Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I was hoping the "Subject" captured it... But ok here is filler or contet.

I have been a ruthless frontliner for pilots that have been getting banned and what-not type-of-banned;

No, I do not own a banned account; I'm trying to incease Eve's utility.

Yes it is a fact that CCP did change its stance on this issue and i may be "kicking a dead horse".

---

"Why", you may ask, do i bother?

I am convinced that it is human nature to "not-read-the-EULA at any cost".
And,
that every action a pilot does is usually an irrational action defined by said pilot's imaginary steriotype.
example:
[Person] : "that seams cool...
frack the law...
im gona do that thing...
casue im over caffinated and not thinking".

---

Ok.. into the "how", "blueprints" or "use[r] case[s]".

[This is] very basic cardboard design here;
It has the technical depth/requierment of being simple:
1) comparing a string with an array of strings.
2) returning a boolean with respect to [being] string found or not.
3) If false then 3a else 3b
3a)
conosle.warning("addon shield preventing logon, either:
A) disable addon shield and risk getting banned ,
B) remove recently added addon ,
C) if B fails then delete the entire addon folder");
3b) null nothing nada no-change

The addon name that the pilot added
is simply checked with a pre-existint permitted-addon name list(array);

Moreover (if i may dare use that wrecked word),
to quantify this program, thus, simplifing its design.
It would only check addons that go into
the pre-existing addon folder within Eve's folder structure (assuming it exists);
Thus, for all addons that are installed in anyother location than Eve's addon folder . . . are considered bannable.

I agree that the last phrase above is flawed for it assumes " A posteriori (field: philosophy) " .

---

Intention or overal purpose intended.

$$$ for CCP:
Via preventing the average new-pilot,
that is storming in from WOW-y land of addon-athon everything per second or u-be-differnet,
from getting kicked and banned for simply following a social
bias that is implimented/socially-enforeced in anyother massive multiplayer online role playing game (MMORPG).

Moreover, we are repeating this falacy (that i'm trying to convey)
a thousand times and have somehow dug ourselves into the
deterministic reaction of portraying the ego-centric daftness-face-expression
(picture zombies in a confress room trying to comprehend a door knob)
of pondering why we are getting Denial Of Service attacked
and otherwise negative affect/effects : reviews, word of mouth, low-player-base-growth-rate

RESPONSES ARE NOT RECOMMENDED!!

I'm quite literally sick of reading,
past responses from, 90% of pilot's methods of formulating rational phrases.

The inteded post message is also paraphrasable into:
STOP FIGHTING HUMAN NATURE IT IS UNETHICAL TOWARDS CCP's UTILITY AND INCOME!!!

here is a nice song to mellow eveybody out
ABC the look of love
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lg6J5VT5VRM

I tried really hard and i think someone he knows got an account banned for botting and that this is in some way unfair.
Either that or they used tons of naughty words or linked a bunch of porn in local and are surprised that someone reported them.

Now i think more about it the incoherance added to entitlement suggests a high sec miner and so most likely the ban was for making IRL death threats.

If this last one is true then good. people like that should be banned.

Depends
Does coffee count

was that a rethorical quesiton that intended no response to occur

are you bleeding from you nose at this point or not?

TELL ME!

This does not count as constructive feed back. Check your grammer.