The Swastika idea was a generic example. I wasn't taking offense to it. I was merely stating that there are far to many people posting offensive bs on these forums, then trying to mask it with "don't get angry, it's only meant as a joke".
I don't care if the message wasn't aimed at me, i was using your post as an example.
Godwin's Law FAQ
Subject: How to post about Nazis and get away with it - the Godwin's Law FAQ Newsgroups: alt.usenet.kooks,alt.usenet.legends,alt.answers,news.answers Approved: news-answers-request@mit.edu Summary: This is a list of frequently asked questions about Godwin's Law, the natural law relating Usenet and Nazis once and for all. Followup-To: alt.usenet.legends From: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin) Reply-To: tskirvin@killfile.org Message-ID: Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 00:45:02 -0600 Expires: Thu, 27 Dec 2007 06:45:02 GMT
Godwin's Law FAQ -or- "How to post about Nazis and get away with it"
One of the most famous pieces of Usenet trivia out there is "if you mention Hitler or Nazis in a post, you've automatically ended whatever discussion you were taking part in". Known as Godwin's Law, this rule of Usenet has a long and sordid history on the network - and is absolutely wrong. This FAQ is an attempt to set straight as much of the history and meaning of Godwin's Law as possible, and hopefully encourage users to invoke it a bit more sparingly. Of course, knowing Usenet, it won't do an ounce of good...
[Standard Disclaimers: this document assumes you have some basic knowledge of Usenet; if you don't, go check out news.announce.newusers for a while to gain said knowledge. Misuse of the information contained within this FAQ is not the responsibility of the author (though he's pretty confused exactly how you could misuse this information). Copyright 1999-2002, Tim Skirvin, all rights reserved, <, fnord, furrfu.]
I. The Basics 1. What is Godwin's Law?
Godwin's Law is a natural law of Usenet named after Mike Godwin (godwin@eff.org) concerning Usenet "discussions". It reads, according to the Jargon File:
As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.
2. What does it mean?
It pretty much means exactly what it says - as a Usenet thread goes on, the chances of somebody or something being compared to a Nazi approach one.
3. Yes, but what does it *mean*?
Aah, now *there's* the real question.
In case your head has been buried in the sand for the last sixty years or so, the Nazis were a German political party led by Adolf Hitler that slaughtered upwards of ten million people that didn't meet their standards of "ethnic purity" and set off to conquer Europe and the world in World War II. They are generally considered the most evil group of people to live in modern times, and to compare something or someone to them is usually considered the gravest insult imaginable.
As a Usenet discussion gets longer it tends to get more heated; as more heat enters the discussion, tensions get higher and people start to insult each other over anything they can think of. Godwin's Law merely notes that, eventually, those tensions eventually cause someone to find the worst insults that come to mind - which will almost always include a Nazi comparison.
4. That still doesn't answer my question. What does it *MEAN*?
The Law is generally used on Usenet as an indicator of whether a thread has gone on too long, who's playing fair and who's just slinging mud, and who finally gets to "win" the discussion. It has, over time, become the closest thing to an impartial moderator that Usenet can get.
So, what this means in practical terms:
o If someone brings up Nazis in general conversation when it wasn't necessary or germane without it necessarily being an insult, it's probably about time for the thread to end. o If someone brings up Nazis in general conversation when it was vaguely related but is basically being used as an insult, the speaker can be considered to be flaming and not debating. o If someone brings up Nazis in any conversation that has been going on too long for one of the parties, it can be used as a fair excuse to end the thread and declare victory for the other side.
The Swastika idea was a generic example. I wasn't taking offense to it. I was merely stating that there are far to many people posting offensive bs on these forums, then trying to mask it with "don't get angry, it's only meant as a joke".
I don't care if the message wasn't aimed at me, i was using your post as an example.
Godwin's Law FAQ
Subject: How to post about Nazis and get away with it - the Godwin's Law FAQ Newsgroups: alt.usenet.kooks,alt.usenet.legends,alt.answers,news.answers Approved: news-answers-request@mit.edu Summary: This is a list of frequently asked questions about Godwin's Law, the natural law relating Usenet and Nazis once and for all. Followup-To: alt.usenet.legends From: tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim Skirvin) Reply-To: tskirvin@killfile.org Message-ID: Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 00:45:02 -0600 Expires: Thu, 27 Dec 2007 06:45:02 GMT
Godwin's Law FAQ -or- "How to post about Nazis and get away with it"
One of the most famous pieces of Usenet trivia out there is "if you mention Hitler or Nazis in a post, you've automatically ended whatever discussion you were taking part in". Known as Godwin's Law, this rule of Usenet has a long and sordid history on the network - and is absolutely wrong. This FAQ is an attempt to set straight as much of the history and meaning of Godwin's Law as possible, and hopefully encourage users to invoke it a bit more sparingly. Of course, knowing Usenet, it won't do an ounce of good...
[Standard Disclaimers: this document assumes you have some basic knowledge of Usenet; if you don't, go check out news.announce.newusers for a while to gain said knowledge. Misuse of the information contained within this FAQ is not the responsibility of the author (though he's pretty confused exactly how you could misuse this information). Copyright 1999-2002, Tim Skirvin, all rights reserved, <, fnord, furrfu.]
I. The Basics 1. What is Godwin's Law?
Godwin's Law is a natural law of Usenet named after Mike Godwin (godwin@eff.org) concerning Usenet "discussions". It reads, according to the Jargon File:
As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.
2. What does it mean?
It pretty much means exactly what it says - as a Usenet thread goes on, the chances of somebody or something being compared to a Nazi approach one.
3. Yes, but what does it *mean*?
Aah, now *there's* the real question.
In case your head has been buried in the sand for the last sixty years or so, the Nazis were a German political party led by Adolf Hitler that slaughtered upwards of ten million people that didn't meet their standards of "ethnic purity" and set off to conquer Europe and the world in World War II. They are generally considered the most evil group of people to live in modern times, and to compare something or someone to them is usually considered the gravest insult imaginable.
As a Usenet discussion gets longer it tends to get more heated; as more heat enters the discussion, tensions get higher and people start to insult each other over anything they can think of. Godwin's Law merely notes that, eventually, those tensions eventually cause someone to find the worst insults that come to mind - which will almost always include a Nazi comparison.
4. That still doesn't answer my question. What does it *MEAN*?
The Law is generally used on Usenet as an indicator of whether a thread has gone on too long, who's playing fair and who's just slinging mud, and who finally gets to "win" the discussion. It has, over time, become the closest thing to an impartial moderator that Usenet can get.
So, what this means in practical terms: o If someone brings up Nazis in general conversation when it wasn't necessary or germane without it necessarily being an insult, it's probably about time for the thread to end. o If someone brings up Nazis in general conversation when it was vaguely related but is basically being used as an insult, the speaker can be considered to be flaming and not debating. o If someone brings up Nazis in any conversation that has been going on too long for one of the parties, it can be used as a fair excuse to end the thread and declare victory for the other side.
A clip from a tv show about tv shows explaining why all reality tv such as big brother is bullshit - also pretty funny if you like british humour [video]BBwepkVurCI[/video]
So because I my opinions differ from yours I'm trolling? lol I seriously don't wish to argue about computer games at (2.00ofmgAM)
and bet you do watch tv or alt_tab while "playing" - I did and so did most of the people in my corp;) All I'm saying is I think Eve is a shitty boring game - to me. Your posts seem to say that if you don't like eve you're somehow less intelligent. Which is fairly typical of the elitist attitudes which seems to be present in all RPG's. And as for your niche game comments - once again you seem to imply that because I don't like the game i am immature.
In summary: It's just a game who cares.
BTW In Frontier you could crash into the planets and even back on my old spectrum playing the granddaddy "Elite" you'd crash into the stations if you weren't careful.
Thats the thing that pisses me off the most about EVE; that it could have been a fucking amazing game
Wee fun. I've been playing over a year now, and its the best MMORPG I've ever played.
What a lot of people do not understand is that it is an RPG. Not a space simulator. They don't understand why the game is why it is, and often presume they're getting some arcadey point and clickedy click game, which it is anything but. Fair nuff about it being a rpg - I found that out soon enough (to my utter disgust btw) it's not some much a game... more of a hobby, let put it this way i'm sure you and every other eve player has a tv in the same room as the pc. Wrong. The developer in question lost his job, and the accuser was banned for being a forum hacker, amongst other things. Don't know how you got that misinformation. Also the devs are allowed to play without abusing their powers - would you seriously develop a game that you would not be allowed to play?
""In public response to CCP's decision to ban him, Kugutsumen posted: "If CCP is not willing to work with the me on a serious issue like this, and rather prefer to ban my accounts and attempt to silence me, then I will have to work with the players so they know the game is rigged and know what they're paying for," and went public with his information. As it made its way to the official EVE boards, his findings sent a tidal wave through the community. Members of BoB - and BoB's enemies - began posting wildly, forcing CCP's message board moderators began auto-deleting posts with certain keywords related to Kugutsumen and his findings. Eventually, the call for action became too loud to ignore, and CCP began an internal investigation into what happened.""
That would be one or two days in skills. Existing players in the game do "trial account pirating" in frigates (cheapest combat ships in the game) and get dozens of kills in the 14 day free trial, solo, with newbie characters. Imagine starting off playing WoW as a level 10 player and running around killing level 50s-60s. Its a matter of learning how to play the game, then applying it to a PvP situation. I prefer the time based skill system over the lameness of grinding 1000 monsters to get a level.
At least there isn't if you're fighting AI NPCs, which isn't "combat". PvP is combat, and there is a heck of a lot to learn about it, which cannot be learnt all in the trial. Perhaps you could give me a full guide to scanning if you think you know everything about PvP. The game is not about NPCs, its about the other players.
Thats because its an RPG. Consider the fact that you're controlling a ship through a computer, with a ping to the other side of the world. Imagine if you lagged out. You would lose your 100m ISK investment ($20) from lag by crashing into a station. That would be seriously bad game design. EVE is an RPG, not a sim. Perhaps you should understand game design before having a go at that one, because you don't. or you could program the ships to fly around stations, planets etc
I dont mean to be nasty at all. Most people who play EVE and leave simply don't get it, or simply think they're going to get a happy, fun, sci-fi game with lots of big explosions and good times with friends. Sure, its sci-fi, has explosions and you can have good times, but unlike other games you actually have to put some effort into the game to get anything back from it. EVE is comparable to real life on both the economic level (a market so vast and complex the developers hire economists to keep it stable) and social (corporations and alliances are one of the core parts of the game, and are based on trust, assets and manpower, just like RL.)
I don't want to come across as nasty either. The game seems like it was desgined by people who think excell is fun. Without ISK the game is shit, like a RPG it's all about loot and levels - so you will never be able to truly test your skill against anyone -as it will always boil down to upgrades and skills - yawn a stats based pissing contest.
EVE, at its core, is a player driven MMO. One of very few, and the only one to do it properly. Games like wow simply don't compare on the design complexity - EVE is designed to be run by the players, not run for the players. You build your own empire, make your own money. Death is harsh, scams, griefing, are legit and all part of the game. It is rarely a fun game. For this, most people don't like it. I like it purely for the massive scope of the game, the ability to do anything to anyone anywhere and anywhen (given normal constraints) and not have whiny kids complaining to the devs about it. I truly hate all RPGs. I honestly don't see the point of paying money and investing all that time, just to be a level 60 ranger or something - imo the higher the level the more introverted the player is.
Average age of players: 27. Consider the average age of your normal Bf2 player. One single server (no shards), 200k people, some 6000 systems.
Most EVE players put it like this: "If I wanted someone to choose how I should play my game, I'd play WoW. If I want to play a game the way I want to play it, ill play EVE."Sorry for the wow-bashing, ive played it too, it ain't that bad.
It's just not what I would call a terribly good game
EVE is terribly brutal, unforgiving and very hard to learn, but is by far the most complex game in existence. If you don't like it for this, then it isn't your type of game. But if you're looking for a game that is completely different to 99% of all other games you've played, then its by far a good choice. The only problem is that the trial doesn't give you enough time to scratch the surface, but if you get hold of someone who is willing to help, they'll point you in the right direction.
It's and interesting concept and has some potential but my problems with it are:
1) Corrupt Devs 2) It has a subscription fee (never give a sucker an even break) 3) Great fun for well established players - shitty for newbies 4) It requires perseverance over skill 5) David Brabern should sue 6) If you thought school was fun you'll love work;)
I played the trial and tbfh - the game is rotten to the core - the devs play in corps and have been caught cheating more than once. Their reply was to ban and delete the accusers accounts.
the thing that really pisses me off is the pvp, it would at least six months to be pvp capable as there is absolutely no skill involved in combat. :disappoin IF youre in a corp it can be quite tactical but you will never be able to destroy a better ship though skill.
Oh one more gripe - wtf is there no collision detection? it pisses me off when your ship flys straight though a station or a planet, ffs. /[rant]
I don't think he was a priest. Surely not. If so he has surely lost his job. But yea. Fucking 12 year olds thinking they are so hardcore.
He is a priest, and by the amount vids they have of him he is being harassed by these little pricks. I saw on the news that a couple of them were in their twenty's and the rest are 18-19.
IMO what that guys needs to do is buy himself a big evil fucker of a dog and teach it to "sic balls" :007:
