These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

GM clarification on rewording of the Terms of Service

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#1181 - 2013-09-13 06:33:24 UTC
Sid Hudgens wrote:
He is saying that if you choose to use an alt to IMPERSONATE yourself in a SCAM then he has to handle that the same way as he handles someone else IMPERSONATING you in a scam.


So, any and all business conducted through alts is banned. Super.

There is no way to distinguish between a scam and a legitimate business deal in EVE, because all scams are legitimate business deals in EVE.

Quote:
Why? Because if he treats those two cases differently he is essentially giving out information on player accounts ... specifically by confirming that one character is an alt of another.


That's an argument for not having the rule, not for enforcing it in a literally insane manner.

"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
Crimson Gauntlet
Six Gun Sound
#1182 - 2013-09-13 06:34:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Crimson Gauntlet
Sid Hudgens wrote:
Dirk Action wrote:
The punishment of finding a smart mark is that the scam falls through. *The punishment should not be a ban.*

Soundwave help us that this is the GM team we're stuck with.


Nobody from CCP has said anything about any of this being grounds for an insta-ban. I don't know why people think they're going to get banned out of the blue for scamming. Chill.


Probably because a bunch of guys from Pizza did in fact get banned for precisely that pretty much the same day that this "clarification" came out.

Either knock off the apologist nonsense, or at least stop talking out your ass.

In fact, I will clarify it for you. People are in a state of unrest because several well known, well liked FCs got lifetime bans after someone fell for a brutally obvious scam and pulled the hurt feelings alarm. And the GMs bought it, almost immediately before they made this change.

So people want to know. Especially since this game tends to generate hurt feelings at a pretty incredible pace, people want to know whether they stand to get smooshed with the banhammer just because some other butthurt moron pulls the hurt feelings alarm.

ESPECIALLY because all of this behavior was as good as sanctioned just a short time ago.

Get it yet?
Number of times my posts have come in after the dev/mod locked the thread:  1
Petrus Justinianus
Trinity Collective Co.
DammFam
#1183 - 2013-09-13 06:36:56 UTC
Sid Hudgens wrote:
Dirk Action wrote:


god
damn


like I can't actually believe that you're saying this.

You are saying, with a straight face, that you using an alt in order to scam someone, *or otherwise represent YOURSELF* on that alt character, is against the rules.

I am like... completely flabbergasted. And angry.

You cite earlier in the thread - and I can't remember where because this entire fuсking thread is a trainwreck of your team putting their feet in their mouth - that each character is its own representation.

This is rеtarded, and let me tell you why. The character doesn't matter in this game, especially with the Character Bazaar being a thing. What matters is the person behind the keyboard. Who are you to say what someone wants to do from within the confines of the game? Why shouldn't someone like Abdiel, or The Mittani, or Chribba himself, be able to decide, "hey this guy has a stupid amount of money, I feel like liberating it from him from this character I am going to claim is my main's alt (which it really is!) because... that's EVE!"

God just get out forever. You have no idea what this game is about, and how you EVER managed to become a GM - and SENIOR GM at that - is a mystery to any sane person; something you clearly aren't.


Actually, no.

Try to keep up.

He is not saying that you can't use an alt to scam someone.
He is not saying that you can't use an alt to represent yourself.
He is saying that if you choose to use an alt to IMPERSONATE yourself in a SCAM then he has to handle that the same way as he handles someone else IMPERSONATING you in a scam.

Why? Because if he treats those two cases differently he is essentially giving out information on player accounts ... specifically by confirming that one character is an alt of another.




never go full ******, never
Mildew Wolf
#1184 - 2013-09-13 06:38:13 UTC
Sid Hudgens wrote:
Mildew Wolf wrote:



Afaik to "impersonate yourself" is an oxymoron




Fair enough. I wasn't clear there. Someone using one of their characters to impersonate another of their characters. My point remains the same.


Claiming to be an alt of a char isn't the same as claiming to be (impersonating) a char

Such a claim clearly refers to the real life person who (ostensibly) controls both chars
Sid Hudgens
Doomheim
#1185 - 2013-09-13 06:40:18 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:


So, any and all business conducted through alts is banned. Super.

There is no way to distinguish between a scam and a legitimate business deal in EVE, because all scams are legitimate business deals in EVE.



How in god's name did you get to that conclusion from what I wrote? Seriously? You're trolling me now right? Please say that you are...

Quote:
That's an argument for not having the rule, not for enforcing it in a literally insane manner.


It's not an insane manner. It's probably the only manner in which they can enforce it. If they enforce it any other way and someone like Chribba decides he wants to make an alt and run scams ... then I can get it confirmed, by a GM that the alt is his and ruin his main's reputation. In an EVE universe where impersonating other characters is not allowed, this manner of enforcement actually protects THE SCAMMER.

"....as if 10,058 Goon voices cried out and were suddenly silenced."
Sid Hudgens
Doomheim
#1186 - 2013-09-13 06:43:12 UTC
Crimson Gauntlet wrote:


Get it yet?


You are butthurt. I get it.

"....as if 10,058 Goon voices cried out and were suddenly silenced."
Ripply Kat
Temporal Paradox
#1187 - 2013-09-13 06:44:44 UTC
This change is painfully bad, its one thing to stop misleading character names which the early tos covered, but with the information that a non-missleading name provides is enough protection from claims that they are alts or have connections that are not backed up by there name or player info. This stance that players needed a way to petition back lost assets didn't come from the community.
Crimson Gauntlet
Six Gun Sound
#1188 - 2013-09-13 06:44:51 UTC
Sid Hudgens wrote:
Crimson Gauntlet wrote:


Get it yet?


You are butthurt. I get it.


And now I get it. You aren't here to argue, you are here to derail the thread to further whatever carebear agenda you are trying to make sure sees it through.

Answer my point, or at least have the common decency to shut up.
Number of times my posts have come in after the dev/mod locked the thread:  1
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#1189 - 2013-09-13 06:46:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Sid Hudgens wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:


So, any and all business conducted through alts is banned. Super.

There is no way to distinguish between a scam and a legitimate business deal in EVE, because all scams are legitimate business deals in EVE.



How in god's name did you get to that conclusion from what I wrote? Seriously? You're trolling me now right? Please say that you are...

Quote:
That's an argument for not having the rule, not for enforcing it in a literally insane manner.


It's not an insane manner. It's probably the only manner in which they can enforce it. If they enforce it any other way and someone like Chribba decides he wants to make an alt and run scams ... then I can get it confirmed, by a GM that the alt is his and ruin his main's reputation. In an EVE universe where impersonating other characters is not allowed, this manner of enforcement actually protects THE SCAMMER.

Except that a GM is unlikely to confirm the identity of a scammers main. Somewhere in this thread I'm fairly sure we were told, by a CCP representative, that they can't verify alts and mains because there is no ingame way to do so (actually there is, but a GM said that there isn't, so I'm actually lying here Roll )

edit - the exact text
GM Karidor wrote:
What needs to be kept in mind regarding impersonations is that all characters involved are seen as their own, independent entity, which effectively means it's quite possible that a situation may appear where a player impersonates his trustworthy main character using an alt character located on the same account. As there is no in-game way to verify whether or not certain characters are located on the same account (the API needs the key and external tools to be read properly, so that one doesn't count here), this case would be handled the very same way as the impersonator character being owned by another player.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#1190 - 2013-09-13 06:50:46 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Sid Hudgens wrote:
How in god's name did you get to that conclusion from what I wrote? Seriously? You're trolling me now right? Please say that you are...


Then define a scam in EVE in a way that doesn't amount to "a business deal which one party regrets."

If you can't, if I do any business on an alt, and one of the people I do business with regrets the deal, they can petition me for scamming and impersonating my main, therefor I can't do any business on any alts.


And that's entirely aside from the fact that, regardless of what the GMs enforce, you shouldn't have to break the rules to engage in legitimate gameplay.


Quote:
It's not an insane manner. It's probably the only manner in which they can enforce it. If they enforce it any other way and someone like Chribba decides he wants to make an alt and run scams ... then I can get it confirmed, by a GM that the alt is his and ruin his main's reputation. In an EVE universe where impersonating other characters is not allowed, this manner of enforcement actually protects THE SCAMMER.


"This rule is impossible to enforce sanely" is not an argument for enforcing the rule in an insane manner. It's an argument for scrapping the rule.

Banning people for their own protection is insane.

"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
Crimson Gauntlet
Six Gun Sound
#1191 - 2013-09-13 06:53:17 UTC
Going to go ahead and repeat what someone else already said.

We need this to happen in this thread.
Number of times my posts have come in after the dev/mod locked the thread:  1
Sid Hudgens
Doomheim
#1192 - 2013-09-13 06:53:47 UTC
Crimson Gauntlet wrote:


Answer my point, or at least have the common decency to shut up.



The only high profile "against the rules" scam shenanigans I'm familiar with recently was the guys who ransomed someone for a RL pizza (scamming someone for RL money or goods was not allowed, ever) and the one where someone edited the wiki to indicate that a CCP representative vouched for the scammer (essentially impersonating CCP.)

I'm afraid I don't know the parties involved or what alliance they're from... so I'm not sure if either of those is what you're talking about.

"....as if 10,058 Goon voices cried out and were suddenly silenced."
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#1193 - 2013-09-13 06:55:11 UTC
Crimson Gauntlet wrote:
Going to go ahead and repeat what someone else already said.

We need this to happen in this thread.

Maybe GM Spiral should post in here, it seems like he doesn't beat around the bush.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Crimson Gauntlet
Six Gun Sound
#1194 - 2013-09-13 06:56:40 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Crimson Gauntlet wrote:
Going to go ahead and repeat what someone else already said.

We need this to happen in this thread.

Maybe GM Spiral should post in here, it seems like he doesn't beat around the bush.


No kidding. When I inevitably get petitioned for being a suicide ganker, I hope he's the guy reading my ticket. 
Number of times my posts have come in after the dev/mod locked the thread:  1
Sid Hudgens
Doomheim
#1195 - 2013-09-13 07:03:53 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Sid Hudgens wrote:
How in god's name did you get to that conclusion from what I wrote? Seriously? You're trolling me now right? Please say that you are...


Then define a scam in EVE in a way that doesn't amount to "a business deal which one party regrets."

If you can't, if I do any business on an alt, and one of the people I do business with regrets the deal, they can petition me for scamming and impersonating my main, therefor I can't do any business on any alts.


And that's entirely aside from the fact that, regardless of what the GMs enforce, you shouldn't have to break the rules to engage in legitimate gameplay.


Quote:
It's not an insane manner. It's probably the only manner in which they can enforce it. If they enforce it any other way and someone like Chribba decides he wants to make an alt and run scams ... then I can get it confirmed, by a GM that the alt is his and ruin his main's reputation. In an EVE universe where impersonating other characters is not allowed, this manner of enforcement actually protects THE SCAMMER.


"This rule is impossible to enforce sanely" is not an argument for enforcing the rule in an insane manner. It's an argument for scrapping the rule.

Banning people for their own protection is insane.


Ok, I'm going to (seriously) apologize because I don't seem to be bringing my point across (at least to you.) Let me give it another shot...

Non-scam business conducted on alts = OK (why would they even be petitioned? and if petitioned and non-scam why punished?)

Scams conducted on alts that do not involve impersonating any other character (yours or otherwise) = OK

Scams that involve impersonating one character by another character (regardless of if they are both yours) = NOT OK

Is having all scams based on impersonating other characters be against the rules a good idea? Maybe, maybe not ... but it appears it has been for some time.

I do not see any reason why you could not conduct non-scam business on your alts or conduct scams that don't involve impersonating any other character on whatever character you want.

"....as if 10,058 Goon voices cried out and were suddenly silenced."
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#1196 - 2013-09-13 07:10:58 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Sid Hudgens wrote:
I do not see any reason why you could not conduct non-scam business on your alts or conduct scams that don't involve impersonating any other character on whatever character you want.


You skipped right over most of my post, didn't you? It's ok, it happens a lot. I'll give you another bite at the apple:

What distinguishes a scam from a non-scam in EVE?
Because the only halfway decent definition of a scam that fits what's legitimate gameplay in EVE is that if someone regrets the deal, it's a scam.

Which means that, because anyone can decide they regret anything at any time, you can't do business on any alts who have an identified connection to your main, because CCP's going to ban you for your own protection.

"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
Crimson Gauntlet
Six Gun Sound
#1197 - 2013-09-13 07:11:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Crimson Gauntlet
Quote:
I do not see any reason why you could not conduct non-scam business on your alts or conduct scams that don't involve impersonating any other character on whatever character you want.


Mostly because, as he has been trying to explain to you, a "scam" is defined by the victim. It's actually a business transaction that one party (typically immediately) regrets. It also tends to be avoidable by the victim. The combination results in a ton of hurt feelings.

And, if you have been playing this game long enough, you should know that "victims" in this game tend to be a bunch of butthurt crybabies.

So, as I tried to tell you, people are concerned about the ability of butthurt crybabies who should have known better anyway to get people banned for something that was previously as close to being a sanctioned activity as it's possible to be.

My basic point is, that this "clarification" puts yet more power into the hands of the people who cry the loudest and file the most petitions.

And I hate that. It rewards stupidity, even worse it makes the stupidity of Person A the fault of Person B so long as Person A can find enough flimsy justification to file a petition about it(because this casts such a wide net). And since Eve's GM decisions are legendary for being subjective and inconsistent...
Number of times my posts have come in after the dev/mod locked the thread:  1
Sid Hudgens
Doomheim
#1198 - 2013-09-13 07:13:37 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:

Except that a GM is unlikely to confirm the identity of a scammers main. Somewhere in this thread I'm fairly sure we were told, by a CCP representative, that they can't verify alts and mains because there is no ingame way to do so (actually there is, but a GM said that there isn't, so I'm actually lying here Roll )

edit - the exact text
GM Karidor wrote:
What needs to be kept in mind regarding impersonations is that all characters involved are seen as their own, independent entity, which effectively means it's quite possible that a situation may appear where a player impersonates his trustworthy main character using an alt character located on the same account. As there is no in-game way to verify whether or not certain characters are located on the same account (the API needs the key and external tools to be read properly, so that one doesn't count here), this case would be handled the very same way as the impersonator character being owned by another player.


Yes, that is actually my entire point! If a GM treated the "I'm Joe's alt" scam differently because that character really is Joe's alt then he is essentially confirming the identity of the scammer's main.

I would be willing to bet that GMs are constrained by CCP policy to never confirm if one character is an alt of another and therefore have no choice but to treat each character as an "independent entity" in order to avoid confirming that information.

"....as if 10,058 Goon voices cried out and were suddenly silenced."
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#1199 - 2013-09-13 07:21:05 UTC
Sid Hudgens wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:

Except that a GM is unlikely to confirm the identity of a scammers main. Somewhere in this thread I'm fairly sure we were told, by a CCP representative, that they can't verify alts and mains because there is no ingame way to do so (actually there is, but a GM said that there isn't, so I'm actually lying here Roll )

edit - the exact text
GM Karidor wrote:
What needs to be kept in mind regarding impersonations is that all characters involved are seen as their own, independent entity, which effectively means it's quite possible that a situation may appear where a player impersonates his trustworthy main character using an alt character located on the same account. As there is no in-game way to verify whether or not certain characters are located on the same account (the API needs the key and external tools to be read properly, so that one doesn't count here), this case would be handled the very same way as the impersonator character being owned by another player.


Yes, that is actually my entire point! If a GM treated the "I'm Joe's alt" scam differently because that character really is Joe's alt then he is essentially confirming the identity of the scammer's main.

I would be willing to bet that GMs are constrained by CCP policy to never confirm if one character is an alt of another and therefore have no choice but to treat each character as an "independent entity" in order to avoid confirming that information.

Therein lies a fundamental flaw in policy.
The only real way to resolve it is either to make impersonating or claiming to represent other characters or groups, even ones you own, against the rules, or it would be to make impersonating or claiming to represent other characters or groups fine and allowed as long as it's within legitimate game mechanics.
Bob FromMarketing
Space Marketing Department
#1200 - 2013-09-13 07:21:47 UTC
As someone who trades characters, and a huge amount at that, we're talking around 120 characters in the last 10 months, I usually have a handfull of accounts with multiple characters and the need to still contact people. I put across sales offers linking eveboards, rightfully claiming that I own said pilots but I just don't want to or am unable to log out and back in to advertise a skillsheet.

This new rule means that my lack of wanting to re-log (which is a ridiculous task in itself holy **** GG CCP UI design) will get me banned an average of thirteen times in one day.


Thank you CCP, for making my life even more liveable.