These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Open letter to CCP and the community regarding HYDRA and OB ban from ATX

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Time Funnel
Just a side dish
Outspoken Alliance
#101 - 2012-05-25 15:49:01 UTC
Pallidum Treponema wrote:
Quote:
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. -- Robert J. Hanlon



Were Hydra and 0utbreak stupid to merge into a single corp on SiSi for the tournament practice?

Yes.

Did they have malicious intent?

I don't know. I want to believe that they did not.


Were CCP stupid to make such a harsh ruling, and sticking with it even after learning about the GM response?

Yes.

Did they have malicious intent?

I don't know. I want to believe that they did not.


Well at least you are kind enough to point out they may actually be stupid. I suppose that is better than malicious.

...
Karl Planck
Perkone
Caldari State
#102 - 2012-05-25 15:54:29 UTC
Gnaw LF wrote:
Evelgrivion wrote:
This is certainly one of the most vindictive exchanges I've ever read from this community. Straight Come on guys, you can, and should be, better than this.

Regarding the issue in question, in no uncertain terms, Hydra and Outbreak worked together to a degree that could be considered collusion and thus by letter of the law, absolutely should be barred from competing together. However, where it gets messy is the correspondence of the Game Masters.

A Senior Game Master, an individual who is, reputedly, one of the highest authorities available to the playerbase for questions and concerns, said that what Hydra and Outbreak were doing, practicing together in the same system on the test server, was okay. Acting on good faith that what a Senior Game Master tells a player is true and accurate, Hydra and Outbreak went ahead and performed what was, by the rules of the tournament organizers, against the rules of Alliance Tournament X participation, and thus were banned from competition. Thus far, no opportunity for a dialogue between CCP and the banned parties has been publicly granted.

Do the Game Masters have reliable authority in Eve Online, or do they not? Can we, as players, take Game Masters at their word, and can we act in good faith that what a Game Master tells us is true, accurate, and reliable? The Game Masters are the front of customer service between the game's developers as operators of the online environment and the customer base; if we cannot trust that anything a game master tells a player will not be overridden by other employees at CCP, there is a horrific problem with the customer service aspect of the Eve Online service that should be addressed immediately. The ability for CCP's Game Masters to serve as a reliable source of information and advice to the player base has been substantially undermined by this incident.




Nailed on the head a thousand times over. The issue here is not whether or not Hydra or Outbreak deserve a ban, but rather should such a ban be placed under the current circumstances. Considering they head OFFICIAL ******* GO AHEAD FROM CCP, doesnt matter who in CCP, they had a response telling them that they are within the rules. To then turn around and ban them without so much as a warning or ultimatum is not only capricious but also malicious. Do the right thing CCP.


Hyrda did not disclose the full extent of what they were doing. Placing both teams in the same corp in the same pos on the test server and saying "trust us, were not working together THAT much" is a load of bull. If they had FULLY DISCLOSED what they were doing i am confident the answer would not have been the same

I has all the eve inactivity
Kyros Xero
Xuronautics
#103 - 2012-05-25 15:58:27 UTC
The GM response was a narrow ruling on a specific item - sparring against other teams - and specifically included a warning against "appearing to be the same people". Holding that up as a blank check for anything Hydra might choose to do on the test server (merging corps, etc) is weak sauce.

It would be like getting the ok from your buddy to go hang out, then banging his Mom. Not the same thing.

Don't villainize the GM.

POS Layered Defenses: "Panic" mode and defense-automation arrays
Darius III
Interstellar eXodus
The Initiative.
#104 - 2012-05-25 16:01:10 UTC
I have voiced my displeasure officially as CSM in the CSM/CCP secret place.

CCP doesnt have good track record with PR or communications with players and this incident highlights inadequacies with both. This has left a stain on the AT itself and is unfortunate and would have been easily avoided by CCP by making policies crystal clear and/or answering more succinctly *OR* the alliances themselves by simply going forward in complete separation.

I will miss HYDRA's participation greatly and I wish they hadn't taken a chance on trusting CCP to make the rules clear to everyone, nor taken a chance to even risk what could be viewed as collaboration if they did not in fact collaborate. HYDRA has always been an outfit with peerless skill and combat acumen and I am deeply saddened by their banning and the circumstances surrounding it.

Hmmm
Evelgrivion
State War Academy
Caldari State
#105 - 2012-05-25 16:01:44 UTC
Karl Planck wrote:
Hyrda did not disclose the full extent of what they were doing. Placing both teams in the same corp in the same pos on the test server and saying "trust us, were not working together THAT much" is a load of bull. If they had FULLY DISCLOSED what they were doing i am confident the answer would not have been the same


First off, what is the actual intent of the "No alternate teams" rule? Is it meant to stop the same entity from entering multiple teams from the same alliance/organization? Is it intended to prevent an alts vs alts situation such as the finale of AT9? If it's the former, Red vs Blue looks to have been granted preferential treatment while engaging in similar behavior. If it's the latter, I wasn't aware Hydra and Outbreak are alt corps; are they?
Karl Planck
Perkone
Caldari State
#106 - 2012-05-25 16:05:58 UTC
Evelgrivion wrote:
Karl Planck wrote:
Hyrda did not disclose the full extent of what they were doing. Placing both teams in the same corp in the same pos on the test server and saying "trust us, were not working together THAT much" is a load of bull. If they had FULLY DISCLOSED what they were doing i am confident the answer would not have been the same


First off, what is the actual intent of the "No alternate teams" rule? Is it meant to stop the same entity from entering multiple teams from the same alliance/organization? Is it intended to prevent an alts vs alts situation such as the finale of AT9? If it's the former, Red vs Blue looks to have been granted preferential treatment while engaging in similar behavior. If it's the latter, I wasn't aware Hydra and Outbreak are alt corps; are they?


If they want to compete like alt corps then what exactly are then in reference to the AT? They can cry foul all they want about having permission, but without full disclosure they can't be surprised, even though they are moaning its not fair.

Please tell me, why didn't they ouline their entire plan for practice to the GM if they were so concerned about the legitimacy. Please.

I has all the eve inactivity
Evelgrivion
State War Academy
Caldari State
#107 - 2012-05-25 16:13:36 UTC
Karl Planck wrote:
[If they want to compete like alt corps then what exactly are then in reference to the AT? They can cry foul all they want about having permission, but without full disclosure they can't be surprised, even though they are moaning its not fair.

Please tell me, why didn't they ouline their entire plan for practice to the GM if they were so concerned about the legitimacy. Please.


For starters, you can try to give the benefit of the doubt with regards to intent. Second, it is very difficult to frame a full disclosure question that provides a good contextual framework from which the question was asked. It's entirely possible, and not unreasonable, that the question asked of the GM was perceived to adequately provide context to the issue in question.
Kadesh Priestess
Descendance.
GoonSwarm.
#108 - 2012-05-25 16:15:49 UTC
Evelgrivion wrote:
For starters, you can try to give the benefit of the doubt with regards to intent. Second, it is very difficult to frame a full disclosure question that provides a good contextual framework from which the question was asked. It's entirely possible, and not unreasonable, that the question asked of the GM was perceived to adequately provide context to the issue in question.
I want to emphasize that it wasn't just GM, it was senior GM which was confirmed to be one of the most adequate by CCP official (in private convo).
Karl Planck
Perkone
Caldari State
#109 - 2012-05-25 16:20:50 UTC
Kadesh Priestess wrote:
Evelgrivion wrote:
For starters, you can try to give the benefit of the doubt with regards to intent. Second, it is very difficult to frame a full disclosure question that provides a good contextual framework from which the question was asked. It's entirely possible, and not unreasonable, that the question asked of the GM was perceived to adequately provide context to the issue in question.
I want to emphasize that it wasn't just GM, it was senior GM which was confirmed to be one of the most adequate by CCP official (in private convo).


adaquate response cannot be given when the details of what you were doing (specially those that crossed the line) were not disclosed to the GM making the decision.

You got an answer to the question you asked, it was the wrong question to validate your actions

I has all the eve inactivity
Kratisto
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#110 - 2012-05-25 16:26:16 UTC
What I find most amusing about this thread is Outbreak. and Hydra attempting to lawyer their way into the tournament. That works in civil courts with laws and rules, and accountability of judges.


CCP is the sovereign lord and master of the game and tournament. They do not have to do anything. Basically it comes down to this: Who needs whom more; Does Hydra/Outbreak need CCP for the tournament, or does CCP need them. It is frankly quite easy to say CCP has all the leverage; you guys should be on your knees begging for mercy, not on your feet trying to worm your way around like a lawyer. Sue for tempered understanding, not technicalities.

Your rage and tears do nothing but feed the masses who harbor resentment for the anticlimactic ending of last year, where (intentionally or not) you swung your dicks around and slapped all the viewers and organizers in the face. Yes you were within the law that time, but the new rules were specifically added to prevent the same thing from happening! You changed nothing, and expected no punishment? It was clear to all viewers, that last year one team was preordained to win. That there was an A team, and a B team.

In this thread I hear you apologized and feel bad about how that ended. Your apologies were not publicized, if they were given. You will find little compassion, unless you issue a very public and heartfelt apology for last year, ask for forgiveness and understanding, and request one team be allowed to compete.

Right now, all I see is lawyering.
Evelgrivion
State War Academy
Caldari State
#111 - 2012-05-25 16:28:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Evelgrivion
Karl Planck wrote:
adaquate response cannot be given when the details of what you were doing (specially those that crossed the line) were not disclosed to the GM making the decision.

You got an answer to the question you asked, it was the wrong question to validate your actions


It was entirely possible for CCP to pursue extra clarification; no single party can be blamed for inadequate understanding here.

Quote:
that is total bull and you know it. If there was NO DOUBT in your actions you wouldn't have petitioned it in the first place. If it was simply stupidity that whoever wrote the petition happened to forget the actual suspicious actions in the petition then you know where to point the finger.


Strawman. As was indicated by my previous post, I found that the intent and specifics of the rules regarding the alternate team clauses are not clear.

Now, for my full disclosure: I think that Hydra and Genos should be allowed to participate, so long as the characters used in the tournament do not belong to the same people. EDIT: Meant to say Hydra and Outbreak.
Kadesh Priestess
Descendance.
GoonSwarm.
#112 - 2012-05-25 16:30:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Kadesh Priestess
Karl Planck wrote:
adaquate response cannot be given when the details of what you were doing (specially those that crossed the line) were not disclosed to the GM making the decision.

You got an answer to the question you asked, it was the wrong question to validate your actions
This is true. However, please consider that this petition was filled by outbreak member as act of free will - he has no direct relationship to HYDRA leadership. He just knew we're waiting for email response and decided to help, presenting us just GM's reply.

Who knew that question wasn't worded correctly enough. If anybody would know & notice it - question would have been reworded with 100% chance, i remind you of amount of attention we were putting into this.
Daneel Trevize
Give my 11percent back
#113 - 2012-05-25 16:31:01 UTC
Kratisto wrote:
In this thread I hear you apologized and feel bad about how that ended. Your apologies were not publicized, if they were given. You will find little compassion, unless you issue a very public and heartfelt apology for last year, ask for forgiveness and understanding, and request one team be allowed to compete.
Did you miss Duncan's detailed write-up response last year with Garmon's apology, or something?
Karl Planck
Perkone
Caldari State
#114 - 2012-05-25 16:34:35 UTC
Kadesh Priestess wrote:
Karl Planck wrote:
adaquate response cannot be given when the details of what you were doing (specially those that crossed the line) were not disclosed to the GM making the decision.

You got an answer to the question you asked, it was the wrong question to validate your actions
This is true. However, please consider that this petition was filled by outbreak member as act of free will - he has no direct relationship to HYDRA leadership. He just knew we're waiting for email response and decided to help, presenting us just GM's reply.

Who knew that question wasn't worded correctly enough. If anybody would know & notice it - question would have been reworded with 100% chance, i remind you of amount of attention we were putting into this.


This being the case why did you practice together until you got clearence? Everything in eve works like this. For example, if you are exploiting something that seems like a bug then the GM can temp ban you for doing it (if they THINK you had intent to break the rules).

This is no different. You guys were playing with fire and you got burned.

All of this said, I am sad you guys wont be competing as HYDRA has done very well in the past, but that sadness is much much less than my appriciation for CCP holding up the rules it set out.

I has all the eve inactivity
Jimmy Luv
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#115 - 2012-05-25 16:42:57 UTC
Pretty simple really......

Senior GM responds to Garmon giving them the go ahead to practice with each other on the test server. If this wasn't supposed to be allowed in the first place then the blame can only lie with CCP. A lack of communication on they're part should not consitute a problem on Outbreak/Hydras.

There simply is no other argument to be made.

Sort your S**t out CCP.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#116 - 2012-05-25 16:47:07 UTC
Jimmy Luv wrote:
A lack of communication on they're part should not consitute a problem on Outbreak/Hydras.
It is when Outbreak/Hydra are the ones not communicating properly…

Yoink.

…bah! Breaking sipes by deletion is a much bigger GM issue! Cry
Kadesh Priestess
Descendance.
GoonSwarm.
#117 - 2012-05-25 16:48:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Kadesh Priestess
Karl Planck wrote:
This being the case why did you practice together until you got clearence?
You must've missed my post where i said that we wouldn't get response from evetv email address no matter what.

We would understand if CCP would limit both HYDRA/OB to fielding one team, using previous year as precedent.

We would even understand if CCP told us that both HYDRA and OB are not allowed to participate in tournament on 2nd may, when they published the rules.

But making it just now, when thousands of man-hours (3-5 training sessions a week + logi + theorycrafting + spying stuff) were spent and making such lame excuses makes me thing that the only thing which drove CCP in this case is bitterness of certain persons who placed their own opinion above anything else.

I entered HYDRA just few months ago to participate in ATX. After hanging around for a while - I really thought these guys are tinfoiled and that they really overestimate amount of hatred towards HYDRA. After recent events, it turns out they had a good reason to do so.
Kadesh Priestess
Descendance.
GoonSwarm.
#118 - 2012-05-25 16:49:58 UTC
Tippia wrote:
It is when Outbreak/Hydra are the ones not communicating properly…
I would be glad to hear your advice on how we would have to communicate with CCP.
Tyrrax Thorrk
Guiding Hand Social Club
#119 - 2012-05-25 16:50:09 UTC
Jimmy Luv wrote:
Pretty simple really......

Senior GM responds to Garmon giving them the go ahead to practice with each other on the test server. If this wasn't supposed to be allowed in the first place then the blame can only lie with CCP. A lack of communication on they're part should not consitute a problem on Outbreak/Hydras.

There simply is no other argument to be made.

Sort your S**t out CCP.


Permission to practice with each other is different from permission to use same SiSi corp / logistics / theorycraft / setups
Right up until tourney starts ( at which point one can only assume they'd still be in constant communication and metagaming together )

But yeah the Tourney team should've communicated better.
Doesn't mean the GM gave them permission to behave as if their two alliances were one team.
Intigo
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#120 - 2012-05-25 16:54:54 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Jimmy Luv wrote:
A lack of communication on they're part should not consitute a problem on Outbreak/Hydras.
It is when Outbreak/Hydra are the ones not communicating properly…


...what did we do wrong when we emailed the official Alliance Tournament address twice?

Zero reply.

hydra provail