Backstage - OOC Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

That Scagga once had a bodyguard by the name of 'cuddles'?

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7

Author Topic: Information Leak / I-RED Disclaimer.  (Read 11473 times)

Kaleigh Doyle

  • Guest
Re: Information Leak / I-RED Disclaimer.
« Reply #60 on: 24 May 2011, 12:11 »

That doesn't negate them from the responsibility of what they post.

Please elaborate. Aside from one entry regarding JR's Net cafe I didn't see anything that could possibly be considered 'irresponsible' on my part.
Miz has pretty much summed up how I think of the leak. We obtained the information, there was a lot of it, we published it without comment. I have a feeling if we had made attempts to comment on released material, we'd have been jumped on in a similar fashion, given past reactions to criticism from ANN.
Well, you posted material on your site. Presumably, because you're a roleplay corporation, your news is also of a similar persuasion. You make information public, on your site, the material is now your responsibility. In other words, stating, "Hey we just got the info and dumped it un-edited, don't blame us for having personal (ooc) content on there" doesn't negate that point that you made it available to the public. It's your responsibility.

So you had a choice here. You could have edited out the information that wasn't personal or clearly OOC, and gotten flak for 'not posting the full story', or left it all in a giant infodump like you did, where people now question the validity of the content. I think in your position I'd have chosen the former, that's all.

I don't have anything against your organization, I just think it could have been handled better. (opinion :P)

Logged

Silas Vitalia

  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3397
Re: Information Leak / I-RED Disclaimer.
« Reply #61 on: 24 May 2011, 12:18 »

Posting OOC content to an IC forum (IGS) is a dick move, end of story. No way to weasel out of it, argue, change opinions, or the usual.  That content does not belong on IC threads on IGS.

The IGS post was not one of mine. There is presently a blanket ban on AI posting there, and I'm no exception to the rule.

I haven't looked into it enough to know who posted exactly what, just speaking about the concept in general. If you didn't put it up, nothing directed at you.

Logged

Ken

  • Will Rule for Food
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1261
  • Must Love Robots
Re: Information Leak / I-RED Disclaimer.
« Reply #62 on: 24 May 2011, 12:21 »

I love ANN, but having read most of the leaked material, I still found it rather unimportant.  There are no indications, imo, of an I-RED failure cascade and no earth-shattering revelations to be found in the stuff.  It's just... a bunch of mails and internals.

I'd also like to know whether the people decrying it at 'petty', 'irrelevant' and 'smear material' OOC have actually read through it.  Most of the specific complaints I've had seen been one or two entries, which in my mind, are hardly inflammatory at all. I've removed one on request, but frankly, I feel a number of people are using this as an opportunity to make attacks on me and my corporation.

I don't think it's petty of you, AI, or ANN to act as an information broker.  In fact, I think it's rather neat, but you could have done a bit more cleaning up of the leaked data before publishing, especially since John clearly objected to the inclusion of the RL information and said information (even if someone doesn't mind it getting out) obviously has no place in RP.  Overall I don't think this leak can fairly be called 'petty' or 'nasty' as it really doesn't seem to give offense of any kind.  There's no commentary.  It's just reprinted information.  However, it was apparently rushed, published in far too raw a form to pass as much of an 'event', and the content is just a flop.  Hype without substance.  But maybe that's part of working in the media.  ;)

I like Jade's suggestion from several posts up.  Can we have a re-do?
Logged

Cheiftan

  • Clonejack
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 29
Re: Information Leak / I-RED Disclaimer.
« Reply #63 on: 24 May 2011, 13:15 »

I think the problem lies with the fact I-RED do not communicate internally IC, we discuss the IC ramifications of our actions but it's mostly OOC chatter.

My gripe is with the fact that allot of this OOC information was just dumped out in an IC format on an IC news agency, to me this is wrong.  That being said if we removed all the OOC logs this dump would be tiny.

as for whom the spys are well..

From what ive seen the government chat ends two months ago meaning that came from a different source while more recent stuff came from a drake pilot with no roles within RDC.

I have a vague idea who would sell out our Gov chat logs like that who left two months ago.

I-RED is not concerned about our mails being leaked, we know we have spys, we just don't like our real life laundry being leaked with it and then pressented as IC, the RP community dose not need to know about us as people only us as charaters.
« Last Edit: 24 May 2011, 13:17 by Cheiftan »
Logged

Verone

  • Dirty Gurista Loyalist
  • Egger
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 168
  • :3
    • Veto Corp.Com
Re: Information Leak / I-RED Disclaimer.
« Reply #64 on: 24 May 2011, 14:21 »

That doesn't negate them from the responsibility of what they post.

Please elaborate. Aside from one entry regarding JR's Net cafe I didn't see anything that could possibly be considered 'irresponsible' on my part.
Miz has pretty much summed up how I think of the leak. We obtained the information, there was a lot of it, we published it without comment. I have a feeling if we had made attempts to comment on released material, we'd have been jumped on in a similar fashion, given past reactions to criticism from ANN.

I'd also like to know whether the people decrying it at 'petty', 'irrelevant' and 'smear material' OOC have actually read through it. Most of the specific complaints I've had seen been one or two entries, which in my mind, are hardly inflammatory at all. I've removed one on request, but frankly, I feel a number of people are using this as an opportunity to make attacks on me and my corporation.

You know full well that we've always got on and I have no reason at all to want to make an attack on your corporation.

I still stand by my opinion that it was an extremely dick-headed move, and I honestly didn't expect it coming from you.

Milo Caman

  • Guerilla Gardener
  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 618
    • Out of Sinq
Re: Information Leak / I-RED Disclaimer.
« Reply #65 on: 24 May 2011, 14:22 »

My gripe is with the fact that allot of this OOC information was just dumped out in an IC format on an IC news agency, to me this is wrong.  That being said if we removed all the OOC logs this dump would be tiny.

As far as I'm concerned, It was 'dumped' with an IC News agency in .txt format. As Mizhara has already mentioned, many of the not-explicitly IC channels and information can be used IC, without crossing sensible boundaries.
It's also my impression that IRED do bugger all RP internally. If I'd released purely OOC information with none of the explicitly IC logs, would everyone still be up in arms about this? probably.

Logged

Aira Hakaari

  • Clonejack
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19
Re: Information Leak / I-RED Disclaimer.
« Reply #66 on: 24 May 2011, 14:40 »

I have to agree with Milo. I feel that there is a lot of unnecessary drama going on just. OOC comments were in there, and as a player you have to read that as well. There was enough IC information there to get the point across that I-RED was engaging in behavior not expected. OOC logs are the norm in most alliances, just for logistical and organizational purposes. To harp on this one point is flawed, in my opinion.

That being said, what's done is done. Deleting the post won't change anything, but appease those that are concerned. Furthermore, by even commenting in OOC in Isagar's IC thread is changing the tone and adding conflict. It should have been handled in an IC way, Silas.
Logged

John Revenent

  • Taisho - Friendly Neighborhood Caldari Liberal (Punching Bag)
  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 509
Re: Information Leak / I-RED Disclaimer.
« Reply #67 on: 24 May 2011, 14:51 »

le'sigh
Logged

scagga

  • Everything for Vaari
  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 570
Re: Information Leak / I-RED Disclaimer.
« Reply #68 on: 24 May 2011, 15:04 »

Is a damn good point. Imagine if the BBC just put out a random collection of junk notes and unattributed videos and with the disclaimer ... "sort out the news yourself guys!"

Not really good enough.

I take it you've been watching the coverage in Syria
Logged

Silas Vitalia

  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3397
Re: Information Leak / I-RED Disclaimer.
« Reply #69 on: 24 May 2011, 15:06 »

Furthermore, by even commenting in OOC in Isagar's IC thread is changing the tone and adding conflict. It should have been handled in an IC way, Silas.

Disagree. By commenting IC you are encouraging the thread and giving this sort of behavior oxygen.



Logged

Cheiftan

  • Clonejack
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 29
Re: Information Leak / I-RED Disclaimer.
« Reply #70 on: 24 May 2011, 15:07 »

Quote
Quote from: Jade Constantine on Today at 10:53 AM
Is a damn good point. Imagine if the BBC just put out a random collection of junk notes and unattributed videos and with the disclaimer ... "sort out the news yourself guys!"

Not really good enough.

Quote
I take it you've been watching the coverage in Syria


HAHAHA wow thats sharp lol
« Last Edit: 24 May 2011, 15:11 by Cheiftan »
Logged

Shintoko Akahoshi

  • Red Mom of War(?)
  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 540
  • Red Mom of War!
Re: Information Leak / I-RED Disclaimer.
« Reply #71 on: 24 May 2011, 15:17 »

Pretty much everything can be considered IC from where I'm standing. Diplomacy, Voice Comms, and yes... even SiSi. (Combat Simulator, voila. SiSi is IC.) Vent/TS is just a voice comms protocol and forums and killboards are exactly that. Galnet resources for the corporation/alliance in question.

There's almost nothing you can't turn IC if you can be arsed.
That's the beauty of Eve.

Sure, but only if you're assuming that IC and OOC motivations are linked. That, in my opinion, is the catch here. Should I assume that because Miz acts in a certain way, that you (the player) does, too? Should I make assumptions about, for example, the character Stephanie Plum based on what I know of the author Janet Evanovich? IRL I'm quite friendly with some people who play characters that Shin is distinctly hostile towards. Someone could grab an OOC chat I have with them (in game, so Shin's name is there). Does that mean that Shin is being friendly ICly with that person? Of course not.

It's not the technology (Sisi as a simulator, etc). It's the fourth freakin' wall.

Mizhara

  • Prophet of New Eden
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2545
  • The Truth will make ye Fret.
Re: Information Leak / I-RED Disclaimer.
« Reply #72 on: 24 May 2011, 15:29 »

Oh, I agree there, Shin. Some stuff is just purely OoC. However, a lot of the stuff that's done OoC in this game can be taken as IC. If not, we could never really interact with non-RPers without stuffing our fingers in our ears and going "LALALALALALA MY CHARACTER CAN'T HEAR OR SEE YOU!".
Logged


John Revenent

  • Taisho - Friendly Neighborhood Caldari Liberal (Punching Bag)
  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 509
Re: Information Leak / I-RED Disclaimer.
« Reply #73 on: 24 May 2011, 15:59 »

Oh, I agree there, Shin. Some stuff is just purely OoC. However, a lot of the stuff that's done OoC in this game can be taken as IC. If not, we could never really interact with non-RPers without stuffing our fingers in our ears and going "LALALALALALA MY CHARACTER CAN'T HEAR OR SEE YOU!".

Just dont picture John as a child who whines in alliance that he has to take a shit like I do OOCly. plsthx  :oops:
Logged

Orthic

  • Wetgraver
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 58
Re: Information Leak / I-RED Disclaimer.
« Reply #74 on: 24 May 2011, 19:50 »

Hmm... well, this was fun. Out of the loop for a bit and then kaboom, shitstorm. So, for starters, I wasn't made aware of what we'd been handed until after it had been published, at which point I said "huh, that's neat," and went to bed.  But there seems to be a lot of unhappiness over it, so I'd like to sort out what happened and why and see if we can get everyone on the same page.

What happened prior to the publishing of the logs and mails and whatnot: ANN was approached by disgruntled member of IRED who had some stuff they wanted published. [To clarify - there was no infiltration, this was provided to us by a current member of IRED. That said, if you want to give us an award for worst infiltrators of the year, we'll take it. It'll give me something shiny to give my gf to show that we're going steady. Aaaannnyways...] The directorate of ANN gave it a quick read-through, edited out most of the stuff about RL (As I'm not part of the ANN team or the corp Directorate, I'm not in a position to apologize for them, but I will anyways. Sorry JR about the bit of RL that slipped through), and published it. A small blurb on ANN was written and that was it.

What happened afterward: One of ANN's readers linked the article on IGS and said some stuff about how this would be the downfall of IRED. Frankly, we all know that it won't be the end of IRED, they've been around for years and probably aren't going away any time soon. This then led to a bunch of people shouting "Down with this sort of thing" and basically spewing OOC vitriol on the IGS. While I mean no disrespect to any of the people involved, I find it hard to believe that their characters would suddenly behave that way if not for the feeding frenzy that was started. This really does seem (to me) like OOC bleeding right back into IC.

Unfortunately, ANN failed to do what it needed to and dissociate itself from the statements of the OP immediately, because in addition to not planning to put it up on IGS, we actually have a corp-wide ban on IGS posting in effect in order to keep some of our more impulsive members from getting dragged into arguments they shouldn't be in. So rather than heading this off when there was a chance, the echo chamber got going and we've seen where that ended up.

[ As an aside, I believe that this should demonstrate the distinction between Anshar and ANN quite clearly - as I have been the only reliably active member of Anshar for the last couple months and I had no knowledge at all of this going on. ]

On to the other issue, and were most people seem to have a problem with what was published: The dreaded Content.

The fact is that a lot of what ANN was given was OOC logs and mails from various channels. Understandably, posting these logs as part of the dump on an IC news site could be (and was) seen as a breach of the IC/OOC divide. My question is this: How would you have handled it to maintain the integrity of that divide? We've recently seen the growth of a couple of immersionist RP corps where all meaningful discussion is done IC and it would therefore be possible to release IC logs of their plotting and scheming. But what do you do with an organization like IRED where everything internal occurs OOC? If we were to cut it down to strictly IC, there'd be nothing. At least, nothing from the logs we were provided by the aforementioned disgruntled IRED member, we did have a leftover log from Stars End when JR chatted with Nikita about harassing LDIS.

For example, let's say that I'm in a corp. Let's say I'm even a member in good standing, not a spy. It comes up in discussion in corp chat to screw over another corp for whatever reason. However, the discussion doesn't technically occur in character - we're not sitting around a table /emoting our way though it, we're chatting in corp. Now let's say that my character has a conscience and decides to go and tell someone about this plan IC - or maybe goes and blabs about it on IGS or in a public bar or something. Was this a breach of the IC/OOC divide?

The other question then: How should something like this be handled in the future?
Not that I expect there to be a future event like this for us, but fate has a sense of humor, so who knows. ANN understands that this was mishandled even if they are still a bit surprised by the rather vitriolic response from all corners and intends to learn from the resulting clusterfuck.

Would you prefer to simply see such OOC logs never published? Should they be more heavily edited to exclude most of the OOC?

What parts of these OOC logs are viable information IC?

What parts of OOC logs in general are viable IC?

Should I be ignoring IC the fact that someone might be plotting to betray me simply because the plot is 'strictly OOC'?

How many people have actually read all of the logs in question? I haven't yet.

Hoping we can turn this towards a more civil discourse now that everyone's (hopefully) done calling Milo a dick.

Thanks,
Orthic
The Stone-Faced Old Man
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7