His real identity is printed right on CCP’s web site. Can’t claim wilful ignorance as a defense.
They knew he was associated with the avatar name because they put it there!
https://community.eveonline.com/community/csm/candidate?id=1229924
"In real life, Brisc Rubal is the online persona of Brian Schoeneman, a veteran lawyer and politician in the United States. In his day job, he represents America’s largest seafaring union in the halls of Congress and the White House. "
you know he wrote that right?
Thats literally brisc’s csm vote for me shpeal.
Well done chap, you just became “that guy”
/me golfclaps
Unless things have changed the candidates write their own bios. But, that said, they did publish the connection of real to avatar. It has been a while since CCP insisted on doxxing candidates.
m
Sure, he wrote it, but they did put it on their site. After all, Brisc can’t edit that page any more than you can.
the only thing i find slightly odd is that he wrote it in the third person tbh.
Come on CCP, release the statement and outcome for all involved…
That is weird, yes.
Probably stupid newbie question, but: werent this a game, where all the possible in-game crimes are allowed, like one of GM explained to me regarding in game trade window scam? If yes - then what there you are talking about? Some1 used knowledge, he has, to make some ISK? But that`s EXACTLY how all the in-game scams work! Lack of knowledge or attention, and there you go! And no1 even thinking about trade window scam fix, 4 example!
Stop playing silly buggers CCP, RELEASE YOUR STATEMENT!
In-game crimes are ‘allowed’, yes. The crux of things here is out-of-game breaches of confidentiality.
You see breaches happen “in-game” and destroy game rule “everything goes”, CCP destroyed game basic rule and game itself.
What goes around, come around…
“No collusion and no obstruction just total exoneration”.
Brisc Rubal for 2nd CSM term. Naw only kidding /sigh.
Someone has to die either Brisc or CCP DoppyBollocks alongside the GSM who orchestrated the ban. My bet is on Brisc remaining dead to this game inoccent or not.
I’m going with the CCP ■■■■■■ up, will unban all three but won’t go back on brisc being booted off the CSM. The CSM member who made the claim will stay anonymous and go unpunished and no CSM “joint” statement will come about.
I’d be more apt to look at whoever ok’d the initial press release than I would a guy who just stepped into some really big shoes and maybe got meta-gamed.
Ooh jealousy… mixed with inaccuracy. Not surprised.
I am sorry to say, but: its all still about the game, and “crimes” were made in-game… In my understanding - if “all allowed” in game, do not be surprised about same stuff regarding the game, kinda out of it…
Violating a real-world, legally-actionable contract (the NDA) is not ‘in-game’. Nor is making public statements insinuating someone has done so.
I have five different instance about this situation, and would appreciate yours and CCP’s input about them.
Banning without reason
The fact that CCP banned Brisc without a proper explanation had me thinking, what if this has happened to other people too? What type of justice system, or level of professionalism does it portrait when an international gaming company (in dire need of new players) when it bans players and do not present a decent reason with proof of treachery?
Warning before actions
On the other hand, if CSM members have the EULA/TOS or a new contract to sign, shouldn’t CCP (as a service provider) remind them now and then of the gravity of sharing sensitive information at the end of each meeting? And if CSM when members happen to cross the line, wouldn’t CCP be wiser to give them a first warning before firing them?
Universal Justice
The law of Eve online should apply to anyone equally. I strongly believe, it is unprofessional in this case for a lawyer (or anyone else) to use RL occupation, or wealth, or ties with royal families, etc., to leverage a dispute for a “Vitual” situation. I find that almost a pathetic and childish to use such excuse. And worser if CCP would bend over to accomodate such tantrum.
Publicity Stunt
This could all be a setup for publicity, as news with negative connotations generally attract more viewers, than a positive ones. Which leads to have online blogs and scifi newspapers fired up, and generate more advertising revenues, as well as an attempt to bring more people in the game. If that is the case, it might be time to adopt a new rebranding team and associated advisers.
Are we your juries CCP?
That pre-emptive statement/devblog only tell me that CCP would like to read our concerns prior to deliberating the final approach. But why? It’s not about the in-game matters, but about the rules. And decisions of ban always have been secret to CCP alone, so why beat around the bush before applying this one? Are you considering us as your assembly of jury? Okay, but so far without proof of misconduct, or outlines of those CSM who denounced treachery, we ‘the juries’ cannot pronounce anything valid. Then again, this almost feels like you, CCP have dropped in confidence to apply your very own rules, and this leave me skeptical of the actual status and longevity of Eve online.
CCP’s problem with high profile bans is that there is no consistency ever with them. Previous removals of CSM only 1 other has resulted in a perma ban I think. Others were just removed from the CSM and only given temp bans.
Then we go on to just high profile players who have had some of the weirdest bans. I first quote CCP Falcon who has stated pubicly that CCP do not use 3rd party information for bans…but then bans stunt for 3rd party information on taking the piss but I might add that it was contact with a CCP Dev out of game that it’s because of, go figure…
edit Actually I don’t think any csm have been given perma bans during their term.
Stunt was also banned for reposting something sent to him by someone else, not for any contact with a Dev. The Fozzie quote wasn’t real.