I have to laugh at issues like the proximity of a fake digital character being compared to actual bullying. There are people who starve to death on a daily basis and I wish I could take off in a space ship. I can't stand how disgustingly insulated and complacent humanity has gotten when they can't understand the difference between a video game character and their own bodies. Are you honestly asking for in game police officers and security guards? You're out of your mind.
I have to laugh at issues like the proximity of a fake digital character being compared to actual bullying. There are people who starve to death on a daily basis and I wish I could take off in a space ship. I can't stand how disgustingly insulated and complacent humanity has gotten when they can't understand the difference between a video game character and their own bodies. Are you honestly asking for in game police officers and security guards? You're out of your mind.
its yes.. "Just a game" Its also a question of.. "Being a decent human being in real life or here" if u feel justified in saying this then.. go say this to your mother.. yor sister .. or how about any person in real life to there face.. and good luckwith that..
These come standard in most MMO's--the idea of in-game GM's is far from an exotic concept. I don't think it's too much to ask to have a sufficient number of them relative to this game's population to perform their job up to the standard observed in MMO's like Warcraft.
Within the confines of the game environment, rules exist in the TOS governing acceptable and unacceptable behavior, and there is nothing unreasonable in expecting enforcement of those rules. Accepting the EULA means accepting the idea that those rules may be enforced against oneself in the event of a violation. That PWE/Cryptic has not enforced those rules in-game to the degree permitted by the EULA does not suddenly make it an outlandish act for them to change their minds and do so.
But if the disagreement is with the idea of such a EULA in the first place, if you consider too cushy or sheltered, there are environments like EVE Online that might be more to your liking, since they set the expectation right up front that there are very minimal rules and you enter at your own risk. Perhaps you would feel better supporting a business more in line with your stated "ideals."
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
I have to laugh at issues like the proximity of a fake digital character being compared to actual bullying. There are people who starve to death on a daily basis and I wish I could take off in a space ship. I can't stand how disgustingly insulated and complacent humanity has gotten when they can't understand the difference between a video game character and their own bodies. Are you honestly asking for in game police officers and security guards? You're out of your mind.
I dare you, ask any socialized, educated adult that bullying in videogames can't do any harm, and that only real life bullying can be harmfull. Trust me, every response you will get is denial. Denial of your words. This is exactly what is wrong. People think that bullying online can't do harm, so that's why they do it. No wait, not true. They WANT to do harm. It's a fact that there are kids in the world that are suicidal because of online bullying. Even suicidal attempts, failed and succeeded. You are still telling me that we cannot compare real life bullying and online bullying?
I suggest you empathize a bit, read more about the world, instead of replying without even thinking.
"There are people starving" comparisation is even worse. There are children beaten at school, but comparing with children starving to death makes it allright. That's what you practically said. So, you have a opinion about us comparing, and to formulate your opinion you use a worser comparisation. You need a larger mirror, mate. Because your ego can't fit in your current mirror.
I agree with tomaswille.... so i posse a simple question to all who say " Itsjust a game" or " it cant realy hurt anyone."
Why do you choose to hurt folks on the internet... but not in real life? Why do u choose to make someones gaming experiance misrable .. yet .. get upset when someone dose you wrong in real life? Shouldnt the person you are be lagitimite 100% of the time? i really dont understand why folks think its ok to act like a jerk in one world.. then be totally different in another. to me it is just an excuse.. the animinity of gaming makes folks do really hurtful things.. because they will never have to personally face the consiquences of there actions face to face.. anyone denying that.. well there just cowards hiding behind a screen..
I get that 'cyber bullying' is a buzzword, but honestly, at least learn what it means before deploying it as your latest weapon against the players you don't like.
"Examples of cyberbullying include mean text messages or emails, rumors sent by email or posted on social networking sites, and embarrassing pictures, videos, websites, or fake profiles."
It's about people's real lives, its not having some stranger dance next to you in a video game. You people cheapen the word and dilute its meaning, and you should honestly be ashamed of yourselves. It's a real problem that affects real people, its part of actual bullying of actual people, not just a buzzword to repeat over and over to try to get people in video games in trouble because you don't like them.
You guys can keep whining, whatever. I'm going to give away more free stuff to celebrate the Risa event and the Summer.
Funny! Why is everyone here telling us to do something while they are making the same mistakes? Don't be such a hypocrite. You tell us to learn what it means, so you drop us a link and a quote. And you believe by quoting and giving a source, that you are instantly right? You know what's more funny?
Cyber Bullying can happen across several mediums such as:
Social Networks such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Youtube, MySpace, etc.
Instant Messaging (IMs) and Text messaging.
Email.
Chat rooms/forums/blogs.
Online Games.
The spectrum of Cyber Bullying actions is very broad.
The most famous examples are:
Harassment. Stalking.
Rumor Spreading.
Disclosure (sharing of personal information of others without their consent).
Exclusion/Ostracism.
Heated Exchanges.
Defaming, Belittling, or Mocking. Impersonating.
I guess we are all educated enough to know what cyberbullying is.
You are only giving us more excuses , so that you can troll freely, without consequences.
If you also red some more here, it was not just "dancing next to her". It was stalking, following her at each instance. Standing right through her. And it's not a stranger. It's Nbreeki. And he is famous for this massive troll behaviour. Not just stalking.. Also (see list) rumor spreading, mocking, impersonating, heated exchanges etc etc
And isn't that the same as a real life bully? Those kids are beaten by their dad, yelled out by their own family, are on medicines, got bullied themselves. In other words, they have something that is abnormal in a normal society.
Respectfully for every bully that had something like you describe happen to them, there's another bully that was never beaten, has a supportive family, doesn't take drugs, and is one of the popular kids. They're simply mean spirited [redacted]bags. Furthermore their parents are in denial that their precious little angels would act that way and blame the victims.
Yes forgive me, you are right. I remember a student from my class back in the time, he was always being bullied for just one reason: wearing glasses. One day they got into a fight, the bully broke his nose and glasses. Just because he was getting tired of being bullied and stand up for himself. When school decided to talk with both parent, the parents of the bully said they couldnt believe it, and that the victim surely had done something to provoke him. One example and you are absolutely right. I am almost afraid to let my daughter play online games when she is older, but i cannot forbid her. Only warn her, and if i notice she will be one of the bullies, she will be dealing with me.
There was a period in my life, that whenever I went to a party, I'd always request they play this so I could dance. I mean, how does this song not make you want to dance, am I right?
A better solution would be to make all players on your ignore list invisible. This is a solution employed by some MMO's in response to just such a problem. Griefer can parade around like an idiot, but if he's on your ignore list, you simply can't see him. He gets to remain stupid, and you get to go about your business like he's not even there.
I think the people here are absurd and running off the rails trying to proclaim dancing too close amounts to cyber bullying. However that seems to be the cool thing these days. I am offended, that's racist, that's homophobic, that's not inclusive enough, trolling causes suicide, yatta yatta. The problem isn't that cyber bullying is an issue. It's ignorance of the MMO environment. The ESRB clearly states conditions of the online game are NOT REGULATED, and thus you expect to encounter unfriendly people. If you don't think you're going to run into a jerk or two on the internet, you just haven't been on enough. Hence I have no time for ignorance.
We can talk philosophy all day long, but in the real world as long as people can whip up free accounts, and you go into public areas of the game, you can expect to be trolled.
If you can't understand how to prepare yourself or your children, the online environment may not be for you.
P.S. If you want to make a difference, ask Cryptic if you can work for free.
A better solution would be to just dance and have fun. This is an MMO - you can't control everything on the screen, particularly other players. When I go to Quarks or Drozana to play Dabo, I personally don't like to see bleach-skinned half-naked Orions dancing on tables, people with silly names like "HotNSpiceyZZZ", or have people carrying on with dreary pedantic role-playing (often of an explicit or sexual nature) in local chat. It spoils my immersion. But do I turn it around and try to make it all about me, demanding that they be silent or vanish from my screen? No. They are other players and have as much right to be there as me, even if I don't like what they are doing.
Seriously, what kind of control issues do people have, in order for them to refer to someone that attends a PUBLIC DANCE PARTY as a cyberbully? Just because you can't force someone that you don't like for whatever reason to completely disappear from the game it doesn't mean you can throw names around.
Comparing this to real life bullying, or even actual cyberbullying is narcisstic and cheapens the meaning of the term.
It's this insane narcissism that gets to me I think. Cyber bullying may be a buzzword these days, but it's actually a real thing, that affects real people. So it bothers me when individuals try to twist and appropriate it into something that seems important to them, but isn't really actually doesn't matter at all.
This insane narcissism twists it, to where it's not just actual bullying, it also has to apply to something about the narcissist. Narcissists in video games twist it to make it look like trivial nonsense in a video game is really important. Real cyber bullying really is really important, and really affects people. Narcissistic redefined "cyber bullying" in video games isn't, it's just a narcissist not getting his own way, and trying to find some way to get back at the people he doesn't like. Trying to latch onto a buzzword to inflate clown shoes stuff.
This is actually a great demonstration of a common technique used by people engaging in bullying or abusive behavior: in an attempt to establish control over their target, or enlist unwitting others as "accessories," they seek to minimize their actions and make the target doubt their instincts about the wrongness of the behavior--and thus, trying to ensure that they submit to the bully's definition of what is and is not acceptable behavior instead of their own. This is related to the technique of gaslighting. This can occur in private correspondence, but it takes on another dimension when employed in public to attempt to strip support away from the target--or at least create the illusion in the target's perspective--that "greater society" finds their perceptions and feelings to be unreasonable, stupid, or even worthy of the perpetrator's abusive behavior.
An interesting thing to note about gaslighting is that very often, very minor behaviors are employed as part of the perpetrator's manipulation technique. This decision is purposeful. We can see that illustrated very clearly in this case; it's not the individual action, taken by itself, that stands for anything. If the incident in this thread were the only one, rather than part of a years-long string of behavior, it would probably be fair to say it was a mountain out of a molehill. And it is true, objectively speaking, what is going on here is not in the same category as IRL threats such as violence, vandalism, doxing, swatting, and other actions that have a physical component to them. However, the technique of psychological manipulation is identical--and even relies directly on the actions used not crossing the line into something universally recognized and reviled on first sight.
It is the technique that is the fault and the sign of intent, and is in and of itself problematic.
Out of context, viewed alone, what the gaslighter does very often can appear to be small, and not actionable. The seeming insignificance of these behaviors is a part of the tactic. By not acting in an overt manner and calling attention to him or herself in a way that draws swift and widespread condemnation from society at large, if not legal consequences, this not only affords the perpetrator the opportunity to avoid penalties for his or her actions, but to undermine the target's perceptions. Or worse, sometimes the attempt to undermine social support for the target actually does succeed instead of just being a perception the perpetrator has crafted for the target. Through this, bystanders can end up being co-opted to the perpetrator's cause.
Now, it should be said that innocent differences in perception about the motives of a person's actions can occur, and often the perpetrator in a case like this will take advantage of that fact to paint the target's reactions to their behavior as if the target were victimizing the perpetrator. But there are two key differences that can help distinguish accidental offense from deliberate manipulation.
The first is how the person who has given offense reacts to having their error pointed out. If it is indeed just that--an error, or a difference in perceptions and cultures--the typical response is to be willing to stop or modify one's own behavior and not to in any way attempt to invalidate the other person's perceptions. In other words, there is recognition of the fact that the other person has a right to their perceptions, and an honest attempt to understand what the other person is thinking. This is a key element of respect. This form of respect can extend across cultures, and it can exist without even agreeing about whether or not said action is offensive. But the critical point here is that as soon as the person who has had such an error pointed out to them begins to use "you" language to defend themselves (i.e. "You're too sensitive," "You're wrong for even thinking that in the first place," "You have issues"), this is often an indicator that there is something else going on in the perpetrator's mind besides a genuine attempt at reconciliation.
Now, there can be a different motivation for anger and those sorts of reactions on the part of the person who has had an offense brought to their attention--but how they work through that and how they conduct themselves in the long run is the key to distinguishing the person who has simply erred or had a genuine difference in perception, and the deliberate manipulator. It is in human nature to get defensive when called out on one's behavior, particularly when one didn't mean it to come off the way it did, and sometimes that initial reaction will look like I described in the previous paragraph.
However, if you give that person time to cool off, how their behavior changes--or does not change--in the long run will demonstrate whether they are being manipulative or whether it was an innocent accident. The key is to observe whether or not the behavior changes, and changes consistently, after the cooling-off period has passed. Once they are no longer in the heat of the moment, a person who genuinely did not mean to offend will begin to change the way they act. This change may not come with an apology. Some people feel that to apologize is to lose face. Or they may be uncomfortable approaching you--or even just not like you. But here's the thing: liking someone is not a requirement of civility. You can dislike someone all day but still treat them in a civil manner that respects their boundaries.
For someone who does mean to offend--who doesn't care about this and is a deliberate manipulator--the behavior pattern will never change. The denials of the behavior and the belittlement of the target's perception of the behavior will continue, though particularly when gaslighting is the technique of choice, the behavior may not escalate in outward severity; the perpetrator is relying instead on the constancy of it to wear their target down.
Ultimately, it is the employment of manipulation techniques that has to be looked at to determine the motivation of the behavior--not its severity. The technique in and of itself is a direct sign of intent.
I'm pretty sure I'll get some interesting responses to this. I also expect they will conform to the pattern I've identified here.
Post edited by gulberat on
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
I think the people here are absurd and running off the rails trying to proclaim dancing too close amounts to cyber bullying.
Actually no, they are not calling "dancing too close" cyberbullying. They are calling chasing a person around instances purely for the purpose of dancing on top of and jumping over their toon whereever they go even after being asked to stop cyberbullying. In this they are right.
I did some research on cyberbullying you guys. If you feel you are being cyberbullied you need to have a sit down with your parents and discuss it with them. So if you are a teenager please do that and see what they have to say on the matter. It didn't say what to do if you are a grown adult however, so I cant help you guys there.
I think the people here are absurd and running off the rails trying to proclaim dancing too close amounts to cyber bullying.
Actually no, they are not calling "dancing too close" cyberbullying. They are calling chasing a person around instances purely for the purpose of dancing on top of and jumping over their toon whereever they go even after being asked to stop cyberbullying. In this they are right.
Today in America, some kid is going to actually get bullied online.
But also, some individual is talking about a video game toon jumping over his video game toon and dancing, and that kids suffering will be somehow minimalized, because in the eyes of the narcissist, it's the same thing.
Here's a news flash, you not being pleased by video game toons jumping around is not exactly something that matters. A kid actually getting bullied is. They aren't the same thing, not at all. The world doesn't revolve around you.
I don't generally have the issue, others do, and I have seen it. So I really do not give a hit about your tiny little opinions, TRIBBLE.
But also, some individual is talking about a video game toon jumping over his video game toon and dancing, and that kids suffering will be somehow minimalized, because in the eyes of the narcissist, it's the same thing.
Your continuous attempts to ignore that your friend was stalking the OP from instance to instance isn't fooling anyone, and only makes your arguments weaker and weaker with each post you make.
Indeed, what makes it bullying is not dancing too close, or jumping on top of them, what makes it bullying is incessantly following the person around any public instance they go to in order to do things specifically for the purpose of disrupting the player. It's the act combined with the intent, not merely once instance of an act alone.
I think the people here are absurd and running off the rails trying to proclaim dancing too close amounts to cyber bullying. However that seems to be the cool thing these days. I am offended, that's racist, that's homophobic, that's not inclusive enough, trolling causes suicide, yatta yatta. The problem isn't that cyber bullying is an issue. It's ignorance of the MMO environment. The ESRB clearly states conditions of the online game are NOT REGULATED, and thus you expect to encounter unfriendly people. If you don't think you're going to run into a jerk or two on the internet, you just haven't been on enough. Hence I have no time for ignorance.
We can talk philosophy all day long, but in the real world as long as people can whip up free accounts, and you go into public areas of the game, you can expect to be trolled.
If you can't understand how to prepare yourself or your children, the online environment may not be for you.
P.S. If you want to make a difference, ask Cryptic if you can work for free.
There's dancing too close... then there is dancing.. more like walking on top of a toon... while she is hosting a party and running a toon and running a radio show.. do u have any clue whatsoever.. how do u expect anyone to interact at a function like that with someone blocking your view on purpose.. they moved 3 times .. they tracked her down.. they did it again and again until finally they had to move completely off the planet to continue what they were doing. bottom line they targeted an individual.. knowing it would be disruptive.. and pursued it to the point that folks had to relocate.. 3 times and finally off Risa... not bullying.. really ........ wow ...
IMO, if you don't like people interacting with you in a way the game allows in an MMORPG, you should probably not play MMORPGs. Just a lil thought here.
If you don't like following the ToS, you should probably not play a game with a ToS. Just a lil thought here.
Right, as I suggested before, EVE Online is there to satisfy those with urges to run around in a completely uncontrolled Wild West environment. Per our TOS, that is not the case here. There are plenty of YouTube videos and news websites dedicated specifically to EVE Online politics and intrigue to give ideas to those who would like to go on that game and grief and even take advantage of people in ways that will cause them real monetary losses.
Like I said, that environment is not here, per our TOS.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Comments
its yes.. "Just a game" Its also a question of.. "Being a decent human being in real life or here" if u feel justified in saying this then.. go say this to your mother.. yor sister .. or how about any person in real life to there face.. and good luckwith that..
These come standard in most MMO's--the idea of in-game GM's is far from an exotic concept. I don't think it's too much to ask to have a sufficient number of them relative to this game's population to perform their job up to the standard observed in MMO's like Warcraft.
Within the confines of the game environment, rules exist in the TOS governing acceptable and unacceptable behavior, and there is nothing unreasonable in expecting enforcement of those rules. Accepting the EULA means accepting the idea that those rules may be enforced against oneself in the event of a violation. That PWE/Cryptic has not enforced those rules in-game to the degree permitted by the EULA does not suddenly make it an outlandish act for them to change their minds and do so.
But if the disagreement is with the idea of such a EULA in the first place, if you consider too cushy or sheltered, there are environments like EVE Online that might be more to your liking, since they set the expectation right up front that there are very minimal rules and you enter at your own risk. Perhaps you would feel better supporting a business more in line with your stated "ideals."
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
I dare you, ask any socialized, educated adult that bullying in videogames can't do any harm, and that only real life bullying can be harmfull. Trust me, every response you will get is denial. Denial of your words. This is exactly what is wrong. People think that bullying online can't do harm, so that's why they do it. No wait, not true. They WANT to do harm. It's a fact that there are kids in the world that are suicidal because of online bullying. Even suicidal attempts, failed and succeeded. You are still telling me that we cannot compare real life bullying and online bullying?
I suggest you empathize a bit, read more about the world, instead of replying without even thinking.
"There are people starving" comparisation is even worse. There are children beaten at school, but comparing with children starving to death makes it allright. That's what you practically said. So, you have a opinion about us comparing, and to formulate your opinion you use a worser comparisation. You need a larger mirror, mate. Because your ego can't fit in your current mirror.
Why do you choose to hurt folks on the internet... but not in real life? Why do u choose to make someones gaming experiance misrable .. yet .. get upset when someone dose you wrong in real life? Shouldnt the person you are be lagitimite 100% of the time? i really dont understand why folks think its ok to act like a jerk in one world.. then be totally different in another. to me it is just an excuse.. the animinity of gaming makes folks do really hurtful things.. because they will never have to personally face the consiquences of there actions face to face.. anyone denying that.. well there just cowards hiding behind a screen..
Funny! Why is everyone here telling us to do something while they are making the same mistakes? Don't be such a hypocrite. You tell us to learn what it means, so you drop us a link and a quote. And you believe by quoting and giving a source, that you are instantly right? You know what's more funny?
I took this from: http://nobullying.com/what-is-cyberbullying/
I guess we are all educated enough to know what cyberbullying is.
You are only giving us more excuses , so that you can troll freely, without consequences.
If you also red some more here, it was not just "dancing next to her". It was stalking, following her at each instance. Standing right through her. And it's not a stranger. It's Nbreeki. And he is famous for this massive troll behaviour. Not just stalking.. Also (see list) rumor spreading, mocking, impersonating, heated exchanges etc etc
Yes forgive me, you are right. I remember a student from my class back in the time, he was always being bullied for just one reason: wearing glasses. One day they got into a fight, the bully broke his nose and glasses. Just because he was getting tired of being bullied and stand up for himself. When school decided to talk with both parent, the parents of the bully said they couldnt believe it, and that the victim surely had done something to provoke him. One example and you are absolutely right. I am almost afraid to let my daughter play online games when she is older, but i cannot forbid her. Only warn her, and if i notice she will be one of the bullies, she will be dealing with me.
We can talk philosophy all day long, but in the real world as long as people can whip up free accounts, and you go into public areas of the game, you can expect to be trolled.
If you can't understand how to prepare yourself or your children, the online environment may not be for you.
P.S. If you want to make a difference, ask Cryptic if you can work for free.
Seriously, what kind of control issues do people have, in order for them to refer to someone that attends a PUBLIC DANCE PARTY as a cyberbully? Just because you can't force someone that you don't like for whatever reason to completely disappear from the game it doesn't mean you can throw names around.
Comparing this to real life bullying, or even actual cyberbullying is narcisstic and cheapens the meaning of the term.
Your fleet keeps forgetting the instance stalking that went with it.
This is actually a great demonstration of a common technique used by people engaging in bullying or abusive behavior: in an attempt to establish control over their target, or enlist unwitting others as "accessories," they seek to minimize their actions and make the target doubt their instincts about the wrongness of the behavior--and thus, trying to ensure that they submit to the bully's definition of what is and is not acceptable behavior instead of their own. This is related to the technique of gaslighting. This can occur in private correspondence, but it takes on another dimension when employed in public to attempt to strip support away from the target--or at least create the illusion in the target's perspective--that "greater society" finds their perceptions and feelings to be unreasonable, stupid, or even worthy of the perpetrator's abusive behavior.
An interesting thing to note about gaslighting is that very often, very minor behaviors are employed as part of the perpetrator's manipulation technique. This decision is purposeful. We can see that illustrated very clearly in this case; it's not the individual action, taken by itself, that stands for anything. If the incident in this thread were the only one, rather than part of a years-long string of behavior, it would probably be fair to say it was a mountain out of a molehill. And it is true, objectively speaking, what is going on here is not in the same category as IRL threats such as violence, vandalism, doxing, swatting, and other actions that have a physical component to them. However, the technique of psychological manipulation is identical--and even relies directly on the actions used not crossing the line into something universally recognized and reviled on first sight.
It is the technique that is the fault and the sign of intent, and is in and of itself problematic.
Out of context, viewed alone, what the gaslighter does very often can appear to be small, and not actionable. The seeming insignificance of these behaviors is a part of the tactic. By not acting in an overt manner and calling attention to him or herself in a way that draws swift and widespread condemnation from society at large, if not legal consequences, this not only affords the perpetrator the opportunity to avoid penalties for his or her actions, but to undermine the target's perceptions. Or worse, sometimes the attempt to undermine social support for the target actually does succeed instead of just being a perception the perpetrator has crafted for the target. Through this, bystanders can end up being co-opted to the perpetrator's cause.
Now, it should be said that innocent differences in perception about the motives of a person's actions can occur, and often the perpetrator in a case like this will take advantage of that fact to paint the target's reactions to their behavior as if the target were victimizing the perpetrator. But there are two key differences that can help distinguish accidental offense from deliberate manipulation.
The first is how the person who has given offense reacts to having their error pointed out. If it is indeed just that--an error, or a difference in perceptions and cultures--the typical response is to be willing to stop or modify one's own behavior and not to in any way attempt to invalidate the other person's perceptions. In other words, there is recognition of the fact that the other person has a right to their perceptions, and an honest attempt to understand what the other person is thinking. This is a key element of respect. This form of respect can extend across cultures, and it can exist without even agreeing about whether or not said action is offensive. But the critical point here is that as soon as the person who has had such an error pointed out to them begins to use "you" language to defend themselves (i.e. "You're too sensitive," "You're wrong for even thinking that in the first place," "You have issues"), this is often an indicator that there is something else going on in the perpetrator's mind besides a genuine attempt at reconciliation.
Now, there can be a different motivation for anger and those sorts of reactions on the part of the person who has had an offense brought to their attention--but how they work through that and how they conduct themselves in the long run is the key to distinguishing the person who has simply erred or had a genuine difference in perception, and the deliberate manipulator. It is in human nature to get defensive when called out on one's behavior, particularly when one didn't mean it to come off the way it did, and sometimes that initial reaction will look like I described in the previous paragraph.
However, if you give that person time to cool off, how their behavior changes--or does not change--in the long run will demonstrate whether they are being manipulative or whether it was an innocent accident. The key is to observe whether or not the behavior changes, and changes consistently, after the cooling-off period has passed. Once they are no longer in the heat of the moment, a person who genuinely did not mean to offend will begin to change the way they act. This change may not come with an apology. Some people feel that to apologize is to lose face. Or they may be uncomfortable approaching you--or even just not like you. But here's the thing: liking someone is not a requirement of civility. You can dislike someone all day but still treat them in a civil manner that respects their boundaries.
For someone who does mean to offend--who doesn't care about this and is a deliberate manipulator--the behavior pattern will never change. The denials of the behavior and the belittlement of the target's perception of the behavior will continue, though particularly when gaslighting is the technique of choice, the behavior may not escalate in outward severity; the perpetrator is relying instead on the constancy of it to wear their target down.
Ultimately, it is the employment of manipulation techniques that has to be looked at to determine the motivation of the behavior--not its severity. The technique in and of itself is a direct sign of intent.
I'm pretty sure I'll get some interesting responses to this. I also expect they will conform to the pattern I've identified here.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Weren't a lot of these people driven off of Drozana years ago and are still bitter about it?
Actually no, they are not calling "dancing too close" cyberbullying. They are calling chasing a person around instances purely for the purpose of dancing on top of and jumping over their toon whereever they go even after being asked to stop cyberbullying. In this they are right.
I don't generally have the issue, others do, and I have seen it. So I really do not give a hit about your tiny little opinions, TRIBBLE.
Indeed, what makes it bullying is not dancing too close, or jumping on top of them, what makes it bullying is incessantly following the person around any public instance they go to in order to do things specifically for the purpose of disrupting the player. It's the act combined with the intent, not merely once instance of an act alone.
There's dancing too close... then there is dancing.. more like walking on top of a toon... while she is hosting a party and running a toon and running a radio show.. do u have any clue whatsoever.. how do u expect anyone to interact at a function like that with someone blocking your view on purpose.. they moved 3 times .. they tracked her down.. they did it again and again until finally they had to move completely off the planet to continue what they were doing. bottom line they targeted an individual.. knowing it would be disruptive.. and pursued it to the point that folks had to relocate.. 3 times and finally off Risa... not bullying.. really ........ wow ...
Right, as I suggested before, EVE Online is there to satisfy those with urges to run around in a completely uncontrolled Wild West environment. Per our TOS, that is not the case here. There are plenty of YouTube videos and news websites dedicated specifically to EVE Online politics and intrigue to give ideas to those who would like to go on that game and grief and even take advantage of people in ways that will cause them real monetary losses.
Like I said, that environment is not here, per our TOS.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.