VTES Survey
OrgPlay
I am conducting a survey to better understand the VTES market. These
things include tournament participation and buying practices. Please
take the time to participate in the survey and spread this to as many
players as possible.
http://www.questionpro.com/akira/TakeSurvey?id=669344
Oscar Garza
Organized Play Coordinator
White Wolf
librarian
Some of the answers to the questions aren't mutually exclusive, like
whether one trades or buys singles, but you can only pick one. It would
be nice if the option "All of the above" was listed.
Also, the question of income seems to be capped sort of low at $45k+.
But I guess that's why you do surveys, right?
Good to see some market research going on. I hope the Eve online folks
let you share some of the info later.
best -
chris
--
Super Fun Cards
http://myworld.ebay.com/superfuncards/
auct...@superfuncards.com
OrgPlay
> OrgPlay wrote:
> > VTES players,
>
> > I am conducting a survey to better understand the VTES market. These
> > things include tournament participation and buying practices. Please
> > take the time to participate in the survey and spread this to as many
> > players as possible.
>
> >http://www.questionpro.com/akira/TakeSurvey?id=669344
>
> > Oscar Garza
> > Organized Play Coordinator
> > White Wolf
>
> Hey Oscar -
>
> Some of the answers to the questions aren't mutually exclusive, like
> whether one trades or buys singles, but you can only pick one. It would
> be nice if the option "All of the above" was listed.
>
> Also, the question of income seems to be capped sort of low at $45k+.
> But I guess that's why you do surveys, right?
>
> Good to see some market research going on. I hope the Eve online folks
> let you share some of the info later.
>
I tweaked the survey slightly. I'll be watching/tweaking real-time for
the rest of the week. Trying to get maximum usable results. TELL YOUR
FRIENDS :)
oscar
andrea....@infinito.it
Another tweak suggested.
I do not trade so i did not answer the question but a "i do not trade"
answer could be useful.
Also the order of question is strange: the "you buy for yourself or in
a group" should be just after "where do you buy..."
Andrea
Robert Goudie
Won't continual tweaks skew your data? For instance, if you'd made
that income level change later in the week, the income results would
have been crap.
-Robert
OrgPlay
right, but if i make answers that come up commonly in the "other"
blanks into buttons, i'll get data that's easier to manipulate.
oscar
Benird
questions like, where do you play and where do you buy your cards?
I know my group plays 3 times/week at 2 people's private homes and at
our local retailer.
Also I buy from several different sources all at about the same
proportion. I would say I buy 30% of my cards from US retailers like
Potomac and Allstar Trading Cards, 30% from eBay and 30% from my local
retailer. The other 10% mix between those 3 sources.
Noal McDonald
> let you share some of the info later.
EVE Online folks shouldn't have any trouble sharing. After all, their
devs shared the Tech 2 blueprints with...well...themselves. The person
that found out about the EO's dirty laundry...well...he's not invited
to play their reindeer games any more.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/68591-Jumpgate-EVEs-Devs-and-the-Friends-They-Keep
http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/15/0726233
I truly hope that White Wolf isn't involved in business relationships
with those clowns. If so, V:TES will forever be dead to me.
Regards,
Noal
Jadasc
> I truly hope that White Wolf isn't involved in
> business relationships with those clowns. If so,
> V:TES will forever be dead to me.
You may wish to contact your local undertaker. CCP and White Wolf
merged late last year. http://www.white-wolf.com/index.php?line=news&articleid=629
Noal McDonald
> You may wish to contact your local undertaker. CCP and White Wolf
> merged late last year.http://www.white-wolf.com/index.php?line=news&articleid=629
Okay, then. Looks like I've bought my last V:TES card.
Regards,
Noal
atomweaver
news:1175190214.6...@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com:
?? No smilies, nothing..? Seriously? I read your links. ...Trying now
to understand what a CCG put together by a guy in Columbia, SC and a couple
more in Atlanta has to do with a MMORPG developer issue in Iceland, even if
there is some joint ownership above each?
DZ
AW
Noal McDonald
> "Noal McDonald" <dharz...@my-deja.com> wrote
> > Okay, then. Looks like I've bought my last V:TES card.
>
> ?? No smilies, nothing..? Seriously? I read your links. ...Trying now
> to understand what a CCG put together by a guy in Columbia, SC and
> a couple more in Atlanta has to do with a MMORPG developer issue
> in Iceland, even if there is some joint ownership above each?
It's a follow the money thing. I don't want the money I spend to
benefit a company that doesn't do the right thing when a proven
conflict of interest arises. A company that attempts a cover up and
punishes its customers and not its employees when those employees have
violated company policies and the trust of its customer base is not
one that I reward with my money. CCP is a bad actor and I will not
spend my money on White Wolf products until such time as they no
longer have business relations. CCP has already stated that they
consider the matter closed, despite the fact that they have refused to
do the right thing.
Regards,
Noal
atomweaver
> On Mar 30, 9:15 am, atomweaver <atomwea...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> "Noal McDonald" <dharz...@my-deja.com> wrote
>> > Okay, then. Looks like I've bought my last V:TES card.
>>
>> ?? No smilies, nothing..? Seriously? I read your links. ...Trying
>> now to understand what a CCG put together by a guy in Columbia, SC
>> and a couple more in Atlanta has to do with a MMORPG developer issue
>> in Iceland, even if there is some joint ownership above each?
>
> It's a follow the money thing.
I'd like to know how you're doing that in two merged, privately held
companies... What is the basis for your assumption of shared profits
between the two companies?
> I don't want the money I spend to
> benefit a company that doesn't do the right thing when a proven
> conflict of interest arises.
How does CCP profit from WW revenues?
> A company that attempts a cover up and
> punishes its customers and not its employees when those employees have
> violated company policies and the trust of its customer base is not
> one that I reward with my money. CCP is a bad actor and I will not
> spend my money on White Wolf products until such time as they no
> longer have business relations. CCP has already stated that they
> consider the matter closed, despite the fact that they have refused to
> do the right thing.
>
IMO, its ridiculously short-sighted to _not_ support the product and
division that has tried (and mostly succeeded) to offer nothing but good
will for its players, to spite a merged division of another company
literally a quarter of an Earth away, especially given the clear
separation of operations... but, as they say, its your money.
Me, I'll choose _not_ to "punish" LSJ, Oscar, and the rest of the VTES-
related staff in Atlanta, because of some completely-beyond-their-control
bad choices made by a recently merged partner in Iceland...
DZ
AW
OrgPlay
>
> It's a follow the money thing. I don't want the money I spend to
> benefit a company that doesn't do the right thing when a proven
> conflict of interest arises. A company that attempts a cover up and
> punishes its customers and not its employees when those employees have
> violated company policies and the trust of its customer base is not
> one that I reward with my money. CCP is a bad actor and I will not
> spend my money on White Wolf products until such time as they no
> longer have business relations. CCP has already stated that they
> consider the matter closed, despite the fact that they have refused to
> do the right thing.
t20 (the employee in question) apologized and was reprimanded. CCP has
since created an Internal Affairs department to deal with situations
like this. Cheating is taken very very seriously by the company and
does not go unpunished.
See Hilmar's (CCP CEO) Dev Blog announcement for a more complete
explanation:
http://myeve.eve-online.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=423
and, uh. keep buying VTES :)
Oscar Garza
CCP | White Wolf
Noal McDonald
> "Noal McDonald" <dharz...@my-deja.com> wrote
>
> I'd like to know how you're doing that in two merged, privately held
> companies... What is the basis for your assumption of shared profits
> between the two companies?
You mean besides the fact that they merged?
> > I don't want the money I spend to
> > benefit a company that doesn't do the right thing when a proven
> > conflict of interest arises.
>
> How does CCP profit from WW revenues?
You mean besides the fact that they merged?
> IMO, its ridiculously short-sighted to _not_ support the product and
> division that has tried (and mostly succeeded) to offer nothing but good
> will for its players, to spite a merged division of another company
> literally a quarter of an Earth away, especially given the clear
> separation of operations... but, as they say, its your money.
It's the principal of the thing. The whole sordid business was handled
extremely poorly. CCP can say all they want about how they've changed,
but it's the actions that count. All the press releases in the world
doesn't change the fact that t20 is still employed and the customer
that brought the issue to light was treated very poorly and has never
received an apology and, to top it off, is still perma-banned from the
game.
White Wolf has generally been a very good company and I certainly wish
Steve Wieck well. Should they part company with CCP, I may consider
returning to the game.
> Me, I'll choose _not_ to "punish" LSJ, Oscar, and the rest of the VTES-
> related staff in Atlanta, because of some completely-beyond-their-control
> bad choices made by a recently merged partner in Iceland...
They made a business decision. Now I'm making one.
Regards,
Noal
XZealot
Noal,
I know we have probably only met once or twice, so take that for what
it is. I had something really clever and enlightening that I had
rationally written out, but I deleted it to write this.
If you stop doing something you enjoy to spite someone else, then you
are only hurting yourself.
Comments Welcome,
Norman S. Brown, Jr
XZealot
Archon of the Swamp
Blooded Sand
Um, Norm, there is a flip side to this. It may be that Noal is looking
at this from an ethical point of view.
There is something which brings to joy to Bob. Acme, which produces
the product, behaves in a thoroughly unethical manner. Bob, even
though he enjoys the product, decides that he can no longer support
Acme. You realize that if more people though this way, the world would
probably be a better place?
Gomer
> On Mar 30, 9:15 am, atomweaver <atomwea...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > "Noal McDonald" <dharz...@my-deja.com> wrote
> > > Okay, then. Looks like I've bought my last V:TES card.
>
>
> Regards,
> Noal
Noal,
Thanks for posting the info on the CCP/BoB debacle. It's a VERY
serious subject that many VTES players can't appreciate.
For those asking Noal why he feels so strongly and has reacted as he
has, consider this.
CCP, now merged with White Wolf, is assumed/expected to develop World
of Darkness based mass-multi-player online games. Most of you already
know but for those that have only experienced the CCG, V:TES has been
based off of the roleplaying game Vampire: the Masquerade, along with
several novels and various other material. There were several other
World of Darkness RPG's for Werewolves, Changelings, Demons, Mummies,
Kindred of the East and any others escape my mind right now.
My point is this. A developer for CCP, playing Band of Brothers,
pulled some really shady crap. He got a slap on the wrist. He should
have been fired. Meanwhile, the whistleblower gets a permaban. Makes
me glad I don't play Band of Brothers. I might play a World of
Darkness based online game. That's something I had been hoping would
get developed for some time. UH OH!!! Guess who's gonna develop any
WoD MMO? That's right, CCP.
So while we may not be players of EVE or Band of Brothers, a World of
Darkness game IS something fans of the WoD RPGs or V:TES are likely to
play and why the hell would I want to spend my money on a game
produced by a company that has not only shown itself capable of
corruption and collusion, but mishandling the fallout? For all we
know, the developer in question, I believe he went by T20, may have a
role in the WoD game and may play in that. That just doesn't sit well
with me.
While I cannot endorse boycotting V:TES over these issues, I
completely understand where Noal is coming from. I will NEVER
purchase, play or support CCP in any way shape or form. I will NEVER
play any WoD MMO game they develop. If they get any $ of mine from my
V:TES purchases, I'd be surprised, but it won't stop me from buying or
playing V:TES myself.
Brian
Carpe Jugulum
Blooded Sand
Actually he was an Eve player, part of a coalition called band of
brothers. my 2 eurocents
And reading some of the interviews and articles, it seems as if the
corruption may be larger that just one employee. To me it seems like
standard Corp reaction. employees are guilty of gross misconduct, Corp
issues some ridiculous explanation (the entire management team was on
holiday. Believable. Unreachable in a situation that threatens the
reputation of their entire company? C'mon), one employee is scape
goated, given a totally in appropriate penalty, then its business as
usual, making sure the exdposer is banned so he cannot attempt to
expose more of the same? Hmmmmmmmm... Also strange is that the company
has now decided to deem the matter closed, even though there is still
massive unrest regarding this in the online community.
So if this is the company that will develop WoD MMO, what will stop
them from doing the same again? While I would definitely believe in
the good character and high ethical behaviour of WW staff (LSJ OrgPlay
et al), them being coupled with what seems now to be a highly shady
bunch of characters does tend to bring a strong sense of dismay to my
expectations for the WoD MMO. (my 2 euro's)
Gomer
Yeah, I realized that after typing out my rant, I had things a bit
boggled up. Chalk it up to emotional, irrational typing and not any
lack of intelligence on my part. Please? :) I still stand by my
opinion.
> And reading some of the interviews and articles, it seems as if the
> corruption may be larger that just one employee. To me it seems like
> standard Corp reaction. employees are guilty of gross misconduct, Corp
> issues some ridiculous explanation (the entire management team was on
> holiday. Believable. Unreachable in a situation that threatens the
> reputation of their entire company? C'mon), one employee is scape
> goated, given a totally in appropriate penalty, then its business as
> usual, making sure the exdposer is banned so he cannot attempt to
> expose more of the same? Hmmmmmmmm... Also strange is that the company
> has now decided to deem the matter closed, even though there is still
> massive unrest regarding this in the online community.
The links Noal included in his posts pretty much covered the details.
Didn't feel the need to write an even longer novel than I had. What
you added is important as well. Thanks.
> So if this is the company that will develop WoD MMO, what will stop
> them from doing the same again? While I would definitely believe in
> the good character and high ethical behaviour of WW staff (LSJ OrgPlay
> et al), them being coupled with what seems now to be a highly shady
> bunch of characters does tend to bring a strong sense of dismay to my
> expectations for the WoD MMO. (my 2 euro's)
My thoughts exactly. A WoD MMO would be a great concept and now I'm
really f'n pissed that I cannot play this game even if it were
developed. My morals say to hell with corporations that are only
concerned with sweeping things under the rug and my intelligence says
fool us once, shame on you, fool us twice, shame on anyone willing to
gamble with the huge amount of money that can be invested and spent in
and on an MMO.
Brian Gomez
Carpe Jugulum
Peter D Bakija
"Gomer" <TheMupp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> My point is this. A developer for CCP, playing Band of Brothers,
> pulled some really shady crap. He got a slap on the wrist. He should
> have been fired.
Care to expound for the curious onlookers--please assume that I have
only an incredibly vague idea what EVE is (some World of Warcraft type
of multiplayer online time waster?) and what makes for "shady crap" in
such a situation.
Peter D Bakija
pd...@lightlink.com
http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html
librarian
> In article <1175425004....@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
> "Gomer" <TheMupp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> My point is this. A developer for CCP, playing Band of Brothers,
>> pulled some really shady crap. He got a slap on the wrist. He should
>> have been fired.
>
> Care to expound for the curious onlookers--please assume that I have
> only an incredibly vague idea what EVE is (some World of Warcraft type
> of multiplayer online time waster?) and what makes for "shady crap" in
> such a situation.
>
>
And if you can make it analagous to VTES that would really illustrate
the perfidy.
(Fictitious Example: Designer gets a limited promo card made that is
very desirable - Heart of Nizchetus level desirable - and then keeps a
bunch back for him/herself, and sells them on eBay for much money.)
Thanks,
Blooded Sand
> > "Gomer" <TheMuppetPas...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> My point is this. A developer for CCP, playing Band of Brothers,
> >> pulled some really shady crap. He got a slap on the wrist. He should
> >> have been fired.
>
> > Care to expound for the curious onlookers--please assume that I have
> > only an incredibly vague idea what EVE is (some World of Warcraft type
> > of multiplayer online time waster?) and what makes for "shady crap" in
> > such a situation.
>
> And if you can make it analagous to VTES that would really illustrate
> the perfidy.
>
> (Fictitious Example: Designer gets a limited promo card made that is
> very desirable - Heart of Nizchetus level desirable - and then keeps a
> bunch back for him/herself, and sells them on eBay for much money.)
>
> Thanks,
>
> chris
>
> --
> Super Fun Cardshttp://myworld.ebay.com/superfuncards/
GM (Game Master) is a member of a coalition. He gives very sizeable
advantage to his coalition, both in temrs of tech and info, to advance
their cause. Apparently multiple clans and devs are involved
VtES correlation: difficult, as the way that this kind of advance
would be presented would be tough to copy in a CCG. Closest anology
would most likely be above example of uber promo, limited print run,
kept for small group who profit in tourneys by being only people
having said promo availble. Power level of promo would be equivalent
to having master that say "Master. Unique. All your minions gain +1
strength, +1 stealth, may prevent 1 damage per round of combat, and
all pay 1 lees for cards they play." Or something like that.
Essentially in the economy of the game Blueprints for very large
battlesghips were given out, which would equate to game world coinage
in the microsoft budget range
Peter D Bakija
"Blooded Sand" <sand...@gmail.com> wrote:
> GM (Game Master) is a member of a coalition. He gives very sizeable
> advantage to his coalition, both in temrs of tech and info, to advance
> their cause. Apparently multiple clans and devs are involved
This paragraph may intend to explain something. It does not explain
something, however. A coalition of what? Advantage in what? Tech and
info for what? Advancing the cause of what? Clans and devs are what
("devs" isn't even a word...)?
Like, apparently, someone did something really bad. Or something. But to
the people looking on in wonder, who haven't followed this scandal,
don't play EVE online, and have no idea what any of you are talking
about, what y'all are het up about is completely obscured. Someone
really should explain what you are talking about. In terms that someone
who does not play EVE online and has not been following this scandal are
likely to understand.
Morgan Vening
Ok, I'll give it a try.
White Wolf hold a promotional deal for VTES. In every 1000 booster
boxes of the next expansion, there is a "Golden Ticket" card, which
entitles the bearer to recieve a booster case of a reprinted limited
run Sabbat set. Something with a value within our society that has a
fairly impressive market value, but to the 'man on the street', isn't
worth much.
Now imagine that one of the developers of this promotion gets a hold
of these, takes or manufactures 10 copies of these, and hands them out
to his local playgroup.
Now lets say you find out about this, after noting how big an impact
these boxes have on the world VTES Tourney landscape. People showing
up with decks with 12 Camarilla Vitae Slaves that just dominate the
Tourney (it's hard to be completely comparable).
Now imagine you discovered this has happened, along with other such
finky goings on, like falsified tourney reports to boost his
playgroups ratings, deck data or prefferential seating arrangements
given at a tourney.
Now, you report this to OrgPlay. And his response is removing that
developer's ranking, but no further disciplinary action, the playgroup
given these perks is unaffected, and you receive a permanent life ban
from VTES tournaments and official strucures (and you have no local
friendly game group*). And that OrgPlay then produces a statement
saying that it's been resolved now, and the matter is closed.
* Given that EVE-Online is server driven, like most of those games,
there is no alternative but playing there. Unlike other multiplayer
computer games, you can't make your own servers, so if you're banned
from EVE, you no longer play.
Morgan Vening
- That's about the closest comparative example I could think of, in
the VTES world.
Peter D Bakija
Morgan Vening <mor...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> Ok, I'll give it a try.
Hmm. Perhaps I did not explain myself well. I'm not looking for an
analogy (although Shorb was, but I think he wanted an analogy *in
addition to* the actual story). I'm looking for an explanation of what
Guy X did to piss everyone off. Using non lingo terms (i.e. no use of
"devs"). Someone who works for CCP or whatever did something that was
bad. Somewhere. And apparently kinda got in trouble for it. But
apparently not in enough trouble to make someone like Noal happy with
the outcome.
Again, please assume that I don't play EVE online (I don't), nor have I
followed whatever story is being referenced here. Yes, an analogy might
be helpful, but more helpful would be what actually happened, at which
point, perhaps an analogy might be appropriate.
Morgan Vening
Hmm... my bad. I'll try again. I did try to keep the analogy cross
comparative, though.
"t20" was a game developer for EVE. The extent of what he did as a
game developer (or dev), I'm unsure of. It could have been as simple
as playtesting, to actual code creation. But that part isn't really
relevant. Just say he had more insight than a regular player.
EVE is a mass multiplayer online game. The game is built to
incorporate (and actively promotes) the inclusion of
factions/clans/coalitions, rather than each player for themselves.
The allegations are, that t20, abusing his status as a game developer,
gave his playgroup a large amount of in-game resources (tech, called
'blueprints'), well beyond what is capable through legitimate play,
that bolstered the strength of his playgroup over that of their
rivals. He is also alleged to have provided priveledged information of
future in-game events that provided unique prizes to the winners
(unique prizes won by his playgroup a disproportionate amount of the
time).
These details were discovered by another player (through morally
ambiguous means), who informed several leaders of other playgroups. It
was brought to the attention of the CCP management. Initially all
claims were dismissed. Upon pressure, t20 was forced to remove himself
from his playgroup, but he recieved no real life penalty. Noone in his
playgroup (I believe) suffered any penalty. The player who brought
this to the attention of the public received a permanent life ban. CCP
considers this matter resolved. Several players of varied influence
within the EVE gaming community believe more needs to be done.
Given that the game is built on a competitve environment, and that
there is a substantial fee (not out of proportion with other games of
a similar style), and time investment needed to play it at a high
level, and given it (like most online or real life gaming communities)
tends to attract what can probably be considered 'fanatic'
playerbases, temperatures run a bit high.
So it sits at thus. After initially trying to cover up corruption by
one of it's employees, CCP gave it's employee a slap on the wrist,
removed the whistleblower from the community, and says "Move along,
nothing to see here". In a community (online gaming, in general),
where game company integrity can be just as important as any other
factor, it seems CCP have handled things poorly.
Morgan Vening
Peter D Bakija
Morgan Vening <mor...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> Hmm... my bad. I'll try again. I did try to keep the analogy cross
> comparative, though.
Heh. This one worked *much* better. Thanks :-)
> "t20" was a game developer for EVE. The extent of what he did as a
> game developer (or dev), I'm unsure of. It could have been as simple
> as playtesting, to actual code creation. But that part isn't really
> relevant. Just say he had more insight than a regular player.
Hmm. Interesting. From the outside perspective, it seems like the extent
of his game development position would be relevant--someone who is, say,
a playtester, is little more than a slightly more informed player
volunteer where, say, a game designer is an employee of the company. If
"t20" (I'm assuming this is the guy's "cool" online name or something)
was simply a playtester who was abusing his knowledge and connections, I
can see how the company would not react real strongly--i.e. if he is
just a volunteer who went bad, then they cut him off and that is that.
If he were an an actual employee of the company, I'd expect a stiffer
penalty, however.
> EVE is a mass multiplayer online game. The game is built to
> incorporate (and actively promotes) the inclusion of
> factions/clans/coalitions, rather than each player for themselves.
>
> The allegations are, that t20, abusing his status as a game developer,
> gave his playgroup a large amount of in-game resources (tech, called
> 'blueprints'), well beyond what is capable through legitimate play,
> that bolstered the strength of his playgroup over that of their
> rivals. He is also alleged to have provided priveledged information of
> future in-game events that provided unique prizes to the winners
> (unique prizes won by his playgroup a disproportionate amount of the
> time).
Hmm. I'd figure this sort of thing would happen all the time in online
computer games. Does it not?
> These details were discovered by another player (through morally
> ambiguous means), who informed several leaders of other playgroups. It
> was brought to the attention of the CCP management. Initially all
> claims were dismissed. Upon pressure, t20 was forced to remove himself
> from his playgroup, but he recieved no real life penalty. Noone in his
> playgroup (I believe) suffered any penalty. The player who brought
> this to the attention of the public received a permanent life ban. CCP
> considers this matter resolved.
That certainly seems kinda dubious.
Morgan Vening
<pd...@lightlink.com> wrote:
>In article <mg7013dk401hp9o82...@4ax.com>,
> Morgan Vening <mor...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>
>> Hmm... my bad. I'll try again. I did try to keep the analogy cross
>> comparative, though.
>
>Heh. This one worked *much* better. Thanks :-)
>
>> "t20" was a game developer for EVE. The extent of what he did as a
>> game developer (or dev), I'm unsure of. It could have been as simple
>> as playtesting, to actual code creation. But that part isn't really
>> relevant. Just say he had more insight than a regular player.
>
>Hmm. Interesting. From the outside perspective, it seems like the extent
>of his game development position would be relevant--someone who is, say,
>a playtester, is little more than a slightly more informed player
>volunteer where, say, a game designer is an employee of the company. If
>"t20" (I'm assuming this is the guy's "cool" online name or something)
>was simply a playtester who was abusing his knowledge and connections, I
>can see how the company would not react real strongly--i.e. if he is
>just a volunteer who went bad, then they cut him off and that is that.
>If he were an an actual employee of the company, I'd expect a stiffer
>penalty, however.
Oh, he works for the company, as in is a paid employee. And yes, 't20'
is his cool online name.
>> EVE is a mass multiplayer online game. The game is built to
>> incorporate (and actively promotes) the inclusion of
>> factions/clans/coalitions, rather than each player for themselves.
>>
>> The allegations are, that t20, abusing his status as a game developer,
>> gave his playgroup a large amount of in-game resources (tech, called
>> 'blueprints'), well beyond what is capable through legitimate play,
>> that bolstered the strength of his playgroup over that of their
>> rivals. He is also alleged to have provided priveledged information of
>> future in-game events that provided unique prizes to the winners
>> (unique prizes won by his playgroup a disproportionate amount of the
>> time).
>
>Hmm. I'd figure this sort of thing would happen all the time in online
>computer games. Does it not?
In a lot of the free access games (MUDs or Multi User Dungeons) used
to be rife with this kind of thing. In a paid company, where people
pay a company for their entertainment and integrity, it should not
happen. It's like the difference between taking bets amongst your
friends at differing odds, and finding out that SuperBet.com is
fudging the line.
>> These details were discovered by another player (through morally
>> ambiguous means), who informed several leaders of other playgroups. It
>> was brought to the attention of the CCP management. Initially all
>> claims were dismissed. Upon pressure, t20 was forced to remove himself
>> from his playgroup, but he recieved no real life penalty. Noone in his
>> playgroup (I believe) suffered any penalty. The player who brought
>> this to the attention of the public received a permanent life ban. CCP
>> considers this matter resolved.
>
>That certainly seems kinda dubious.
Hence the issue being taken and the reason one person at least (Norm?
Noal?) has removed all future financial investment in a company
co-owned by CCP, and several others have stated a removal of intent to
play in any game organised and run by CCP.
Morgan Vening
XZealot
> Um, Norm, there is a flip side to this. It may be that Noal is looking
> at this from an ethical point of view.
>
> There is something which brings to joy to Bob. Acme, which produces
> the product, behaves in a thoroughly unethical manner. Bob, even
> though he enjoys the product, decides that he can no longer support
> Acme. You realize that if more people though this way, the world would
> probably be a better place?
People do it every day, for no apparent reason. The world is no
better place for it.
The world is filled with sadder people who are so self-inflicted with
angst and powerlessness who could have better driven their point home
by writing a letter to the company explaining their rational. I know
that every complaint letter that most companies get is read. You
figure there is about 100:1 ratio of upset customers to upset
customers who write a letter. If you get alot of them then you change
your behavior pretty quick.
That is the view from where I sit. It has very little to do with
ethics. It has everythigng to do with customer relations. As we all
know, relationships are a two-way street.
Bram Vink
You're about 2 months late or something making this shocking and
terrible discovery. I suggest you cool down, wipe the froth from your
mouth, take a week, take a good hard look at your business decision.
At the time, the problem was handled poorly by CCP, and choosing
wether this affects your endorsement of WW is, of course, solely your
business.
However, it's well within the realm of reasonable response to your
publicizing this business decision you're making, to tell you you're
an idiot for making this decision.
Just ask yourself:
Did this incident affect the trust you had in WW?
Did this incident affect anything between your relation, service, or
product from/with WW?
Is there any interaction between the "WW division" and the persons/
things that went wrong? Does one affect the other in a way that you
feel makes boycotting of one because of faults of the other is a
meaningful exercise?
Did you enjoy playing V:tES? Did what went wrong affect your enjoyment
of playing V:tES meaningfully?
I wish you good luck on your boycot. Idiot.
Boycotting, fine.
Quitting, fine.
Boycotting because of unrelated reasons, fine, but stupid.
Cheers,
Bram
mgre...@googlemail.com
> On Mar 28, 12:52 pm, librarian <aucti...@superfuncards.com> wrote:
>
> > Good to see some market research going on. I hope the Eve online folks
> > let you share some of the info later.
>
> EVE Online folks shouldn't have any trouble sharing. After all, their
> devs shared the Tech 2 blueprints with...well...themselves. The person
> that found out about the EO's dirty laundry...well...he's not invited
> to play their reindeer games any more.
>
>
> http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/15/0726233
>
> I truly hope that White Wolf isn't involved in business relationships
> with those clowns. If so, V:TES will forever be dead to me.
>
> Regards,
> Noal
Whatever the feelings about giving your money to these guys, those
links highlight why the rec...jyhad newsgroup is so important; in that
WW/CEC has no control over the views expressed here. We're the guys
and gals buying your products, so come talk to us on our turf. After
all, we cared enough to set it up.
Free speech, even free speech from ass-clowns, has to be a healthy
thing for V:TES.
Matt
atomweaver
> On Mar 30, 2:08 pm, atomweaver <atomwea...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> "Noal McDonald" <dharz...@my-deja.com> wrote
>> > It's a follow the money thing.
>>
>> I'd like to know how you're doing that in two merged, privately held
>> companies... What is the basis for your assumption of shared profits
>> between the two companies?
>
> You mean besides the fact that they merged?
>
Yes. Merging is not an indicator of profit (re)allocation.
>> > I don't want the money I spend to
>> > benefit a company that doesn't do the right thing when a proven
>> > conflict of interest arises.
>>
>> How does CCP profit from WW revenues?
>
> You mean besides the fact that they merged?
>
Yes. Merging is not an indicator of profit (re)allocation. You have no
insight into the financial mechanations of the two businesses. Has CCP
pushed a bunch of money into WW? Is it the other way around? Do they
each maintain seperate profit centers? There's no way to know for sure,
because they're privately held, but I'd consider effecting WW's CCG
revenue to be about the last thing that's going to have your desired
effect.
>> IMO, its ridiculously short-sighted to _not_ support the product and
>> division that has tried (and mostly succeeded) to offer nothing but
>> good will for its players, to spite a merged division of another
>> company literally a quarter of an Earth away, especially given the
>> clear separation of operations... but, as they say, its your money.
>
> It's the principal of the thing. The whole sordid business was handled
> extremely poorly. CCP can say all they want about how they've changed,
> but it's the actions that count. All the press releases in the world
> doesn't change the fact that t20 is still employed and the customer
> that brought the issue to light was treated very poorly and has never
> received an apology and, to top it off, is still perma-banned from the
> game.
>
> White Wolf has generally been a very good company and I certainly wish
> Steve Wieck well. Should they part company with CCP, I may consider
> returning to the game.
>
OK. Like i said, its your money. IMO its an absurd position to take,
but there you go. Selling your collection, then?
>> Me, I'll choose _not_ to "punish" LSJ, Oscar, and the rest of the
>> VTES-
>> related staff in Atlanta, because of some
>> completely-beyond-their-control bad choices made by a recently merged
>> partner in Iceland...
>
> They made a business decision. Now I'm making one.
You are conflating various values for "they", in the process of making
your decision. CCP made some bad choices, and I can totally see wanting
to make them know how you feel by "voting with your feet" and ending
support of EVE Online, which is a factor that they will actually track
and notice over the course of dealing with their "issue". But, thinking
that stopping VTES is somehow also going to deliver that same message is
not reasonable...
DZ
AW
Noal McDonald
> I wish you good luck on your boycot. Idiot.
Go choke on your own vomit, fuck nuts.
Noal
Noal McDonald
> OK. Like i said, its your money. IMO its an absurd position to take,
> but there you go. Selling your collection, then?
As you know, I haven't played in a while for a number of reasons, most
of which mostly lack of time and no small amount of burn out. When
considering whether or not to make the effort to return to the game or
not, I found out about White Wolf entering into a business arrangement
with CCP. If nothing else, it's a straw on the proverbial camel's
back.
As for selling my collection, doubtful. They'll likely continue to
gather dust for a while on the off chance that I do find the time and
inclination to play again. These days, if I have that amount of free
time available, it's rather spontaneous and I just go down to the
casino and take money from people via the poker tables.
Regards,
Noal
Kevin M.
> As for selling my collection, doubtful. They'll likely continue to
> gather dust for a while on the off chance that I do find the time and
> inclination to play again. These days, if I have that amount of free
> time available, it's rather spontaneous and I just go down to the
> casino and take money from people via the poker tables.
Well, you have my number if you do want to get rid of those beautiful
cards. Or if you end up in Vegas for some strange reason. ;)
Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas
"Know your enemy, and know yourself; in one-thousand battles
you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War*
"Contentment... Complacency... Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier
Bram Vink
Such hostility. Oh well, it's said it's a difficult task protecting
people from their own stupidity. QED.
Dont forget the froth-wiping, pausing to think about what you do, and
not publicizing your irrational decisions, good idiot.
Cheers and many more ad hominem posts at request,
Bram
PS. to further your education, no space in fucknuts.
Gomer
Bram, as witty as your response might have been, you still were the
one to degrade the conversation by calling Noal an idiot. Last time I
checked, no rational, intelligent conversation ever included such
childishness. I thought higher of you. Now I know better. Carry on.
Peter D Bakija
"Gomer" <TheMupp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Bram, as witty as your response might have been, you still were the
> one to degrade the conversation by calling Noal an idiot. Last time I
> checked, no rational, intelligent conversation ever included such
> childishness. I thought higher of you. Now I know better. Carry on.
Ya know who liked to call people idiots? Hitler. Hitler liked to to
that...
Wait. Damn.
Jeff Kuta
> In article <1175425004.099898.96...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > My point is this. A developer for CCP, playing Band of Brothers,
> > pulled some really shady crap. He got a slap on the wrist. He should
> > have been fired.
>
> Care to expound for the curious onlookers--please assume that I have
> only an incredibly vague idea what EVE is (some World of Warcraft type
> of multiplayer online time waster?) and what makes for "shady crap" in
> such a situation.
>
> Peter D Bakija
A little late to the discussion, but here's the first analogy that
came to my mind:
Online poker company has hundreds of thousands of players. Employee/
developer CHEATS and gives his friends access to tools which allow
them to win hands and money. Reputation is shattered. Everyone leaves
for other sites.
That's how seriously EVE should be handling this situation.
Jeff
Bram Vink
I am a firm believer in the idea that if people make stupid decisions,
it's better to say it up straight than to use polite euphemisms. So
yes, sure, I was the one who called Noal an idiot.
However, I also personally doubt that Noals supposed quitting has
anything to do with this whole CCP business. It's more likely he's
quit a long time ago and now just has a nice excuse to make a
statement.
However, that he links his buying of WW product to this (old)
incident, is irrational, or at least based on very large assumptions.
I think it warrants a proper flame, and since I'm assuming he means
what he says, that makes him an idiot.
Thus, I said nothing I don't mean, so I'm not apologizing for it,
either.
Cheers,
Bram
PS. Apparently, things changed since last time you checked. I change
the rules, baby!
Bram Vink
> In article <1175561981.831455.321...@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
>
> "Gomer" <TheMuppetPas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Bram, as witty as your response might have been, you still were the
> > one to degrade the conversation by calling Noal an idiot. Last time I
> > checked, no rational, intelligent conversation ever included such
> > childishness. I thought higher of you. Now I know better. Carry on.
>
> Ya know who liked to call people idiots? Hitler. Hitler liked to to
> that...
>
> Wait. Damn.
>
> Peter D Bakija
Don't forget that heinous pro-gun lobby with all their lies, the
immoral and in foreign policy weak democrats, and of course the
debauchery we call christianity.
They all like to do that. Together with Hitler.
Chill, nigger,
Bram
PS. and the war in Iraq is legit. and so should sex with children/
siblings/combinations be.
Janne Hägglund
> In article <1175561981.8...@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
> "Gomer" <TheMupp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Bram, as witty as your response might have been, you still were the
> > one to degrade the conversation by calling Noal an idiot. Last time I
> > checked, no rational, intelligent conversation ever included such
> > childishness. I thought higher of you. Now I know better. Carry on.
>
> Ya know who liked to call people idiots? Hitler. Hitler liked to to
> that...
>
> Wait. Damn.
When you invoke Godwin's law, you make baby Hitler cry.
(Theoretically safe for work, since it contains no nudity, but I'm not so
sure...)
ObVTES: Wouldn't that make a terrific unique location for the game?
--
hg@ "If you can't offend part of your audience,
iki.fi there is no point in being an artist at all." -Hakim Bey
XZealot
wrote:
> Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> writes:
>
> > In article <1175561981.831455.321...@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > Bram, as witty as your response might have been, you still were the
> > > one to degrade the conversation by calling Noal an idiot. Last time I
> > > checked, no rational, intelligent conversation ever included such
> > > childishness. I thought higher of you. Now I know better. Carry on.
>
> > Ya know who liked to call people idiots? Hitler. Hitler liked to to
> > that...
>
> > Wait. Damn.
>
> When you invoke Godwin's law, you make baby Hitler cry.
>
> http://naziforest.ytmnd.com/
>
> (Theoretically safe for work, since it contains no nudity, but I'm not so
> sure...)
>
> ObVTES: Wouldn't that make a terrific unique location for the game?
You guys look like a bunch of idiots.
XZ
Gomer
You know, I was going to respond but I think I'm just going to move
on...some of you need to grow up and start using this group for more
than insults and such. I'll leave you guys to your nifty little
group. I want none of this kinda garbage.
Gomer
Yeah...thanks...right back atcha.
Bram Vink
I basically said that whereas I did call Noal an idiot, I did this on
a rational, reasoned basis, as a reply on your assumption that calling
him such was childish, and not present in any rational intelligent
conversation. Neither my response on his choking-on-vomit nor my
response on Peter's joke on escalating things carried any intellectual
value, nor were they meant to.
However, as a suggestion to enhance your enjoyment of the newsgroup,
most newsreaders have functions to ignore the posts of certain people.
You can remove these posts from the things you read, and instead read
only the posts of those grown up enough to use this newsgroup for more
than insults.
Who you find not reaching the standards you'd like to see when reading
the newsgroups, is, of course, entirely up to you. And no longer
reading the newsgroup similarily.
Cheers,
Bram
Peter D Bakija
> You guys look like a bunch of idiots.
Hey man--don't drag me into this. I was just making an A-List
intnernet discussion meta joke. I don't know *what* everyone else is
doing around here.
Wait, shouldn't there be a Delaying Tactics in here?
-Peter
Ector
>
> Wait, shouldn't there be a Delaying Tactics in here?
>
OK, guys, hopefully the simple fact that insults are useless here is
obvious to everyone :)
Let me attempt to end this hassle by drawing the fire to myself -
after all, I've got accustomed to the insults here :)
IMHO, from the common player's perspective the developer's "crime"
isn't so big. EVE Online is NOT a "gambling game" and NOT a sport game
either. It's a ROLE-PLAYING game. If you're playing a role-playing
game and suddenly realize that somebody gained a huge advantage (even
improperly), why this should spoil your game? That person could just
find those blueprints in some ancient ruins. As long as you aren't
struggling to become "the most powerful one", that "cheating" should
mean almost nothing to you. There are always some powerful beings
around, and why the developers cannot be those beings? After all, did
somebody promise that everything is going to be "fair" in the galaxy?
Is it possible at all? The developers can know some hidden information
about the game that can provide them much greater advantage than those
damned blueprints!
Please compare this to the Victor Pelletier ("championship-only
promo"). From the common player's perspective it's much worse that the
mentioned "cheating": VTES is the sport game, and the advantage
provided to limited number of players really spoils the game. Yes,
Victor wasn't issued to WW stuff or sold by them, but nevertheless,
most players don't have him. A player with Victor has some advantage
over a player without it, even if it's minimal. Yes, this advantage
doesn't guarantee victory, but EVE blueprints also didn't make those
players "the gods".
And though the limited promo was obviously bad, nobody left the game
because of it. No reason to leave EVE as well.
However, when they banned the player that tried to fix the problem, it
was a shame indeed. CCP must restore his account and compesate him for
his losses - and I wish a good luck to any person struggling for THIS.
But struggling to make CCP fire the "guilty" developer is pointless,
IMHO.
Yours,
Ector
Peter D Bakija
> OK, guys, hopefully the simple fact that insults are useless here is
> obvious to everyone :)
Why is this framed as a response to me?
-Peter
XZealot
I wasn't addressing you Gomer. I was addressing Peter B and Janne H
who think that Nazi/Hitler jokes are cute, which they are not.
XZ
XZealot
> On Apr 3, 4:29 am, "XZealot" <xzea...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > You guys look like a bunch of idiots.
>
> Hey man--don't drag me into this. I was just making an A-List
> intnernet discussion meta joke. I don't know *what* everyone else is
> doing around here.
That's just not funny.
XZ
XZealot
> > on...some of you need to grow up and start using this group for more
> > than insults and such. I'll leave you guys to your nifty little
> > group. I want none of this kinda garbage.
>
> I basically said that whereas I did call Noal an idiot, I did this on
> a rational, reasoned basis, as a reply on your assumption that calling
> him such was childish, and not present in any rational intelligent
> conversation. Neither my response on his choking-on-vomit nor my
> response on Peter's joke on escalating things carried any intellectual
> value, nor were they meant to.
The response to Peter's joke (if you can call it that) was completely
unnessary, and was truly offensive and off-topic as well.
XZ
Ector
no such thing as "general response". I also cannot respond to the
several persons at once, alas. So I simply decided to respond to the
last message.
Yours,
Ector
Kevin M.
PETER PETER PETER >:(
How many times do I have to tell you, and do you have to see it, that this
newsgroup has absolutely *NO* sense of humor unless your message is
accompanied by several EMOTICONS! :) =) ;) :D
Bram Vink
If you honestly were offended by that, that wasn't my intention. But
if you were, I think you need to realize that there wasn't a single
serious word in that. If you are truly offended by written, obviously
nonserious things from a total stranger, I think there's a problem on
your side.
It's just a listing of things that tend to get people riled up. I
don't know what got you offended, and I don't really want to know.
It was indeed completely offtopic and unneccesary. It wasn't intended
to be either, but thanks for pointing this out.
Cheers,
Bram
Peter D Bakija
"XZealot" <xze...@cox.net> wrote:
> The response to Peter's joke (if you can call it that)
Uhh, wha? I mean, maybe I'm just thinking I'm super clever and all, but
I thought it was pretty clear that my post was, ya know, a Godwin's Law
of the Internet joke. Ya know--you've been on the internet before, right?
Peter D Bakija
"Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
> PETER PETER PETER >:(
>
> How many times do I have to tell you, and do you have to see it, that this
> newsgroup has absolutely *NO* sense of humor unless your message is
> accompanied by several EMOTICONS! :) =) ;) :D
I'm beginning to get that sense. All my A-List material is apparently
going to waste on these people...
Peter D Bakija
"XZealot" <xze...@cox.net> wrote:
> That's just not funny.
I'm not quite sure why you would say that. I mean, for my money, any
joke involving Godwin's Law is pure gold. Especially when the actual
discussion going on around it is rapidly approaching that point anyway.
I mean, yeah, ok, *you* might not appreicate the humor and all, but I
tell man. Gold.
Peter D Bakija
"XZealot" <xze...@cox.net> wrote:
> I wasn't addressing you Gomer. I was addressing Peter B and Janne H
> who think that Nazi/Hitler jokes are cute, which they are not.
Ah. So you don't think Hitler jokes are funny. I can see that. But see,
it was a Godwin's Law joke, which isn't a Hitler joke. It is an internet
joke. Ya know, about, the internet. It is meta-humor.
librarian
> Peter D Bakija <pd...@lightlink.com> wrote:
>> XZealot <xzea...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> You guys look like a bunch of idiots.
>> Hey man--don't drag me into this. I was just making an A-List
>> intnernet discussion meta joke. I don't know *what* everyone else is
>> doing around here.
>>
>> Wait, shouldn't there be a Delaying Tactics in here?
>
> PETER PETER PETER >:(
>
> How many times do I have to tell you, and do you have to see it, that this
> newsgroup has absolutely *NO* sense of humor unless your message is
> accompanied by several EMOTICONS! :) =) ;) :D
>
Ahhh, see Kevin? You are learning! True humor lies in the humorless...
All of those emoticons telling me that I should be laughing with them
create true humor. Like sitcoms with their laughtracks.
best -
chris
--
Super Fun Cards
http://myworld.ebay.com/superfuncards/
auct...@superfuncards.com
Peter D Bakija
librarian <auct...@superfuncards.com> wrote:
> Ahhh, see Kevin? You are learning! True humor lies in the humorless...
> All of those emoticons telling me that I should be laughing with them
> create true humor. Like sitcoms with their laughtracks.
See, this is why The Office isn't doing as well as it should be...
Peter D Bakija
> Sorry, but I couldn't determine to whom I should respond, and there is
> no such thing as "general response". I also cannot respond to the
> several persons at once, alas. So I simply decided to respond to the
> last message.
See, but you were responding to the discussion about CCP and whatever,
rather than the discussion about who knows what this discussion has
turned into (Hitler? Godwin's Law? Comedy without laughtracks and the
people who can't understand that?)
You should probably look for more appropriate discussion to respond
to, as it makes your posts make more sense--thus is the flaw with
threaded discussion.
-Peter
XZealot
> In article <1175623233.635226.151...@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
>
> "XZealot" <xzea...@cox.net> wrote:
> > The response to Peter's joke (if you can call it that)
>
> Uhh, wha? I mean, maybe I'm just thinking I'm super clever and all, but
> I thought it was pretty clear that my post was, ya know, a Godwin's Law
> of the Internet joke. Ya know--you've been on the internet before, right?
I am familiar with Godwin's Law. I have been around. It's not
funny.
XZ
XZealot
> In article <1175622962.576148.244...@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
>
> "XZealot" <xzea...@cox.net> wrote:
> > I wasn't addressing you Gomer. I was addressing Peter B and Janne H
> > who think that Nazi/Hitler jokes are cute, which they are not.
>
> Ah. So you don't think Hitler jokes are funny. I can see that. But see,
> it was a Godwin's Law joke, which isn't a Hitler joke. It is an internet
> joke. Ya know, about, the internet. It is meta-humor.
If it's funny then it's funny. Your joke wasn't funny. It was
offensive.
Peter D Bakija
> If it's funny then it's funny. Your joke wasn't funny. It was
> offensive.
You are really calling the following offensive:
"Ya know who liked to call people idiots? Hitler. Hitler liked to to
that...
Wait. Damn. "
Is this honestly what you are reacting to? I wrote "Hitler liked to
call people idiots". This you find offensive? A gag about Godwin's Law
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law ), with a scentence that
refers to Hitler liking to call people idiots. You find that
offensive.
Even completley devoid of the context of the Godwin's Law, I can't
imagine why anyone would find this offensive. If you found this
offensive, I'm sorry. I had no intention at all of being offensive.
But I can't even see what you would find offensive about it. A mention
of Hitler? That is offensive? Have you seen the History Channel?
-Peter
Peter D Bakija
"XZealot" <xze...@cox.net> wrote:
> I am familiar with Godwin's Law. I have been around. It's not
> funny.
Ok. Then you didn't think it was funny. Sure. But *offensive*? You
honestly find the phrase "Hitler liked to call people idiots" offensive?
On what grounds is that possibly offensive?
Pat
news:pdb6-459085.1...@news-server.stny.rr.com...
> In article <EgzQh.136612$907.1...@newsfe13.phx>,
> librarian <auct...@superfuncards.com> wrote:
>
>> Ahhh, see Kevin? You are learning! True humor lies in the humorless...
>> All of those emoticons telling me that I should be laughing with them
>> create true humor. Like sitcoms with their laughtracks.
>
> See, this is why The Office isn't doing as well as it should be...
>
Hey, I had a quality The Office reference a few months ago... give me some
credit (he said sternly, with no smilies in evidence).
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/369e1bf12d8c6c20?hl=en&
- Pat
p.s. I liked your Hitler joke. Nice meta.
XZealot
> In article <1175646319.567595.112...@w1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
>
> "XZealot" <xzea...@cox.net> wrote:
> > I am familiar with Godwin's Law. I have been around. It's not
> > funny.
>
> Ok. Then you didn't think it was funny. Sure. But *offensive*? You
> honestly find the phrase "Hitler liked to call people idiots" offensive?
> On what grounds is that possibly offensive?
This is not that big of a deal in isolation, but what it did was get
Bram and Janne inspired to "run with the ball". They went completely
overboard, which you can't control, but you did derail the thread in
the first place with your "humor".
It's just better not to joke about such things as some people don't
know where to stop.
XZ
Janne Hägglund
> I am familiar with Godwin's Law. I have been around. It's not
> funny.
I think perhaps you're confusing a personal preference with a universal
fact.
I mean, if you say "that joke offended me", then you're absolutely right,
my bad, these things happen.
*But* if you're saying that the joke in question is never funny, to anyone,
in any context... You begin to sound like a punchline:
"Q: How many moral crusaders does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: That's not funny!"
--
hg@ "If you can't offend part of your audience,
iki.fi there is no point in being an artist at all." -Hakim Bey
Bram Vink
It was a funny joke. You taking offense at it, or my attempt at humor,
or Janne's post is either outright trolling, or you need to toughen
up. "completely overboard". Get a grip, perspective, and a sense of
relativation. I don't know how you'll survive this wild jungle of free
speech and gratuitious offense we like to call "the internet"
otherwise.
Really.
Cheers,
Bram
Salem
> "Peter D Bakija" <pd...@lightlink.com> wrote in message
> news:pdb6-459085.1...@news-server.stny.rr.com...
>> See, this is why The Office isn't doing as well as it should be...
>>
>
> Hey, I had a quality The Office reference a few months ago... give me some
> credit (he said sternly, with no smilies in evidence).
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/369e1bf12d8c6c20?hl=en&
>
> - Pat
>
> p.s. I liked your Hitler joke. Nice meta.
shhh. it wasn't a hitler joke, it was a Godwin's law joke!
did you americans make a remake of The Office, or are we all talking
about the Britsh one? (which is on my pile of "to watch" DVDs).
--
salem
(replace 'hotmail' with 'yahoo' to email)
Pat
news:4613...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
My original Office ref was to the 'murcan remake, which, unlike most such
remakes, is actually quite good. It's turned out a bit different from the UK
version, but in a good way.
The UK version is excellent as well.
- Pat
Peter D Bakija
> Hey, I had a quality The Office reference a few months ago... give me some
> credit (he said sternly, with no smilies in evidence).
>
Oh, heh. Yeah--I even thought that was funny at the time. Go Pat!
-Peter
Peter D Bakija
This is not that big of a deal in isolation, but what it did was get
> Bram and Janne inspired to "run with the ball". They went completely
> overboard, which you can't control, but you did derail the thread in
> the first place with your "humor".
>
> It's just better not to joke about such things as some people don't
> know where to stop.
So due to possibly giving folks an opportunity to go off the deep end,
which I have absolutely no control over, in a thread that had
*already* gone off the deep end and had already been completely
derailed by "flinging insults" (as opposed to "humor"), my comment of
"Hitler liked to call people idiots" was the offensive part.
Ok then. Just making sure. We can move on now.
-Peter
Peter D Bakija
> did you americans make a remake of The Office, or are we all talking
> about the Britsh one? (which is on my pile of "to watch" DVDs).
We did. It is a fine, fine show. But consistiently less appreciated
than it should be. Due to it having subtle and uncomfortable humor.
-Peter
Salem
ah, that's good. I was worried that, as per Men Behaving Badly, that
your glorious nation might have, perchance, butchered it, so to speak.
Good to hear it stayed close to its roots, as far as the humourous
stylings go. I might check it out, too.
Peter D Bakija
> ah, that's good. I was worried that, as per Men Behaving Badly, that
> your glorious nation might have, perchance, butchered it, so to speak.
> Good to hear it stayed close to its roots, as far as the humourous
> stylings go. I might check it out, too.
It is produced and occasionally written by Gervais and his
exceptionally tall friend.
-Peter
XZealot
wrote:
> "XZealot" <xzea...@cox.net> writes:
> > I am familiar with Godwin's Law. I have been around. It's not
> > funny.
>
> I think perhaps you're confusing a personal preference with a universal
> fact.
>
> I mean, if you say "that joke offended me", then you're absolutely right,
> my bad, these things happen.
>
> *But* if you're saying that the joke in question is never funny, to anyone,
> in any context... You begin to sound like a punchline:
Great, maybe that punchline would have been funny.
As for me being a moral crusader, well that is funny.
XZ
XZealot
Grip established.
The funny thing about free speech is that you are guaranteed to
disagree with someone about something, that's what makes it so good.
XZ