These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Lying About Identity No Longer Allowed Under EULA

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#101 - 2013-09-10 07:27:51 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
TharOkha wrote:
So the rules changed and you cannot scam using someone elses identity/corp name. I dont see a point why all the rage because of this change. AttentionQuestion I think that this is very good. I would be pretty p!ssed off if someone would use my identity/corp name to scam other people and destroy my reputation / good name (hypothetically).


The problem is that that's not what the rules change says.


We're all behind "don't use Thar0Kha to impersonate TharOkha." Same with "Oasis Group for 0asis Group." But those types of impersonations have been banned for a long time.


The issue with the intent behind the change is whether someone in the Caldari Navy named Bob can say "I speak on TharOkha's behalf" without being in breach of the TOS.
I happen to think that kind of lie is fine because, really? This isn't the 17th century where you have to have agents working on your behalf in far flung corners of the globe. If someone says "I speak on TharOkha's behalf," you send TharOkha a damn mail before doing business with them. In EVE, Scamming and lying, and using lies to scam are allowed.


The issue with the rules change as written is that a lie of "I am not a goon" fits as a violation of the TOS. (The EVE group being impersonated is the group "not-goons")

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Lady Areola Fappington
#102 - 2013-09-10 07:35:59 UTC
Shalua Rui wrote:
Change to the game in ANY way or form > Rage!

...it's expected. Blink

Seriously though: I think that's a good change... if it can be enforced in a comprehensible way. It's something one cannot really enforce ingame, so some outgame solution had to be found eventually.



I'm really going to say this in the nicest way I can, and I mean no disrespect but....reread what you just posted.

An out-game solution? That implies a Real Life solution, to me. No Ma'am. EVE always has been, and forevermore will be a video game. The second any video game decides to use out-game measures to regulate in-game conflict, a line has been crossed.


To use one of my fun outrageous examples, why not just get everybody's name, email, address, and phone number, and tie it to the account for everyone to see. That would also cut down on all this abusive scamming and what have you. People would think twice if a scam victim could come over and slash their tires.


The issue with the current ToS wording is not what rules it implies. If CCP wants to end certain types of scams and confidence tricks, that's well within their rights. The problem is, the wording is so vague on this clause, that things not intended to be caught, will fall under as a violation.

Again, the technical example...a guy is playing a chick avatar. Plays himself off as female. Gets on Ventrillo, and has a 40 year old truckers voice. One of his corpmates gets offended, and submits a support ticket, for misrepresentation (ladies are a group of players, and would fall under this clause).

Of course we can sit back and say "Ehhh, GM's will use common sense, that's not what the TOS covers". At that point, we now have unequal application of rules (Hey, if a guy can pretend to be a girl, I can pretend to be a CFC recruiter). We also fall into the cache scraping issue..."Yeah, it's against ToS, but we won't enforce that, till we think we need to"

That's the issue, hope I helped clear things up from the other side.

o7

7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided. --Eve New Player Guide
Lady Areola Fappington
#103 - 2013-09-10 07:41:55 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:

The issue with the rules change as written is that a lie of "I am not a goon" fits as a violation of the TOS. (The EVE group being impersonated is the group "not-goons")



Mr. Ruby, that makes me consider something. I'm a member of the Something Awful forums, known as "Goons". I am not in any Goon/CFC corporation. Would this mean my simple existence in the game is a ToS violation, as I'm impersonating the group of "not-goons"?

How bout if I just came out and told someone "Hey, you can trust me, I'm not a Goon."?

7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided. --Eve New Player Guide
Kwa Zulu
The Graduates
The Initiative.
#104 - 2013-09-10 07:52:35 UTC
I am glad http://evemaps.dotlan.net/alliance/Northern_Coalition. is now going to be banned for pretending to be our former glorious coalition. Go forth CCP and lay down thy sword
SKINE DMZ
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#105 - 2013-09-10 08:13:20 UTC
Nothing has changed, I have a serious suspicion that you are all from the "please remove animations they make me dizzy" thread.

I disagree
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#106 - 2013-09-10 08:14:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Zappity
Seems like a legal-driven knee jerk response to something. Seen it a few times in my line where legal wants a watertight definition but operations needs a deliberate lack of clarity.

This is messy.

They should specifically define precise activities that are not permitted (and keep them to an absolute minimum) and bugger off with their broad clauses. Remember what defines EVE.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#107 - 2013-09-10 08:18:39 UTC
SKINE DMZ wrote:
Nothing has changed, I have a serious suspicion that you are all from the "please remove animations they make me dizzy" thread.


Thank you. Your feedback is important to us. Please hold for a customer service operator.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
CCP Falcon
#108 - 2013-09-10 08:38:50 UTC
CCP Guard wrote:
Hey everyone. It's evening here in Reykjavík, our senior staff are presumably at home with their families and it may take until tomorrow to get this all cleared up in an official manner.

I can assure you that this is intended in the best way, as clarification of policy that's been in effect for a long time so I hope we have your patience until office hours tomorrow. Nothing bad will happen in the meantime.

If it turns out that this change to the wording is actually too far reaching, goes against its intended purpose, or is somehow confusing things rather than clarifying them, that will be taken care of...trust me. If it turns out to make sense despite the worries you guys have, proper explanations will be provided.

I want to give the people responsible for drafting the policy a chance to read your posts and address the matter. Agreed?



As guard posted last night, we'll look into this today for you guys..

I'm going to take your concerns, and the concerns highlighted by the CSM directly to the GM Team to get this all ironed out. Whether this is a full explanation of the wording change in detail, or alteration to the wording is to be decided, of course.

CCP Falcon || EVE Universe Community Manager || @CCP_Falcon

Happy Birthday To FAWLTY7! <3
Suomi Khan
Doomheim
#109 - 2013-09-10 08:40:48 UTC
The policies about impersonating and names have allways been useless and stupid.
There is no reason for CCP to limit the EVE sandbox with this kind of out of game policies as long as the impersonation is "in the game". Now impersonating an GM or ccp employe is another story, but impersonating a corp, alliance, player is all part of the sandbox..

Also, you simply can't have a policy about naming and impersonating and then only uphold it when it is convenient, even with the old ruling, severel big events in EVE history should have lead to a ban..

Just remove the entire rule.. As it stands now(and before) the rule is a ticking bomb under your GM team..
Damian Vilsalant
Ember Inc.
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#110 - 2013-09-10 08:42:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Damian Vilsalant
forget it.
Princess Saskia
Hyperfleet Industries
#111 - 2013-09-10 08:49:33 UTC
Does this mean I am impersonating everyone? ?.?

 ♥ 
Lady Areola Fappington
#112 - 2013-09-10 08:49:45 UTC
CCP Falcon wrote:
CCP Guard wrote:
Hey everyone. It's evening here in Reykjavík, our senior staff are presumably at home with their families and it may take until tomorrow to get this all cleared up in an official manner.

I can assure you that this is intended in the best way, as clarification of policy that's been in effect for a long time so I hope we have your patience until office hours tomorrow. Nothing bad will happen in the meantime.

If it turns out that this change to the wording is actually too far reaching, goes against its intended purpose, or is somehow confusing things rather than clarifying them, that will be taken care of...trust me. If it turns out to make sense despite the worries you guys have, proper explanations will be provided.

I want to give the people responsible for drafting the policy a chance to read your posts and address the matter. Agreed?



As guard posted last night, we'll look into this today for you guys..

I'm going to take your concerns, and the concerns highlighted by the CSM directly to the GM Team to get this all ironed out. Whether this is a full explanation of the wording change in detail, or alteration to the wording is to be decided, of course.




That's the best we can ask for Falcon, and I for one appreciate you guys taking our concerns seriously.


Is it at all possible to get some alibi time until we get a full-on clarification? It would make things a little less worrisome for some of us, if we could have a "This is the rule but we aren't enforcing it until time as it's clarified".

7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided. --Eve New Player Guide
Princess Saskia
Hyperfleet Industries
#113 - 2013-09-10 08:59:50 UTC
There also comes the question about wether you are even trying to impersonate another group.

Having corp names with different spelling but similar to other names may not be direct impersonation but may infact be trying to be their own identity. This is the same with character names which was outlines earlier (with people that have a name they like that is taken so use small differences in order to keep their name similar. There involves a hell of alot of work if CCP have to investigate properly weather someone was impersonating someone else before taking any action. Work that I think won't be carried out beceause hell if someone going to spend 3 hours per petition investigating weather members even said they were a part of the official group.

 ♥ 
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#114 - 2013-09-10 09:06:07 UTC
CCP Falcon wrote:

As guard posted last night, we'll look into this today for you guys..

I'm going to take your concerns, and the concerns highlighted by the CSM directly to the GM Team to get this all ironed out. Whether this is a full explanation of the wording change in detail, or alteration to the wording is to be decided, of course.


Thanks for keeping us in the loop and recognising our concerns.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Lady Areola Fappington
#115 - 2013-09-10 09:20:57 UTC
Princess Saskia wrote:
There also comes the question about wether you are even trying to impersonate another group.

Having corp names with different spelling but similar to other names may not be direct impersonation but may infact be trying to be their own identity. This is the same with character names which was outlines earlier (with people that have a name they like that is taken so use small differences in order to keep their name similar. There involves a hell of alot of work if CCP have to investigate properly weather someone was impersonating someone else before taking any action. Work that I think won't be carried out beceause hell if someone going to spend 3 hours per petition investigating weather members even said they were a part of the official group.



That's a good point. I mean, what if I make a Goons Inc. corp. No relation to SA Goons, I'm just using the traditional definition. Don't forget, the Police League (PL), Notorious Criminals. (NC.), and Transstellar Engineering, Shipping and Technology (TEST).

Either they're banned, which will spawn a ton of work for GMs to muddle through (see above), or it'll be allowed, which makes the ruling moot (Hey man, come join GOONS, only 10mil ISK (Great Outstanding Organization that Never Surrenders).)

7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided. --Eve New Player Guide
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#116 - 2013-09-10 10:02:05 UTC
unban barracuda ii he did nothing wrong :'( Sad

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#117 - 2013-09-10 10:04:46 UTC
If I were to say "I represent the group of players known as "people who live in nullsec", pay me 10bn isk and you will be given a free pass to all of nullsec."

^
i would now be banned, correct?

This is the kind of babying that is exactly what I came to EVE to avoid. Another step towards to being just another mmo that endlessly coddles the dumb players, rather than having them fight it out with pvp, economics, wits, etc
Jassmin Joy
Pulling The Plug
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#118 - 2013-09-10 10:09:14 UTC
Rabble Rabble Rabble.

Seriously though, this is why Code of Conducts in societys and others take years to impliment, you need to get the wording spot on otherwise this happens, i can see what you were trying though, but it's a pretty massive change to counter the "you can't pretend you're an ISD or "vouched" by ISD".
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#119 - 2013-09-10 10:14:59 UTC
By the way, while we're at it, can we make it so that the rule works in reverse too: that lying about what groups other people belong to get slapped around too? Twisted


I can think of a couple of people who keep accusing me of belonging to the goons/nullsec cabal/dev team that would run out of arguments (or accounts) very quickly if that happened…
Pap Uhotih
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#120 - 2013-09-10 10:15:12 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
If I were to say "I represent the group of players known as "people who live in nullsec", pay me 10bn isk and you will be given a free pass to all of nullsec."

^
i would now be banned, correct?


On the plus side it would potentially mean that the bumpers wouldn't be able to claim to be from/an agent of New Order when they are not, maybe even cut down on the sheer volume of spam they pump into local which is probably the most irritating part of their activity. Its not all bad.