I've received the following statement or question five times now during my CSM run, and I thought it would be useful to make public what is becoming my standard answer to the question.
Here's the statement netted down to its basic form:
Scamming should be against the EULA. Don't you think so, Jester?Here's what is becoming my standard response:
You are directly attacking one of the bedrock principles that EVE rests on. EVE is a sandbox controlled by player actions with the barest minimum action against players taken by CCP. It is quite literally laissez-faire capitalism taken to the farthest extreme. In a very real way, that principle is what a lot of EVE players play EVE for: it is not Star Trek, where humanity is a many times nicer version of itself. Instead, it is a world built without warning labels or consumer protection bureaus where you have to watch out for yourself. Stealing from people is a valid tactic within the game. Hell, CCP wrote a whole trailer video about it promoting this style of game-play.Might lose me a few votes, but that's what I believe on this topic. Here's the trailer that I reference in the response:
In EVE, wherever possible, in-game problems are solved by the players, not the devs.
If scamming bothers you that much, why not start a searchable database of scammers that EVE players can reference, add to, and comment on? Then as it becomes a popular service, add in-game or RL advertising and make a few ISK/dollars for yourself? That is the sort of player-driven solution that compliments how EVE is built. This is how an EVE player solves an in-game problem, not another set of rules that CCP has to enforce.
It's a pretty harsh answer, but "harsh" is what EVE is about. Sorry I can't give you an answer you like better...
Now my response.
- First off, the first and second sentence are at odds with each other. Eve will never have any bedrock principals BECAUSE it is a SANDBOX!
- "Harsh" is what Eve is all about. Very interesting statement there. Again, if this is a true sandbox and you want to run for the CSM, maybe even be the Chairperson for the CSM then perhaps sir you should STOP telling me how to play in my OWN SANDBOX! LISTEN to all of the player base and not what YOU perceive to be what the eve universe is!
Focus: CSM Summit Minutes, "Null-sec" sessions
Let's start with the most famous quote in these two sections, shall we?
On top of that, Soundwave added, the POS system by itself would only affect a small portion of the community.Now, I've already mentioned this quote in another blog post and pointed to both Two step's blog post about it and his growing threadnaught. It's up to 121 pages, and I'm told that CCP is counting the number of unique player accounts that reply to that thread. So if you've been thinking about posting in there but think your contribution doesn't matter or enough players have already spoken up about it, I'd encourage you to revisit that thought process.
So was Two Step wrong when he went public with this and not stay quite like Selene and the rest of CSM wanted him to? or do you think he really did the right thing? or is that not a fair question to ask now?
So I say this to you Jester. You have been asked so far 6 times now, since I am including myself in this blog "Scamming should be against the EULA. Don't you think so, Jester?". That would statistically show you the same thing? That maybe you should not be so set in what you think Eve is and work more on what we ALL LIKE about eve.
If I am ever to have a quote in Eve it will be this:
"Eve Online does not have any Bedrock Principles as that contridicts the very nature of how the sandbox design was created". - ROCK MELTER