Jita Park Speakers Corner

[do not add to this letter unless you have something constructive to say].
This letter is on the subject of altering CCP Eve's "zero tolerance" towards "Addons" and similar programs.
The letter considers the eventual outcome of having a "zero tolerence" in an universe of M.M.O.R.P.G.s that do not.
Player-social-biases are discussed along with their inability or incapability to read or comprehend E.U.L.A.s :
Social biases that leads to the player's banning by CCP Eve's crew.

I would like to begin by chooping directlly at the problem by saying,
consider lifting all perminent bans that have been issued by CCP towards CCP's Eve Players.
[added] not isk related offences.
[added] empahsize the "pilot thinks / believes "cheating" is ok . . due to "cannot / will-not read EULA".

What we may have here is a case of "people that like computers to much",
or in other words Hackers, getting banned for simply sticking to cyber-social-biases tought by all the other MMORPGs.
Via logical induction and inferences, it is quite simple to derive that those people are Hackers and love space ships.
(+)
What we have here is an ever growing number of players that were only following cyber-social-biases dictated/tought by all the other M.M.O.R.P.G.s' cultures. External social biases that completely accept all forms of "Addons".
[added] : I am not saying "allow addons".
[added] : Conisder that Aurora autopilots the ship to the "nearest" station, and CONCORD sends the pilot a letter saying "Flight Licence Revoked, as is something something, enjoy roaming the station".

Now, let us consider the low % of pilots that actaully read the E.U.L.A.; moreover, let us consider the number of pilots that are literate to the point of comprehending an E.U.L.A..


Now, consider the logical sequence that would almost always happen with new players :
An external cyber-social-bias that has tought pilots to accepts addons is firmly embedded in the pilots subconcious,
and (+)
the very real and very high % of pilots that were ' incapable of ' / 'unable to' read the E.U.L.A..


Step of your high horse for a minute and look at the battle field.
Increased attacks upon CCP's assets by hackers,
could that have anything todo with the shear volume of players that have been banned.


There are always acouple of rotten apples in the basket of this size,
such as players that deserve an entire year's ban (BUT NO MORE) for their clashes with CCP's zero tolerance.
Yet, consider when the "fellon" has been identified,
then re-identifying an violation is no longer "finding an needle in an hay stack".


CPP's zero tolerance for addons is also quite unethical:
banning of an individual for conducting activities that is very well accepted in all other M.M.O.R.P.G.S. is ultimatlly self defeating.
Also, the alteration of the "zero tolerance" would rend half the opposing hacking forces to your banner (assuming a glorious speech).
[added] again, I am not sying permit addons, i am saying get the rules into the face of the offending pilot: Just because you and all your friends are literate does not mean the rest of the world is. Aditionally, the act of punishment is effective if the restricted action is unrestricted later on . . compared to the illlogical action of an perminent ban, without warning or prior short-banns, is pointless due to . . . re read from paraghraph it is quite clear.


Seriously now,
would we reject a subscription from 1000+ pilots because you can't see the forest for the ego/caffeen/hangover.
How, also, would it not release the utility of an % # of your crew that is fending of cyber attacks when 1/2 of those cyber attacks would be rended NULL by simply doing this.


In conclusion, and beware the demonology . . . (its just letters)
What kind of self delusional [sensored] would impliment such an reaction towards it's companies subscribers? No one!
I would suggest that we have here an case of RL Corporate warfare, where we have been feed subterfuge and false statistics that ultamitely lead CCP to the self defeating "zero tolerance". An policy that cannot be changed by any regualr [muu muu] Joe cause Joe could never see through its ego, even if Eden IS burning!! So stop fighting your regular subscriber which is a space ship loving hacker that has better things todo then read 3k pages of EULA pr week and is via nature breed into following socialy acepted biases over all other things.

You mean the people who got a warning for botting, and who then continued to do so, so got banned?

Or those who did direct client modification? Sure, /some/ of them might not have realised. But still, it's hard to call CCP 'unethical' for sticking to the word of the contract that these people signed.

Why was a thread directed at CCP moved to Jita Park?

But on topic.

Bots, RMTers and people who try to fudge the code, deserve a ban.

Frankly I think CCP is to soft on them.

People who are smart enough to tinker with the client code are smart enough to know that it's disallowed.

Again, true, yet you are taking the worst case scenario and using it to cast a shadow on the rest of the "banned".
With the inevitalbe result of all bannable offenses receive the same unethical bann time of : infinite.

I am saying that we are fighting the nature of the regular "Joe".
Where our example pilot "Joe" is socially inclined to disregard E.U.L.A. reading and to get as many addons on its screen as possible.

Yes, very many people cannot read, [yet] that [fact] seams to escape allot of people.

No, the ban is not stupid; it is simply too long.
Additionally, by permitting banned players to re-enter CCP Eve's Universe after a years ban . . . then those accounts are "known" and do thus logaically not have to be "found" . . . thus this would save the CCP Eve's crew time in tracking the "fellon" 's new accounts.

So let us sum up what we are seeing here:

Every single last reponse to this post has shown how we have
demonified the result of getting banned;
We are always looking at the worst case scenario and letting those scenarios place a shadow over all the other banned cases.

So what is that? A simple error in quantifcation and an run way crew with an plausible ego problem. That is when we define the 1st premise, of many, via emotion instead of logic (Counter is actaully a glass of water).

We are not comprehending all the other cases that are absolutlly not deserving of a perminent bans; thus, we have spawned an entire base of unethically banned players.

And i do enjoy being the Devils advocate. SO ASK f.f.s.

Illiterates are being cybersocially oppressed by being forced to read a EULA! Pitchfork and torch time!

What does this even mean?

...

The "first strike" is there for people who just assume that CCP is indifferent to bots and hacks. It's pretty soft. If you're arguing on behalf of the people who were perma-banned then sorry, no sale. Sure, they will occasionally get a false positive, which sucks, but in the overwhelming majority of cases the people who are permanently banned were banned for crapping up the game with bots and code injection exploits which were knowingly used to gain an unfair advantage over other players (in the best case! and for RMT and credit card fraud in the worst), and the game is better off without them.

The people doing this have read your post. In your post, you say two particularly damning things:

1) everyone who has been banned should be unbanned;

2) if you just let people hack the game, they won't be so tempted to compromise and DDoS it.

Right off the bat, you're not talking about people with parking tickets. The people who have been banned have been banned precisely for hacks, botting or RMT, or some combination of those. Those are, unsurprisingly, the people who would resort to attacking the game itself. So you're talking about amnesty for the very people who CCP wants out of the game. You can post all the non sequiturs you can think of, but that doesn't change the content of your original post.

The implicit threat in #2 is a nice touch, by the way:



Nice game you got there. Shame if something happened to it, amirite?