These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
James Fnord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#781 - 2013-09-12 00:22:21 UTC
Our main problem with this is that it makes illegal a large number of activities that were previously legal. And those activities are part of the cultural makeup that Eve has and is the main reason a lot of people play the game in the first place.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#782 - 2013-09-12 00:22:33 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.

Well, good thing their careful clarifications have shored up good-will.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#783 - 2013-09-12 00:24:50 UTC
James Fnord wrote:
Our main problem with this is that it makes illegal a large number of activities that were previously legal. And those activities are part of the cultural makeup that Eve has and is the main reason a lot of people play the game in the first place.

Maybe this the cultural revolution eve has needed.

A kinder, less harsh, warmer eve.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#784 - 2013-09-12 00:25:32 UTC
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:
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.

I'm glad you agree.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
John Ryuk
C0NC0RD P0LICE DEPT.
#785 - 2013-09-12 00:25:56 UTC  |  Edited by: John Ryuk
Most of you whine way to much,

For 1. It's THERE GAME, they can do whatever they want whenever they want.

2. They CAN ban you for cussing, but since I have been around since 2005 and cuss more in local chats than a sailor, they use GM Discreation, Meaning if you sit and try and say your ODIN there gonna laugh at that report, but if you say your GM or DEV so and so, it's ban hammer time.

This is to cut down on scammers, and I'm for it. It all comes down to common sense, which most of you don't seem to have because your over thinking this.

Use some common sense.


Keeping it real since 1886
Sid Hudgens
Doomheim
#786 - 2013-09-12 00:26:38 UTC
Georgina Parmala wrote:
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"



Your argument doesn't track with me...

In this situation the GMs are the police officers and the "speed limit" is clearly marked as "don't impersonate anyone." If you want to go 5kph over the limit you're probably ok but you knew where the limit was. You might get a ticket, or a warning. (or in this case a warning from a GM or having your scammed goods removed.) If you go 100kph over the limit ... you're probably going to jail if you get caught. (or in this case you get banned.)

I don't see where anyone from CCP has suggested that any violation of the "letter of the law" results in instant ban-hammer...?

"....as if 10,058 Goon voices cried out and were suddenly silenced."
Georgina Parmala
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#787 - 2013-09-12 00:26:40 UTC
Sid Hudgens wrote:

Do we know CCP is going to use this impersonation clause "a lot"?

A few pages back we got confirmation they have used it - prior to it actually existing - in a case where a player used the name of a corporation he does not belong to in the contract name of a private scam contract.

What do you think?

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
Sirane Elrek
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#788 - 2013-09-12 00:28:13 UTC
Sid Hudgens wrote:
Alright, so let's say I agree with you on that...

...which you obviously don't, so why pretend?

Sid Hudgens wrote:
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?"

Unlike the catch-all clause, the other terms in the ToS are actually there for day-to-day use. Remember the thing I said about "looking arbitrary"? It's not arbitrary if something's explicitly forbidden and you act on it. It is however arbitrary if you disallow something and then don't act on it.
I'm not going to claim I know how often that rule will be used, because that'd be dishonest. But the fact that there is a rule against misrepresentation now means that it's going to be used.
Fix Lag
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#789 - 2013-09-12 00:28:23 UTC
John Ryuk wrote:
This is to cut down on scammers, and I'm for it.


I'm sure you are. Now show us on the doll where the bad man took your things.

John Ryuk wrote:
It all comes down to common sense, which most of you don't seem to have because your over thinking this.


That's exactly what's happening here. Exactly.

CCP mostly sucks at their job, but Veritas is a pretty cool dude.
Miner Hottie
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#790 - 2013-09-12 00:28:28 UTC
As it stands right now the current ToS wording is vague and open to subjective interpretation on what a "group of players" is, with a negative effect on the actions that make eve unique, like scamming, Awox, spying and generally no pants tom foolery.

All of the GM and CSM clarifications have told me is how the ToS will be applied.

The unspoken bit is: this is how we plan to apply them today.

Tomorrow, a new GM (let us call him "GM WoW") is brought in to reorganise the GM team after they curled up into a ball trying to deal with a billion anti goon petitions. GM WoW decides the solution is to properly apply the wording of the new ToS and he unpacks the banhammer and goes beserk based on the many different ways this new rule can be applied, as has been identified in this threadnaught.

The solution to prevent this absolute clusterfuck is simple: Fix the wording of the ToS, so that true offenses that are wrong are banned and common garden scams and awoxing etc can continue on.

Also, the ToS should drive the application of policy, not policy should be written to bolster the ToS, if you're doing it this way, you're doing it wrong.

Warming up my guns for the abuse of a Jita monument.

It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#791 - 2013-09-12 00:29:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
John Ryuk wrote:
Most of you whine way to much,

For 1. It's THERE GAME, they can do whatever they want whenever they want.

2. They CAN ban you for cussing, but since I have been around since 2005 and cuss more in local chats than a sailor, they use GM Discreation, Meaning if you siteand try and say your ODIN there gonna laugh at that report, but if you say your GM or DEV so and so, it's ban hammer time.

This is to cut down on scammers, and I'm for it. It all comes down to common sense, which most of you don't seem to have because your over thinking this.

Use some common sense.


Keeping it real since 1886

Look at your corp name, then look at the new "totally not changed" ToS especially the bit with reference to impersonating an NPC entity, and ask yourself am I in violation of it?


edit - For those that are interested the Jita monument is merely getting tickled at the moment, bring moar guns the system is nowhere near capped.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Elizabeth Aideron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#792 - 2013-09-12 00:29:28 UTC
John Ryuk wrote:
Most of you whine way to much,

For 1. It's THERE GAME, they can do whatever they want whenever they want.

2. They CAN ban you for cussing, but since I have been around since 2005 and cuss more in local chats than a sailor, they use GM Discreation, Meaning if you sit and try and say your ODIN there gonna laugh at that report, but if you say your GM or DEV so and so, it's ban hammer time.

This is to cut down on scammers, and I'm for it. It all comes down to common sense, which most of you don't seem to have because your over thinking this.

Use some common sense.


Keeping it real since 1886


http://i4.minus.com/jSnAit8P0MhM2.jpg
Sid Hudgens
Doomheim
#793 - 2013-09-12 00:30:31 UTC
Georgina Parmala wrote:
Sid Hudgens wrote:

Do we know CCP is going to use this impersonation clause "a lot"?

A few pages back we got confirmation they have used it - prior to it actually existing - in a case where a player used the name of a corporation he does not belong to in the contract name of a private scam contract.

What do you think?


Ok .. so they used it once.

What about the catch-all clause? Have they ever used that once? Have that used that one twice? Which is the bigger threat?

"....as if 10,058 Goon voices cried out and were suddenly silenced."
John Ryuk
C0NC0RD P0LICE DEPT.
#794 - 2013-09-12 00:32:38 UTC
Elizabeth Aideron wrote:
John Ryuk wrote:
Most of you whine way to much,

For 1. It's THERE GAME, they can do whatever they want whenever they want.

2. They CAN ban you for cussing, but since I have been around since 2005 and cuss more in local chats than a sailor, they use GM Discreation, Meaning if you sit and try and say your ODIN there gonna laugh at that report, but if you say your GM or DEV so and so, it's ban hammer time.

This is to cut down on scammers, and I'm for it. It all comes down to common sense, which most of you don't seem to have because your over thinking this.

Use some common sense.


Keeping it real since 1886


http://i4.minus.com/jSnAit8P0MhM2.jpg



Lol Goons reporting goons alts, i love this game
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#795 - 2013-09-12 00:32:41 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?



I don't think any of the language I've used ITT has been defamatory, vulgar, etc, and the in game organization that I am a member of is founded on the proposition that people like waffles, so I don't see how that could be a hate group.

How am I in TOS section 2 and 3's crosshairs?

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Le Creed
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#796 - 2013-09-12 00:32:56 UTC
John Ryuk wrote:
Most of you whine way to much,

For 1. It's THERE GAME, they can do whatever they want whenever they want.

2. They CAN ban you for cussing, but since I have been around since 2005 and cuss more in local chats than a sailor, they use GM Discreation, Meaning if you sit and try and say your ODIN there gonna laugh at that report, but if you say your GM or DEV so and so, it's ban hammer time.

This is to cut down on scammers, and I'm for it. It all comes down to common sense, which most of you don't seem to have because your over thinking this.

Use some common sense.


Keeping it real since 1886

Reported for impersonating Concord.
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#797 - 2013-09-12 00:33:01 UTC
Elizabeth Aideron wrote:
John Ryuk wrote:
Most of you whine way to much,

For 1. It's THERE GAME, they can do whatever they want whenever they want.

2. They CAN ban you for cussing, but since I have been around since 2005 and cuss more in local chats than a sailor, they use GM Discreation, Meaning if you sit and try and say your ODIN there gonna laugh at that report, but if you say your GM or DEV so and so, it's ban hammer time.

This is to cut down on scammers, and I'm for it. It all comes down to common sense, which most of you don't seem to have because your over thinking this.

Use some common sense.


Keeping it real since 1886


http://i4.minus.com/jSnAit8P0MhM2.jpg


I didn't even catch that. ******* priceless.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal
Sam Alkawe
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#798 - 2013-09-12 00:34:10 UTC
Georgina Parmala wrote:
Sid Hudgens wrote:

Do we know CCP is going to use this impersonation clause "a lot"?

A few pages back we got confirmation they have used it - prior to it actually existing - in a case where a player used the name of a corporation he does not belong to in the contract name of a private scam contract.

What do you think?


The thing is we are left in the dark about the process because a series of restrictions that do not allow us to even hear about cases like that one, nor what the CSM is actually doing to further the player's interest in this case. So, even worse than that, is the fact that all we can do is complaint until somebody tells us "here is the solution" because "we are working on it" is not good enough as it can easily result in "we did nothing".
Fix Lag
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#799 - 2013-09-12 00:34:25 UTC
John Ryuk wrote:
Lol Goons reporting goons alts, i love this game


Stop trying to impersonate a goon.

CCP mostly sucks at their job, but Veritas is a pretty cool dude.
John Ryuk
C0NC0RD P0LICE DEPT.
#800 - 2013-09-12 00:34:28 UTC
Took you all long enough