These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Hide your ISK, Team Security is out of control. (Allegedly)

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#241 - 2013-02-12 15:07:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Mallak Azaria wrote:
3.You may not use your own or any third-party software, macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play. You may not rewrite or modify the user interface or otherwise manipulate data in any way to acquire items, currency, objects, character attributes or beneficial actions not actually acquired or achieved in the Game.

That's pretty transparent.


To me, the statement about "3.You may not use your own or any third-party software, macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an *accelerated* rate when compared with ordinary Game play" is badly stated.

Because a cynical person could see that they are allowed to use stuff to facilitate acquisition of items etc. at a *same or slower* rate when compared with ordinary game play.

Now, while acquiring stuff at a slower rate seems dumb, there are a number of ways to make intense gains with it.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Cebraio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#242 - 2013-02-12 15:07:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Cebraio
Abrazzar wrote:
Dante Uisen wrote:
If/when it becomes illegal/impossible to use the cache files, what will happen to the massive amounts of isk players have made using this technique?

Nothing. It wasn't against the rules then, so they can't be punished for it.

John wants to have a word with you.
Morg Braktar
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
#243 - 2013-02-12 15:11:10 UTC
Sreegs,

If I may offer a bit of advice. The phrase you should be using goes something like this.

"I could tell you but then I would have to kill you." As we have learned from every spy movie. You could also use the less apt cop movie line, "Move along, nothing to see here."

Personally, I think you have done an excellent job of explaining the situation from CCP's perspective. If Kelduum really thought that they should have kept the ISk, then why even segregate it and ask if it was illegal. There would be no reason to do this if it was assumed to legal, they had foreknowledge of the events and choose to cover their gluteus. No one asks if the goods they are receiving are stolen if they have no reason to believe they haven't been.

Keep up the good fight!
Abernie
Thoroughly Incompetent
#244 - 2013-02-12 15:13:09 UTC
Please stop using the word "illegal" when talking about things that are not allowed by EULA before I pop a blood vessel in my brain. Evil

Also cache scraping being a bannable offence sounds a bit bad.

Other than that carry on.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#245 - 2013-02-12 15:15:14 UTC
Cebraio wrote:
Abrazzar wrote:
Dante Uisen wrote:
If/when it becomes illegal/impossible to use the cache files, what will happen to the massive amounts of isk players have made using this technique?

Nothing. It wasn't against the rules then, so they can't be punished for it.

John wants to have a word with you.


"John" used a market bot - the discussion about this IGB crap is just a huge derail.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#246 - 2013-02-12 15:16:21 UTC
Cebraio wrote:
Abrazzar wrote:
Dante Uisen wrote:
If/when it becomes illegal/impossible to use the cache files, what will happen to the massive amounts of isk players have made using this technique?

Nothing. It wasn't against the rules then, so they can't be punished for it.

John wants to have a word with you.

He has no voice on this matter anymore.

Sovereignty and Population

New Mining Mechanics
Arya Greywolf
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#247 - 2013-02-12 15:16:26 UTC
CCP Sreegs, you did the correct thing here.

"John" was manipulating the market through botting. That's all that matters.

/thread.
Diane Yanumano
Yanumano Light Industries
#248 - 2013-02-12 15:16:59 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:


EULA wrote:
3.You may not use your own or any third-party software, macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play. You may not rewrite or modify the user interface or otherwise manipulate data in any way to acquire items, currency, objects, character attributes or beneficial actions not actually acquired or achieved in the Game.


That's pretty transparent.



I'm afraid I disagree. It doesn't say that this software needs to interact with the client, only that I cannot use it to do x faster than I would otherwise be able to do X. Correct? It also disallows 'patterns of game play ... When compared to ordinary game play."

So, what exactly constitutes 'ordinary game play'? Is using eve-market a 'third-party software that facilitates acquisition of currency at an accelerated rate'? Seems to me to fill that definition perfectly.

I'd these decisions were explained in a way that referred to principles that explicated what these phrases are intended to mean, then more of these disputes could be avoided.

CCP is confusing confidentiality with secrecy, I think. Also, given the nature of the player-base and the complexity of game play, some of us need more finely grained guidance at the margins of game play. I personally have no idea what the attraction of spending the efforts in squeezing every last 0.01 ISK at the risk of contravening the EULA. On the other hand, I do not work on Bay Street, Wall Street, or Canary Wharf.
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#249 - 2013-02-12 15:19:48 UTC
The EULA, like any of its kind, is intentionally vague so that people cannot nit pick them apart as they please.

Sovereignty and Population

New Mining Mechanics
Dan Leviathan
Legion of Lemmings
War Rats
#250 - 2013-02-12 15:20:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Dan Leviathan
You all seem to just be inclined to argue. John pushed the envelope. He put himself in an unwise position and took a hit for it. It happens. It sets precedent. The EULA can't cover every single botting scenario. [EDIT] At least i wouldn't want to be the one to write it...
CCP Sreegs
CCP Retirement Home
#251 - 2013-02-12 15:26:23 UTC
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:
Mallak Azaria i think the issue here is not how botting is defined currently as per the EULA, its the ad hoc redefinitions to suit ccp sreegs whims.

in relation to cache scraping i might add

if the guy in question was 'updating his market orders in game' using a macro program to do it faster than normal gameplay, he deserves the wrath of the security team. if he was merely pulling data passively like many others do then imho CCP sreegs is acting unfairly.


This thread has nothing to do with cache scraping. I stated my opinion on the subject. The measuring stick we use to determine whether to action against a player is the EULA and only the EULA which is a legally binding agreement.

I'm going to go drink a bunch of beer now you can all go back to fighting.

"Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012
Thur Barbek
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#252 - 2013-02-12 15:27:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Thur Barbek
Dan Leviathan wrote:
You all seem to just be inclined to argue. John pushed the envelope. He put himself in an unwise position and took a hit for it. It happens. It sets precedent. The EULA can't cover every single botting scenario. [EDIT] At least i wouldn't want to be the one to write it...


EULA's are intentionally 1/2 vague so that CCP can interpret it how they please. They can also just change it randomly and force us to re-accept to log into eve ever again. This is standard procedure for 99.99% of EULA's.

edit: yay lets all get drunk and fight more!
Dan Leviathan
Legion of Lemmings
War Rats
#253 - 2013-02-12 15:31:50 UTC
Thur Barbek wrote:
Dan Leviathan wrote:
You all seem to just be inclined to argue. John pushed the envelope. He put himself in an unwise position and took a hit for it. It happens. It sets precedent. The EULA can't cover every single botting scenario. [EDIT] At least i wouldn't want to be the one to write it...


EULA's are intentionally 1/2 vague so that CCP can interpret it how they please. They can also just change it randomly and force us to re-accept to log into eve ever again. This is standard procedure for 99.99% of EULA's.

edit: yay lets all get drunk and fight more!


Only 1/2 vague?
digi
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#254 - 2013-02-12 15:32:05 UTC
I'm going to the John.
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#255 - 2013-02-12 15:35:10 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:
Mai Khumm wrote:
CCP Sreegs wrote:
Frankly we're a bit disturbed by the allegations made here given that the person in question waited until they exhausted every resource possible prior to posting this then lamented the lack of an escalation path. Not getting the answer you like isn't a lack of an escalation path and never will be.


With this games interesting.......history, do you REALLY blame half the allegations made. I mean, all of them, not just in this thread.


While I'm not trying to slide things under a rug, yes basing an allegation against my team on a single act of misconduct 7 years ago is pretty insane.


CCP has been caught deceiving its customers more than once, so how exactly is it "insane" to believe that it could happen again?

How does that saying go? “I’m not upset that you lied to me, I’m upset that from now on I can’t believe you”.




☼

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.
Hammer Borne
Doomheim
#256 - 2013-02-12 15:39:28 UTC
Please continue to swing the banhammer, but do so more often and harder. Only the guilty should be concerned.

Let those of us who play the game have a level playing field.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#257 - 2013-02-12 15:39:34 UTC
Well at least we now know who the bot lovers are. I look forwards to the next few weeks of mass bannings and isk vanishings that happens every time the botters wage a troll war against CCP Sreegs.
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#258 - 2013-02-12 15:42:40 UTC
CCP Sreegs, named after the sound bots make when they're hit with the banhammer.

Sovereignty and Population

New Mining Mechanics
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#259 - 2013-02-12 15:44:28 UTC
Abrazzar wrote:
CCP Sreegs, named after the sound bots make when they're hit with the banhammer.


it was actually some dumb forum meme

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#260 - 2013-02-12 15:46:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Vera Algaert
baltec1 wrote:
Well at least we now know who the bot lovers are. I look forwards to the next few weeks of mass bannings and isk vanishings that happens every time the botters wage a troll war against CCP Sreegs.

... and i thought Sreegs had declared the time of mass bannings to be gone for good - in favor of his more systematic & steady approach.

Or do you mean to imply that CCP Sreegs might not be entirely truthful with us?

that's a shocking accusation to make.

.