justicebeliever

This is condescending, since you, Pax, and I all know he is more than capable and in fact did read the first post. Much as I did. You just don't handle disagreement very well.

Verboten topics would be those explicitly called out in the Code of Conduct, and any content that is completely unrelated to either the game or superhero culture at large. It is a private forum as previously stated. I apologize, I did misstate something. The general, Yosemite Sam definition of "those are Fighting Words, rabbit" are not a form of protected speech like I said, rather they are not a form of prohibited speech (I said the opposite of what I meant, and I do apologize. You can use fighting words all you want that tend to create (deliberately or not) a verbal or physical confrontation, legally, so long as they don't meet the legal criteria of prohibited free speech (inciting hatred or violence). Clearly, all legal fighting words meet the general definition, but the general definition does meet the legal definition all the time. But regardless, you asked me to do something at the beginning of the post (which I did), and now here at the end of the post, it's let's not engage anymore. Again, it makes it difficult to engage with you. When you ask me to do something and then suggest I go away. I'll end our conversation with this, the degeneration of this thread had nothing to do with "Nerf X" threads, since you weren't suggesting a nerf. It has to do with player behavior, and the belief that contrary opinions force others into derogatory behavior, something that is false. And that's the commonality between this thread and the others. I wish you well @TheAdjustor. But I won't be hearing from you anymore sir!

@TheAdjustor I'm really not sure how to respond or engage with you. I've made no attacks on you. Perhaps look back at this thread and decide if you are imputing some motive to me that doesn't really exist. I have no idea how you were raised, and in fact, I have said so several times. You accuse me of inciting hatred or violence, which is a stretch on my worst day of posting. Every time I say something, you call it out as a personal attack on you and a straw man. Pretty hard to have a constructive conversation. If you feel that internet posts control your responses, then yes, I question your self control. Because I don't automatically believe a thread that says "Delete Brutes" and then provides math, data, and rationale, is an attempt to troll bait me into personal attacks, verbal or otherwise. I may not agree with that . It may or may not be trolling. But I still don't believe that we need to restrict that kind of speech on the internet because I can still choose to ignore it, or respond in a measured way. Much like I am doing now. This is a video game forum. We aren't talking about politics, classes of people, modes of wealth, types of economies, environmental policy, how to raise children, or how to make a relationship work. There is nothing here, that if said by the existing code of conduct, should cause a reasonable person to feel assaulted in such a way that a reasonable response is name calling, or a physical attack. Yes, people react badly all the time. It's true. But that's on them. Blaming others isn't' the solution. Fighting words has two definitions. One is the legal definition, of inciting violence or hatred. If a post was started that said, "Delete Stamina and Health", that shouldn't lead to violence or hatred. If it doesn't, I would question that persons self control. It might lead to outrage, but outrage is not part of the legal definition. The other definition, is the old Yosemite Sam bit, "those are fighting words, rabbit" which refers to First off, those fighting words are not a form of protected speech unless a reasonable person thinks it will incite violence or hatred. It's just the grammatical definition for the phrase "fighting words". Second, it's covered by the Code of Conduct. Radical suggestions should be allowed. Period. I'm OK with it, and I don't want to see them suppressed. People trolling intentionally will eventually be banned, and people who aren't shouldn't be treated like their ideas are. Now if you feel the Code of Conduct isn't being enforced fairly, that's a separate suggestion. But if that is the problem, adding another rule won't make the behavior better. Lax enforcement is a separate issue from a lack of rules. I'm not suggesting there is an enforcement issue btw. If you want to just say strawman again, or accuse me of personal attacks again, feel free to do so. That's your right, and I support it. However, it'll be clear that we have reached the end of a discussion, and I'll go ahead and exercise my right to ignore you, because I don't have to turn to personal attacks myself if measured responses fail.

If more topics equals 3, then yes. But I don't see three as an avalanche of trolling that requires a draconian policy change. As for a cancerous imbalance...what would that look like? Declining subscriptions? Not a metric we can test against. Reduced playtime? Well, that is sadly what has been happening. Month over month fewer people are playing. I'm not qualified to say that's cancerous or not, but it's not an indicator that everything is the best it can be. But seriously, what metric defines a cancerous imbalance (no sarcasm here, I'm genuinely curious if you or the community know of way that this can be measured)? Since I believe I am a normal person, and I don't honestly know the answer, I would not question someone else motives. Especially since it's just a suggestion that you can respond to. It's not like they are a developer with any real power, and it's not like their voice is stronger than your voice. So why silence them? Furthermore...if you feel that a particular person is going to do this, then just ignore them. It's an easy feature of the forum boards.

Are you seriously accusing me of trying to incite violence or hatred? That's a pretty strong reaction to some pushback. If you are not arguing about censoring threads that are critical of the game, then I apologize, because I clearly have no idea what you are talking about. If you are telling me that not allowing so called "nerf herding" threads is NOT a form of censoring criticism, then I apologize, because clearly we have very different definitions of the words, criticism and censor mean, and I should not have engaged here. Help me out here, what I am missing? Because I am honestly not trying to put forth a strawman, just trying to voice an opinion.

It's dead now. I believe the conversations here kept if it from becoming, "this command is going away in the next build, just deal with it" and instead turned it into, "this command is going away as soon as we can buff the Base Transporter to make it better, because clearly you (the community) have shown that it's very valuable to you". So the thread had a lot of value, but I just think it's been squeezed for all the juice it's worth at this point.

No intent to personalize this. Apart from us sharing "personal" opinions. I am not attempt to provoke you, just discuss. And while I could attempt to provoke a personal attack, this is the internet, and you can ignore me (it's very doable on the forums) or choose not to attack me (It's very doable in life). You make it seem like I am in control of your behavior. You saying it doesn't make it so. It's not a strawman, and emotional import you give it, is your choice. I am merely saying (repeating myself), that I don't believe we need the additional restriction on speech here on the forums. And what you are suggesting is a restriction on speech. The reason? I believe, unless there is a need to, we shouldn't suppress speech on forums. The code of conduct is such a restriction, and it's needed to ensure that we can have the opportunity for polite and civil conversations. And I believe it's sufficient to manage the type of thread you are suggesting from becoming personalized and devolving into attacks.

It is old, and it always makes me sad to see it. PvP is the reason it was brought to the communities attention that this command was going to be leaving us (it was a PvP thread where HC first spoke about the fact it was being removed), so I suppose some people are going to hold onto that bone no matter what you say, even though the GM's were clear that this was going to be going away anyway. @ShardWarriorI agree this is distracting from the thread, but honestly, what's left to be accomplished here? The command is going away, it's going to be replaced by some unknown improvements to the Base Teleporter at the same time. No discussion here will change either of those 2 facts I believe...just my opinion.

No...you intentionally flamed PvP'ers and thought this was a funny way to do it. That's not fixing things, that's tearing them apart. @macskullthanks for always being a refreshing voice for the PvP community (seriously). And I agree, I've never been in a PvP zone and been "ganked" unknowingly, and typically not ever ganked, given the low populations we have.

I didn't take Capocollo's post as saying all responses where one way or the other. And I'm not taking a position on the Hasten post either. I did read the whole thread, and I will say there were some very measured discussions that took place there. And there were some very unmeasured ones. And his post was about the unmeasured ones that took place, because the measured ones did as Capocollo suggested, made their points and moved on. But some people either reacted emotionally, or got frustrated when the other person didn't accept their "overpowering" logic; and those people decided to switch to character assassination, personal attacks, name calling, etc.

Not suggesting this is a public forum, nor I am suggesting they are the same thing. Merely, that I tend to err on the side of not restricting speech as part of my upbringing. Maybe it wasn't a part of yours. I don't know, but either way, since neither of us are moderators here, and we don't make the rules, it's open to debate. I misspelled slightly. I meant censor, not censure. And this is absolutely censoring: censor (verb): to suppress or delete as objectionable; and it is absolutely about criticism: criticizing (verb): to find fault with : point out the faults of And my critique is neither appeal to emotion, nor strawman. I'm not asking others to take up 1st amendment issues here, I'm merely stating that I believe personally, and I tend to believe of others within the United States (and I only limit myself there, because I am admittedly unfamiliar with people of other nations, since I don't travel abroad), that because of our culture, I and we tend to react negatively against suggestions that restrict free speech. I didn't even mention the 1st amendment. And this is squarely one of those suggestions. And it's hardly a strawman, since we weren't talking about all speech on the forums here, including fighting words or incitement (which would be banned under the code of conduct), just a specific kind of thread. I agree my position is perfectly fine to hold, and I appreciate you saying so (sincerely), but I am in no way trying to distort this thread, merely stating my objection and my reasons for it. As for your reasons, I do agree that some threads encourage personal attacks and the personalization of the debate. However, if we abide by the code of conduct, we can avoid the attacks and the personalization. Those are choices that the person reacting makes, not the person posting. And I believe the onus of behavior should fall on those misbehaving, not those who aren't.

It was a change that the OP of that thread suggested. So it’s not going to work the same as the existing power. But it was her intent to try to solve a problem, and she did dare to use math, data, and rationale to back it up. She responded to almost everyone who gave criticism about her math and rationale , and adjusted when errors were pointed out. She philosophically didn’t agree with the assertion that Hasten is fine the way it is, but that’s her right. She’s not a game designer on homecoming so i was unclear why so many felt they had to disabuse her of that notion. I thought the title changes were great, because they showed that her ideas were evolving over time. So in summary, the OP of that thread saw a concern, evaluated it, responded to the forums with data and math. The poster then evolved their idea instead of digging in, and tried to come up with alternatives (again each with math and data). How is that not a good thing, except for the part where she didn’t agree philosophically about it being broken in the first. (Which is also ok, or there would never be any changes to the game, ever)

If the whole conversation went political, it would be wildly off topic and therefore inappropriate to this message board. This particular thread is about censuring peoples ability to criticize the game and the game mechanics because they don't like it. I'm not going to assume you come from the United States, but most of the players do, and at least for me, that runs pretty contrary to my beliefs about free speech and the internet. I would hope most people ultimately feel the same way and are able to deal with criticism they don't want to hear in a manner that most do, by ignoring it or responding in a manner that addresses the criticism without trying to inflame the conversation. Clearly Homecoming is able to pull this off, because to my knowledge they don't ban people just because they are critical of the game they are caring for. They either ignore them, or respond maturely. I'm not suggesting it, but my personal wish would be to ban posts were people assume the motivations and the intent of others based on a total lack of intonation, lack of facial expression, personal unfamiliarity and about 1000 word post about one specific item. Again, my wish, not a suggestion, because while I don't like it when others treat people unkindly in this manner, I can either ignore them or respond maturely instead.

There is not. You can switch like crazy with Mr. N Gull

When you say “collaborating” @Jimmy, can you expand on what that means? For example, will ParagonWiki be allowed to be updated with HC content? Will you be swapping code with Victory and Resurgence? Are they also at the negotiation table with NCSoft (I know that Titan Network is).

I’d like this. It’s super clunky to have to check your current settings in the nav and jump back and forth between different menus. +1 to an obvious QoL improvement

No one is suggesting that if HC gets a C&D that they shouldn’t comply with it. If they get such a demand, then such a policy should be put in place. However, since it’s unlikely to get such a demand, then it’s silly to demand a change in behavior until such time. Either way, it’s not going to shut down the servers.

Well, to save his city he had to become something else, become someone else.

If this was possible, I would do more testing on Justin's Pineapple. Codebase wise it shouldn't be an issue, if my live character can't make it over to Pineapple's code, than Pineapple's code shouldn't be moving to Live.

I'll say it - I don't personally copy other peoples work knowingly. However, I don't personally have a problem with it here, because, you know, the Internet, and no one is profiting or removing profit from another entity. I am playing on a pirate server that doesn't have official permission from the IP holder to be online, because, you know, the Internet, and again, no one is profiting or removing profit from another entity. If an IP holder, either because of trademark or copyright violation insisted on HC enforcing a policy of renaming characters, I would wholly support it, just as I did in Live, because that is their right. If NCSoft decides to shut this down tomorrow, I'll shed a tear, just one, and I'll motor on in life, because that is there right. I have no moral high ground. I am not right in a moral or legal sense. I sleep just fine at this point, because there is no obvious harm happening, nor I am personally at any legal risk either. That doesn't make me right, just content. Pax, I don't find this humorous either, but what are you really fighting for? Anyone with any legal sense, accepts that infringement might be an issue here at some point. Anyone who doesn't won't be swayed by anything you or I say.

Yes, but Marvel/Disney, DC/Warner, and anyone else with a Superhero IP knows about the internet. From FanFiction, to Fan-Art, to Cosplay sites, they are all over. And if you've been to a comic con, you know that those some of those fan artists are selling DC/Marvel prints they haven't gotten permission for. I'm not saying it's right. But if we are going to go with the Tacit Permission argument, then DeviantArt and all the others must have a state of tacit permission. Finally, while you could make the argument that NCSoft is open to this arrangement (and let's be clear, they have not said so yet), that would only hold water if you started play on Aug 7, because prior to that it was extremely unclear if NCSoft was at all OK with this arrangement. That would eliminate either of us from holding any "moral high ground" here.

This is getting silly. @MunkiLordhit it on the head. This is a pirate server with pirated code. NCSoft's lack of action or choice to engage, doesn't abrogate their rights to enforce action later...Why? Because it's still a pirate server. However, if we are going to take the argument that NCSoft's lack of enforcement is somehow legal acceptance, then DC and Marvel's lack of pursuing fan-art and cosplay is also somehow legal acceptance, because they are also not enforcing action against those artists and costumers. I'm always down for a good legal debate on IP Infringement, it's a fascinating subject, but there is no room for moral high ground here from anybody on this forum. We can spin all sorts of coulda, woulda, shoulda, arguments and who knows, as I sit here writing this, my roof could cave in. But it's unlikely. And based on the current landscape, there seems to be no appetite from comic book companies to pursue fan artists and cosplayers. Could they? Sure. Would they? Maybe. Should they? That's murky law at best right now. But here's the fact - have they? They have not, and it appears they don't wish to pursue it because it's a.) murky law when it comes to fair use, and b.) the PR backlash could be absolutely staggering - "DC goes to war with it's biggest fans" is a pretty bad headline. So we can debate what could happen all day, but at the end of the day, let's keep these 4 things in mind: 1.) Nobody is the moral leader here...it ain't happening as long as you are playing. I'm not saying if you stop playing you are the moral leader. But you most certainly are not as long as you are playing pirated software 2.) No action is likely forthcoming. I can't say for absolutely, but we can be pretty sure that if DC/Marvel/Whoever wants to start enforcing their IP privileges, they probably won't start here. This is a small niche. There are other far more appetizing targets (DeviantArt?) then a pirate server where the fan creations are limited to only in-game. 3.) If, in the extreme chance, someone takes action, it'll be a simple C&D letter asking for HC to stop the behavior of copying IP. At that point, HC will either have the resources and abilities to comply, or they won't. And no amount of hand wringing is going to change that. It's out of our control 4.) Finally, is this where you want volunteer GM's to spend their time, right now? "I'm stuck in a mission, why won't the GM's respond?"."Well, there is only a few of them, and they are having to scan, every single character to see if they might be a copyright violation....they'll get back to you in a few months". "Now justicebeliever, that's silly, we can just go back to the way it worked during live," you say? Well, then I point you back to #3. Let's cross the bridge when we come to it, same as it happened on Live.

This is a very fair response. Thank you!

Absolutely zero chance is pretty impossible to promise anybody. I rarely leave the house, but I know there is still a small chance I could get hit by a bus today. They have committed to keep it free to play, why should we doubt them at this point? We don't have new data to contradict it.

I appreciate the response, but "continue to work with them" is pretty vague. I am still working with my neighbor to get his dog to stop barking in the middle of the night, all night. Last we heard from HC, once the negotiations were completed, ParagonWiki would fold into Homecoming and we would be able to update it with Homecoming specific content. Last we heard from HC, Titan Network was part of these negotiations with NCSoft. Should we assume neither of these are true at this point? I want to be clear, saying that neither is true at this point doesn't mean to me the SKY IS FALLING, DOOMtm or anything else dramatic. It doesn't mean to me that you are liars, or that NCSoft is destroying the world. It just means that things changed, and you are being transparent with us. What's NOT transparent, is getting this information second-hand at this point. So TonyV said what he said, Sekoia said what Sekoia said. Can we get some clarity and depth to the level that Titan network is getting it?