Assembly Hall

I am sure this proposal will not go down easily, but I believe it needs to be made and implemented at some point in the future.

CCP seems to be getting better and better at chasing down botters and RMT. If we find any, and we have good reasons to believe someone is breaking the EULA, do we use petitions to report them. Nothing further needs to be said at this point.

The sandbox principle works fine for all matters that take place inside of it. Players need not fear the loss of their ships and playing with a player's fear (of a ship loss) is part of the game. However, players do need to fear the loss of their accounts as a means to prevent EULA violations and it is not a matter of the game play within the sandbox itself. Accusations of EULA violations are not required to have fun in EVE.

In EVE there are players who use accusations of EULA violations as a means to PvP. While players are being harassed with spaceships are they often accused of being bots and to be breaking the EULA. Because this is a play style, which leaves the sandbox, should players be protected from it, to give a good meaning to the fear of EULA violations and to preserve the good fun within the sandbox. To stay with the sandbox analogy - it does not need kids in the sandbox, who shout "Give me your shovel or I'll tell your Dad!"

As such do I propose that any such accusations, by means other than with petitions, should be taken as a violation of its own and receive recognition by CCP. Meaning, players who make such accusations as part of their play style, to grief and harass other players, should receive a warning in-game as well as when done on the forums.

I believe by giving it more recognition will it not only lead to a better game play, but also to more players taking EULA violations more seriously.

There is no size involved here.

*snipped discussion of moderation* - CCP Eterne

I still cannot see what size it is you are asking me about.

Am I being accused of making a petty proposal??

If I understand correctly, his problem is ppl smacking drama in local about how he's going to get you banned for EULA violation, instead of quietly file a petition and let CCP sort it out.

There's a merit in this. +1
Threatening players with imagined backing of authority, is akin to posing as GM, and is already a bannable offense in most mmos.

This is especially acute in Eve (aka, spreadsheet online), where botting consists of OCR bots that do not use code injection and thus impossible to positively identify/proven. Banning for botting is merely a matter of educated guess.

Ok. Yeah I was way off.

For the record I think you're fighting a losing battle.

Not necessarily. Like I said, threatening players with imagined backing of authority is already a bannable offense in most mmos, ranging from huge themepark mmos like WoW that's closely controlled, to small ones like Salem that's far more hardcore than Eve (you died? Biomassed! No clones, game over).

May not guarantee it will happen in Eve, but precedents are all over the place, in wide range of mmos.

I assume you have little knowledge on human rights or only the rights within the European Union of which Iceland is trying to become a member of. It will surprise you to know dignity is being recognized in article 1 of the fundamental rights to the European Union, which is possibly why you think of it as being overrated. Therefore will I not discuss dignity with you. If you want to know more can you find plenty of information about it on the Internet.

Further does it not mean it needs an army of GMs and ISDs to introduce this. It will simply be another rule just like "discussion of moderation is not allowed" is a rule. There is no need to ban lots of players. What it needs is to create an awareness among the players that such a play style is unwanted. New players will pick it up much faster than older ones. However, those who play EVE long enough will already not violate it, because I believe a lot of us are rather sick of it.

This lets me believe that the battle has already been won and CCP only needs to declare the winner. Who then does not see the point of it will be made aware of it in the usual way: first through leniency, then through warnings, then with temp bans.

No. It would simply take the discussion further away from the topic, which is about the introduction of a new game rule. You wouldn't take your own comment now and call it "on topic", would you?

How does everyone know they did not do something wrong, when many young players have difficulties interpreting the EULA in the first place? In the end is the interpretation of the EULA entirely left to CCP, we have no say in it, and as such is a discussion about the rules of no help. A rule, which forbids accusations of EULA violations, on the other hand is quite easy to understand and shuts all arguments, discussions and accusations up (one rule to rule them all ...).

It gets everyone back to the game, lets players dust off and get up faster, than any whining or smacking ever can. All it currently does is to lead to fixed mindsets and emotional trench warfare. It would be nice to get rid of some of it.

Besides what Shah has already pointed out, consider the following: If we already troll with fake threats of EULA violation reports, what's going to happen when you make EULA violation threats petitionable?

People are immediately going to threaten to report people for threatening to report EULA violations. It'll turn into a constant, swarming storm of garbage that will, in the end, only cause more problems for CCP.

Besides that, I highly doubt CCP doesn't have rules for people who impersonate GMs. If they're already posted somewhere, I'm going to feign ignorance to where they are because I'm too lazy to look it up.