No Laughter for Cruelty

   Well, this blew up rather quickly.

   There is a massive cascade of a threadnought underway on the forums, which it is now entirely unreasonable to read the whole of, but the vocal opinions have divided themselves mostly to extremes, with about as many decrying player Erotica 1's actions as defending them as funny. There are a much smaller number asking about what the principles we should be using to resolve a course of action in this kind of situation, and where the line between players and CCP should be drawn in terms of responsibility. However, the general inflammatory rhetoric has tended to bury those voices so far.

"You just don't get it. (But I do, for I am enlightened.)"
"What if it was you? (You aren't as full a human being as I am, here have some empathy.)"
"Show it to someone else and see what they think. (Then you'll revise your opinion.)"
"This is the way Eve is. (I don't want to examine my beliefs or the status quo.)"

All of these things sound the same to to me, despite the fact that they come up on both sides of the debate:

"I get this, and have distilled it down to its essence -anyone else is wrong, and the discussion is now over. I acknowledge no viewpoint but my own."

That we are embroiled in such a low level of 'discussion' for such a nuanced topic is discouraging.

   To get my visceral reaction out first: I hate the attitude that considers cruelty funny. Ignorance is not funny either. Even when possessed to such a degree as to render the owner ridiculous, and a faun among wolves as is the case here, I do not think we should laugh at it, nor should we attack people personally, through a game or out of one. Does this mean we should we protect fools from losing their things? No - games should not matter enough that losing the whole of your investment in them is a crippling blow. As long as Eve's harsh realities are contained in the scope of damage to Eve characters, I have no problem with skulduggery taken to its extremes. But that is not the same as condoning, either through praise or inaction, the taking advantage of people's insecurities and vulnerabilities, to debase and humiliate them. Once someone moves past the avatar to maliciously harm the player behind them, they have gone too far.

   Is this a grey line? Yes, of course - for our avatars are nothing without the investment of part of our real selves, so to adhere to the letter of what I propose would render all forms of PvP interaction impossible, and Eve would be an empty game. Sensible people will admit that such is not the spirit my remark is to be taken in. There must be balance between how much we put in, and how vulnerable we allow ourselves to be through doing so. So, personal feelings aside, what should be the standard for behavior in a game like Eve, which allows us freedoms we don't normally have? We are trying to define what to allow into, and what to keep out of, our culture and our reputation, but most vitally our own experience as players.

   Some seem to want such a thing as meta-game bullying and personal attacks to be part of what Eve is associated with. Others do not. I agree with the notion that human should always be treated with respect, even when they are in a situation disadvantageous too them. This point of view is often derogatorily and incorrectly referred to as 'space honor.' Everyone is free to act without regard to others, and abuse others if it is with their power. But they cannot expect to be extended respect and protection for such an act. If someone perpetrates a heinous act, that is abominable to the majority, they deserve exile, and are not exempted on the grounds that they are a minority viewpoint. How do we judge when that threshold has been crossed?

   Here is the acid test I would offer: if after being tricked, a reasonable and intelligent man would say "it was my own fault," then the practice is not one we need to police or even censure. Eve already has built a great reputation for this sort of practice, where we can stab people in the back, break alliances apart, steal, pod people, and generally be bitches and bastards - but then share drinks and laugh in a pub if we ever meet up in real life. 

   But mind games are a thing too - are they acceptable? Take a game item, it is ephemeral, easily regain-able, it is not as valuable as a physical item. However, toying with the emotions by means of those ephemeral items is only possible if we value them. How ought to engage ourselves in those items then? If I might extend Eve's first rule a bit, it is still; "don't invest what you can't afford to lose." Beyond investment in the form of capital and game assets, a reasonable person must also not engage their temper or their hopes, or their hatred, or their dispassion past an appropriate level. Otherwise, they will be vulnerable to injury. If a reasonable man loses his temper over a gank, or a scam, or his own mistake, that still is not necessarily a bad thing, if after he has regained his equilibrium he can say, "I was wrong to be so angry over something that should not matter to that extent." But it is critical that he can re-balance his emotions.

   Not everyone who plays this game will be reasonable. When someone with unreasonable expectations encounters someone with unreasonable limitations, we get the scenario that has played out. If the same scenario had occurred without the mediation of a game, the victim would have and deserve legal redress for the abuse they had suffered. It is cowardly for anyone to try and hold up the 'nature of Eve' as a shield against moral culpability. It is not reasonable to suppose anyone wishes or deserves to be treated inhumanly, and it is not reasonable or responsible to take advantage of those who leave themselves open to such treatment.

   The implicit contract we are entering into while playing Eve is ultimately meant to be one of fun. We play in order to have fun. But if what constitutes fun for you cannot ever be taken to assist the enjoyment of another, then you are not participating in that contract. The player who is scammed learns to avoid their own greed. A gank may fall abruptly, but next time one can take more precautions, carry less value at once, manage one's risk. Every mistake or falling to another player's stratagem becomes a chance to get better at the game - avoiding the mistakes you made in the past opens the portal into feeling of accomplishment and enjoyment.

   The idea that you should present something to someone else can be your moral compass and confirm or deny something along with you is a misguided argument. It is rhetoric, designed to scare someone into recanting their own view. "You think that's funny now, but what if it was you?" is the wrong question to ask. We really should be asking "Does an objective standard of what constitutes acceptable behavior apply to all of us?" Some people want to say that the can be no objective standard, and so we should each go our own ways with our personal, subjective, one. But in a community game, played by differing people, such a view is selfish, naive, and generally held only by the contentious. The community standard has to come from the community, inclusively of all those who consider the good of the community, and not dictated by the few who only want freedom to do what they want, and not consider the effects of those actions.

   So if we all, as Eve players decide we will allow bullying and abuse with our game, that will be our standard. We will be failing to exercise our compassion and our decency, and setting up a very exclusive club of vicious tyrants. Whereas if we decide that our shared experiences are more important than the freedom to harm people without reason, that we can chat in a friendly manner with the player that podded us, that there are real friendships and relationships at play behind the lighter substance of out avatars and items, then we should also embrace the higher standard that preserves those good for us in the real world. 

   I haven't listed to the recording and I don't want to, just as I don't want to see someone break a treasured possession, or receive news of the death of a beloved. Spiritual pain is unavoidable as part of life, and human beings are affected not only by what we experience personally, but through extend empathy with others, so that their experiences become ours as well. In that light, either deliberately hardening oneself to real pain or allowing it in unnecessarily scars us.

   We laugh at what is comedic, and we laugh at what is tragic as well. Both are expressions of catharsis, of remedying what is either too ridiculous or too painful to accord to a harmonious understanding of life and our experience. But laughter has to end somewhere. To keep laughing betrays a depraved mind that cannot reconcile itself to taking things seriously. And one who can take things not in the proper way is not to be respected or tolerated.

   Think back to that idea that in some way we can all be jerks but then share a drink. That's what we are really doing in Eve, having a shared experience, a fun experience. It is not enjoyable 100% of the time, nor is it meant to be. But neither should it crush us, it should not be, if we are playing sensibly, unremitting pain. It gives us war stories, exploits, a group of our own peers. If someone is taking actions that would make it impossible to meet in a civil manner in real life, those actions should be countered and punished. If we want Eve to be a harsh game, then we need to work to make our players more mature, so that they can stand in-game loss. Bullying is opposed to this sort of tough love, because it suppresses and eradicates the growth of an individual at the outset. 

   Bullying is an expression of power for power's sake, and laughing at someone who slips and falls is only appropriate if they can get back up. Laughing while keeping them down is sadistic. Danger in Eve should come from slipping, not from people who will hold you down and refuse to let you up. Sometimes, while the majority disapprove of an act, it should still be allowed, for the sake of our sandbox, and our diversity, and our war stories. But this is not a matter in a gray area where allowing heinous behavior can benefit our game. To torture people is vile, and condoning it poisonous. If we allow that poison into our game, we should not be surprised that it will becomes less and less fun to play, as the boundaries of acceptable get pushed further and further, and such cruel people encroach further and further into the player population.

   I wish I could be more articulate than I have been about this subject, but I hope the discussion continues. The final word in this needs to be more than any one players viewpoint, but drawing that line in the sand should never, in my opinion, be on the side that condones cruelty. I don't want to be part of that, and I don't think we are that. If I'm in any part right, this extent of sadistic behavior will be curtailed. If I'm wrong, I hope I can find a different place to have fun. Either way, it is now the turn of others to speak out.