it's
been permenently banned.
"Scotty1118" <scott...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000227142805...@ng-fs1.aol.com...
> I just had a question about the whole harassment accusation. A while
back, I
> was called all sorts of nasty stuff at a bank. When I called a GM saying
I had
> been harassed he told me I had to tell the person who insulted me to stop
and
> warn him that I would call him for harassment BEFORE anything would happen
to
> him (i.e. getting his account blocked). Well since then, every time I
warn
> someone in this way, they stop and leave me alone. Keeping this in mind,
why
> did this guy get his account blocked for saying one thing, without any
form of
> a warning?
iczer-two
or excitment or not i belive he should be banned...
most 'hate crimes' are not thought out... they happen in the heat of the
moment and emotion... (as do love crimes)...
Austin <007...@direct.ca> wrote in message
<9ry4OCHsBYrMvd9jUvdRJbqxcP=w...@4ax.com>...
>On Sun, 27 Feb 2000 16:53:33 +1100, Otara <sp...@spammity.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 26 Feb 2000 22:38:29 -0700, "V" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>Folks, it doesn't matter WHAT I said. That's what the language filter is
>>>for - DUH. What matters is that OSI has gone too far by alllowing
real-life
>>>crimes of thievery and murder in their game, but then disallowing a
>>>real-life response of foul language associated with such actions. This
>>>player reported that I was 'harassing' him. Right. He just tried to
steal
>>>from my char (and stole 3 SOSs from another), and I ran him down.
>>>Technically his mocking me after stealing my kat would fall into the same
>>>category, but not being a whiner, I don't even consider reporting
people --
>>>it's part of the game.
>>
>>Not really, just hard to draw the line sometimes.
>>
>>Tricky one overall, depends what you said for a start - sounds like it
>>was pretty yucky considered what you _are_ saying in this post.
>>
>>And of course its not _really_ thievery or murder, because its a game,
>>whilst verbal harassment can be 'real' in UO and you even admit what
>>you said yourself was extremely offensive and that you were
>>deliberately using it in order to get the reaction you wanted.
>>
>>I certainly would be worried at the idea of being banned simply on one
>>persons say so, but of course, we have no idea of what else OSI has
>>recorded against you - its really only your word that you used this
>>'tactic' for the first time - it looks a little to me like you've
>>possibly used it before.
>>
>>Otara
>>
>>
Richard Cortese
news:Rjeu4.13637$7c2.2...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> But doesn't the FAQ say something about if you find it offensive you have
to
> a) ask them to stop, and b) try to leave the area? And then if they
follow
> you around you can call them on harassment. I am not saying this guy was
> banned unjustly, just wondering about exactly where the line is drawn,
since
> there have been many stories here about people reporting harassment and
then
> themselves being warned about complaining about it.
There is the time honored explaination, the thief was an off duty OSI
employee.
We do have one report from someone who said he was banned for typing WTF to
a GM. Lower threashold if it involves an OSI butt buddy.
iczer-two
'techinically' trying to set up was to be the better person and act like an
adult instead of playing into their hands...
Richard Cortese wrote in message ...
>Austin <007...@direct.ca> wrote in message
>news:9ry4OCHsBYrMvd9jUvdRJbqxcP=w...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 27 Feb 2000 16:53:33 +1100, Otara <sp...@spammity.com.au>
>> wrote:
>> He wasnt banned on one persons say so. When a harrassment complaint is
>> made, he journal is clipped and sent. So OSI has a record of exactly
>> what he said. He was banned justly, im guessing racial slurs, or
>> perhaps sexual slurs.
>There is the possibilty he was set up a bit though. I have noticed this
>myself a few times, scumbag will get REALLY rude, then suddenly not say
>anything really offensive for ~3 minutes.
>
>I think what has happened is the low lifes have figured out exactly how
much
>of your journal is sent in a harassment report. They will start in really
>boarderline with verbal abuse, then not say anything, and I mean anything
>that can be construed as making them what OSI considers an equal
participant
>in the conversation. I mean I have even had someone try to follow a "Fag"
>comment directed at one of my characters with a "Why are you harassing me?
I
>never said anything to you". Only thing I can figure is they are trying to
>set up their journal.
>
>That way the "FUK U NEWBIE" that they initiate the exchange with has
>scrolled while the "FUK U 2" gets into your permanent record.
>
>Once again, shard dependant. This has never happened on Hokuto, used to be
a
>weekly occurance on Baja.
>
>
C urt Phipps
When you kill the thief in real life..he cant come back to harass you time and time
again.
HangUP75 wrote:
> First of all id like to say that im on your side.
>
> They say that they want this game to be like "Real Life", you just cant call
> guards on someone that attacks you in town and BAM 2 seconds later your dead.
>
> And like what he said if this game is so real life then why cant you say
> language that you hear every day.
>
> There is a rating on the box for a reason.
> *not that i believe in that stuff anyway*
>
> But this game isnt real life at all, in fact the only thing real about this
> game is the infractions like what happened in this case
>
> The dictionary definition of Harassment is: To make repeated attacks on
> (someone or something) well he said three things and i dont no if i can call
> that harassment especially if he deserved it because people work hard for what
> they do and REAL LIFE EMOTIONS get in the way or are said i say that words are
> just things nothing more people say things so whocares if it makes you that mad
> then say something back, well i say if OSI wants to ban people for something
> that happens in REAL LIFE Then FU*K OSI
>
> ISAM of LS
>
James McMahon
well, more power to ya, many on this board are a bunch of liberal, gunna
make the world a better place and I know how panty-waists. Fuck OSI and
their bug ridden mess of a game. I hope you find happiness in whatever you
endeavor to do next, I'll just continue on in UO making people miserable by
pk'ing and npk'ing anyone I can, and I've got a few. :)
p.s. all you regulars, don't bother announcing that your "plonking" me,
just quietly do it and be done, I really don't care....
V <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:Omfu4.617$TY1....@news.uswest.net...
Maachanto no Remon
<jimmy...@worldnet.att.net> simply wrote:
> I hope you find happiness in whatever you
>endeavor to do next, I'll just continue on in UO making people miserable by
>pk'ing and npk'ing anyone I can, and I've got a few. :)
So, you pay $9.95 a month to make people miserable? Very interesting.
-Katie
Uwe Fischer
zi5u4.957$uF1....@news.uswest.net...
> I guess the main point was missed here. The real question
is this -- how do
> you feel about playing a game that can take hundreds, or
thousands of hours
> of work, only to have it all lost because somebody elses'
whiny opinion was
> able to shut your account down? Of course we could all
walk on eggshells
> (and many of you do), but is that what you really want?
Besides, if the
> game is designed to allow role-playing, why should we be
limited to how we
> role-play? You really think if somebody stole from you
back in the 14th
> century that you'd just speak politely to them?
There is no reason to speak politely. You are able to curse
him in a medieval usage of language and if you do, you will
have no problem. Using racial or sexual offenses are against
the terms of agreement. And it´s also against each rule of
human community.
> If you're caught speeding (and most of you reading this
have sped, which is
> against the law), do they impound your car for life?
Nope, they write you a
> ticket and then impound your car only after X number of
tickets.
It depends on how high your speed is above the allowed
speed. Same is true for harassing in UO.
> Granted harassment is an issue -- I can see somebody
following another,
> getting in the way of their gameplay, and making the game
misreable -- but
> to steal from somebody and then report their response to
taking away from
> their work, and then be able to report and shut their
account down?
Don´t deal with those jerks. Simply ignore them. So they are
the clowns. Now you are.
> Folks, stealking is part of the game, but at the same
time, when you steal
> from somebody you steal their time and effort. God forbid
that somebody
> gets upset when their time and effort into something is
taken away. God
> forbit they use words to express their response to those
actions.
I can understand your reaction but it was against the rules.
We can discuss, wether the rules are right or wrong, but we
have to accept them. If you are doing something against the
rules, you have to take punishment.
It was your decision to carry your katana of vanquishing.
Don´t misunderstand me. I don´t want to say that those guy
acted right, but if you give a chance to those a******s
it´s your fault, not OSI´s.
> Granted it's their 'world', I can't cry a river saying
"it's not fair!" but
> I can say "why would I want to play in a world where
people who are offended
> at mere words are capable of bringing down another players
hard work?"
>
> Taking a look at the bigger picture, I think this is a
serious issue.
Sure, you are right, but again, you where the one who broke
the rules, not he.
Regards
Grizwood, Seneschall (MTB), Drachenfels
For Baphomet with fire and sword!
BTC: Baphometic Trade Center Drachenfels
http://internetjunk.com/users/baphomet/
MTB: Militia Templum Baphomet
http://www.angelfire.com/mo/autumnvision/
Uwe Fischer
20000227142805...@ng-fs1.aol.com...
> I just had a question about the whole harassment
accusation. A while back, I
> was called all sorts of nasty stuff at a bank. When I
called a GM saying I had
> been harassed he told me I had to tell the person who
insulted me to stop and
> warn him that I would call him for harassment BEFORE
anything would happen to
> him (i.e. getting his account blocked). Well since then,
every time I warn
> someone in this way, they stop and leave me alone.
Keeping this in mind, why
> did this guy get his account blocked for saying one thing,
without any form of
> a warning?
If you use racial, sexistic, religious or political slurs,
you will be banned immediately.
Uwe Fischer
Newsbeitrag:
wDku4.9651$YG.7...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> V, I'm with ya man, bet you called that thief a cunt,
didn't you. ;) Oh
> well, more power to ya, many on this board are a bunch of
liberal, gunna
> make the world a better place and I know how panty-waists.
Fuck OSI and
in whatever you
> endeavor to do next, I'll just continue on in UO making
people miserable by
> pk'ing and npk'ing anyone I can, and I've got a few. :)
>
your "plonking" me,
> just quietly do it and be done, I really don't care....
No reason to PLONK you. Postings like this are allways good
for a decent laugh in the morning.
Uwe Fischer
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: V <nos...@nospam.com>
Newsgroups: rec.games.computer.ultima.online
Gesendet: Sonntag, 27. Februar 2000 06:38
Betreff: OSI has gone too far -- permenently banned for a
few words...
> I am posting this in order to inform all of the players
what OSI has done.
> I'm sure that many (if not most) of you will find it as
pathetic and in
need
> of attention as I have.
*snip*
Did you ever read the license-agreement? Harassment is
against the terms.
You did it and you got the punishment. That´s the way how
judgement works
(if it works). I think, you where aware of the risk.
Quaestor
> That way the "FUK U NEWBIE" that they initiate the exchange with has scrolled
> while the "FUK U 2" gets into your permanent record.
I have found that acting very newbie/proper is a great way to get them to
continue. I say things like, "Please do not make sexist remarks." They just
can't stop. Once I have asked them 3 times and they continue, I make the
harassment call, and often get results. This is how I gave a "harassment count"
to corwin.
> Once again, shard dependant.
It's very GM-dependant. Just like stanky names. I have on many occasions
reported npk for having exploit names like "a chicken," etc, and got no response
or told they could do that if they wanted. Today I reported the infamous "an
ettin" (on LS) and got a good GM. No telling if he forced him to change it, but
if not I'll find him again and keep reporting until I get results.
Quaestor
> i was thinking the same thing and if he used either of those- heat of anger
> or excitment or not i belive he should be banned...
>
> most 'hate crimes' are not thought out... they happen in the heat of the
> moment and emotion... (as do love crimes)...
All the more reason to make the punishment more extreme, so the thought sticks
with the miscreant even in the heat of the moment.
Quaestor
> Someone will probably be macroing attended when the phone rings and get
> banned for unattended macroing too when they turn away from the computer to
> pick up the phone.
It's amazing what a simple solution presents itself. Put the phone by the
computer. :-)
Also, get rid of that comfy chair and play while sitting on the toilet, with
your fridge, stove, front door, playpen, and nuclear physics experiments all
close at hand.
*nudge*
Quaestor
> I just had a question about the whole harassment accusation. A while back, I was
> called all sorts of nasty stuff at a bank.
I was too, and I transfered my accounts and boy were they pissed.
> When I called a GM saying I had
> been harassed he told me I had to tell the person who insulted me to stop and
> warn him that I would call him for harassment BEFORE anything would happen to
> him (i.e. getting his account blocked). Well since then, every time I warn
> someone in this way, they stop and leave me alone.
It does work. Just like standing and waiting for the "duelist" to stop taunting
and attack (they never do - they are either trying to give an MC or kill without
taking one), just giving a simple, direct, civil, clear response like, "Please do
not make racist comments," is the key to getting the jerks. After saying this 3
times and the jerks continue to harass, most GM will act. I have clobbered several
this way, and made a lot more of them shuddup.
> Keeping this in mind, why did this guy get his account blocked for saying one
> thing, without any form of a warning?
OS lets their GM's have a lot of leeway as to just how they are going to work,
maybe not in writing, but in reallity. The whole thing is very GM-dependant. You
want to get a jerk for one of these iffy things, you have to expect to make a
number of calls before getting a GM who will do the right thing.
Quaestor
> If you use racial, sexistic, religious or political slurs, you will be
> banned immediately.
It's not that certain. corwin is still in the game after I got him for
that. But the account gets marked (if you get a gm that will act at all),
and if it happens again they are very likely to get banned.
And the fact is, most such reports when validated do result in immediate
banning. I have gotten quite a few that way, for bad names And for
harassment.
And I feel very good about it.
iczer-two
guilty of such crimes on UO... and harassment IS a crime in all senses of
the word, tend to forget that there is a human being on the other side of
that screen that they face when they play...
we live in a sterile world where we see so much happen on TV and in the
media and even our games are all about killing our friends and family, and
in a real sense we have come to accept that because it is part of our
compeditive nature as humans.
but in contrast competition has its limits. and though we may mock a
persons skill in what they do, beat them in a game of chess or basketball or
mortal combat, we still have to accept that certian things in our lives are
taboo to attack. those things are of course what are sacred to the
individual and define who and what they are...
race - religion - and sexual preference...
attack those and i am sorry but you are less than human. you should not be
playing on UO. you should not be doing anything except serving time doing
pennance for your crime.
i run a non-osi shard and if any person atttacks those on my game, the least
they loose is their account. i will use logs. i will use inter ISP contact
and i will do everything in my power to protect those who play from people
like that.
in closing - if you want to come here and play the victim, then i can not
stop you from that. but if you play on a shard either osi or non-osi you
abide by their rules or you do not play. end of story.
- miyagami noriko
- Iczer-two Server (TUS-048a)
Quaestor wrote in message <38BA58D1...@Skara.Brae>...
VMax from Europa
I think you had better watch your tongue a little... you should have
realised that the internet is dominated by America (have you ever watched
Jerry Springer ?peeep peeep what the $#@$#^ peeep :-)
I am sorry it happened to you and perhaps one day there will be a "grown up/
anti moral majority shard"
It will probably be a Dutch shard hehehehe
On which you can say what you like or think, a real red light district in
Britain and coffeeshops all over Trinsic!! than we get the undead as slow as
possible by feeding them spacecake to kick them out.
You can buy a windmill in stead of a tower and a new skill will be
woodenshoemaker.
Vmax from Europa
"V" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:oH2u4.2054$ad7....@news.uswest.net...
Vargon
James McMahon wrote in message ...
<snip all the verbal diarrhoea>
> p.s. all you regulars, don't bother announcing that your "plonking" me,
>just quietly do it and be done, I really don't care....
>
You don't care?....hmmm pretty much our attitude about you.
Opium
movie), showing crime, death and destruction is acceptable but
not foul words...
Sex is even worse, it's harder to buy the Playboy magazine
than a gun :-)
Richard Cortese
news:KUfu4.1383$XL5....@news.pacbell.net...
> this whole kind of thing can be avioded if the person that they are
> 'techinically' trying to set up was to be the better person and act like
an
> adult instead of playing into their hands...
described as burnt out.
When Baja first came up, I transferred there from Pacific. I managed to get
a tent/vendor at a city gate and our guild started the first day there were
guilds with the stone on a house in the same area.
I was probably playing 5-7 nights a week, pretty much as soon as I got off
work ~10PM. For 5 months straight, 5-7 nights a week, 2 hours every night a
couple of jerk OSI butt buddies with thief characters would harass everyone.
They would create new characters every week with names like "Crazy Hitler"
or "Corps killer" and run around snooping, stealing, emoting "Hail Hitler",
calling people niggers, fags, hors<sic>, emoting "Skull fuks your corps" if
anyone got guard whacked while trying to defend themselves from being stolen
from.
After ~7PM, the rest of their LoD <It could have been LotD, been so long I
can't remember> buddies would finally get on line and they would put their
thieves away to go PK.
I make that at ~200+ hours of exposure to that type of jerk on a nightly
basis. That much exposure makes you kind of brittle. I am fortunately beyond
getting in trouble for language violations, someone snoops me they die. But
I do remember there was a rough period there where I would trash talk with
them vs just kill them ASAP.
Point Grosse Blank, "It isn't an excuse, but it is a reason".
Richard Cortese
news:38BA5876...@Skara.Brae...
> Richard Cortese wrote:
> > Once again, shard dependant.
>
> It's very GM-dependant. Just like stanky names. I have on many occasions
> reported npk for having exploit names like "a chicken," etc, and got no
response
> or told they could do that if they wanted. Today I reported the infamous
"an
> ettin" (on LS) and got a good GM. No telling if he forced him to change
it, but
> if not I'll find him again and keep reporting until I get results.
offensive stuff seems to be gone now. But sometimes I wonder of treefrog got
to hand pick his replacement.
I try to think about how people ended up with the names they are using. At
first "Stinky Pants" got a bit of a rise out of me for general stupidity,
then after reflecting on it for a bit I decided I would pretend it probably
started with a character named ~"I crapped my pants" and a GM changed it.
There is no basis in fact for believing this, but it makes me feel good
everytime I see "Stinky Pants" now, whereas before I would just kind of
groan/sigh.
Self deception can be a useful tool for stress relief when properly applied.
Richard Cortese
and you don't have to show your ID.
Quaestor
> Yah, but you got a gun, you can get all the free Playboy magzines you want
> and you don't have to show your ID.
"ID? I GOT your ID right HERE! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! Ha ha hA HA ha Ha
ha hA HA ha Ha ha hA HA ha Ha ha hA HA ha!" *grabs an armload of smutzines
and dodges off down the street*
Corwin of Amber (WE/LS)
>I have found that acting very newbie/proper is a great way to get them to
>continue. I say things like, "Please do not make sexist remarks." They just
>can't stop. Once I have asked them 3 times and they continue, I make the
>harassment call, and often get results. This is how I gave a "harassment count"
>to corwin.
ROFL
I was never contacted by anyone about that. They probably put it down
on your record as a bogus report.
I had every right to be offended by a man dressed up as a women
without even the common decency to cover-up.
I understand the teenage boys get quite the thrill from looking at
their 1/2 naked female characters ... but really, what's your excuse?
Corwin
Corwin of Amber (WE/LS)
>I am posting this in order to inform all of the players what OSI has done.
>I'm sure that many (if not most) of you will find it as pathetic and in need
>of attention as I have.
I'm surprised they acted so quickly without the usual song and dance
routine ... perhaps there was some other marks on your record?
Anywho, it sounds like you deserved it, and I can't see slamming OSI
for enforcing the TOS.
Don't do the crime ... if you can't do the time ...
Corwin
fwiw, you don't seem at all like the typical asshole bitching about
getting banned ... who would typically fill their posts with even more
examples of why we don't want 'em in UO. I'm hoping you will learn
something out of this ... that regardless of whatever other people do
to us, our reaction needs to be tempered, controlled, and in context.
Corwin of Amber (WE/LS)
wrote:
Utter bullshit.
V
I guess my point is that language restrictions on a game that has a language
filter is pretty lame -- especially when you can ignore other players, and
the game supports crimes such as murder and stealing. Limiting players to
their verbal responses is both manipulative, and misrepresentitive of the
true nature and means of the game -- human interaction.
Think about it. You can murder somebody, cut their body up into little
pices, and throw them around, then take all of their stuff, and mock them,
but you can't use any four letter (or other 'offensive') words, or you will
get banned. You can steal somebody's item that's worth weeks of work, but
if you respond with language that isn't appealing, you can get banned.
The whole idea behind this enforcement is flawed to a point where it's both
scary and disgusting.
That was my point.
"Corwin of Amber (WE/LS)" <cor...@wind.atlantic.com> wrote in message
news:38bb0230...@news.clark.net...
The Gamemaster
agreement, and it pretty clearly stated what you can and cannot do. Bottom
line, "Don't do the crime if you can't do the time". Cussing is for children
anyways.
--
-The Gamemaster
-"Real men don't use cheat codes"-me
-"Fear not death, but a life poorly lived"-me again
-to e-mail me, remove "nospam" from my address.
"Otara" <sp...@spammity.com.au> wrote in message
news:ebq4OD5ZkzK9GT...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 26 Feb 2000 22:38:29 -0700, "V" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> >Folks, it doesn't matter WHAT I said. That's what the language filter is
> >for - DUH. What matters is that OSI has gone too far by alllowing
real-life
> >crimes of thievery and murder in their game, but then disallowing a
> >real-life response of foul language associated with such actions. This
> >player reported that I was 'harassing' him. Right. He just tried to
steal
> >from my char (and stole 3 SOSs from another), and I ran him down.
> >Technically his mocking me after stealing my kat would fall into the same
> >category, but not being a whiner, I don't even consider reporting
people --
> >it's part of the game.
>
> Not really, just hard to draw the line sometimes.
>
> Tricky one overall, depends what you said for a start - sounds like it
> was pretty yucky considered what you _are_ saying in this post.
>
> And of course its not _really_ thievery or murder, because its a game,
> whilst verbal harassment can be 'real' in UO and you even admit what
> you said yourself was extremely offensive and that you were
> deliberately using it in order to get the reaction you wanted.
>
> I certainly would be worried at the idea of being banned simply on one
> persons say so, but of course, we have no idea of what else OSI has
> recorded against you - its really only your word that you used this
> 'tactic' for the first time - it looks a little to me like you've
> possibly used it before.
>
> Otara
>
>
>
VMax from Europa
offensive ?
And first of all, it is quite impossible to determine if someone is a negro
a female or a homo a chinese or a white trash by looking at the paperdoll???
So how can you effectively offend someone ???
And insults based on religion ? isn't it a fact that mankind allready
suffers for thousands of years under the dictatorship of all kinds of
religion, and now christianity almost lost his iron grip on society in the
western world, we still have the heritage of our morals based on
christianity.
Don't get me wrong, I think we have to have moral standards in a society and
although it's based on a fairytale I think theres truth in a lot of the
christian based morals.
But when someone is offended by using a biblical term or naming genitals or
what you can do with it, I can say I am offended when someone says the word
"PIANO" to me because I hate the sound of it ! I mean what real harm does it
do ? exactly : NOTHING !
And taking someones product of weeks of work away (even if its a chunk of
bites :-) is allowed ! hmmmm.....
Final thought : I find it a lot easier to say F**ck you then say : I will
place my reproductive organ in a place in your body where normally sunlight
doesn't shine.
"V" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:DGHu4.1251$Aa4....@news.uswest.net...
Quaestor
> Actually what bothers me the most is the fact that who decides what is
> offensive ?
> And first of all, it is quite impossible to determine if someone is a negro
> a female or a homo a chinese or a white trash by looking at the paperdoll???
So what? Attacks on the character are attacks on the player. I got a guy
banned for "jigga boo" aimed at my character, Kai Du, who is dark brown, even
though I'm not, and rightly so. Such attacks are unjust and unacceptible
regardless of the color or anything else of the player being attacked.
> So how can you effectively offend someone ???
I'm sure you'll find a way if that's what you want to do.
> And insults based on religion ? isn't it a fact that mankind allready
> suffers for thousands of years under the dictatorship of all kinds of
> religion, and now christianity almost lost his iron grip on society in the
> western world, we still have the heritage of our morals based on
> christianity.
Is this supposed to justify attacking people based on religion?
> Don't get me wrong, I think we have to have moral standards in a society and
> although it's based on a fairytale I think theres truth in a lot of the
> christian based morals.
> But when someone is offended by using a biblical term or naming genitals or
> what you can do with it, I can say I am offended when someone says the word
> "PIANO" to me because I hate the sound of it ! I mean what real harm does it
> do ? exactly : NOTHING !
Such things are (supposed to be) judged based on what a majority, or at least a
plurality of people would think if they were so attacked. In the 50's, "nigger"
(and coon, tar baby, spook, etc) were "ok" because most people (the whites)
would just laugh it off as clearly untrue. Now, most people look to the
generallity. "Nigger" is just one small part of the general idea of attacking
people for what they were born to, and most people now judge that to be wrong.
"Piano" is not an accusation most people would be offended by.
> And taking someones product of weeks of work away (even if its a chunk of
> bites :-) is allowed ! hmmmm.....
All we have in that regard is to vote with our feet.
> Final thought : I find it a lot easier to say F**ck you then say : I will
> place my reproductive organ in a place in your body where normally sunlight
> doesn't shine.
Why lie? The first person you degrade when you do so is yourself. That what
you want?
V
defined rules, and enforcement (and many others agree). I will not deal
with it, because OSI was wrong in terminating hundreds of hours of my time
based on an offensive sentence that was reported by somebody who stole
actual gametime from me by stealing.
Origin has created a set of conditions that you MUST agree with in order to
play their game which you just paid $X for. Now even though others can
steal hours, days, and even weeks by murdering, looting, or stealing from
you, the TOS states that you cannot respond to those events (which truly
take away from gameplay experience) with any vulgar language of any sort.
The TOS are unrealistic, biased, binding, and allow a level of control over
the players that's unfounded. Technically, based on the TOS, you could be
banned for saying "Damn you!" which, of course, was commonly used back in
medevil time. God forbid it offends somebody.
I've already talked to people who have been 'warned' and banned for a
limited amount of time for 'breaking' the TOS the way that I did (some of
them more than once) -- and a few of them had a past record. They can't
believe I was banned permenently on my first offense, and think it's
pathetic -- nobody has ever heard of somebody being peremenently banned for
anything on the first time around.
What I love, Gamemaster, is that you tell me what to do, and what I did, and
what I deserved. Sounds like the mentality of the guys at OSI. Sounds like
somebody trying to play parent instead of explain why you support your
statements, or why you think it was just.
Without an explination, your response is only received as forced opinion
with no reinforced reason.
What's your real opinion on the TOS -- do you think they're realistic based
on available game actions, and the punishment just? If somebody can murder
you and cut you up into little pieces and mock you, do you think you have
the right to respond the way that YOU want to? Doesn't matter if you
support vulgarity or not -- we're talking about the core concept.
Right now, this is what the TOS supports: you're walking in a forest minding
your own business, then some guy comes up, murders you, then cuts you up
into little pieces (and throws them around, "ha ha ha"), steals everything
you have, then yells, "man you are such a loser. You suck because..."
<blah> <blah>
Now, that guy hasn't broken a single rule of the game according to the TOS
(it would only constitute as harassment if he continued to do it).
You respond before walking away as a ghost (say he has spirit speak on),
"dude, you're an asshole."
BAM. You just broke the rules. You can now be banned permenently according
to the TOS defined by OSI.
This is the problem that I'm addressing. Doesn't anyone think something is
wrong here? Every one of you who says I got what I deserved, blah blah, is
saying they support the above scenario -- why? Because it's part of the
TOS?
"The Gamemaster" <nospam.the...@home.com> wrote in message
news:jAMu4.836$E85....@news1.rdc1.md.home.com...
Damocles
>I will not 'just deal with it' when I feel I've been wronged by poorly
>defined rules, and enforcement (and many others agree). I will not deal
>with it, because OSI was wrong in terminating hundreds of hours of my time
>based on an offensive sentence that was reported by somebody who stole
>actual gametime from me by stealing.
<snip>
It's their game, they make the rules. You broke one of them, you're
gone. Deal.
Greg
continued posts speak otherwise.
EVEN if you had not been CAUGHT breaking the rules before, by your own
admission, you broke rules, and are paying the price.
EVEN if this was the first time you violated the TOS, you broke the rules and
are paying the price. It is JUST NOT FAIR that you alone were singled out, but
then again,
YOU BROKE THE RULES, and got caught..
If you hadn't, you would not be whining about this now, would ya...
If ya can't do the time, don't do the crime... Don't do it
Katherine
wrote:
>It's their game, they make the rules. You broke one of them, you're
>gone. Deal.
While I agree he broke the rules, I do find it disturbing that he was
banned on a first offense. Particularly considering the haphazard
nature of rule enforcement.
Katherine, Grandmaster Healer
Ciaran, Lia Fail Empire (Atlantic)
Corwin of Amber (WE/LS)
>That's the thing -- I have absolutely no past record with OSI -- at all.
Heh, you musta really gone off. I've heard stories of GM's banning on
the spot if they hear someone using the 'n' word, etc ...
>I guess my point is that language restrictions on a game that has a language
>filter is pretty lame -- especially when you can ignore other players, and
>the game supports crimes such as murder and stealing.
Not at all. It's just the difference between acceptable in-game
actions and unacceptable out-of-game actions. The ignore option and
the filter option have many documented problems.
>Limiting players to
>their verbal responses is both manipulative, and misrepresentitive of the
>true nature and means of the game -- human interaction.
Not really. Verbal harassment and hazing is against the law, and
probably violates your agreement with your ISP, and some various FCC
statutes ... Would you rather lose your UO acct? Or get fined or
thrown in jail? OSI is acting responsibly.
The GM had to make a judgement call. Without knowing exactly what you
said I can't really say whether it was a fair judgement or not.
>Think about it. You can murder somebody, cut their body up into little
>pices, and throw them around, then take all of their stuff, and mock them,
>but you can't use any four letter (or other 'offensive') words, or you will
>get banned. You can steal somebody's item that's worth weeks of work, but
>if you respond with language that isn't appealing, you can get banned.
*thinks about it*
Key word is "offensive". Games are supposed to be fun, not offensive.
Stealing is allowed. Verbal harassment isn't.
>The whole idea behind this enforcement is flawed to a point where it's both
>scary and disgusting.
Not by your arguments, IMO.
>That was my point.
Not really. Verbal harassment is not allowed. The only issue I see is
whether what you said was deserving of a ban on first offense.
I also think the GM or a counselor should had spoken to you after the
incident ... but ... you really need to stop trying to rationalize
your misbehaviour.
Corwin
V
will affect their life in such a way that they have to report it like a
child tattling on another is what chaps me. I'll play the game and somebody
can spew all the shit at me that they want, and what do I do? Either laugh
and ignore them (knowing they're a loser), or leave. I'm not one to 'tell'
on somebody -- besides, if I got them banned, they wouldn't be around for me
to hunt down and termiante later on.
The current support of the TOS and the idea behind is is a frame of mind
I'll never relate to, out of choice.
I guess that I don't understand why there are so many people out there that
are so weak at heart that they let themselves be affected by mere words. It
would have been different if he asked me to stop and I continued, but that
didn't happen. One sentence, one report, and bam. Accoring to the
dictionary, it doesn't constitute as harassment, since it was a mere
sentence.
This individual was zoned on getting me banned, not being offended by the
words that I said. A sleazy thief who used the 'system' to remove a
productive player hences a flawed system.
Having my account disabled due to a kindergarden tattletale mentality is
pretty sad. Regardless of opinion on whether what I said was right or
wrong, the fact that people who can't handle 'the real world' can bring down
others is the saddest part.
Words should not be able to bring somebody down, but harassment is another
issue. This was not a case of harassment. It was a case of reprise.
While I disagree with your response in many areas, I think it's been one of
the most thought out and intelligent responses -- for that I thank you.
"Corwin of Amber (WE/LS)" <cor...@wind.atlantic.com> wrote in message
news:38bc3d32...@news.clark.net...
Patrick B Fisher
: On Tue, 29 Feb 2000 18:15:49 GMT, phae...@yahoo.com (Damocles)
: wrote:
: >It's their game, they make the rules. You broke one of them, you're
: >gone. Deal.
: While I agree he broke the rules, I do find it disturbing that he was
: banned on a first offense. Particularly considering the haphazard
: nature of rule enforcement.
Agreed. Yesterday I was being harrased (nothing serious, just obnoxious)
by Hugh in moonglow on chessy. He's quite the character, apparently. He
repeatedly called me a p**sy and other non-nice things, and wouldn't leave
me alone despite two requests for him to leave. I decided that since the
GMs were so hard on harrassment I'd report him to at least let the GMs
warn him not to be such a jerk. After all, he was being offensive,
vulgar, and harrassing. I asked him twice to leave. What happened? A GM
says "you're fine now. Try setting him to ignore" Fine, I thought. If they
don't want to do anything about him, I'll just ignore him. Then, I got an
e-mail saying I had abused the harrassment system, and that I had a
limited number of chances to "misuse" the system before I'd be punished.
What kind of garbage is this? I reported someone who just wasn't vulgar
enough, so I'm in trouble? Their rules enforcement is ridiculous. For them
to ban anyone on a first offense for questionable harrassment is
unacceptable.
Zam
>
>While I agree he broke the rules, I do find it disturbing that he was
>banned on a first offense. Particularly considering the haphazard
>nature of rule enforcement.
>
a set guidlines about punishments and something more than banning.
How about loss of assests
Loss of skills or stats
and there also need to be a fair hand in dealing out these punishment
and take into account some people really do get emotional about this
game.
not just banning them from getting a little profain in there speech
personally i try not to let real world language into the game on my
end but when someone uses to me i dont really care its there choice
and mine too by not using the obscenity filter
Duane Gundrum
Patrick B Fisher <pbfi...@blue.seas.upenn.edu> wrote in message
news:89hhbj$oof$1...@netnews.upenn.edu...
> What kind of garbage is this? I reported someone who just wasn't vulgar
> enough, so I'm in trouble? Their rules enforcement is ridiculous. For them
> to ban anyone on a first offense for questionable harrassment is
> unacceptable.
Some months ago, I called a gm for harassment because some guy threatened to
personally find me and kill me, and then proceeded to call me EVERY name in
the book. This was in response to a two word statement I said: "Grow up".
And then, this medium level thief, starts running around town telling people
I scammed him of some item that has never existed (the whole thing started
cause the guy was snooping me and wouldn't leave me alone; the thought of
doing any type of trade with him was never a thought on my mind).
I received, in turn, the same message of "everything's fine now. Just put
him on ignore" and yes, I too, received a warning from UO that I may be
abusing the harassment reporting policy.
I'm not exactly sure what to report for harassment. Does he need to be
physically at my door? Does he need to carbon copy me his log with abusive
statements within it? So, when I put him on ignore, he runs around telling
everyone I scammed him, and I don't even know why people are coming up to me
and saying: "dude, you're an asshole."
Yes, something's seriously wrong here. Every character I have I play on the
virtue system (trying to emulate the avatar quest in uo). I don't cheat
people, and I don't get into verbal sparring matches with them if at all
physically possible. Yet, I can understand how someone would get really
concerned that this just so happens to be OSI's response.
Duane Gundrum
du...@penguinlogic.com
(I'd give you a list of my characters and shards so you could seek them out
and kill them, but there are enough people who do that already for the hell
of it)
gil
> I received, in turn, the same message of "everything's fine now. Just put
> him on ignore"
A huge problem with putting jerks on ignore is that doing this adds to
your lag, putting you at a disadvantage vis-a-vis the harasser. I think
even the spell-casting words of the harasser are filtered out, depriving
you of some warning of what's about to occur.
Too often OSI's response to harassers is to lock up the target of
harassment, while leaving the harasser free, which is what their advice
of "put the harasser on ignore" does.
rend
gil'lomion LS
gil
> I guess that I don't understand why there are so many people out there that
> are so weak at heart that they let themselves be affected by mere words.
You miss the point completely. It's not about folks withstanding verbal
abuse, it's that it shouldn't be there to be withstood in the first
place.
It has nothing to do with being weak, it has everything to do with the
fact that unacceptable behavior is just that - unacceptable. The
responsibility for unacceptable behavior is on the behaver, not the
those around him/her.
The only weak person is the one doing the unacceptable behavior.
rend
gil'lomion LS
Quaestor
> On Tue, 29 Feb 2000 18:15:49 GMT, phae...@yahoo.com (Damocles)
> wrote:
>
> >It's their game, they make the rules. You broke one of them, you're
> >gone. Deal.
>
> While I agree he broke the rules, I do find it disturbing that he was
> banned on a first offense. Particularly considering the haphazard
> nature of rule enforcement.
What makes you sure it was his first? Because he SAID so?
Quaestor
> On Tue, 29 Feb 2000 21:44:33 GMT, ka...@mhn.org (Katherine) wrote:
> >
> >While I agree he broke the rules, I do find it disturbing that he was
> >banned on a first offense. Particularly considering the haphazard
> >nature of rule enforcement.
> >
> That is a serious issue that needs to be addressed by OSI. They need
> a set guidlines about punishments and something more than banning.
>
> How about loss of assests
> Loss of skills or stats
How about criminal and civil prosecution? A credible threat of violence is
a crime. A credible threat of death can be a fellony. If a few of these
punks were slammed in jail for a good long stretch, maybe a few of the
others would decide that this is not a good way to behave. If not, they too
can go to prison. Why be nice about it? Failure to enforce rules always
leads to the breaking of ever more serious ones. The time to stop a
murderer is before he kills.
Richard Cortese
news:89hhbj$oof$1...@netnews.upenn.edu...
> repeatedly called me a p**sy and other non-nice things, and wouldn't leave
this isn't considered sexual harassment?<sic>
Said to a female employee by a GM ~"Hey pussy, get me a cup of coffee"
Oh well, kind of funny really. At least I can laugh about it.
Thanks for relating the story, it is stories like these that characterize
what OSI means by harassment and keeps a lot of us out of trouble with what
will be considered false reports.
Richard Cortese
news:uhIM08wg$GA.197@cpmsnbbsa03...
> the book. This was in response to a two word statement I said: "Grow up".
conversation in OSI's POV. Once you have become an equal party, nothing that
happens from then on out is considered grounds for banning.
> And then, this medium level thief, starts running around town telling
people
> I scammed him of some item that has never existed (the whole thing started
> cause the guy was snooping me and wouldn't leave me alone; the thought of
> doing any type of trade with him was never a thought on my mind).
recall away or leave the area. If you don't leave the area, you are a
willing partner.
> I'm not exactly sure what to report for harassment. Does he need to be
considered a technical problem then taking anything OSI says literally.
Just think Catch 22 type of situation. If you can leave and don't, you are a
willing party and can't report harassment.
If you are unable to leave and you ask politely for them to stop, you may
have a case, but that would only apply to very few people in the game.
If you have any exchange other then asking them to stop, i.e. "Quit being a
jerk"., you are now a willing participant in the verbal exchange and exempt
from GM intervention.
Just so I am clear here, I kill people for snooping, I kill people for
stupid/offensive names, I hate the way OSI admins the game, I was ready to
elect Dundee king when he said he would just stand at the bank and ban
everyone with a stupid name. But I do play by the rules and make every
effort to comply with the harassment policy as silly as I think it is.
Richard Cortese
decision. There is another hurdle that the threat has to be "immediate".
An example of this would be ~Say gil tells Corwin, "Dundee needs to die". If
Corwin kills Dundee within hours, this would satisfy the immediate
requirement. If a year from now Corwin kills Dundee, then gil would no
longer be held liable in the death of Dundee because his statements did not
meet the 'immediate' language.
This kind of let's people off the hook for a stupid statement made in haste
coming back to haunt them while it still suffices for the murder for hires
and other tests.
Richard Cortese
news:38BC1C07...@bigfoot.com...
> If you hadn't, you would not be whining about this now, would ya...
that fits. It just isn't a good word for constructive conversation.
Just about any other word or phase is ok. "You don't have a valid point",
"Debating", "Registering a complaint", "Reporting".
Or you can attack the premise of course i.e. "The 3 strikes and you are out
policy is not for language, it is only applied to unattended macroing ergo
first offense has always been last offense for language".<I don't know this
to be true, just using it as an example>
Sometimes "whining" does fit, just doesn't seem to be the best choice of
words in this case.
Otara
>I guess the whole idea of somebody thinking that words they find offensive
>will affect their life in such a way that they have to report it like a
>child tattling on another is what chaps me. I'll play the game and somebody
>can spew all the shit at me that they want, and what do I do? Either laugh
>and ignore them (knowing they're a loser), or leave. I'm not one to 'tell'
>on somebody -- besides, if I got them banned, they wouldn't be around for me
>to hunt down and termiante later on.
You seem to be assuming that because it doesnt bother you that it isnt
a problem.
Thing is, it _does_ hurt other people, quite seriously.
Otara
Damocles
>On Tue, 29 Feb 2000 18:15:49 GMT, phae...@yahoo.com (Damocles)
>wrote:
>
>>It's their game, they make the rules. You broke one of them, you're
>>gone. Deal.
>
>While I agree he broke the rules, I do find it disturbing that he was
>banned on a first offense. Particularly considering the haphazard
>nature of rule enforcement.
It's totally haphazard, depends on the time of day, what the GM had
for breakfast, etc. They still have the right to do it, though.
Katherine
wrote:
>What makes you sure it was his first? Because he SAID so?
I have no more reason to doubt his honesty than you have to believe
his deceit.
Uwe Fischer
8_Tu4.41$hi1....@news.uswest.net...
> I will not 'just deal with it' when I feel I've been
wronged by poorly
> defined rules, and enforcement (and many others agree). I
will not deal
> with it, because OSI was wrong in terminating hundreds of
hours of my time
> based on an offensive sentence that was reported by
somebody who stole
> actual gametime from me by stealing.
You agreed to those rules. You broke those rules and they
caught you. You must live with it.
> Origin has created a set of conditions that you MUST agree
with in order to
> play their game which you just paid $X for. Now even
though others can
> steal hours, days, and even weeks by murdering, looting,
or stealing from
> you, the TOS states that you cannot respond to those
events (which truly
> take away from gameplay experience) with any vulgar
language of any sort.
They don´t steal your hours or days. Other pixels steal
pixels from you. That´s all. And they are allowed to do that
by the conditions. If you don´t like that and you are unable
to ignore such jerk behavior, don´t agree to their
conditions and don´t play that game.
> The TOS are unrealistic, biased, binding, and allow a
level of control over
> the players that's unfounded. Technically, based on the
TOS, you could be
> banned for saying "Damn you!" which, of course, was
commonly used back in
> medevil time. God forbid it offends somebody.
You could be banned for that, but that´s very hypothetic.
The banning thing depends on what words you are using.
> I've already talked to people who have been 'warned' and
banned for a
> limited amount of time for 'breaking' the TOS the way that
I did (some of
> them more than once) -- and a few of them had a past
record. They can't
> believe I was banned permenently on my first offense, and
think it's
> pathetic -- nobody has ever heard of somebody being
peremenently banned for
> anything on the first time around.
You stated before, that you used words and are unable to
repeat them here. It must have been very very offendig
words. And so you can be perma-banned in the first offense.
It allways depends on what you did.
> What I love, Gamemaster, is that you tell me what to do,
and what I did, and
> what I deserved. Sounds like the mentality of the guys at
OSI. Sounds like
> somebody trying to play parent instead of explain why you
support your
> statements, or why you think it was just.
>
> Without an explination, your response is only received as
forced opinion
> with no reinforced reason.
>
> What's your real opinion on the TOS -- do you think
they're realistic based
> on available game actions, and the punishment just? If
somebody can murder
> you and cut you up into little pieces and mock you, do you
think you have
> the right to respond the way that YOU want to? Doesn't
matter if you
> support vulgarity or not -- we're talking about the core
concept.
It doesn´t matter, what anyone thinks abour the TOS. We all
agreed to the TOS and we have to follow the rules given by
the TOS. The TOS is part of the contract between the player
and OSI. If one party breaks the contract, the other party
has the right to terminate the contract.
> Right now, this is what the TOS supports: you're walking
in a forest minding
> your own business, then some guy comes up, murders you,
then cuts you up
> into little pieces (and throws them around, "ha ha ha"),
steals everything
> you have, then yells, "man you are such a loser. You suck
because..."
> <blah> <blah>
He can be banned, because that is offensive.
> Now, that guy hasn't broken a single rule of the game
according to the TOS
> (it would only constitute as harassment if he continued to
do it).
> You respond before walking away as a ghost (say he has
spirit speak on),
> "dude, you're an asshole."
There is no difference between what you did and what he did.
Also offensive. Also bannable.
> BAM. You just broke the rules. You can now be banned
permenently according
> to the TOS defined by OSI.
Yep.
> This is the problem that I'm addressing. Doesn't anyone
think something is
> wrong here? Every one of you who says I got what I
deserved, blah blah, is
> saying they support the above scenario -- why? Because
it's part of the
> TOS?
Exactly.
Regards
Grizwood, Seneschall (MTB), Drachenfels
For Baphomet with fire and sword!
BTC: Baphometic Trade Center Drachenfels
http://internetjunk.com/users/baphomet/
MTB: Militia Templum Baphomet
http://www.angelfire.com/mo/autumnvision/
Uwe Fischer
38c83db5...@news-server.nc.rr.com...
> While I agree he broke the rules, I do find it disturbing
that he was
> banned on a first offense. Particularly considering the
haphazard
> nature of rule enforcement.
He stated the usage of words too bad to repeat them here. So
I think it was right to ban him on this first offense.
Uwe Fischer
im Newsbeitrag: 89hhbj$oof$1...@netnews.upenn.edu...
> Agreed. Yesterday I was being harrased (nothing serious,
just obnoxious)
apparently. He
> repeatedly called me a p**sy and other non-nice things,
> me alone despite two requests for him to leave. I decided
that since the
> GMs were so hard on harrassment I'd report him to at least
let the GMs
> warn him not to be such a jerk. After all, he was being
offensive,
> vulgar, and harrassing. I asked him twice to leave. What
happened? A GM
> says "you're fine now. Try setting him to ignore" Fine, I
thought. If they
> don't want to do anything about him, I'll just ignore him.
Then, I got an
> e-mail saying I had abused the harrassment system, and
that I had a
> limited number of chances to "misuse" the system before
I'd be punished.
wasn't vulgar
> enough, so I'm in trouble? Their rules enforcement is
ridiculous. For them
> to ban anyone on a first offense for questionable
harrassment is
> unacceptable.
In that case you should send an e-mail to OSI complaining
about that GM.
Katherine
wrote:
>Are you sure you play on Atlantic?
>
>I thought we were a lot more jaded and cynical than that. ;)
Well you gotta remember, I'm still fairly new...
Katherine
wrote:
>He stated the usage of words too bad to repeat them here. So
>I think it was right to ban him on this first offense.
My problem is not necessarily with the banning-on-first-offense, but
the fact that one person can be banned with no warning while others
can be blithely ignored altogether. In order to be effective, rule
enforcement must be consistent.
Damocles
>On Wed, 1 Mar 2000 11:41:44 +0100, "Uwe Fischer" <fisch...@ngi.de>
>wrote:
>
>>He stated the usage of words too bad to repeat them here. So
>>I think it was right to ban him on this first offense.
>
>My problem is not necessarily with the banning-on-first-offense, but
>the fact that one person can be banned with no warning while others
>can be blithely ignored altogether. In order to be effective, rule
>enforcement must be consistent.
>
You'll be eternally frustrated with OSI customer service then, because
absolutely nothing about it is consistent.
Katherine
wrote:
>>My problem is not necessarily with the banning-on-first-offense, but
>>the fact that one person can be banned with no warning while others
>>can be blithely ignored altogether. In order to be effective, rule
>>enforcement must be consistent.
>
>You'll be eternally frustrated with OSI customer service then, because
>absolutely nothing about it is consistent.
Or effective. Believe me, I've noticed... spent weeks trying to get
an answer about the east-coast cable modem thing before the folks here
finally told me how to fix the problem... AFAIK there are still cable
users who can't connect to UO.
Otara
>My problem is not necessarily with the banning-on-first-offense, but
>the fact that one person can be banned with no warning while others
>can be blithely ignored altogether. In order to be effective, rule
>enforcement must be consistent.
Agreed - however I think this is more of a problem for the people
being harassed than the harassers.
Otara
S. Watson
another student. No, I don't think it was right to ban him on this first
offense.
"Uwe Fischer" <fisch...@ngi.de> wrote in message
news:89itg8$qh9$2...@news.online.de...
> Katherine <ka...@mhn.org> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
> 38c83db5...@news-server.nc.rr.com...
> > While I agree he broke the rules, I do find it disturbing
> that he was
> > banned on a first offense. Particularly considering the
> haphazard
> > nature of rule enforcement.
>
> He stated the usage of words too bad to repeat them here. So
> I think it was right to ban him on this first offense.
>
DW
gains. Just how long would it take to become a GM mage by not macroing.
More time than most people have for the game.
--
______________________________________________
Get Paid to Surf !!!
All the programs in one convenient location!!
http://www.refmaker.com/members/money4free.shtml
S. Watson <swa...@always-online.com> wrote in article
<NkUv4.37$ef1...@news2.randori.com>...
Austin
<swa...@always-online.com> wrote:
>That's like a permanent suspension from school for a student who curses at
>another student. No, I don't think it was right to ban him on this first
>offense.
>
>
Your analogy is poor. You are not paying $10 a month to go to school.
If you are issatisfied with the school you cant just quit, and stop
paying. You are paying a company to use their service. You are bound
by their rules.
Otara
<swa...@always-online.com> wrote:
>That's like a permanent suspension from school for a student who curses at
>another student. No, I don't think it was right to ban him on this first
>offense.
I disagree - UO is a game, not access to education.
He said himself that it wasnt a case of losing his temper, it was a
calculated act of abuse to achieve a goal.
I really dont see why we have to give 'three strikes' for this kind of
situation - nothing grey about it whatsoever IMO.
Otara
S. Watson
"Otara" <sp...@spammity.com.au> wrote in message
news:XDnAOHOJjWP1ec...@4ax.com...
I pray that you people who agree with permanent banning for a first offense
never get caught doing something arguably against the TOS. If you are,
please don't be a hypocrite by posting your cries for mercy on this
newsgroup.
S. Watson
"Austin" <007...@direct.ca> wrote in message
news:xhzAOFS9UsKDe8...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 03 Mar 2000 19:25:33 GMT, "S. Watson"
> <swa...@always-online.com> wrote:
>
> >That's like a permanent suspension from school for a student who curses
at
> >another student. No, I don't think it was right to ban him on this first
> >offense.
> >
> >
>
> If you are issatisfied with the school you cant just quit, and stop
> paying. You are paying a company to use their service. You are bound
> by their rules.
>
>
>
also transfer to another school. Anyway, an analogy is not "poor" if every
single aspect of it does not relate. The main point, which you may have
missed, was that using foul language should not be grounds for suspension
(from UO or from school) if it's a first offense.
Cozy
<swa...@always-online.com> wrote:
>You are paying for school if you, or your family, are paying taxes. You can
>also transfer to another school. Anyway, an analogy is not "poor" if every
>single aspect of it does not relate. The main point, which you may have
>missed, was that using foul language should not be grounds for suspension
>(from UO or from school) if it's a first offense.
>
There is one problem with foul language.
Some people outside countries where english is spoken may think that
some words isn't so foul to use. It may be that they are spoken alot
on TV but allways translated to rather "non"-foul words in their own
language.
Maybe this problem never occur in UO, but it's not impossible that it
could.
I just want to say that there should allways be a warning of some kind
or a way to defned your rights.
Remove "spamfilter" from emailaddress
or send to jan @ stormdragon . com
www.stormdragon.com
Jan Gustavsson
(Cozy on Drachenfels in UO)
Richard Cortese
news:gnOw4.266$u74....@news2.randori.com...
> > <swa...@always-online.com> wrote:
> >
> > >That's like a permanent suspension from school for a student who curses
> at
> > >another student. No, I don't think it was right to ban him on this
first
> > >offense.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Your analogy is poor. You are not paying $10 a month to go to school.
> > If you are issatisfied with the school you cant just quit, and stop
> > paying. You are paying a company to use their service. You are bound
> > by their rules.
> >
> >
> >
can
> also transfer to another school. Anyway, an analogy is not "poor" if
every
> single aspect of it does not relate. The main point, which you may have
> missed, was that using foul language should not be grounds for suspension
> (from UO or from school) if it's a first offense.
Germany. Thing was, at the time the people involved got kind of desperate as
they found themselves in a situation that may have meant the end of life as
they knew it.
Banning on first offense in UO is just their equivalent of carpet bombing.
Yeap, they are going to hit some churches and hospitals, but for the most
part they are hitting they targets they want, it is having its desired
effect. Looks like the people at OSI will still be able to have a merry xmas
vs updating their resume.
*IF* 60 years later people are still arguing over carpet bombing, do you
think this particular TOS issue can be resolved? If any two people even
remembers UO in 60 years, I imagine they will get in an argument over the
TOS and banning people. It will always be, ~it stinks, but no alternative.
Austin
<swa...@always-online.com> wrote:
>You are paying for school if you, or your family, are paying taxes. You can
>also transfer to another school. Anyway, an analogy is not "poor" if every
>single aspect of it does not relate. The main point, which you may have
>missed, was that using foul language should not be grounds for suspension
>(from UO or from school) if it's a first offense.
>
Yes, it should. UO is NOT a free speech forum. You agreed when you
logged in to not use any profanity. The profanities used, were used in
a calculated effort to get a response, and the guy who did it is a
disgusting human being. Condoning his actions are deplorable. He wont
even repeat his profanities, so all we can do is SPECUALATE how bad it
was, and if its even 1/10 as bad as I am speculating he should be
banned quickly.
Otara
<swa...@always-online.com> wrote:
>I pray that you people who agree with permanent banning for a first offense
>never get caught doing something arguably against the TOS. If you are,
>please don't be a hypocrite by posting your cries for mercy on this
>newsgroup.
This wasnt something 'arguably' against the TOS - even the guy who did
it makes it very clear he knows he was wayyy over the line.
I am not siyng people should be banned first time for anything that is
against the TOS. I am saying I think it should happen for clearcut
cases of deliberate harassment.
Otara
Uwe Fischer
Newsbeitrag: NkUv4.37$ef1...@news2.randori.com...
> That's like a permanent suspension from school for a
student who curses at
> another student.
It愀 not. Cursing another student is not a bannable offense
by the school-license-agreement. But cursing another student
can be a criminal act. You could be suited be the other
student.
> No, I don't think it was right to ban him on this first
> offense.
So we seem to have different opinions about social
interactions and behavior between people. Cursing others is
a problem of self control. And if you can愒 control
yourself, you shouldn愒 play an online game with an
international player base.
Regards
Grizwood, Seneschall (MTB), Drachenfels
For Baphomet with fire and sword!
BTC: Baphometic Trade Center Drachenfels
Uwe Fischer
> You are paying for school if you, or your family, are
paying taxes. You can
> also transfer to another school. Anyway, an analogy is
not "poor" if every
> single aspect of it does not relate. The main point,
which you may have
> missed, was that using foul language should not be grounds
for suspension
> (from UO or from school) if it's a first offense.
It allways depends on how foul it is.
Uwe Fischer
> I pray that you people who agree with permanent banning
for a first offense
> never get caught doing something arguably against the TOS.
If you are,
> please don't be a hypocrite by posting your cries for
mercy on this
> newsgroup.
Cries for mercy to this newsgroup are fairly useless. OSI
doesn´t read here.
S. Watson
>
> > That's like a permanent suspension from school for a
> student who curses at
> > another student.
>
> It愀 not. Cursing another student is not a bannable offense
> by the school-license-agreement. But cursing another student
> can be a criminal act. You could be suited be the other
> student.
>
> > No, I don't think it was right to ban him on this first
> > offense.
>
> So we seem to have different opinions about social
> interactions and behavior between people. Cursing others is
> a problem of self control. And if you can愒 control
> yourself, you shouldn愒 play an online game with an
> international player base.
>
So, by this rationale, you are not allowed to lose your temper - ever. No
one, no matter how much he/she is provoked, is allowed to respond with
profanity. If UO has a zero tolerance for profanity, then why have a
language filter? Just ban anyone who ever utters a profane word and UO will
be a shiny, happy place. If, as you say, anyone who loses control shouldn't
be allowed to play an online game, then there would only be a few model
citizens such as yourself in all of Britannia. I would hazard to guess that
most UO players have had moments of weakness or have used poor judgment at
one time or another. It has something to do with being human.
Uwe Fischer
> So, by this rationale, you are not allowed to lose your
temper - ever. No
> one, no matter how much he/she is provoked, is allowed to
respond with
> profanity.
We are not talking about profanity here. We are talking
about harassing other people.
> If UO has a zero tolerance for profanity, then why have a
> language filter?
There is a big different between using foul language and
harassing other people. And some people don´t want to read
some words if they are used. Therefore we have a lanuage
filter.
> Just ban anyone who ever utters a profane word and UO will
> be a shiny, happy place.
And again profane words are not the problem. Throwing such
words against someone elses head is the problem. It is
forbidden by the TOS and we have to accept this. In RL life
we also have to accept social isolation if we do it.
> If, as you say, anyone who loses control shouldn't
> be allowed to play an online game, then there would only
be a few model
> citizens such as yourself in all of Britannia.
> I would hazard to guess that
> most UO players have had moments of weakness or have used
poor judgment at
> one time or another.
Everyone has such moments in his life, but you have to take
the consequenses. Feel free to cry around. Cry your
frustration to your monitor but never type it on your
keyboard. This will cause problems with the people who read
it. Not only in an online game.
> It has something to do with being human.
It has something to do with the ability to control the wild
animal which is sleeping in every human beeing. Sometimes it
goes wild and you have to tame it again.
S. Watson
> On Tue, 07 Mar 2000 13:27:02 GMT, "S. Watson"
> >So, by this rationale, you are not allowed to lose your temper - ever.
No
> >one, no matter how much he/she is provoked, is allowed to respond with
> >profanity.
>
>
> Otara
>
I urge you to re-read the described incident. One instance of profanity was
used, IIRC. That does not constitue harassment, whether defined by OSI or
Webster's dictionary.
S. Watson
> S. Watson <swa...@always-online.com> schrieb in im
> Newsbeitrag: Gs7x4.163$vB....@news2.randori.com...
> > If, as you say, anyone who loses control shouldn't
> > be allowed to play an online game, then there would only
> be a few model
> > citizens such as yourself in all of Britannia.
> > I would hazard to guess that
> > most UO players have had moments of weakness or have used
> poor judgment at
> > one time or another.
>
> Everyone has such moments in his life, but you have to take
> the consequenses. Feel free to cry around. Cry your
> frustration to your monitor but never type it on your
> keyboard. This will cause problems with the people who read
> it. Not only in an online game.
>
> > It has something to do with being human.
>
> It has something to do with the ability to control the wild
> animal which is sleeping in every human beeing. Sometimes it
> goes wild and you have to tame it again.
"Sometimes it goes wild and you have to tame it again." Exactly my point.
Sometimes you "go wild" and make a mistake.
What we're talking about is a player using profanity - against another
player who stole from him - only once. The "offended" player did not move
away or ask him not to do it again. For the last time: THIS IS NOT
HARASSMENT.
harassment:
(either harris-meant or huh-rass-meant) n. the act of systematic and/or
continued unwanted and annoying actions of one party or a group, including
threats and demands.
Corwin of Amber (WE/LS)
>I urge you to re-read the described incident. One instance of profanity was
>used, IIRC. That does not constitue harassment, whether defined by OSI or
>Webster's dictionary.
I suggest YOU re-read the described incident. He didn't bother to
repeat the ACTUAL incident because he did not think the words were
appropriate in THIS forum.
Corwin
Brian K
>
> "Otara" <sp...@spammity.com.au> wrote in message
> news:KQbFOA5DkgwqHo...@4ax.com...
> > On Tue, 07 Mar 2000 13:27:02 GMT, "S. Watson"
> > >So, by this rationale, you are not allowed to lose your temper - ever.
> No
> > >one, no matter how much he/she is provoked, is allowed to respond with
> > >profanity.
> >
> > Its not about profanity - its about harassment.
> >
> > Otara
> >
>
>
was
> used, IIRC. That does not constitue harassment, whether defined by OSI or
> Webster's dictionary.
>
>
Here is a quote from the original message: It specifically states at least
two instances, and I think there's more implied by his "so I start talking"
statement.
Sounds like borderline harassment to me. Still debatable, but a point in
favor of the people arguing that it WAS harassment.
Even if it was just ONE instance, it could be termed harassment: Suppose
someone was called a "Jew motherf---er" and it turned out the victim WAS
Jewish?
Brian K
"Next thing I know, he disappears. Hidden. Now I can't cast reveal, and
don't have detect hidden, so I start talking "come out you little fuckin'
thief... Daddy wants to play with you!" granted this language may offend
some, it's normally spoken -- besides, he deserved it -- that's exactly what
he was.
Nothing.
So, I decided to become more colorful and creative, so I said something that
was pretty nasty, and he popped out "hey! that's harassment! I'm going to
have you banned!""
Otara
Otara
<swa...@always-online.com> wrote:
>I urge you to re-read the described incident. One instance of profanity was
>used, IIRC. That does not constitue harassment, whether defined by OSI or
>Webster's dictionary.
Actually with OSI it does count as exactly that - from their
harassment policy http://support.uo.com/harass.html:
"As stated in the UO Rules of Conduct, any type of behavior that
causes distress or offense to other players is not permitted in the
game. Inappropriate conduct may include, but is not limited to:
Vulgar or obscene language, Derogatory names and remarks Racial,
sexual, gender or religious comments Any other words or actions which
offend, inflame, upset or humiliate If caught, the offending player
can be subject to permanent banning, removal from play, and/or other
forms of action which ORIGIN sees fit."
Again, what we're really talking about here was a calculated act of
abuse. He knew exactly what he was doing, and he knew he was crossing
a line.
Otara
Otara
<swa...@always-online.com> wrote:
>"Sometimes it goes wild and you have to tame it again." Exactly my point.
>Sometimes you "go wild" and make a mistake.
And you have to take the consequences that go with that 'mistake'.
-snip shouting-
;
>harassment:
>(either harris-meant or huh-rass-meant) n. the act of systematic and/or
>continued unwanted and annoying actions of one party or a group, including
>threats and demands.
It _was_ systematic - he quite clearly stated it was intended to
achieve a desired goal, and that he used gradually increasing levels
of abuse to achive it.
Otara.