not bad ideas…you fail to see the actual point. We’re tired of the character attacks because player #3243 suggested an idea YOU’ve seen before. Or we’re tired of the character attacks because people can’t think of productive counter arguments so they go for the person. Its a common trait , endemic in our world, but it doesn’t necessairly mean we have to abide by it here.
What good ideas might come out of people with different view points discussing the points instead of the people.
I dont give AF what you think of people - let’s talk about Eve not about how you feel about someone.
ISD should get ability to deal a special kind of ban, 12 hours one that would not count towards the usual bans policy, only to cool of the head of the notorious malicious spammer that notoriously makes some threads with the same thing inside. Then it would save everyone a lot of work.
‘The essential core concept of eve is fulltime pvp in a sandbox environment’
Would you like a link?
Perhaps you shouldn’t fool yourself with some dodgey carebear reasoning.
Oh wait, is that a personal attack? Was you assuming that I’m a dumb sheep that follows null line member reasonings rather than official ccp documents a personal attack?
What I’m saying is it isn’t an insult but a communication tool.
I know. But there seems to be the question. What is a personal attack?
This^^
We aren’t the ones who can properly define what’s ok and what’s not ok. We just cannot do it.
It’s upto the ISD’s and CCP to decide if the way things are aren’t the best they can be.
Not sure who you’re talking to. I don’t get shot down too often (some older threads from way back were in retrospect naive per ignorance), and you are one of the forum posters I agree with and respect most highly on here .
I would never put those two on level. I am in 100% agreement with everything you’ve said so far in this thread (and usually throughout the forums in general). My choice of words was only to emphasize the notion that ISDs shouldn’t be overly aggressive - the boundaries between acceptable and unacceptable conduct and the yellow-carded middle-ground should be fairly unambiguous and reasonable. In previous threads similar to this, some concerns have been raised about ISD becoming “speech police” if they were further empowered. The bar should be low, I agree, but it should not be too low. Retard? Poopiehead? <<< that was my only point.
Source?
We can provide feedback, however, if not the rules.
This is so badly out of date and no longer in use… even uses the old Neocom… I’d like to think CCP now considers the notion of EVE being a sandbox as being inaccurate.
Its still on the website. It’s still the latest version of the faq and there’s no shortage of us linking it on these forums. It can be taken down or changed at any time.
So… a google link to an archival document is an official current document per CCP? Is that what you’re telling me? As opposed to a link from EVE’s homepage (not google) explicitly pointing to current documents (non-archival)? Really? Next you’re going to tell me that snapshots from Wayback Machine are current by virtue of their linkability and existence…
6 CAN I GET A FREE TRIAL ACCOUNT FOR EVE ONLINE?
You can try out EVE Online on a free 14 day trial. You can find more information
at the official EVE Online website here: www.eveonline.com
that makes this whole thing you posted irrelevant IMO… considering there is no more 2 week trial.
Per @Jerry_Falcone’s observation (in conjunction with common sense), @Daichi_Yamato is going to need some for that .
Google links are not official CCP links. Google links do not always indicate current/effective documents if they point to archival documents. I can’t believe I have to tell you that.
i could find more evidence how poorly outdated that is… god that thing is horrible compared to what eve is now.
Jan 14, 2014… yea Not relevant to now, even though it says they won’t keep it updated like the game, its way outdated for any arguments to be made valid.
Ccp fozzie has a post somewhere talking about finely balancing the eco system of ganking. I think he uses a ‘gazelle’ metaphor. But it demonstrates that ganking influences design decisions.
And there’s the CCP soloman quote:
‘The risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which eve was built.’
Well is there a something on the website that refutes it?
EVE Online is a community-driven spaceship MMO where players can play free, choosing their own path from countless options.
Experience space exploration, immense PvP and PvE battles and a thriving player economy in an ever-expanding sandbox.
Participate in many in-game professions and activities, including war, politics, piracy, trading, and exploration, across 7,000 star systems with hundreds of thousands of other players.
But nothing there discounts the element of eve’s pvp core. You seem to think it just stopped applying at some point but can’t say when, why or how?
Do you also think the 8 golden rules of eve don’t apply?
Not really.
One change doesn’t invalidate the entire design philosophy behind eve.
I’m sure you can find something more upto date then.
.
Poopiehead? 
<<< that was my only point.
for that 
.