Welcome to Jester's Trek.
I'm your host, Jester. I've been an EVE Online player for about six years. One of my four mains is Ripard Teg, pictured at left. Sadly, I've succumbed to "bittervet" disease, but I'm wandering the New Eden landscape (and from time to time, the MMO landscape) in search of a cure.
You can follow along, if you want...

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

So they made me their chief

Can't seem to be left alone to finish my day of titan ranting.  ;-)

If you haven't heard by now, The Mittani has decided to forgo the position of Chair of CSM7.  Here is his official statement on the EVE Online forums, and here is the companion e-mail he sent to the Goons.

What this means, in essence, is that Mittens will be "just another CSM member" with exactly the same power that he had this morning.  What he's giving up is the bully pulpit of the chairmanship and the media attention that goes with it.  It won't be Mittens being interviewed by the gaming media or put in front of a camera in Reyk if something goes wrong, it'll be someone else.  But he'll still have the same ability to influence events and would retain the option of flying to Iceland for the May and December summits.

We'll see if CCP allows him to keep this post but again, I see no particular reason why they wouldn't.

EDIT (28/Mar/2012): CCP has issued an official statement, and it is an extremely hard-line response.  See the epilogue at the bottom of this post.

You might be asking: what happens now?

Believe it or not, there's actually a formal document that outlines how the CSM is supposed to operate, the CSM White Paper.  I read it in detail before I ran for CSM6.  It is, for the most part, a fluff sociology paper of very little interest.  Still, once it gets past the fluff, it does lay down process and procedure for a number of situations, one of which is what happens if the CSM Chair resigns, steps down, is removed, or declines the post upon being selected for it.  It is this last case that is obviously of interest to us now.

Specifically, the White Paper says:
If the Chairman decides to step down or rescind his responsibility at any time for any reason, a vote must be held among Representatives to elect another Chairman – should the Chairman voluntarily step down as one he is still eligible for the position during the vote for a new Chairman.

The use of the word "Representatives" here is interesting.  The White Paper makes a specific distinction between Representatives, which are (at that time) the nine voting members of the CSM, and Alternates, who are non-voting members.  The nine Representatives were also those that traveled to Iceland.  The new model for CSM7, however, altered this structure such that it was the top seven vote recipients that would travel to Iceland, not the top nine.  If asked, I would therefore interpret this situation to say that the top seven are likewise the Representatives that will receive voting rights for this decision.

tl;dr: A vote should be held among the top seven vote-getters to decide who the Chairman of CSM7 will be.  Six people are eligible: Two step, Elise Randolph, Greene Lee, Trebor Daehdoow, Kelduum Revaan, and Seleene.  Those six people receive a vote, and The Mittani receives a vote.

Positions eight and nine are held by UAxDEATH and Hans Jagerblitzen, respectively.  If they chose to push a strict interpretation of the White Paper, they could argue that they should not only receive a vote in this matter, they should be able to put their name forward as a candidate for Chair.  Still, I suspect CCP Xhagen (who manages this process for CCP) would agree with my interpretation and they will not be eligible either for the position, or to vote for the position.  The White Paper is clear that the remaining CSM members are both ineligible for the position and ineligible to vote, though of course they can make their opinions known.

So, that's what happens next, and CSM7 has until April 11 to choose its officers.  You're caught up.

EDIT (28/Mar/2012): As I was finishing the final editing of this post, CCP issued an extremely hard-line official statement, and a follow-up to a previous statement issued earlier today.

Calling The Mittani's actions "morally reprehensible", the statement acknowledges his apology, but says the following:
The panelist has subsequently posted a public apology as well as a private apology to the victim of his attack. He has also resigned from his position as Chairman of CSM 6 and has forfeited his right to serve on CSM 7.  As per our policies, this candidate may be eligible to run at a later date subject to candidacy review.
Emphasis mine.  If this position stands, then The Mittani would lose his seat in CSM7, would not be recognized as a CSM representative for the term beginning April 4, and UAxDEATH would be elevated to the seventh representative position.  As such, UAxDEATH would receive both a vote for who the new Chair would be and would be himself eligible to be selected as the Chair by vote of the seven representatives.

The previous statement also has several interesting things to say about CCP generally, which I will cover in a follow-up post.  Needless to say, I will be delaying my final titan rant blog post until tomorrow so that I can follow developments.

Wow!  Stay tuned.


  1. Come for the spaceships.

    Stay for the drama.

  2. lol You need a bot out on the net screaming "EXTRA! EXTRA! Read ALL ABOUT IT!!! HOT off the presses!!!" ;-)

  3. I'm seriously considering resubbing just so I can participate in the upcoming hellcamp of Jita. Mittens said something off-color, but no more reprehensible than what has been previously said at the panels and can be overheard in-game every minute of every day. There is a faction of people who hate Goons and kept posting their butthurt: none of them actually care about what Mittens said. I just hope the hellcamp is brutal enough to make at least some of them unsub. Jita delenda est.

    1. Nah.. they won't unsub, more of them will join just to watch - and even more will create alt accounts to leave in other hubs.

      If anything, the Goons just saw their wiener become flaccid just before entry.

  4. Wow, Eve never gets stale does it? Been watching from the outside for a few months now (not much free time in RL to play) and thought I'd resub today to show my support for CCP's awesomeness as displayed at FF2012. Couldn't have picked a more interesting time to resub.

    Sad to see Mittani booted, even though I think he's an asshat for a million reasons (the most recent one being his douchebaggery at FF2012), but he was a terribly good rep for our Eve...

    Interesting times ahead indeed. Keep up your awesome blogging Jester. I can't wait to read your coverage of the fallout.

  5. Just hypothetically: What if the current 7 think mittens is a better csm member than some alternates. And prefer to have him as chair over not having him - might they actually vote for mittens as chair, but just not as representative? That would keep himn in the loop/available, but totally as a wildcard...

    1. I'd say that's exactly why mittens stepped down from Chair to be a regular member. He knows the content of the White Paper and is expecting to be Chair again pretty soon.

  6. This is a tempest in a teapot. Mittani's preemptive resignation as chair was a transparent attempt to keep himself on CSM7, as he knew he'd have the same influence just by being there, but the sad truth is that this whole situation is emblematic of political correctness run amok. What he said wasn't that bad (despite his profuse apology) and if this Wis guy is so fragile that he is truly at risk of killing himself over a game, he should stop playing it. Additionally, CCP's action is not a principled stand based on their morality and sense of what is "right". It's their way of insulating themselves from a lawsuit.

    1. "if this Wis guy is so fragile that he is truly at risk of killing himself over a game, he should stop playing it."

      A) Easy for you to say.
      B) Even if you're right, to right action would then to be to tell Wis that he maybe should stop playing the game; but NOT to incite your friends to go out and harass him until he kills himself.

      And this is not political correctness, but simply civilized behavior (and keep in mind that this is an out-of-game situation).

    2. A) Anything is easy for anyone to say on the internet, what's your point?
      B) The right action for what purpose? Your suggestion certainly isn't the right action if you are looking to score a laugh from a big crowd, which was the obvious motivation of what Mittani said. Do you really believe he wanted the guy dead?

      And it is political correctness, and it was an out of game comment encouraging behavior in-game (kill the guy's Mackinaws), so the line you try to draw isn't that bright. So-called "cyber-bullying" is a joke and a sign that lawmakers have nothing better to do than pass needless laws to justify their salaries.

      I remember when "sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me" would have been the proper attitude to take in this situation. But I guess now "cyber sticks and stones" are enough to kill. What a joke.

    3. It's easy to say "that fragile person shouldn't play EVE", if you're not the person in question.

      And the right action for the purpose of the Alliance panel would have been to NOT name the name, and NOT call for people to go out and pile onto Wis. While Alex didn't really want the guy dead, at that point he didn't care if his 'joking' remark could lead to just that. Alex didn't think, and he acknowledges that.

      The "sticks and stones" line is something you tell children to help them grow a skin against the random insults, but it is not a universal principle. On the contrary, the power of words has been acknowledged for millennia, and finds its modern expression for example in laws against defamation and harassment, or in the military in the concept of psychological warfare. And if you don't like the hullaballoo around 'cyber-bullying', maybe you should stop behaving in a way suggesting their necessity.

      On the other hand, if I take you at your post, you're presumably ok with the death threats against Alex, his wife and and his dog, because after all they are just words triggered by game event, and most likely even delivered over the internet. Personally I find them abhorrent and unwarranted, but that's probably just me being politically correct.

    4. If you don't see the difference between real world defamation, harassment, psychological warfare, and death threats on the one hand and encouraging someone to blow up someone else's internet spaceships on the other, I think this conversation is over. Have fun in your protected little bubble world.

    5. I was responding to your stupid 'sticks and stones' line, but seeing that you still think that this is about 'blowing up spaceships' alone indicates to me that you're just here to rant about a pet peeve of yours.

      I'm writing this while listening to FunkyBacon's show intro, including him reading an open letter from the Wiz which touches on what happened after the panel, and what goes on in the mind of somebody like him. You, Anonymous, may not want to listen to it for the sake of your world view, as it demonstrates that Mittani's drunken joke (words) had very real fallout for Wiz.

      (Funkybacon also had some very choice words about the other participants in this drama. And if I wanted to live in a protected bubble, I wouldn't be responding at all.)

    6. PS. If you had made the argument that the affair was blown out of proportion by, yes, overly PC people, and buzzword dropping - that I would wholeheartedly agree with.

      But to make this argument, a generic rant against PC and general dismissal aren't sufficient.

    7. First, read the conversation with the "poor victim" recounted here:


      Note that he seemed surprised and mildly amused by the "hullaballoo", as you put it, about the whole affair.

      Next, check out the second conversation with our sad, unfortunate, hero recorded here:


      Note that he has now been contacted by lawyers wanting to sue on his behalf. Only then did he mention how hurt he was by the whole situation. Convenient, no?

      Also, we are to believe that he was personally mining with his -wait for it- 22 accounts, and not botting for isk and/or cash. (Incidentally, if this is true, I'd say this might explain the dissolution of his marriage that allegedly had him so upset to begin with. Poor guy, how could his wife not understand why he'd rather play 22 accounts doing the most boring, time consuming, and tedious task in the entire gaming world rather than spend time with her?)

      Further, it's not about me "believing" that this is just about "blowing up spaceships". The FACT is that blowing up his ships is all that was encouraged by Mittani in his comments at Fanfest. I might defeat some depressed loser playing Candyland, but I certainly wouldn't feel responsible if he killed himself afterward. Especially if all I did was defeat his bots at Candyland.

      And as to your dig at me - "Anonymous" - sorry I am not brave enough to use my real name like you are - "Druur Monakh" - did your mother or your father come up with that name for you? It's also very brave of you to listen to a podcast about a game. Way to expose yourself to the real world, congrats! By the way, did Mittani give out Wis's real name? Address? Send people to his house to harass him?

      Nope. He encouraged people to kill the guy's internet spaceships.

      How terrible.

  7. Mittens needed to go and deserved to go.

    He made a statement IRL asking people to gank someone in game so that person would commit suicide IRL.

    Whether he sincerely regrets it or not, whether he is/was a good chairman or not, have no bearing on the matter. There are some action which cannot be taken back with "I'm sorry", certain lines that cannot be crossed. This was one of those.

    If Joe Blow EVE player had done this, he'd be punished. Just because Mittens is held by many to be of some use for the game does not and cannot hold him indemnified.

    For the Mittens supporters out there, take the blinders off for a moment and try and use your brains to move beyond the knee-jerk defence of your guy.

    For the Mittens haters out there, ask yourselves if the real reason why you think this is an awesome move is because it was the right thing for CCP to do, or do you think this was right just because you hate Mittens?

    1. Actually, interestingly enough, this type of comment has been made before. The only reason it's become such an ordeal is because it was made by The Mitanni. Had the comment been made by ANYONE else, including second vote-getter two step, and it wouldn't have been reported to the gaming media.

      Nor was mittens saying "I want this guy to commit suicide", he was making light of a situation he rightfully judged to be safe and humorous. The miner was never contemplating suicide, he was playing the desperation card to try and get his stuff back.

      Also prior to this event I hated mittens and his ego, after this event I'll probably still hate him, but right now he has my support because the situation is quite literally fucked.

  8. I don't like the decision to boot him from the CSM, but it's done now.

    Please, Jester, try to be a calming influence. I'd hate if Eve were seriously damaged by all of it.

    If you are in contact with CSM members, remind them to be open about their opinions with CCP behind closed doors, but not to fan the flames publically if they can avoid it, etc.

    Bah, i hate this. We were heading in so good a direction.

    1. I agree. I was OK with everything until the moment Mittens was kicked from CSM7. He really was getting things going in the right direction, regardless of him being a jerk.

      I have my hopes pinned on Two Step now, but my enthusiasm for EVE is a bit dampened.

    2. If this stands and they keep Mittens out, Eve IS seriously damaged.

    3. Get real, this doesn't damage EVE one bit. CCP reacted to the unsubs last summer, and most of those had fuck all to do with mittens' position on Incarna. This retro-white-knighting of mittens as a driver in what happened leading up to Crucible is bogus.

  9. If this were the middle of the term, the voting mechanism might apply to selecting a new Chair. This situation is different and unique. CSM7 has not yet taken office, banning Mittens from participating may result in CCP simply ruling Two Step the new chair, and accepting Corvin as the 14th CSM member.

    The could of course do a re-election, but what are the chances they will want to invest the resources in that?

    Its far too early to tell what this holds.

  10. In reply to your double announced tweet (sorry don't tweet), think you had a tug of war between Marketing/Customer Service/PR and Gameplay/Devs(who actually deal with him), and you can see who won (and who's names are all over the pronouncements). Wouldn't be surprised if a little bit of arm twisting was done "Hey Sony, could you call over to my boss and let him know how concerned you are over this incident? Oh you didn't know? thanks!--VP of Marketing. Lots of nasty in house power plays get played out in ways you wouldn't expect or using seemingly unrelated events.

    1. Sony. You think Sony will be interested in standing to the side while 8,000 players in one alliance gleefully name their ops nigfleet, spicfleet, mickfleet and chinkfleet?

      You think Sony will put up with half the playerbase using "jew" as a verb to describe greedy money-grubbing players?

      Dream on. Huge changes are coming, dictated by Sony, that will affect more than just enforced political correctness on the official eve-o forums.

  11. Something else is going on behind the scenes, something different, I mean what he said was not really that bad in that context and I have heard worse in previous fanfests from people on camera and infront of Press. I think this has too be two things, which I have been thinking about for sometime.

    1). Evidence that Sony is likely to Buy out CCP, which explains the rather hard line that CCP has taken and given their rather bad public relations (SWG NEG anybody?) I think this is evidencing something new on the horizon.

    2). Goon hatred, is quite strong in the press it seems for a long time. Sure, they are faggots, douchebags, and general malcontents but they do add to the game by making it non-serious, or they did.

    I'm not say it's either or, but more realistically it's a mixture of both plus CCP is in somewhat a panic mode from what I found from Fanfest. They really need that profit, and they can't have bad press anymore it seems.

    I personally hate Mittani, but in EVE I salute him in his ways, just because we hate someone doesn't mean we should be quiet when their thrown under the bus, no sir, so I'm going to resub and burn down Jita, probably join goonswarm while I'm at it.

  12. CCP had no choice in the matter. They would not be able to enforce the EULA/TOS with anyone if they did not enforce it against the most visible and most well known character in EVE. The fact that the comments were broadcast forced CCP to make the decission.

    CCP had a lot at stake here. At the very same fanfest where this infraction occured, CCP provided more details about WoD, a game that promotes dark behavior, and emphasized their 'hardcore' environment in EVE. They will have to draw a line between acceptable in-game behavior and unnacceptable out-of-game behavior and they'll have to be prepared to make that distinction very obvious. The only way they could do that was to make an example of The Mittani. If they had given him a pass, it would have been seen as an endorsement (or at least acceptance) of this type of behavior and they would not have the moral authority to enforce the EULA/TOS with anyone else.

    Mittani's resignation was also the right thing to do. Had he not stepped down, his apology would have been hollow. Also this afair would have hung over his head and distracted from the business of CSM7. He will now be able to add this event to his resume and increase his notoriety. What's more, by resigning he will certainly have gained the respect of many who had previously dismissed him (myself included). Come CSM8, if he chooses to run, he will be unstoppable and will have far more influence. Had he not resigned, his power would have been erroded.

    The outcome here was pretty easy to see.

    1. Obviously you have never read either the EULA or the TOS.
      But still you feel the need to comment with a wall of text about it.

  13. Trebor for CSM Chair!!

  14. I just read his post on EN24. To the bit about respect I posted a few mins ago: nvm. His post had the tone of "I didn't want the position anyway" (which, doesn't seem out of character). I'm looking forward to the war. I'm going to laugh when GSF gets spanked by the gate guns. I think this will be the beginning of the end of GSF.

  15. I like that folks on the Eve forums are blaming CCP for Alex's ban and loss of the chairmanship and seat on the CSM.

    In truth, Alex Gianturco is the one who eff'ed up and let everyone down.

    Would I have voted for him, if he had done this *before* the CSM elections? Absolutely not.

    Playing an asshat, in game, is one (forgivable) thing. Showing up at Alliance Panel so drunk that he couldn't control his mouth, nor remember what he had done the next day is not acceptable. And, jokes about RL suicide are *never* acceptable - not in game, not out of game. It doesn't matter if you claim you are just role-playing or not.

    Did he violate the EULA/TOS and deserve to get banned, as well as removed from the CSM? Yep - good on CCP.

    Am I now glad that my vote for him for the CSM has effectively been nullified? Damn straight.

  16. well, so much for all the stuff crucible brought us.

    With mittens getting the boot, and people like issler now on the csm, it's going to be one hell of a dogfight to continue the progress that csm6 made.

    1. Mittens deserves no credit whatsoever for any progress CCP made with Crucible. None. Players were unsubbing left and right and they didn't need or hear Mittens telling them to do it. FFS some of you people are pants-on-head dumb.

    2. so basically you're saying csm6 had the same role and influence as their predecessors?

      FFS you might need to put your pants on properly~

  17. I don't understand why The Mittani owns up to his mistake (but not really) and then decides to say he is "fucked" in his broadcast. He fucked himself out of the CSM. That a ban was coming was obvious, that banned players can't be part of the CSM is in the rules.

    He was fucked allright, its called hubris, its called narcissism, he fucked himself. I am not happy about it, but he created the media attention on himself as a person of interest and those get hosed when they fuck up, especially on "live tv"

    I don't like it, but there it is, his actions, his mistake, his failure. Not that of CCP, Sony or anyone else.

  18. CCP seem to have taken pretty much zero responsibility here and I’m astonished by their naivety – I know it’s cute to still be surprised by them. What happens to The Mittani doesn’t really matter; he’s a bit like Kim Kardashian - a big arse that’s amusing to watch but you wouldn’t really miss if she wasn’t here.

    However; there are two issues that CCP don’t seem willing to fess up to and it really does feel like they are using one player as a meat shield.

    1. The most obvious one – CCP admit that they vetted all the presentations. They essentially agreed to the use of an email from a player talking about divorce and suicide in a context that would be used to ridicule him. It beggars belief that no one even considered that the player’s details wouldn’t emerge. CCP allowed him to be a target as much as Mittani made him one. If they had veto’d that slide it simply wouldn’t have come up.

    2. This one is a bit more subtle. In the regulated broadcast media it’s the production team and the broadcaster that is ultimately responsible for their content, not the ‘talent’. When Janet Jackson got her tits out in 2004 although she caught heat in the press it was the broadcaster and production teams that were fined and lost their jobs.

    It’s this complete lack of the most basic principles of broadcasting that is the most staggering aspect of the incident and CCPs attempts to cover up its failing by blaming the ‘talent’. Even the most junior of production assistants would have seen the danger in that slide, would have had a pretty long video delay in place and a insisted on set up more sophisticated that the webcam on a stick CCP seemed to use.

    Reading the two posts put out by CCP here they don’t seem to acknowledge any culpability in this. Nevertheless it was they that allowed this content in the presentation and it was they that hosted a broadcast without even the most basic safeguards in place.

    To pretend that they played no part in the Mittani’s crass behaviour is disingenuous and deeply hypocritical.

    1. I agree with you that CCP didn't handle this event in a professional manner, but they did acknowledge it in the devblog: "It was a mistake to hold the Alliance Panel in the way we did".

      What really amazes me is that it took CCP a few years to realise that if you want to be a big company, you can't have your name associated to drunks, bullying, racism, etc.

      When they merged with White Wolf in 2006, CCP chose to become a bigger company, rather than stay a company catering to a niche market. Once that choice was made, the rest was just logic:
      - 2006 World of Darkness, to break out of the sci-fi niche market, but capitalising on their adult-oriented game reputation,
      - 2009 Dust 514, to jump on the FPS bandwagon ("profit!" they thought),
      - 2010 the new avatars leads the Incarna revolution that will bring regular people (maybe that other half of mankind, women?) and help EvE bring in more money because WoD and Dust are still nowhere near completed,
      - 2011 microtransactions coming in to get more money out of the same number of customers,
      - 2012 fanfest event to light the fire of the pre-launch hype of Dust 514 (live tv + lot of alcohol will start a proper fire!).

      Now does the ban of Alex seem that surprising? When companies do big mistakes (as in broadcasting an uncensored event with no emergency plan), they do 2 things:
      - show they're serious about correcting that mistake (the ban and exclusion of the CSM of Alex)
      - explain how they've made plans to avoid this ever happening ever again ("we, CCP, will be taking serious steps towards fostering a better environment at our panels and beyond." from that same devblog).

      Like Crucible followed monoclegate, bans (or whatever CCP comes up with to clean up EvE's reputation) will follow the AlPanGate.

  19. 1) people who really think about suicide do not discuss it in MMOG chats. The "victim" was shopping for attention, and telling him "sure, go ahead, kill yourself. And pass popcorn please" is the best therapy.

    2) Are only black one-legged lesbians eligible for CSM chairmanship now that political correctness is the law of the space?

    1. 2) presumably hispanic one-legged lesbians are acceptable.

      fuck CCP. this is pretty much the last straw. if they want the politically correct massively-reading wow crowd so damn bad, let 'em have them. and then we'll see how well dust and WoD do.

  20. I would not call CCPs statement in their second devblog hard-line. All things considered it probably was the only option for them:

    Applications to run for the CSM have been previously rejected by CCP on grounds of EULA violations by the applicants (e.g.: http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=554 ). Applicants previously have been removed from the list of eligible CSM candidates by such actions. So if EULA violations have already been the grounds for denying eligibility for applicants the same has to (even more so) apply for the actual members.

    I don’t see a possibility for CCP to have act differently in this case.

    Players have been banned for less before for a far longer period (like Helicity and Liang Nuren). Both got bans longer than 30 days (please correct me if wrong).

    There also was the case of "lost votes" before when Larkonis did step down.

    So I don’t think CCP is to blame for anything, especially not for being hard-line in this case.

  21. This is why I don't play EVE anymore... it's infinitely more fun to just read about this stuff.

    I disagree with their intentional misinterpretation of Mittens - the declining CSM7 chairmanship - as forfeiting his right to serve on CSM7. That just reeks of CCP's usual buzzkill attitude.

    He wasn't wearing the chair hat; end story. CCP is not in charge of social backlash and punishment. Whatever. I might just resubscribe and apply to join GSF.

  22. LOL. Top Goon Griefs Self, news at 11. From beginning to end I am thrilled that I don't give any fucks about Gianturco, Goons, CSM or the idiots who think any of them matter. Seriously.... LOL

    1. I too do not give a fuck about any of this nonsense, and to prove it, I'm going to post in this comments section on a blog post about said nonsense.

      Makes sense.

  23. The comments thread of the Announcement is growing very fast thanks to the goons complaining about the harsh policy. Even the CSM is getting involved and offers to solve the problem by them self. I want to point at the white paper concerning CSM there is:

    "Also, players with a serious warning or ban on any account in their possession can be excluded from candidate eligibility. However, in-game behavior, regardless of play style, will never be a criterion for candidacy unless the rules of the EULA and/or TOS are violated."

    The important part is the "unless the rules of the EULA/TOS are violated". That is what mittani did. If CCP wants to keep mittani on csm they would have to state that he didn't violated the TOS which would be very untrue.

    I'm not one of the witch hunters who wants to see mittani burn. He just made a stupid mistake and now ccp is bound to the rules HE HAS ACCEPTED by being a candidate for CSM. Making an exception now will lead to distrust and a lot of discussion and drama about what to do and what not.

    They may alter the rules in the future but for now they stand and must be enforced.

    Mittanis apology and stepping down by himself are good actions from him and i really think they are honest. Therefore he earned my respect. It all boils down to "dealing with the consequences" what he now must do.
    The CSM it self is player driven and mittani will still keep some influence on the council as most of them respect him and will listen to him in some occasions.

  24. Honestly? People are too damn sensitive. A person who's only source of comfort is ice mining in EVE is probably not mentally stable. Which is bad, but if you crack down on greifing in EVE, then what is EVE?

    Not that there will be a crackdown, only burning of Mittens in effigy.

    1. I like how you just insinuated that all ice miners are mentally unstable.

      Awesome. Now let's go and stomp on mittani some more for the hell of it.

  25. My only problem with this is that's what the Alliance Panel is. Any other venue, sure, whatever. But it wasn't. It was the freak'n Alliance Panel. Thousands of people watch the damn thing exactly to see stuff like this said. I couldn't care less about what the makeup of EvE-Uni or the history of Gentleman's Agreement. I watch the damn thing to see one wormhole corp make fun of the fact no one understands wormhole mechanics and we suck at it. Another wormhole corp to show off the national anthem ransom. Test to act like, well, test. Dirtnap Squad to do a mockumentary piece. And of course, Goons to act like goons.

    The Alliance Panel did exactly as it was advertised to do on the tin. Getting angry at part of it just because you didn't read the tin is sorta silly.

  26. Right now I feel more sorry for Mittens than the miner who he told everyone to gank. Everyone makes mistakes but this one was too public and open to be missed.

    Just because the guy was feeling down and the word 'suicidal' came around people tied the two together and assumed that Mittens was advocating ganking to cause someone to kill themselves; and to be honest if the guy was suicidal then playing EVE is the WRONG game to be playing! :P

    At the moment our 'victim' is looking much better off with 10bil ISK in his pocket and hes not had to lift a finger to get it - fair enough hes had a target painted on his head for a little while but the guy has 21 other accounts to play on while the heat dies down.

    Even in terms of the CSM I can't see it changing much; even if he has lost his official title I think players and other CSM alike will still see him as the chair regardless because of what he has done in CSM6, his established internet fame and personality will mean that hes always at the front line of any issues rather than in the shadows.

    Just more drama for EVE

  27. He deserved to cop the ban and lose his position on the CSM. What he did was not only "morally reprehensible" but also illegal in many countries represented in the playerbase. Using communication technology to harrass,offend,bully, gets people jail sentences. A student jailed last week for 2 months for a drunken rant on twitter in the UK for instance.

    Alexander should be thankful that this is all that has happened and it wasnt far far worse. Those defending him should take a long hard look at the morality of what was said at fanfest. Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequenses.

    I find it morally repugnant that some CSM members and others are actually prepared to criticise this judgement from CCP. It is a good judgement for the game. It sends a clear message about what is decent and acceptable behaviour. This is not about the sandbox, this is about someone trying to use the sandbox as a tool to hurt someone in real life. It is about somone with a platform and position encouraging during a live stream a course of action that could have threatened someones life.

    Alexander brought it all on himselfm deal with it.

    1. None of the players involved think Mittens did anything to threaten anyone's life. Have you read an interview with the miner in question? He's the guy whos life that was "threatened" and not even he took it seriously.

      That guy, is the guy who can call this "morally reprehensible". That guy is the guy who can stand in judgement of what Alex said. And while he may not be perfectly fine with it, neither is he as worked up about it as everyone seems to be for him. So step off your pedestal and come back down to earth with the rest of us. If the person done this great wrong and injustice isn't shouting it from rooftops, maybe the rest of us should step back and try to put it in context as well.

    2. The point is that Alex should not have been discussing RL suicide in game, at all. There was no way for him to know, at the time, if the player in question was or was not actually suicidal. Alex should have reported the player to a CCP GM and discontinued the in game convo. Alex is simply not qualified to make such a judgement call, esp. when drunk.

      And, he certainly should not have exacerbated his mistake by encouraging this sort of behavior from other players in a public forum.

      Plain and simple, Alex violated the EULA/TOS - twice, if you want to be technical about it (the first time in game, and the second time at the Alliance Panel). He was stupid and he got called on it.

      Alex was just lucky that the player in question was *not* suicidal, or he might be under criminal investigation now, for real.

      Role-playing is not an excuse. Being drunk out of your skull is not an excuse. CCP was rather lenient; a court of law would have been much less so.

    3. I'm pretty sure that mittens wasn't actually the person who talked with the player in game. I might be totally wrong, but I was under the impression that it was some random goon who did the ganking and posted on their (the goons) forum (or whatever)

  28. Ok, maybe I'm missing something, and I will start off by saying clearly.

    I'm no Lawyer, however I do have to deal with T&C's a lot, and I've read CCP's EULA and TOS, I'm assuming they are saying the breach has occurred within 7. Conduct, part C, compliance with rules of conduct. (IF I'm wrong there, the whole of what follows needs re-examining)

    The Terms of Service themselves are pretty loose, I can see how the situation can be construed to be in breach here. Particularly points 1 and 2.

    But lets be clear, pretty much every member of that alliance panel was in breach of point 2, every member of Goonswarm are in breach of point 3.

    How many times have alliances jumped into system with so many people with the sole intention of crashing the node? or dump cargo cans etc point 16

    Makers of EFT, Eve Market, other 3rd party applications are in clear violation of point 21.

    Has EVEnews24 got permission from CCP to post up comments from their agents on the CSM, or others every time a story breaks? if not you've violated point 18.

    Why stop there, who in their lives has ever sworn, had angry words at or verbally shouted, made a sexual reference... congrats I'm band, the whole games been pretty much band, and if you haven't been band, why are you playing EVE a game where the strong and rough prosper?

    Tad extreme I know, but point is clear.

    They could of had everyone on that panel in one way or another, hell most of that panel was a walking felony :)

    I don't think the document is meant to be used this way, and I think it's a stretch and a bit distasteful for CCP to be using them in this way, it seems to strike as an excuse.

    I'm not condoning what the Mattanni did, as usual he was a Goon, putting it politely, but CCP pretty much invited this, Alcohol, Alliance leaders of EVE, and a LIVE Stream..... What were they thinking would happen? God they must have all been smoking crack to think that was a good idea!

    It's not often I side with someone as arrogant and self-righteous as the leader of Goons, but sorry I can't justify the decision taken unless CCP are going to ban everyone of the panel members, and fans at fanfest that sworn on the streams, during Q&As, round tables, PVP arenas etc.

    Just where do you draw the line, oh it seems to be suggesting it is drawn at CSM members.... That's fair enough if they have been told, ever bring us into disrepute and your out.... Has that discussion ever been had with them though?

    Overall, I don't know where to stand, but I can say that I'm surprised how zealous CCP has been with it's interpretation of the rules all of a sudden. :-S

  29. The real issue is just what was highlighted above. If/when mass media picks up something like this, what will be the legal backlash from a mass of outsiders looking at computer games in general, peaking in, cherry picking the worst possible bits and then wielding the retarded legal hammer to "protect people" from it. There is a large piece about a guy being a sexist/sexually harassing ass on one of the big time game tournaments to a girl that got to the finals. What happens when the outside public peeks into the on-line game world, sees how people act and then reacts with loads of legal crap.

    In the past, we managed to get by with warning labels of cartoon violence and so on, what happens when a much more pussified society moves in enmasse to "clean up" the on-line MMO/gaming industry? This kind of BS on a broad scale could well lead to crap laws, companies going through EULAs and so on that would adversely affect every foul behavior in every game everywhere. It could well be, and it isn't a far step to think that Goons and their leader, in pushing the envelope of griefing end up screwing us all over in every game world wide.

    It would be a seriously twisted statement on society that Goons end up griefing the act of griefing out of existence.

    1. Good point there. Not many people seem to have realised that we, EvE players, have been quite lucky here. If it had a been a slow week for news media, they could have filled up the airwaves with "online games are full of bullies who will push your children over the edge!" to get their numbers up. Just remember how mainstream news organisations presented Carmageddon and Grand Theft Auto.


  30. I think the following metaphor is quite appropriate to sum up what Alex G. did: "[...]the inability, when faced with what amounted to a free bar, not to drink themselves into blundering violence and to assault the other guests."
    And I've taken this from the latest column of Alex G. Oooh the irony.
    Below is the link to that column:

  31. Threadnaught is a GO!!
    This is going to be news a while.
    1) probably a desperation play by T-W to get sympathy
    2) when interviewed, he didn't seem all that phased about it
    3) CCP is catoring to who?
    I would guess SONY +media peeps. They dont play in a game like EVE. They live it IRL with their corporate power games. When a prospective partner let's something like that slide it sets a bad precedent for the other partner
    BUT DAMN mittani still got it. He is going to force the issue of EVE's futur april 28th. And then the ball will be in CCPs court. That jita lockdown will be a make or break for EVE. Stay tuned

    1. Yeah, at best, they should just let it fly and only move people out if they start to crash the server or some dumb crap.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.