Bitter Vets versus Better Vets

[Kezrai_Charzai]

@Shipwreck_Jones

Also, you do realize that it’s not a witchhunt when you openly admit to trying to sabotage others and the game, right?

Wow, nice reading comprehension fail.

You do realize the difference between describing something that people do, and doing that thing yourself, right? (That’s rhetorical btw because quite apparently you don’t.)

I mean, my very next sentence after your red box says “I don’t bother doing this” but I guess your brain had turned off by that point because you were busy leaping on your donkey to charge at the windmill you thought you saw.

My point there actually also happens to be factual, because CCP has definitely responded to outrage, protests and loss of subs, but frankly you would be very hard pressed to point to any “constructive feedback” on the forums that has led to substantive change.

Your cartoon OP is basically trying to conflate “people who are bad at EVE” with “bitter vets” so you can tar everyone with the same brush. You’re trying to equate “bitter vet” with “sabotaging EVE” and sticking the “bitter vet” label on all kinds of negative feedback. Keep in mind I can provide actual quotes and links of you doing this, I don’t have to draw cartoons.

That’s what makes it a witchhunt.

So lets back up to my original assertion here, which you blew off with a cry of “AAAH you strawmanned me!” (hilarious since your OP is a strawman from the getgo).

A bitter vet is someone who’s played EVE a long time (the ‘vet’ part), and is bitter (meaning, angry and resentful, not “bad at EVE”) because of repeated lies, nerfed playstyles, buggy releases, stillborn concepts (re: Resource Wars), backstabbed players (re: “oh look couple weeks notice and we throw your citadels to the wolves!”), and frustration over how poorly CCP understands their own game (after almost two decades).

Some of those people are actively trying to sabotage EVE/CCP to ‘get revenge’, for sure. And that’s silly, for sure. (Although frankly, CCP markets EVE to appeal to the kind of people who behave that way, so you reap what you sow, I guess.) And yes, behaving that way is bad for EVE.

I didn’t say it’s smart. I didn’t say I do it. I said it’s effective, because it demonstrably is.

Despite the assumptions you’re straining to leap to, I myself am not a bitter vet. You’ll find very few posts of mine that fits either your parody or my actual “bitter vet” descriptions. The most you will find is a long-time critic of what I consider to be lazy, complacent and sometimes incompetent game development and design work on the part of CCP.

That’s my opinion, of course, but I can find dozens of actual, historical, documented facts to back up why I hold it. And I can do it without declaring a general witchhunt on “people who don’t EVE the way I think they should”.

Can you do the same?

[Gerard_Amatin]

@DeMichael_Crimson

OP posts a thread complaining about Vets who complain…

OP posts a thread to distinguish between two approaches to how you can be a veteran player.

If you look at it as a bitter vet, you can interpret it negatively and see the thread as a complaint.

If you look at it as a better vet, you could interpret it positively and see the picture as a nudge to players to tell them how they can have a more positive effect on the community by changing their behaviour.

Nudge nudge.

[Anderson_Geten]

@Ramona_McCandless

Well thats just a flat lie there.

THAT is a flat lie. Please change your lie, the puncture is dangerous.

@Ramona_McCandless

This response makes no contextual sense in english if you are not accusing me of putting words in your mouth.

Still that’s the argument you were using and to which I answered.

Just like your response

@Ramona_McCandless

So how is ban players you disagree with constructive

Implies that I made such a claim, which I did not, and therefore is an affirmation of something you know false, that is a lie.

The only way to affirm that you “did not at any point say it” is to use the literal meaning of saying, but in that case I can do the same and say that I did not say you did.

@Ramona_McCandless

that Shipwreck and you both agree that complaining about people who complain makes you both “better vets” and anyone who complains about things they dont like about EvE are “bitter vets” and that position in itself is an oxymoron.

No it’s not. Funny that you can affirm such things. I actually disagree with shipwreck, as I explained that being bitter vet can be the result of the game changing for the worse and making you lose fun - in that case there is no choice. Now I stated my point, he explained how he disagrees with me, and I appreciate the way he did. Does not mean that I actually agree with him. Funny that you consider that people having a civil discussion, and disagreeing politely, actually agree with each other. Talks a lot about your notion of “discussion”. And that’s also a reason to get you BANNED!!

@Ramona_McCandless

People who think others have no right to voice dissatisfaction are called dictators.

No. People who abuse their power in order to prevent people from voicing opposing voice, for example by asking other people to pollute a communication medium, ARE dictators - because they can force out any opposing voice.

Please learn what words mean before using them.

[Ramona_McCandless]

Thats the longest way to say “no you” youve done so far.

I dont know who you are trying to convince that you didnt say what you actually said, and are quoted as saying so Im assuming its yourself.

@Anderson_Geten

People who abuse their power in order to prevent people from voicing opposing voice

Yes, you and Shipwreck.

You literally say “no” then give definitions that support whats been quoted.

Seriously, if you are the opposition to people complaining about CCP changes, Im very glad theres more and more people complaining, even if its complaints I disagree with.

You have proved to me that krab > dictator. Well done. I didnt think there was anything lower than a krab but there you are.

The biggest hypocrisy of all is there is literally nothing constructive whatsoever about your posts, especially in this thread.

[Zhalyd_Lyehin]

@Gerard_Amatin

If you look at it as a better vet, you could interpret it positively and see the picture as a nudge to players to tell them how they can have a more positive effect on the community by changing their behaviour.

Being all nice and dandy towards CCP has not helped at all to prevent the disasters of the last 10 years. They did not listen to feedback and concerns about structures, about capitals, about industry, about the Rorqual and implemented all the thing how they envisioned them and then all the problems that they were told about materialized. They again did not listen to players when they formalized their vision for mining, which led to the recent trainwreck and only after massive opposition from players, they have started to change things around. They did not listen to player feedback or just brushed it aside during the Trig Shits invasion, which led to incredibly annoying and buggy experiences and results. Being nice also has not prevented CCP from implementing yet another annoying UI feature, the new NES button, despite all the feedback and effort from the red dot that we don’t need that kind of mandatory, unremovable UI features.

The time for playing nice is over if CCP doesn’t improve. If they need pastoral counseling because of the community, they should ask CCP Hillmar for the meds that he wanted us players to take to cope with EVE.

[Gerard_Amatin]

I agree, CCP has made some questionable choices and did not always listen.

But often they do listen, especially when you provide your feedback in a constructive format rather than a rant. Nobody knows what people want when they rant, except that “seems he is angry”, but if you clearly tell CCP why you think it makes no sense to have three separate ice, ore and gas holds on every mining ship, they listen and merge it all into one ‘mining hold’.

[Ramona_McCandless]

Just curious, was there a constructive post about the mining changes that made them scale them back, the volume of rants, or perhaps another reason, in your mind?

[Kezrai_Charzai]

@Gerard_Amatin

But often they do listen, especially when you provide your feedback in a constructive format rather than a rant.

Citation needed.

[Gerard_Amatin]

Ah you posted quicker before I edited in my example.

[Aisha_Katalen]

People aren’t ranting like children, in each and every thread, for the betterment of the game. They’re doing it because they just can’t behave themselves like adults.

[Ramona_McCandless]

Ha nice, though Im not sure the holds were a particular bugbear, but thats just me being picky and pedantic, so I get what you are saying.

[DeMichael_Crimson]

Very well said and I agree 100%.

What’s ironic is that out of the 100 replies in this thread, Gerard decides to pick my insignificant little jest of a jab at the OP and turn it into a big deal.

[Kezrai_Charzai]

@Gerard_Amatin

before I edited in my example

Pretty sure the mining changes had more to do with “mass protests” than “CCP listening to a constructive feedback post”.

[Gerard_Amatin]

Well the holds were one thing I particularly didn’t like of the mining changes, as it didn’t make sense. So a reddit thread and a reply in the feedback forum post got the ball rolling. Seems they merged them now, so I’m happy.

There are other things about the mining changes that I don’t really like, but rather than “mining changes boo - revert it all!” I’ll continue to pick my issues one by one and provide constructive feedback to try and get those changed.

[Gerard_Amatin]

@Kezrai_Charzai

Pretty sure the mining changes had more to do with “mass protests” than “CCP listening to a constructive feedback post”.

Did they revert the mining changes? No, they’re continuing to do the mining changes regardless of the rants and protest.

Did they slightly change parts of the mining changes as a response to constructive feedback about those particular parts of the mining changes? Yes.

CCP is set on improving the mining experience. No amount of ranting will stop them from trying to do so. What we can do is tell them how exactly they could improve the mining experience. That requires constructive feedback, not rants.

[Ramona_McCandless]

I didnt mind the hold changes as it allowed me to carry more of everything.

Reverting the perceived nerfs though, Id rant about that if I was so inclined. I just thought the changes were all good, I guess Im not invested enough to either ree or be constructive about why they shouldnt be reverted.

Ofc, as they were reverted before they were deployed, were they ever real at all…?

[MajorBean]

Can a “Bitter vet” please “Red Pill” me?

Thanks

[Gerard_Amatin]

@DeMichael_Crimson

What’s ironic is that out of the 100 replies in this thread, Gerard decides to pick my insignificant little jest of a jab at the OP and turn it into a big deal.

I respond to many people and was already in the thread. Don’t take it too personal.

Also your insignificant little jest of a jab was quite in line with the left side of the picture, so it was a good opportunity for a reply.

[Kezrai_Charzai]

Well he got that part backwards actually but since it was a nonsense parody I didn’t waste time critiquing the details.

“The terms “red pill” and “blue pill” refer to a choice between the willingness to learn a potentially unsettling or life-changing truth by taking the red pill or remaining in contented ignorance with the blue pill.”

[una_noche_mas]

@Gerard_Amatin

If you look at it as a better vet, you could interpret it positively and see the picture as a nudge to players to tell them how they can have a more positive effect on the community by changing their behaviour.

Please deliver the message :

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/252195326_Strategic_Manipulation_of_Internet_Opinion_Forums_Implications_for_Consumers_and_Firms_Model_Extensions

Nudge manipulations can be only effective if they are executed with the appropriate strategy and qualified people.

They have 2 major strategic mistakes. That’s why this is failing.