EVE General Discussion

Ok, first off, thanks for the effort. Obviously somebody sat down and put a bit of thought into this response.

However, you do realize that this is a massive change in effective policy, whether you were policing it properly before or not? You have just massively altered the nature of effective espionage in this game. The fact that you meant it to be one way all along does in no way change the fact that it, in effect, was not. This isn't just a matter of "scamming", but limits a huge range of deceptions that are currently the bread and butter of the metagame.

Not to speak for everyone, but my guess is that most people thought the earlier posts were "unclear" because we couldn't believe that you would introduce such a massive change in effective policy in the context of "well, this is actually what we meant all along, everyone has just been playing a absolutely crucial and defining aspect of this game improperly, by policy standards, all along".

Frankly, it's farcical, and demonstrates a frightening disconnect between the existing gameplay and those purported to "police" it.

Again, thanks for at least trying this time, though the outcome is more troubling than when I merely thought you were bumbling around with language instead of with the very foundational and defining aspects of the game.

So as CFC, N3, Proviblock, New Order, Bombers Bar etc. are no in-game entities (they are not represented as entities within the game mechanics), there is no way to validate representation w.r.t those and thus there can be no rule violation, right?

So if I have an alt called Yeeep and I go around telling people I'm an alt of Yeep I could get banned for impersonating Yeep (which is myself).

Or does this work the other way? Say I have an alt called nothing like Yeep and someone asks me if I'm an alt of Yeep. If I say no do I get banned (for impersonating not Yeep while actually beeing Yeep)?

Your interpretation ? The TOS are a legally binding document for both parties involved, the fact that you think it should be applied in some broader interpretation that you dreamt, only goes to prove that CCP continues it's pattern of disregarding not only customers, but also legally binding documents.





Since this is the final word and these are the new terms of service for the forseeable future, I see no other option than to unsubscribe in order to avoid beeing forced to adhere to them.

This is deffinitely not the service I agreed to start paying for ( neither from a customer support perspective, or from a gameplay one), hence I have no more need for it, nor do I want to pay for a service which can be suspended on a whim .

Best regards.

Why destroying the beauty of this games aspect that is based on a real life?

I real life you can represent your self as police or plumber even though you are not. Isn't that what CIA is doing on daily bases? Why this is sanctionable by CCP? Who is sanction this in real life?

Many alliances have been destroyed, many corps robbed, many courses of New Eden history has been driven by this action and you are revoking it now? What is the point in this? You guys are satisfied on the how the EVE universe politics and structure is now and you want to preserve it!?

Everyone who is not smart enough or does not put enough effort to investigate credibility or faithfulness of someones states should be scammed, destroyed and what ever is in bounds of possibilities in EVE.

It's simple.

If there is a petition or anything that I can do to revoke this rule of ToS please let me know.

I'm a trigger for this? That's news to me. What happened?

The problem here is you haven't even drawn a fuzzy line, you've created a mile long swath of fuzziness that players have no clear understanding of what may get ruled on and how.

With only your word that things will be fair, the real headache is going to come the first time you rule that player X from X corp actions are fine, but rule against player Y from Y corp. The community is going to scream favoritism! And as long as there is so much fuzziness in the rules, and the details of each case are kept so secrete they will rightly do so since for the players the only defining difference they will be able to see in the cases is the corps involved. Get ready for a lot of locked threads you brought on yourselves!

To ask CCP the question bluntly and directly.... "Can I pretend to be a Goon and scam people out of their ISK (or variations there of)?". There, I said it.

It's a simple question and simple motive - I would want to con someone out of their ISK and keep it after lying to them.

I do not think this warrants a case-by-case investigation, deliberation and decision. In more serious matters (threats, RL identity, RL information, etc) I think it certainly does require investigation and insight into the intent.

At the moment I can't help but think that CCP have left the ball in the air in order to interpret it as and when, and by whom, and however the GM is feeling on that day. I think it would be constructive to say "XYZ is permitted, ABC is banned, anything in between or that we have not encountered will be by case".

What I believe players are asking for is clarification of what in-game scams are allowed, and which are not. How far is too far?

Nobody wants a ban, but people make an "honest living" out of scams, bring down enemies, spread disinformation, set up traps, break morale, manipulate the market and many many others.

TLDR - Please provide some clarification of where the red line and ban hammer come into play.

*in a game where lying is encouraged.

I read "we may take punitive action against you if you represent another one of your own characters via another character."

You can't be serious. So if I allow this account to lapse because I do not intend to use it for a while, I literally cannot handle any in-game business through another character without risking a potential ban? Stop trying to claim that this is not a policy change, because it clearly is, and it's a really bad one.