Print

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

[Senn Typhos]

Well, I guess Hussein did more good than harm 

I just got a mail from CCP. Apparently they spotted the ANN link in GD, and want to get ANN listed as an official fansite.

Whaaaat, that's awesome!
Way to go, bossman.

[Valdezi]

Have to say, after this: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1418776

If this is going to be the way the game is played, I don't think anyone can complain if we respond in kind.

[Casiella]

* Casiella loves it.

[Syylara/Yaansu]

I prefer news articles that give multiple sides things to chew on/clamp onto/hit the other side for.

However, as seen, one-sided articles can be used against the author/entity it supports, as well >:9.

[Seriphyn]

Hmmmm....

Getting ANN to become an official fansite is good...this would imply that fan-made news items would be 'accepted' by CCP.

Prior to that, however, I would [have] concurred that the Intaki Assembly putting in a secession bill is definitely a very dangerous thing to do. The precedent of it, even if it wasn't to pass through, involve a major in-universe AND major in-game change. Compare that to Aicar's article, which just drags up a bunch of random, invented NPCs and slaps their opinions as headline.

Withholding anything regarding fictional quality, I would have to agree that the article is going too far in terms of taking PF liberties; considering the storyline of secession was brought up by CCP, it is definitely something THEY would be storywriting about. Not to mention the PF element of blahblahblah, Intaki secession is minority view blahblah etc. all the same before.

HOWEVER, my personal response is to "ignore" that news article. Not even disprove it IC, hell no, just not even address it IC, or acknowledge it. This prevents getting into the whole godmodding the godmod or whatever sticky business that happens. Basically, that's my opinion, but I won't be enforcing that OOC opinion in an IC fashion, because that hurts RP.

[Casiella]

Seri, first of all, the article never said the Assembly took up the bill. One politician tried to propose it and it died in subcommitee -- no precedent whatsoever.

Also, "official" fansite status doesn't mean that the writing there is canonical in any way. Just means that CCP thinks it doesn't suck.

[Senn Typhos]

I seem to recall a gigantic fuss followed by an equally gigantic thread about whether or not it was alright for players to take control of IG forces or otherwise slightly manipulate canon characters/groups for the sake of interesting PF, so long as one didn't overstretch their reach...

I can't remember how it ended. >>

[Syylara/Yaansu]

I seem to recall a gigantic fuss followed by an equally gigantic thread about whether or not it was alright for players to take control of IG forces or otherwise slightly manipulate canon characters/groups for the sake of interesting PF, so long as one didn't overstretch their reach...

I can't remember how it ended. >>

It ends the way things usually end when someone jumps up and down making a fuss about how things could potentially go badly and nobody listens.  someone ultimately decides to become the very disruption they warned about, to "demonstrate the dangers of letting it go too far".

I mean I certainly hope it isn't that anyone takes their internet spaceships so seriously they engage in hypocrisy to win pretend internet spaceship forum arguments.

I find delicious irony in the fact this has done more to damage the Scope's credibility than anything else (a canon entity which makes it even more potentially dangerous to wield as a prop than a made up one).

Ultimately this is a self-correcting issue, as I tried to express in other discussions the community at large ultimately has control, not one person wielding props.  If something goes too far out of bounds for believability, it gets widely rejected IC as "typical GalNet posturing with no substance."  If public belief about the state of things at some point is found to be contradictory to reality because of some official plot development, well that happens in real life, too.

[Seriphyn]

I think the general rule should be...

Something that will be developed on by CCP - Do not touch
Something that will NEVER be touched by CCP - RP/fictionalize away.

I think it's a fair rule.

[Milo Caman]

Something that will NEVER be touched by CCP - RP/fictionalize away.

Sooooo- most of the storyline?

[Syylara/Yaansu]

I think the general rule should be...

Something that will be developed on by CCP - Do not touch
Something that will NEVER be touched by CCP - RP/fictionalize away.

I think it's a fair rule.

I have my own general rules

Something that you enjoy doing, participate in
Something you won't enjoy doing, avoid
What someone else is doing, don't worry about

I think there's also a world of difference between in-depth articles adding to the EVE tapestry with care and showing multiple viewpoints and the current display of using a canonical entity to make it look like a single character has created a nation-wide fuss like Aicar is using The Scope to attack Jules.