Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[scagga]

Scagga: The entire thing made no sense to me. Probably because I start losing sight of the red thread halfway into the post after I've had to reach for the dictionary the fifth time. As for your "alt's reduce the enjoyment of the game" argument, I see no need to challenge what is purely a personal opinion which isn't even remotely applicable to any overall community.

If what I wrote made no sense to you that's a failing on my part, I'll make a conscious effort to make my posts more comprehensible in the future. 

As such, I completely excuse the accidental misrepresentation you made of one the points I was trying to make.  It was "using alts to infiltrate a target for your main is not good RP", rather than "alts reduce enjoyment of the game". 

Rather than labelling the argument as a personal opinion and not engaging it, why don't you provide an argument that suggests otherwise?

[scagga]

Reply to Inara (1/2)

Umm.... WHAT? I hope you're not implying that 0.0 entities are the only ones using infiltration. I can name a minimum of 5 currently active instances of infiltration in lowsec/hisec corps, 3 of which are heavy RP corps. And while it does make things rough for a patch of time, once most people get past the knee-jerk reaction they just shake their head and smile. Forums are part of the knee-jerk reaction, and some people get honestly butt-hurt over things like this, but the average intelligent person will go "well shit, they got me".

I'm not implying that which you have interpreted here from my post.  I'm making a reference to the quality of community that one can see in entities that engage in no-holds-barred behaviour, in the context of Mizhara's invocation of the term 'community'.

Do you get mad if someone out-wits you in chess, causing you to make a bad move and get yourself checked? This is the exact same situation.

Of course not (and I do play in the chess league), because outwitting me is a learning experience - but it is a false comparison.  I would get irritated if my opponent had a way of actually knowing what I'm thinking, because in such a case they aren't outwitting me, they are cheating.

Let me give you another example - you arrange a duel with someone, but they have an alt repping them or secretly giving them gang bonuses.  Sure, it can be done, but is it good form?

If you need to resort to adding another character under your control to a storyline, you are extending your control beyond what is available to your character as ingame tools.  Another example - What would your view be if someone logged an alt or two and tried to railroad the way a conversation with you was going to go, or engineered actions (diplomatic/conversation) with the alts to get what their main wanted?  Again, it can be done, but is it good form? 

[scagga]

Reply to Inara (2/2)

I'm going to take a stab at this one. I've yet to see a good reason against using alts aside from "ZOMG, THEY WON'T TURN ON YOU." and claims that it's god-modding.

Reasoned argument for it: If you're actually RPing the characters as separate characters instead of two extensions of the same character, they still retain their own 'identity' and the IC defection chance remains in place. You're also allowing for the chance that the infiltrating character can get 'caught'.

Inara.  By definition, if you are using an alt to infiltrate a target for your main then the alt is acting an extension of the same character. 

Are you trying to suggest that the de facto huge confluence of interests can be totally ignored, that people are able to 'by chance' or 'randomised' roleplay, somehow end up with a character doing the undeviating wish of another against the target of the main?  That people who roll a character that serves the interests of their main is not the same as playing two extensions of the same character?
The purpose behind creating these extra characters is to take control of the game, not play it.

While I appreciate your view on the matter, I don't see how your argument is an effective counter to the assertion that using an alt to infiltrate for your main isn't bad form.

[Mizhara]

I still don't see how it's bad form. It's a separate character with it's own reasons, individuality and motivations. In that case, it's bad form to create an alt for industry because you want to try that out, but can't be arsed training it on the main. This is not really any different. The main has other priorities and the alt becomes a separate character, RP'd as a separate character and for RP reasons it's motivated IC to perform this task for the main for any of a plethora of reasons.

ISK, ideology, threats of violence, or whatever.

I see it as just fine RP, especially since you get to play someone else than your main. Diversity is good for everyone, heh.

[scagga]

Mizhara, I completely disagree.  You are making a false comparison.

"It's a separate character with it's own reasons, individuality and motivations"

This is false, and I have explained why I believe it to be so in my replies to Inara.  If you believe it is correct, please address the argument I laid down against it.

-------------------

The arguments you have made are false comparisons.  I will explain:

You are saying that it is ok to create an alt to learn industry because you 'can't be arsed' to train so on your main.  That is fair, but by saying this you are extending the argument to be about alts in general, and that is not its purpose.  It is not a question of skill training, Mizhara, it is about using an alt as a tool for your main character to achieve IC objectives.

I am saying that if you use a character in such a way, and infiltrate another corporation for your main, then you are using the alt to achieve the objective of your main.  The alt is therefore an extension of your main character as you are in full control of both of them.  There are strong reasons to believe that one cannot separate the two, and strong reasons to believe that they are both serving the interests of one player. 

Therefore the player is trying to have unfair control of a game he is playing against other people, rather than play a game.  If one wanted to 'play' RP infiltration without 'controlling' the game, one could either infiltrate with their main or get someone else to do it for them ICly.
I am saying that when you are competing with another player, your usage of alt infiltration is metagaming and thus poor form in RP.

----------

I accept that it is fun and fine to RP with more than one character, but there is no strong argument for 'diversity' when we are talking about using both characters to achieve one character's goals against another player.  That's like trying to control the prosecution and the defendant's lawyer in a court of law.  Can that possibly be a fair trial if you want it to go a certain way?

[Inara Subaka]

Reply to Inara (1/2)

I'm not implying that which you have interpreted here from my post.  I'm making a reference to the quality of community that one can see in entities that engage in no-holds-barred behaviour, in the context of Mizhara's invocation of the term 'community'.

I'm speaking from experience on this, I can't go into details because it would ruin several ongoing things so you can either accept it or say I'm full of malarkey; it's up to you. Long and short of it is, in some the cases of infiltration/information warfare/things of that nature the involved parties end up with a mutual respect for the other for being able to outsmart them/pull the wool over their eyes.

Of course not (and I do play in the chess league), because outwitting me is a learning experience - but it is a false comparison.  I would get irritated if my opponent had a way of actually knowing what I'm thinking, because in such a case they aren't outwitting me, they are cheating.

They still can't read your mind, EVE is basically chess with thousands of players and millions more pieces to move around. Getting information is the same as finding records of past games that your opponent has played looking for patterns/habits.

Let me give you another example - you arrange a duel with someone, but they have an alt repping them or secretly giving them gang bonuses.  Sure, it can be done, but is it good form?

I don't dual because of that very reason, EVE isn't a place to expect a level playing field. It's as much about the fight as it is about slanting the playing field giving you the higher ground. I'd be one of those people using gang-bonuses if they aren't smart enough to request a fleet with me to guarantee we're the only ones in fleet (for bonuses and warpins for backup fleets).

If you need to resort to adding another character under your control to a storyline, you are extending your control beyond what is available to your character as ingame tools.  Another example - What would your view be if someone logged an alt or two and tried to railroad the way a conversation with you was going to go, or engineered actions (diplomatic/conversation) with the alts to get what their main wanted?  Again, it can be done, but is it good form?

Been done to me before, Inara(character) reacts as if she's dealing with 2+ stubborn people. But it's still interaction between Inara(character) and those characters. It's sometimes frustrating to me(player), but I usually work something out with them OOC in that type of situation. Fortunately, most situations like that aren't high impact and I'm able to adjust my plans.

Reply to Inara (2/2)

Inara.  By definition, if you are using an alt to infiltrate a target for your main then the alt is acting an extension of the same character.

Then when I pay people in a corp to give me information from the inside they are just extensions of my character... that is the exact same situation just different people behind the keyboard.

Are you trying to suggest that the de facto huge confluence of interests can be totally ignored, that people are able to 'by chance' or 'randomised' roleplay, somehow end up with a character doing the undeviating wish of another against the target of the main?  That people who roll a character that serves the interests of their main is not the same as playing two extensions of the same character?

A Conflict of Interests can be ignored, I've done it in the past when a spy "went native". Two (or more) separate characters of the same player are not extensions of the same character. That's like saying Winston Smith and Julia are extensions of the same character because they were both written and controlled by Orwell.

The purpose behind creating these extra characters is to take control of the game, not play it.

Adding more pieces to the table is not control, it's influence. There's always counters to extra pieces.

While I appreciate your view on the matter, I don't see how your argument is an effective counter to the assertion that using an alt to infiltrate for your main isn't bad form.

Because using an alt is just as good/bad form (however you view it) as hiring someone else to do it, or paying someone already on the inside to turncoat information for you.

I still don't see how it's bad form. It's a separate character with it's own reasons, individuality and motivations. In that case, it's bad form to create an alt for industry because you want to try that out, but can't be arsed training it on the main. This is not really any different. The main has other priorities and the alt becomes a separate character, RP'd as a separate character and for RP reasons it's motivated IC to perform this task for the main for any of a plethora of reasons.

ISK, ideology, threats of violence, or whatever.

I see it as just fine RP, especially since you get to play someone else than your main. Diversity is good for everyone, heh.

\o/ This, so frickin' much THIS.


EDIT: TL;DR - Characters aside from your main are the same as other characters controlled by other people in terms of RP.

[Mizhara]

Mizhara, I completely disagree.  You are making a false comparison.

"It's a separate character with it's own reasons, individuality and motivations"

This is false, and I have explained why I believe it to be so in my replies to Inara.  If you believe it is correct, please address the argument I laid down against it.

-------------------

The arguments you have made are false comparisons.  I will explain:

You are saying that it is ok to create an alt to learn industry because you 'can't be arsed' to train so on your main.  That is fair, but by saying this you are extending the argument to be about alts in general, and that is not its purpose.  It is not a question of skill training, Mizhara, it is about using an alt as a tool for your main character to achieve IC objectives.

I am saying that if you use a character in such a way, and infiltrate another corporation for your main, then you are using the alt to achieve the objective of your main.  The alt is therefore an extension of your main character as you are in full control of both of them.  There are strong reasons to believe that one cannot separate the two, and strong reasons to believe that they are both serving the interests of one player. 

Therefore the player is trying to have unfair control of a game he is playing against other people, rather than play a game.  If one wanted to 'play' RP infiltration without 'controlling' the game, one could either infiltrate with their main or get someone else to do it for them ICly.
I am saying that when you are competing with another player, your usage of alt infiltration is metagaming and thus poor form in RP.

----------

I accept that it is fun and fine to RP with more than one character, but there is no strong argument for 'diversity' when we are talking about using both characters to achieve one character's goals against another player.  That's like trying to control the prosecution and the defendant's lawyer in a court of law.  Can that possibly be a fair trial if you want it to go a certain way?

How is it unfair? Anyone can do it. It's a level playing field for everyone involved. Choosing not to do it is a self-imposed handicap, and no different from choosing not to use ECM or whatever else 'because it's cheap'. Eve-Bushido isn't something I find even remotely interesting. When I'm in a conflict, I'll play to win. That means using the tools available to me within the game. Alt infiltration is very much part of the game.

Secondly, Katashi for instance is far from an extension of Mizhara. I as a player have even tried to get him to dabble in Sani Sabik stuff which would make him KoS by Mizhara without even a hint of a question. He'll still work for Miz for the ISK and because he ideologically agrees with the overall non-slavery thing, and partially because he's afraid of her. I don't see why using an alt for infiltration makes the alt 'an extension' in any way. You're just RPing another character who has a similar ideology and likes the idea of hurting a certain entity.

There's nothing 'controlling' the game. The character is no less or no more of a threat against the corp/alliance in question just because it's an alt. Hell, alts are harder to get into a corp, and you're under far greater scrutiny and risk of being caught due to the interactions with the main and how the timezones, behaviour patterns and quirks of the player is the same as your main and so on. That the alt is achieving the main's objective is no different from hiring someone else to do it, but it allows you to have the challenge, the RP and so on.

I don't see it being bad form. I see it as playing the game.

[scagga]

I'm speaking from experience on this, I can't go into details because it would ruin several ongoing things so you can either accept it or say I'm full of malarkey; it's up to you. Long and short of it is, in some the cases of infiltration/information warfare/things of that nature the involved parties end up with a mutual respect for the other for being able to outsmart them/pull the wool over their eyes.

Yes, I'm sure that is the case, sometimes.  The thing is, Inara, we both know that within a large population, people may have a variety of responses to the same situation.  What proportion of these responses need to be negative before one may consider the activity, on the balance, to be poor form?  This is a kind of reasoning that can be used for any type of action in a society. 

It is important to look at the damage that an activity can do, rather than selectively citing positive outcomes in such a way that paints a journalistic-ally false picture of reality.

They still can't read your mind, EVE is basically chess with thousands of players and millions more pieces to move around. Getting information is the same as finding records of past games that your opponent has played looking for patterns/habits.

I don't agree.  In the example we are discussing, one player has an advantage of realtime information, which is the equivalent of knowing the other player's thoughts.  It is not a case of outwitting as you describe.  I suggest a different example is necessary.

I don't dual because of that very reason, EVE isn't a place to expect a level playing field. It's as much about the fight as it is about slanting the playing field giving you the higher ground. I'd be one of those people using gang-bonuses if they aren't smart enough to request a fleet with me to guarantee we're the only ones in fleet (for bonuses and warpins for backup fleets).

You speak to me as if I'm naive.   What's 'smart' to do isn't the focus of the debate.  It's about what one regards/values as good/poor form in the context of RP.

Been done to me before, Inara(character) reacts as if she's dealing with 2+ stubborn people. But it's still interaction between Inara(character) and those characters. It's sometimes frustrating to me(player), but I usually work something out with them OOC in that type of situation. Fortunately, most situations like that aren't high impact and I'm able to adjust my plans.

It is fair to talk from your experience Inara, but what is your view on the matter?

Then when I pay people in a corp to give me information from the inside they are just extensions of my character... that is the exact same situation just different people behind the keyboard.

I disagree, I think that's an excellent, legitimate approach to IC infiltration.  If your character bribes another character in a corporation to give you information, you are using an IC route bereft of metagaming and that is valid.  Your 'agent' in the other corporation could give you false information, could be a double-agent, etc. 

A Conflict of Interests can be ignored, I've done it in the past when a spy "went native". Two (or more) separate characters of the same player are not extensions of the same character. That's like saying Winston Smith and Julia are extensions of the same character because they were both written and controlled by Orwell.

Sorry, that's a false comparison. 

1984 is a book written by George Orwell.  The characters all belong to him.  He is not roleplaying with another writer in his book, where each writer has a character and they are playing a competitive game against each other...

Please reflect and tell me what you really think about the confluence (not conflict) of interests, and inability to separate the fact that alts working for your main are stealth extensions of their character.

Adding more pieces to the table is not control, it's influence. There's always counters to extra pieces.

Please don't go into semantics - if you could kindly review the various definitions of influence and control you will find that control is a more applicable.  (see the control of prosecution and defense analogy)

Because using an alt is just as good/bad form (however you view it) as hiring someone else to do it, or paying someone already on the inside to turncoat information for you.

I'm finding the trend is that I give an argument with reasons as to why it is so, and you just say, 'it is not so', without so much as a 'because'.   I'm telling you that rather than creating someone yourself to infiltrate on behalf of your main, if you hire/bribe someone you are using your IC skills to find someone to infiltrate. 

If you decide to metagame because you fail to find someone to hire/bribe, you are not accepting that perhaps you weren't able to infiltrate.  As an OOC motivation, you want to infiltrate so badly that you will metagame to be able to do so.

[Victoria Stecker]

Note: Accidental wall of text, tl;dr at the bottom.


Infiltration as RP - so long as it involves using your main or using another actual player, it doesn't seem like we've got many issues with it. Creating a turncoat from within a corp, or actually getting your main into it to bring it down - absolutely fine.  The argument then is with alts.

Frankly, RP involving alts is metagaming, because one person controls both characters. While I have no problem with people RPing with alts ( I have between four and six RP characters depending on how you count them ), having alts RP together starts to stink of metagaming. If they happen to have similar views, work together for logical in character reasons, that's fine.

However, having an alt 'working for' the main for an infiltration really reeks. It's not at all the same as getting another player to do it for you, for one simple reason: Trust.

EVE runs on trust. The ability to mercilessly screw someone over means that we have to trust each other not to, and we have to accept that risk.

So here's the issue with the alt: It's not going to lie to you. Your alt is not going to betray you, misinform you, turn traitor, etc. Your alt is under the complete control of the same person playing your main. It's purpose is to work for and serve the main. You (the player) know things that you shouldn't - and it wasn't given to you by another player, who you have to risk trusting.

If you're getting another player to help you with your infiltration, there's always the risk of discovery. If you're using an alt, and you're being careful about it, there may be the risk of them being found out as an infiltrator, but no risk of it being linked back to your main. Even handing over a full API won't tell them that if you were really careful about how you moved assets and ships around.


tl;dr : Use of alts constitutes metagaming. Metagaming and EVE are practically synonymous. However, metagaming and good, enjoyable RP are incompatible.

[Lyn Farel]

Sidenote : I personnally find your posts understandable Scagga.

I play EVE to have fun, and to make it fun for the people I like if it's within my ability... Everyone else is an opponent in this game, someone that is in direct competition for resources or something for some reason. And I see this as being as much IC as it is OOC.

Well, if everyone here is an opponent to each other even OOCly, I am starting to wonder what I am doing here. :/

Are we seriously OOC opponents ? I am not sure if it is what you really meant though, but this is what I understoof of it.

The issue is not morality, so I don't see any obligation for you to explain it.  If you want to use the HTFU and accept wholesale infiltration escape I suggest you look at the quality of relations in entities that do so (e.g. 0.0. alliances) and see how that helps build a good community.  It's all evidenced, I'm sure you will agree, in their forum-posting behaviour to each other.

Umm.... WHAT? I hope you're not implying that 0.0 entities are the only ones using infiltration. I can name a minimum of 5 currently active instances of infiltration in lowsec/hisec corps, 3 of which are heavy RP corps. And while it does make things rough for a patch of time, once most people get past the knee-jerk reaction they just shake their head and smile. Forums are part of the knee-jerk reaction, and some people get honestly butt-hurt over things like this, but the average intelligent person will go "well shit, they got me".

Do you get mad if someone out-wits you in chess, causing you to make a bad move and get yourself checked? This is the exact same situation.

Not really the same situation to my opinion. O_o

Both players know against whom they are playing. In infiltration cases, only one knows.

but the average intelligent person will go "well shit, they got me".

If you imply that people like me are not intelligent, well, so be it. Maybe I missed something with the intelligent gene, but from my personnal experience these repeated infiltrations in AM were a total disaster, human wise (and hell, I was not even in the targeted corp, I lost nothing myself, just had to handle the internal consequences). You can shrug as much as you can, it still poses a threat to mutual trust, relationships, and when you also start to think that some spies also enjoy to actually break an entity by breaking its members to play them against each other...

No, you just don't shake you head and smile when this happens. Not really. But maybe I am not intelligent enough to play the game.

[Bacchanalian]

Out of curiosity Lyn, what character name would I know you by in-game?  I have a sneaking suspicion I've put my foot in my mouth. 

In any case, to address the points raised about not being able to prepare for/defend against infiltration, I call bullshit.

When I joined AM, I was given POS anchoring roles the first week.  I much later used those roles to offline half a dozen AM towers and eject their contents into space for stealing/destruction (incidentally, we still have Yoshito's harbinger preserved in its original state with its original fitting in our corp hangar).  Did I need POS roles?  No.  It was easier to give them to me than it would have been to set up a tower for me or simply tell me to get stuffed.  That's an avoidable risk.  In Rote Kapelle, exactly half a dozen members have access to those roles when it comes to our only in-space assets, and all every one of those are people who need the access (ie, they maintain the tower or own supercapitals that park at the tower). 

Similarly, our corp hangars are strictly organized (AM's were as well, btw, the hangars I emptied were mostly full of useless odds and ends, most of which was melted down and liquidated for a paltry few billion).  Trial members have no access at all.  Rank and file members have access to a repository of ammo, nanite paste, drones, and various odds and ends that are mostly useless, some are simply cheap but commonly used modules (solace reps, y-t8 MWDs, etc).  Were someone to empty that hangar, we'd be out a couple billion in junk.  Probably wouldn't be worth the effort it would take to haul it all out.  Capital hangar is restricted to full members who are confirmed capital pilots.  Said hangar contains fuel and maybe a billion worth of capital mods.  Again, more hassle to haul than its worth.  We have a loaner ship hangar, which is mostly logistics and tacklers, and there might be 3b worth of ship in there at any given point in time (we minimize the number of ships in there and replenish it as needed--minor amount of effort, but better than opening ourselves to 10-20b worth of risk).  Only a handful of people have access to this, generally FCs/recruiters/directors chosen based on their timezones and activity (idea is to have these ships available to fleets around the clock without exposing ourselves too much to the risk of theft).  Finally, our POS maintenance and loot hangars--these are strictly director only.  Some of our most valuable assets aren't even accessible by the directors.  Our t2 BPO is in the hands of one pilot who has been in plenty of places where he could have screwed us over--he created the alliance.  Besides which, the BPO technically belongs to his roommate who no longer plays, so it's more of a personal asset in any case.

Even our tourney wallet is locked down.  I'm the tourney captain and I can't access more than a few billion at a time.  Our alliance executor has the fund, and will transfer the requested amounts to a wallet division in the STIM corp wallet, and from there another director actually makes the purchases and delivers them. 

In other words, we have everything pretty segregated.  There is no one person that could clean out every asset we own, and there are only a couple that could do serious damage, all of whom have been in the corporation for several years, most of whom have been in the corporation since day 1.  Maybe they're biding their time.  Fair play to them if they are.  I highly doubt it, however (okay, maybe Gorion, he's been plotting his revenge for Kimotoro for a long time, but we can't really take him too seriously).

Point is, none of that makes EVE less enjoyable to me.  None of it causes me grief when I log in.  If anything, it makes me less concerned about infiltration, because I know that even in my position I couldn't do enough to cripple the corporation, so I'm secure in the knowledge that no matter what happens, our assets will never be completely stolen.  As for the personal relationships, I've met 2 of our directors, have my business' website and email hosted by another, and have the phone numbers of all the rest--addresses for some because we've shipped computer parts around when someone had a gfx card die or some such and one of us had a spare.  And I trust all of them simply because they've been in a position to cripple us in the past and didn't do it. 

Trusting our members?  I trust them with my ships in space.  I trust them with most intel.  I don't trust them any more than that because I have no need to.  Sensitive intel is closely guarded, and again, information is compartmentalized in a similar manner to our assets.  It means more channels open than most, but ultimately works.  If I get drunk and talk a little too much about something sensitive on TS?  I get mails/convos/blinky channels from rank and file members with messages like "you sure you should be sharing that with us?" 

In any case, the absolute worst case scenario if a non-director were to strike?  Our forums leaked to Kugu--quality drama, lots of lolling, nothing of serious concern would get leaked--again, non-directors won't have access to the dangerous stuff.  They clean out let's say 10b of stuff, make people mad for a bit, but we log in that same night and take a fleet out to shoot stuff, which is what we do and the only thing that really matters in the end.  If we're in space making people's ships explode, the rest is just a bunch of complicated detail that the directors are saddled with handling.

Say a spy spends a couple of years being active and in space with us and we decide to make them a director and they steal from us?  Their loss tbh.  They'll be hard pressed to find another group that does what we do.  We're out a few dozen billion.  No more loaner logistics or dictors.  Oh noes.  Maybe our tower gets offlined and stolen.  We all check it with an alt before logging a super on anyway.  We have a couple backups for when that one dies (it will eventually get shot at by someone, surely).  Our director forums get leaked to Kugu, more drama and butthurt happens, but outside half a dozen members that were probably already on the ropes in terms of their position in the alliance, no one ragequits, we move on and keep shooting people in space. 

Morale hit?  Meh, maybe a little.  End of the day, everyone assumes we have spies in the alliance, and frankly it's a bit of a running joke.  We have a couple of guys we recruited from alliances that are either shooting at us/we're shooting at on a regular basis, or are a team we faced in the last tourney.  As a result, they're "Rooks and Kings spai" or "Genos spai" or whatever.  I'm still a PL spai.  Hell, we post shoutouts to PL/RnK/TEST/Goons in any of our capital CTAs or public tourney threads.  It's only a matter of time before we derp 50b in capitals into a trap.  v0v  Undock, it's dead etc etc.  Oh, and no one knows the tourney setup until an hour before the match besides myself and the guy who hauls it for me (the same one that hosts my business site).  And even then the only people that find out before the ships hit the field are the ones sitting in them.  Best a spy could do w/re the tourney is discover about 8 different setups that we've been testing and make a wild guess at which one I'll pick.  And even then I tend to mix them up (different flavor of ewar, damage drones vs rep drones vs ECM drones, swapping the entire race of ships around, etc).  Basics stay the same, pilots I choose are always pilots I know can fly the ship and I check their skill sheets to verify that they're the best I have available for said hulls, so there's no issue with pilots going into a fight clueless. 

Anyway, I guess my long rambling point is you can insulate yourself from damage by simply being careful.  Is it inconvenient sometimes?  Sure.  A lot of folks don't want to get up at 9 am on a Saturday to find out whether or not they might wind up flying in the tourney out of the 50 people who log on.  But we all accept that espionage is a very real part of the tourney and we all want to do as well as we can, and as such we accept the methods we use as optimal.  Similarly, it can be a pain when someone wants to buy some trimarks out of the corp hangar and no one is online to sell them.  But all the things directors can do for members are luxuries.  We don't need them.  We existed just fine without them for a long time.  People have their own logistics chains in place and are used to doing it themselves if they can't wait a day or a few hours.  And again, everyone feels more comfortable the way it is--considering how many of our members spy (and how much hilarity comes out of it--live stream of our targets' TS as we titan-bridge them, for instance:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oPC9bajZ8g ), we all know the risks and want to minimize our collective exposure to them.

I ultimately don't see the problem.  You probably have half a dozen people you trust in the alliance.  Let them have the keys.  Tell everyone else that it's nothing personal (because it's not), but they'll have to ask for someone with the keys to help them with XYZ. 

Also, your welcome for the free intel.    The conclusion you're looking for is "not worth the bother". 

Wow, wall of rambling text.  I blame growing up in Star Fraction reading Jade posts as a young impressionable pilot.   

[Inara Subaka]

I'm speaking from experience on this, I can't go into details because it would ruin several ongoing things so you can either accept it or say I'm full of malarkey; it's up to you. Long and short of it is, in some the cases of infiltration/information warfare/things of that nature the involved parties end up with a mutual respect for the other for being able to outsmart them/pull the wool over their eyes.

Yes, I'm sure that is the case, sometimes.  The thing is, Inara, we both know that within a large population, people may have a variety of responses to the same situation.  What proportion of these responses need to be negative before one may consider the activity, on the balance, to be poor form?  This is a kind of reasoning that can be used for any type of action in a society. 

It is important to look at the damage that an activity can do, rather than selectively citing positive outcomes in such a way that paints a journalistic-ally false picture of reality.

Then because another portion will react badly (rather than seeing it as a well played maneuvering), there should be a RP blanket protection from it? I'm honestly asking your opinion, because I fail to see how this would help the situation at all and could potentially make the RP community 'soft' to the point they'd be ineffective at playing the game alongside non-RPers because they expect some type of blanket protection from this type of activity.

They still can't read your mind, EVE is basically chess with thousands of players and millions more pieces to move around. Getting information is the same as finding records of past games that your opponent has played looking for patterns/habits.

I don't agree.  In the example we are discussing, one player has an advantage of realtime information, which is the equivalent of knowing the other player's thoughts.  It is not a case of outwitting as you describe.  I suggest a different example is necessary.

Even with realtime information, you're not a mind-reader (and trust me, I wish I could have read the minds of some of the places I've been involved). But chess is probably a far too simple example... But I can't think of any other game examples  The idea I'm trying to convey is that even with active incoming information, there are still far too many variables for an infiltrator to accurately assess, even an alt-spy. Unless the alt-spy is in a director/ceo position, at which point there's no need to destroy what you're in, merely reshape it to something useful (this is also much easier than destroying a corp/alliance).

I don't dual because of that very reason, EVE isn't a place to expect a level playing field. It's as much about the fight as it is about slanting the playing field giving you the higher ground. I'd be one of those people using gang-bonuses if they aren't smart enough to request a fleet with me to guarantee we're the only ones in fleet (for bonuses and warpins for backup fleets).

You speak to me as if I'm naive.   What's 'smart' to do isn't the focus of the debate.  It's about what one regards/values as good/poor form in the context of RP.

Morality in EVE has been shown by PF as... vastly different than what our modern perspective of morality is. Many would say lacking comparatively, I'll be politically correct and stick with different.

I don't see using secret gang-bonuses, or neutral repping, or cyno-fits, or <insert myriad of other topics of debate> of poor form in the EVE context. If it were in modern society, with modern determination of values of good/poor form... hell yes I'd be throwing a fit, but in the context of EVE and the environment laid out I see absolutely no poor form to it.

Been done to me before, Inara(character) reacts as if she's dealing with 2+ stubborn people. But it's still interaction between Inara(character) and those characters. It's sometimes frustrating to me(player), but I usually work something out with them OOC in that type of situation. Fortunately, most situations like that aren't high impact and I'm able to adjust my plans.

It is fair to talk from your experience Inara, but what is your view on the matter?

What do you mean? I dealt with it, or rather Inara(character) dealt with it. If people want to make use of tools at their disposal, I encourage them to do so. If they feel the situation requires two separate individuals to address the matter.... all the power to them.

I've used a second character a time or two in RP at the same scene, sometimes their goals are inline and they get along, occasionally agreeing and making points the other couldn't make due to perspective when discussing something with another character that's not mine. Other times, they disagree whole-heartedly, and I find my characters taking sides against each other with other people's characters. It's part of the game, and one I find both enjoyable and necessary at some level.

Then when I pay people in a corp to give me information from the inside they are just extensions of my character... that is the exact same situation just different people behind the keyboard.

I disagree, I think that's an excellent, legitimate approach to IC infiltration.  If your character bribes another character in a corporation to give you information, you are using an IC route bereft of metagaming and that is valid.  Your 'agent' in the other corporation could give you false information, could be a double-agent, etc. 

If you're playing the second character as a separate character and not an extension of the first character, there's still the chance of false information/turncoating/double-agent shenanigans. Because some people are unwilling to allow that on an OOC level doesn't make the RP aspect of it any less valid.

If Inara joined EM (lolwat?) and spent a couple years working through the ranks, finally got in a position to do damage and pulled the trigger... you'd be okay with that? But, If it was my alt that was hired by Inara to do it, and spent a couple years working through the ranks, finally getting where they could do damage and did the same... it'd be wrong? And if I somehow convinced Elsebeth to turncoat (again, lolwat?), using her position as CEO of Gradient to pull the trigger, that would be okay as well?

By my count, all three scenarios are equal in terms of good/poor form.

A Conflict of Interests can be ignored, I've done it in the past when a spy "went native". Two (or more) separate characters of the same player are not extensions of the same character. That's like saying Winston Smith and Julia are extensions of the same character because they were both written and controlled by Orwell.

Sorry, that's a false comparison. 

1984 is a book written by George Orwell.  The characters all belong to him.  He is not roleplaying with another writer in his book, where each writer has a character and they are playing a competitive game against each other...

Fair point , comparing book characters to RP characters is probably... weaksauce.

Please reflect and tell me what you really think about the confluence (not conflict) of interests, and inability to separate the fact that alts working for your main are stealth extensions of their character.

Going back to the random (and impossible), Inara(character) hires Elsebeth(character) to destroy EM: There's a very clear separate of who Inara(character) and Elsebeth(character) is, right? Now, let's look at it as Inara(character) hires Alt#42(character). Assuming the fact that Alt#42(character) isn't known to be played by me(player), people are going to react to Alt#42(character) as they would another character. Alt#42(character) also has the ability to decide that they like Elsebeth(character) enough that they couldn't wreck everything she's worked so hard to create in EM, at which point Alt#42(character) either misleads Inara(character) with bad information or informs Inara(character) of the cancellation of the contract... the exact same way another player would go about doing it.

Yes, this does get tedious in terms of separating IC and OOC information, and which characters are privy to what information. But it's a level of intrigue that many people enjoy, and I find that accusing the people who do enjoy that particular style of play as doing it wrong (in different words), insulting.

Adding more pieces to the table is not control, it's influence. There's always counters to extra pieces.

Please don't go into semantics - if you could kindly review the various definitions of influence and control you will find that control is a more applicable.  (see the control of prosecution and defense analogy)

I'll agree to disagree with you here. I'll go back to the chess analogy: I can influence your next move by what my moves are, but I can't control you and force you to make a move (with the exception of certain check maneuvers ). Eve just has several factors more options of 'moves', but I still cannot force someone to make a particular choice. If I could, I would  .

While I appreciate your view on the matter, I don't see how your argument is an effective counter to the assertion that using an alt to infiltrate for your main isn't bad form.

Because using an alt is just as good/bad form (however you view it) as hiring someone else to do it, or paying someone already on the inside to turncoat information for you.

I'm finding the trend is that I give an argument with reasons as to why it is so, and you just say, 'it is not so', without so much as a 'because'.   I'm telling you that rather than creating someone yourself to infiltrate on behalf of your main, if you hire/bribe someone you are using your IC skills to find someone to infiltrate. 

I went back and pyramid quoted for a reason, the 'because' was in response to the unspoke question of how it is an effective counter to claiming that the use of an alt is bad form.

My point is, there is no difference in mechanical outcome, from a second character or a well paid spy/turncoat. I see no reason to demonize one play-style because someone sees it as 'bad form'.

If you decide to metagame because you fail to find someone to hire/bribe, you are not accepting that perhaps you weren't able to infiltrate.  As an OOC motivation, you want to infiltrate so badly that you will metagame to be able to do so.

It depends on the situation, sometimes I prefer to get my own hands down in the meat and potatoes of the situation rather than hiring it out. Though, when running numerous situations at the same time, it's more productive to hire it out and analyze the information coming in for dissemination to the relevant parties.

If one method fails, it depends on the IC necessity of that particular situation succeeding as to whether Inara(character) will pursue further action. If it's important, of course she'll try to find another way to get what she wants.

My motivations for infiltration/information gathering/etc... are almost always IC. Only some of my old work, pre-BL3H, was OOC motivated; and that was for pure profit, not RP. Also, another point of note, Inara(character) rarely does information gathering for her own purposes, it's usually because someone is hiring her to acquire that information (there's usually 3-5 levels of information exchange between inside source and the entity that makes use of the information).

Well, if everyone here is an opponent to each other even OOCly, I am starting to wonder what I am doing here. :/

Of course we're opponents (mostly IC, moderately OOC), that doesn't mean we can't be cordial and friends at the same time. I'm good friends with some people IRL, but ingame, I'm going to do whatever I can to turn their spaceshippixels into spacedustpixels.

Are we seriously OOC opponents ? I am not sure if it is what you really meant though, but this is what I understoof of it.

OOC, we are both playing a game, and we both have the goal of 'winning' (whatever our personal definition of that may be). Chances are though, our goals mean we have a similar pool of resources, which makes us opponents on some level, yes. The same as any game puts people as opponents.

The issue is not morality, so I don't see any obligation for you to explain it.  If you want to use the HTFU and accept wholesale infiltration escape I suggest you look at the quality of relations in entities that do so (e.g. 0.0. alliances) and see how that helps build a good community.  It's all evidenced, I'm sure you will agree, in their forum-posting behaviour to each other.

Umm.... WHAT? I hope you're not implying that 0.0 entities are the only ones using infiltration. I can name a minimum of 5 currently active instances of infiltration in lowsec/hisec corps, 3 of which are heavy RP corps. And while it does make things rough for a patch of time, once most people get past the knee-jerk reaction they just shake their head and smile. Forums are part of the knee-jerk reaction, and some people get honestly butt-hurt over things like this, but the average intelligent person will go "well shit, they got me".

Do you get mad if someone out-wits you in chess, causing you to make a bad move and get yourself checked? This is the exact same situation.

Not really the same situation to my opinion. O_o

Both players know against whom they are playing. In infiltration cases, only one knows.

Eh, I think this comes down to perspective.

If you imply that people like me are not intelligent, well, so be it. Maybe I missed something with the intelligent gene, but from my personnal experience these repeated infiltrations in AM were a total disaster, human wise (and hell, I was not even in the targeted corp, I lost nothing myself, just had to handle the internal consequences). You can shrug as much as you can, it still poses a threat to mutual trust, relationships, and when you also start to think that some spies also enjoy to actually break an entity by breaking its members to play them against each other...

No, you just don't shake you head and smile when this happens. Not really. But maybe I am not intelligent enough to play the game.

I'm not implying that you're not intelligent, I said the average person. Not everyone will shrug it off, as this conversation would be unnecessary if they did. I play the game under the assumption that at least 2 of the people I fly with are providing intelligence to someone else, and that's even if I was in a corp full of me and my own alts. It doesn't change the fact that I trust the folks I fly with to do their jobs and I'll do mine.


Damn it, I'm posting Walls of Text too... I'm blaming Demetri.


TL;DR - Inara(character) is a separate entity from MyOtherCharacters(character), even though they are played by me(player). And in the grand scheme of things, MyOtherCharacters(character) are just as useful/not useful as a hired infiltrator(character) belonging to someone else(player); and just as morally right/wrong too ^_^.

[Graanvlokkie]

TL;DR - Inara(character) is a separate entity from MyOtherCharacters(character), even though they are played by me(player). And in the grand scheme of things, MyOtherCharacters(character) are just as useful/not useful as a hired infiltrator(character) belonging to someone else(player); and just as morally right/wrong too ^_^.

This statement appears to be the crux of the whole argument. Everyone seems to pretty much agree with all other major aspects.

Maybe this is true for Inara, but I am not sure that it is true the the majority of other specific purpose RP infiltration alts.

[scagga]

Then because another portion will react badly (rather than seeing it as a well played maneuvering), there should be a RP blanket protection from it? I'm honestly asking your opinion, because I fail to see how this would help the situation at all and could potentially make the RP community 'soft' to the point they'd be ineffective at playing the game alongside non-RPers because they expect some type of blanket protection from this type of activity.

Inara I'm really not suggesting that there should be RP blanket protection, and I don't believe I've ever expressed the view that there should be enforced rules and norms for RP organisations.   That, in my view, is jumping to conclusions.  The whole purpose of this discussion is not to lay a precedent for a formal ruling that all should adopt. 

The purpose is to explore and better understand the interface between RP and infiltration in EvE.  At this juncture we are discussing whether a certain common EvE practise is good form in RP, from the point of discussion from principle.  That is not to judge whether it is good/bad form in EvE.   

Regarding the bit you were replying to, I think one risks oversimplifying the argument if one says 'well you shouldn't do that in EvE because it pisses lots of people off'.  The point I was making was, when does a certain behaviour become viewed as 'bad form'.  e.g. Forum asshattery (sp.?), scamming is widely viewed as a poor practise, but that doesn't make it invalid and divorced from playing EvE - otherwise there would be rules against it. 

Even with realtime information, you're not a mind-reader (and trust me, I wish I could have read the minds of some of the places I've been involved). But chess is probably a far too simple example... But I can't think of any other game examples  The idea I'm trying to convey is that even with active incoming information, there are still far too many variables for an infiltrator to accurately assess, even an alt-spy. Unless the alt-spy is in a director/ceo position, at which point there's no need to destroy what you're in, merely reshape it to something useful (this is also much easier than destroying a corp/alliance).

I agree we may need to let that example rest.  Have you watched the movie "lock, stock and two smoking barrels"?  I think the game of brag between Harry the hatchet and Eddy is a good example we can work with.  Harry has his bodyguard using a camera to read the cards of his opponents, and is relaying information to him, which gives him an advantage that wins him the game.

If you haven't watched it, there is a 6 minute sequence here for your perusal and enjoyment:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLGWuWt8wfY

I think it is a good analogous illustration. It's also a great movie.

I don't see using secret gang-bonuses, or neutral repping, or cyno-fits, or <insert myriad of other topics of debate> of poor form in the EVE context. If it were in modern society, with modern determination of values of good/poor form... hell yes I'd be throwing a fit, but in the context of EVE and the environment laid out I see absolutely no poor form to it.

Ok, our views seem to differ on this matter.  My own view is that giving yourself an undisclosed unfair advantage is not good form when arranging a duel.  Sure, there are characters out there who lie and deceive, and that is part of EvE.  I simply pass a personal judgement that I view such choices as poor form (not that I would never do them myself).

What do you mean? I dealt with it, or rather Inara(character) dealt with it. If people want to make use of tools at their disposal, I encourage them to do so. If they feel the situation requires two separate individuals to address the matter.... all the power to them.

I've used a second character a time or two in RP at the same scene, sometimes their goals are inline and they get along, occasionally agreeing and making points the other couldn't make due to perspective when discussing something with another character that's not mine. Other times, they disagree whole-heartedly, and I find my characters taking sides against each other with other people's characters. It's part of the game, and one I find both enjoyable and necessary at some level.

What I mean is, one is using an OOC tool (i.e. an extra account, and extra investment of a subscription) to advance an IC agenda, that is, according to my view on RP, best built using IC actions.  For instance, constructing cardboard cut-outs of people, animating them and pretending they're your friends, rather than actually having friends, in a world where people cannot discern between the cardboard people and the real.  That is what one is doing in EvE by metagaming with 'IC' alts. 

It's like that rumour I heard about aluminium magnate who bankrolled his alliance with $50,000 worth of ETCs.  Sure, it's allowed in EvE and there are no official censures against this, but is it good form?  Please don't confuse poor form with 'against the rules', or 'inconvenience that I can cope with'.

If you're playing the second character as a separate character and not an extension of the first character, there's still the chance of false information/turncoating/double-agent shenanigans. Because some people are unwilling to allow that on an OOC level doesn't make the RP aspect of it any less valid.

It makes it less valid because in reality the option isn't an option.  The reality is that people do not operate according to such utopian principles.  Alts used to infiltrate against the targets of the main are used as extensions of the first character, and it is not plausible believe otherwise until there is evidence that they are not.  All alt IC infiltrations I have come to learn of have supported my view, can you produce examples that do not?

If Inara joined EM (lolwat?) and spent a couple years working through the ranks, finally got in a position to do damage and pulled the trigger... you'd be okay with that? But, If it was my alt that was hired by Inara to do it, and spent a couple years working through the ranks, finally getting where they could do damage and did the same... it'd be wrong?

Exactly right Inara, because you are RP'ing your main with her motivations.  If you are undertaking an OOC action, creating an alt to do Inara's will, rather than using an IC method to achieve an IC goal, you are metagaming and I view that as poor form.  Don't confuse that with 'wrong', I re-emphasise.  It isn't wrong in EvE terms, it is poor quality RP for the many reasons I have explained.

And if I somehow convinced Elsebeth to turncoat (again, lolwat?), using her position as CEO of Gradient to pull the trigger, that would be okay as well?

Yup, that would be fine, because you are using Inara's IC abilities to achieve an IC goal and Elsebeth is using her IC decisions to influence her IC path.  Rather than you creating additional factors in a story that is essentially between two players.
If there is an infiltrator between the two of you it should be a third player that isn't party to 'unknowable' IC knowledge of either of you and is able to make independent IC choices.  Otherwise one of the players is trying to rig the 'game'.

Going back to the random (and impossible), Inara(character) hires Elsebeth(character) to destroy EM: There's a very clear separate of who Inara(character) and Elsebeth(character) is, right? Now, let's look at it as Inara(character) hires Alt#42(character). Assuming the fact that Alt#42(character) isn't known to be played by me(player), people are going to react to Alt#42(character) as they would another character. Alt#42(character) also has the ability to decide that they like Elsebeth(character) enough that they couldn't wreck everything she's worked so hard to create in EM, at which point Alt#42(character) either misleads Inara(character) with bad information or informs Inara(character) of the cancellation of the contract... the exact same way another player would go about doing it.

I think that's a excellent illustration of good quality RP and good quality IC infiltration, and it is very pleasing to see such insight on your part.  I'll go through this bit by bit.  Yes, there is separation of who Inara and Elsebeth are.  Let us, as per your example, assume that Alt#42 (nice number by the way), is hired by Inara to infiltrate against Elsebeth.   The character playing Alt#42 is unknown to Inara.  Therefore the Alt is independent of Inara and can be considered as a validly separate character.   This is achievable in game, and requires laudable skill in my view.

Yes, this does get tedious in terms of separating IC and OOC information, and which characters are privy to what information. But it's a level of intrigue that many people enjoy, and I find that accusing the people who do enjoy that particular style of play as doing it wrong (in different words), insulting.

I am not accusing anyone of anything (no names anywhere, eh?). 
I am not accusing anyone of doing anything 'wrong', which I have already stated clearly.

I am providing a reasoned argument for why certain practises are better/worse than others in the context of RP.  Do not confuse that with right/wrong.

If there are valid reasons to support my positions then there is evidence that they are correct unless there is more convincing evidence against them. 

People should not be offended by a well-evidenced, politely and respectfully written argument that suggests that their practises are poor form.  That is a flaw on their part and they should aim to provide an argument that defends their position. 

If they cannot because there is no convincing defence, then they should accept that they have no valid reasons to believe that anyone is wrong to say that they are engaged in practises that are of poor form.

With the subject matter in context, becoming offended would suggest that they are as 'fickle' as the way they describe their 'victims' who get angry with their behaviour (alt infiltration), and perhaps are not even of  'average intelligence', as someone in this thread suggested.

I'll agree to disagree with you here. I'll go back to the chess analogy: I can influence your next move by what my moves are, but I can't control you and force you to make a move (with the exception of certain check maneuvers ). Eve just has several factors more options of 'moves', but I still cannot force someone to make a particular choice. If I could, I would  .

Again, I suggest you refer to a dictionary and look up the various meanings of control.  You are using a single definition.  With the various definitions considered, control has closer meaning.  I'll copy/paste the definitions if that is too much to ask.

My point is, there is no difference in mechanical outcome, from a second character or a well paid spy/turncoat. I see no reason to demonize one play-style because someone sees it as 'bad form'.

'Demonization' is an exaggeration.  The results do not justify the means.  If you are an adherent to the view that any means can be used to achieve a goal, let me know so I can produce my valid arguments against that.

Of course we're opponents (mostly IC, moderately OOC), that doesn't mean we can't be cordial and friends at the same time. I'm good friends with some people IRL, but ingame, I'm going to do whatever I can to turn their spaceshippixels into spacedustpixels.

My view is that if we are competing IC, we use IC methods to compete with each other.  If we are competing OOC, we used OOC methods to compete with each other.  If we are using both at the same time, we are effectively using OOC methods with IC input to maintain the pretence of an overall IC operation.  You memefication of ingame assets as 'pixels' is a perfect illustration of that.

OOC, we are both playing a game, and we both have the goal of 'winning' (whatever our personal definition of that may be). Chances are though, our goals mean we have a similar pool of resources, which makes us opponents on some level, yes. The same as any game puts people as opponents.

OOC, of course we may want to win (whatever our personal objective are).
If one is a RPer -  IC, one wants to RP and our characters want to 'win' (i.e. achieve their goals). 
As RPers, one acts within the confines of what one thinks their characters would do as well as the confines of what one knows their characters can do.

An RP story is a collection of IC actions with IC reactions.  Usage of OOC actions to achieve IC objectives is poor RP by simple definition if we agree with the previous sentence.

[Lyn Farel]

Out of curiosity Lyn, what character name would I know you by in-game?  I have a sneaking suspicion I've put my foot in my mouth.

In any case, to address the points raised about not being able to prepare for/defend against infiltration, I call bullshit.

Oh I never said that. I even said that it would never have happened in my own corporation, every power was locked to 3 directors only (RL friends).

For the rest I was speaking about trust, but not the mere trust you grant someone by giving him some roles. I was refering to friendship and relationship. Your infiltration was a soft one. Some are a lot, lot worse. Especially when the spy starts to play people against each other over bullshit. This is totally destructive.

My ingame nickname is the same, Lyn Farel. I was part of the directorship of Ubiqtorat when it happened. We were living in 3D-CQU with our own POSes. We were granted the whole executorship of the alliance some time after, and it lasted several months before we had to leave the alliance half for its internal problems, and half for our own corp health memberbase wise (that was another issue).

Well, if everyone here is an opponent to each other even OOCly, I am starting to wonder what I am doing here. :/

Of course we're opponents (mostly IC, moderately OOC), that doesn't mean we can't be cordial and friends at the same time. I'm good friends with some people IRL, but ingame, I'm going to do whatever I can to turn their spaceshippixels into spacedustpixels.

Are we seriously OOC opponents ? I am not sure if it is what you really meant though, but this is what I understoof of it.

OOC, we are both playing a game, and we both have the goal of 'winning' (whatever our personal definition of that may be). Chances are though, our goals mean we have a similar pool of resources, which makes us opponents on some level, yes. The same as any game puts people as opponents.

Ok then I understood poorly. I understood opponents not as adversaries on a game, but opponents directly between each other. We are not, we are players. This is what makes a difference between playing a war and be part of a real war. So yes, I misunderstood the meaning.

In any case it does not change my point, again. Infiltration done between RP entities has a great potential of damage for the RP community. I am not saying that roleplayers should not play on the same level of the non-RPers and not infiltrate them.

I can assure you I will shrug off and say well played to some infiltrator that will only cause isk damage by being a RP turncoat, or kill an expensive ship of us by doing so, or whatever. I will certainly not be so patient with someone playing on people OOC friendship and/or playing them against each other in the sake of the total annihilation of the infiltrated entity. Actually I will probably put him directly in my blocked/black list with profound disgust. This is why it is destructive if it happens between our different RP entities.

EDIT : In any case, we can still argue that people reacting badly to infiltration is stupid, or a lack of intelligence, or maybe that they should just take a breath and chill out, or even that their views on matters of OOC ethics between players are wrong and thus they are doing it wrong by reacting like this, it will never change that a lot of people will react badly to it, and it is a constant threat to the RP community when it happens between our RP entities. 

TL;DR - Inara(character) is a separate entity from MyOtherCharacters(character), even though they are played by me(player). And in the grand scheme of things, MyOtherCharacters(character) are just as useful/not useful as a hired infiltrator(character) belonging to someone else(player); and just as morally right/wrong too ^_^.

This statement appears to be the crux of the whole argument. Everyone seems to pretty much agree with all other major aspects.

Maybe this is true for Inara, but I am not sure that it is true the the majority of other specific purpose RP infiltration alts.

For me playing yourself as a character in roleplay is fundamentaly bad form. Playing a mirror of yourself that remains a totally different character, yes. Playing yourself, very bad form imo.
[/quote]