These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

GM clarification on rewording of the Terms of Service

First post First post First post
Author
Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#761 - 2013-09-11 23:51:23 UTC
Solstice Project's Alt wrote:
Alphea Abbra wrote:
I may or may not be played by a player who may or may not have more than one account, and may or may not on one of these accounts have more than one character. Such a secondary character may or may not currently be shooting a certain structure in Jita largely representative of the last time CCP tried to ruin their own game and source of income.

Are you ?
I can neither confirm nor deny it unless I am made aware of whether your persona is also represented by a character with a likeness to your name.
So I can petition you for representing another character as it is not allowed by the TOS.
Georgina Parmala
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#762 - 2013-09-11 23:52:20 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Georgina Parmala wrote:
Science and Trade Institute [STI] is an NPC entity and as such my views do not represent those of the entity or any of it's members

its, not it's (it's = it is), you need to change that before someone petitions you for impersonating an impersonator that knows grammar Straight

/facepalm I've been at this too damn long I need to sleep.

Science and Trade Institute [STI] is an NPC entity and as such my views do not represent those of the entity or any of its members

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=276984&p=38

Solstice Project's Alt
Doomheim
#763 - 2013-09-11 23:52:46 UTC
Alphea Abbra wrote:
Solstice Project's Alt wrote:
Alphea Abbra wrote:
I may or may not be played by a player who may or may not have more than one account, and may or may not on one of these accounts have more than one character. Such a secondary character may or may not currently be shooting a certain structure in Jita largely representative of the last time CCP tried to ruin their own game and source of income.

Are you ?
I can neither confirm nor deny it unless I am made aware of whether your persona is also represented by a character with a likeness to your name.
So I can petition you for representing another character as it is not allowed by the TOS.
I have no idea.

Buy Solstice Project for PLEX4GOOD ! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=301266 (this alt-character will get deleted once the sale is done, on 6th of december)

Sirane Elrek
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#764 - 2013-09-11 23:58:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Sirane Elrek
Alavaria Fera wrote:
"How can we make them shut up"

That one's easy. Just stop communications, but don't lock the thread. After a week or so, you can then lock it and claim everything has been answered. Most people will have forgotten what it was about in the first place.

Solstice Project's Alt wrote:
How do you like my face ?

It's a face alright

also this thread is going a bit off topic here so if we could just go back to the issue at hand, which is that I can't claim I'm my alt and scams are forbidden now
(this may be true or untrue based on which GM is handling your petition)
Orakkus
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#765 - 2013-09-12 00:00:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Orakkus
Sirane Elrek wrote:
No it's certainly not worth breaking a contract over people being mad about video games.


Fair reason enough, but the fact that such a change has the potential to put CCP out of business as well as put about 400+ workers out of a job in the long run, might just be worth breaking that said contract. Though, I don't think its against the NDA for more than one CSM member to say, "Hey, we heard ya. I'm working on it with the rest of CSM8 and CCP. We wanna get this right, even if it takes all night..."

He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander

probag Bear
Xiong Offices
#766 - 2013-09-12 00:00:19 UTC
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3601626#post3601626

"which effectively means it's quite possible that a situation may appear where a player impersonates his trustworthy main character using an alt character”

I want you to undock right now and go to the monument. Target it, and shoot your guns at it, and yell, 'I'M AS MAD AS HELL, AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS ANYMORE!'
Sid Hudgens
Doomheim
#767 - 2013-09-12 00:02:22 UTC
It was recently pointed out to me that CCP doesn't have to go that deep into the TOS to ban most of you. Read the TOS ... no. 2 and 3 specifically. If all TOS violations resulted in ban-hammer ... how many of you would still be here? Why aren't you up in arms about that?

You get down towards the end of the TOS and it basically says they can ban you or do whatever they want to your account whenever they feel like it anyway. So what's the difference?

"....as if 10,058 Goon voices cried out and were suddenly silenced."

Sirane Elrek
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#768 - 2013-09-12 00:04:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Sirane Elrek
Orakkus wrote:
Though, I don't think its against the NDA for more than one CSM member to say, "Hey, we heard ya. I'm working on it with the rest of CSM8 and CCP. We wanna get this right, even if it takes all night..."

It probably isn't. However, if this ToS change has been presented to the CSM first (and I'm not claiming it has), and nobody on there noticed that the wording is stupid and makes a major part of the EVE universe petitionable, I'm not exactly sure if I want them to have any more input in the matter.
(I'm going to assume for their benefit that the GM-provided interpretation of that clause has not been discussed with them beforehand and is just some brainfart by an overworked staffer.)
Rhes
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#769 - 2013-09-12 00:05:57 UTC
Sirane Elrek wrote:
Rhes wrote:
The CSM response to this issue has been embarrassing.

Not quite as embarrassing as the CCP response though.


It is, though, considering that the CSM is supposed to be representing the players. From what I've seen from this CSM they are more interested in covering for CCP and shaming players into shutting up about valid concerns they have about draconian changes to the ToS.

EVE is a game about spaceships and there's an enormous amount of work to do on the in-space gameplay before players (or developers) are ready to sacrifice it for a totally new type of gameplay - CCP Rise

Sirane Elrek
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#770 - 2013-09-12 00:07:27 UTC
Sid Hudgens wrote:
You get down towards the end of the TOS and it basically says they can ban you or do whatever they want to your account whenever they feel like it anyway. So what's the difference?

Every online game ever has a "we can terminate your account for whatever reason we feel like" clause, but it usually isn't used except for exceptional and grave circumstances (which would not have been foreseen by the authors of the ToS).
Sid Hudgens
Doomheim
#771 - 2013-09-12 00:08:17 UTC
Sirane Elrek wrote:
Sid Hudgens wrote:
You get down towards the end of the TOS and it basically says they can ban you or do whatever they want to your account whenever they feel like it anyway. So what's the difference?

Every online game ever has a "we can terminate your account for whatever reason we feel like" clause, but it usually isn't used except for exceptional and grave circumstances (which would not have been foreseen by the authors of the ToS).


I bet they use it on a case-by-case basis...

"....as if 10,058 Goon voices cried out and were suddenly silenced."

La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#772 - 2013-09-12 00:08:52 UTC
Rhes wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Rhes wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
So if I'm reading this right the "clarification" bans scamming and most of the metagame. Two huge sources of free advertising for CCP, why is this a good idea now?


I think it's good for the GM team who are apparently tired of dealing with scam-related petitions.


The easiest answer to that is a button that replies to a petition with this then closes it:

Dear (insert scammed capsuleer here),

You have been scammed, this is a good lesson for you please learn from it. Do not petition this again.

Best,

(GM team)


You just impersonated a GM.


Perhaps they should give me a job I seem to be able to do it much better than the two who have posted.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133

Sirane Elrek
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#773 - 2013-09-12 00:10:07 UTC
Rhes wrote:
It is, though, considering that the CSM is supposed to be representing the players. From what I've seen from this CSM they are more interested in covering for CCP and shaming players into shutting up about valid concerns they have about draconian changes to the ToS.

Fair enough, I haven't kept up with the CSMs past CSM 6 except for Trebor's blatant try to manipulate the CSM 8 vote, so I was giving them the benefit of the doubt.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#774 - 2013-09-12 00:10:35 UTC
Sid Hudgens wrote:
It was recently pointed out to me that CCP doesn't have to go that deep into the TOS to ban most of you. Read the TOS ... no. 2 and 3 specifically. If all TOS violations resulted in ban-hammer ... how many of you would still be here? Why aren't you up in arms about that?

You get down towards the end of the TOS and it basically says they can ban you or do whatever they want to your account whenever they feel like it anyway. So what's the difference?

To be honest i haven't seen too much of 3 genuinely being violated, not enough to put the majority at risk anyways, although flagrant violations of 2 may make it seem otherwise.
Sirane Elrek
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#775 - 2013-09-12 00:12:17 UTC
Sid Hudgens wrote:
I bet they use it on a case-by-case basis...

They don't use it a lot at all though, because looking arbitrary doesn't actually get you a lot of consumer good-will. That's why there's other rules in the Terms of Service, even if you could just conduct your day-to-day bannings with that catch-all clause.
Georgina Parmala
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#776 - 2013-09-12 00:14:12 UTC
Sid Hudgens wrote:
Sirane Elrek wrote:
Sid Hudgens wrote:
You get down towards the end of the TOS and it basically says they can ban you or do whatever they want to your account whenever they feel like it anyway. So what's the difference?

Every online game ever has a "we can terminate your account for whatever reason we feel like" clause, but it usually isn't used except for exceptional and grave circumstances (which would not have been foreseen by the authors of the ToS).


I bet they use it on a case-by-case basis...

A police officer can arrest and hold anyone on a case by case basis.

That does not mean the posted speed limit is "10 kilometers per hour, but feel free to go faster because we don't really enforce it that way, unless we do, on a case by case basis to be determined by personal opinion of whichever police officer happens to witness it. No really you can go ahead keep driving at a safe, faster speed. We can't tell you what a safe speed is, but you can trust us to only stop those who go at high, unsafe speeds"

Science and Trade Institute [STI] is an NPC entity and as such my views do not represent those of the entity or any of its members

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=276984&p=38

Malcolm Shinhwa
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#777 - 2013-09-12 00:14:38 UTC
I once safaried a corp by claiming to be Canadian and a pot smoker (srsly, those were the two major concerns of the "recruiter"). Since I don't smoke the wacky weed and I'm not sure they even have the Internet in Canada so I'm definitely not Canadian am I looking at a potential ban? I don't really care much, just my wife is bugging me to milk the maple trees and I'd like to give her a timeframe for when I might do that.

[i]"The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental[/i]."

Sid Hudgens
Doomheim
#778 - 2013-09-12 00:19:35 UTC
Sirane Elrek wrote:
Sid Hudgens wrote:
I bet they use it on a case-by-case basis...

They don't use it a lot at all though, because looking arbitrary doesn't actually get you a lot of consumer good-will. That's why there's other rules in the Terms of Service, even if you could just conduct your day-to-day bannings with that catch-all clause.


Alright, so let's say I agree with you on that...

Do we know CCP is going to use this impersonation clause "a lot"? You would think that perhaps the GMs would use some discretion and only use it in extreme situations ... because ... I don't know ... they are concerned with "consumer good-will?"

Are you upset because they are saying they CAN ban for impersonation? Because then you should be upset because they CAN ban for foul language ... or that they CAN ban for whatever they feel like.

"....as if 10,058 Goon voices cried out and were suddenly silenced."

Lady Areola Fappington
#779 - 2013-09-12 00:21:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Lady Areola Fappington
Ok CCP, at this point, we don't need another GM stopping by, clarifying and rehashing this not a change change. You guys have done a great job explaining it, in minute detail.

At this point, we're telling you the clause is wrong, vague, and overreaching. No amount of re-explaining a bad rule will make us go "Ohh, huh, great idea!"

Now, CCP, what you need to do is actually read this thread, get together, and fix the mess you made.


To Summarize:
Your "not a change" is actually a huge change.
Your customer base is getting annoyed
The fix is quite easy (If everything is the same as it was last year..roll back to last years ToS)
Finally, Blawrf is the best yiffer this side of New Eden.

7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided. --Eve New Player Guide

Fix Lag
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#780 - 2013-09-12 00:21:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Fix Lag
I'm still not banned for impersonation, for those of you wondering. Clearly the GMs are full of it.

CCP mostly sucks at their job, but Veritas is a pretty cool dude.