Jita Park Speakers Corner

So I can name an alt ChrLbba if I want to mine rocks all day or manufacture, but not if I want to participate in faction warfare?

This is where the victim contacts the legitimate person being impersonated and

A) the player feels violated and petitions the actions
B) the player was scamming with his own alt and deals with it as they see fit
C) the player laughs at the foolishness of the victim and posts tears in C&P
D) the player privately contacts the impersonator and demands a cut threatening A

Though I do see the issues with placing lots of burden on the player being impersonated, it removes the burden from GM's having to make arbitrary judgements with regard to account action revealing character affiliations.

and player control. As in, it can be manipulated in a confidence scheme to get someone to purchase something far beyond its actual worth. A scam one might say.

Here's the thing.

Buyer's remorse is not "scam".

When you see something for 300 million isk and click buy knowing it's 300 million isk, you are not scammed.

When you think you are able to not only buy that item, but turn around and sell it within 2 seconds for a healthy profit, you made a poor investment decision.(in reality although at the time it might have seemed wise!)

You still paid for the item and were able to buy the item. Therefore no scam.

When you get greedy, and burned, you learn a lesson.

You cannot cheat an honest person.

But this is starting to get off topic, so to bring it back on topic...

Why should someone manipulating buy/sell orders be banned?

There's an in game skills called Margin Trading specifically for making sure your escrow requirements are lower than 100% specifically for, and I paraphrase, "riskier investing".

Getting convinced to buy something is not a scam if you paid for it and received it.

Like almost everybody else I fully agree with mynnna. However, I think the proposed wording isn't saying what it's supposed to say. I believe the marked "their name" is meant to reference anybody's character, corp or alliance name. As it is it can only be read to reference CCP's (or volunteer's) name though which makes it redundant with the first sentence.

So I'd propose a slight modification:
"You may not impersonate or present yourself to be a representative of CCP or an EVE Online volunteer. You may not impersonate or present yourself or your corporation or alliance by imitation of another character's or corporation's or alliance's name."

The point of my post is that "...used to scam..." cannot be anywhere near the rule. It's either against the rule to have similar looking names or not.

Where the line on similarity is is a different issue, and I don't really feel super qualified with that at the moment, so I think the CSM, CCP, and the GM team can come up with some good guidelines for the GMs on where that line is at.
I was using the "A" "4" equivalence because it was easy to work in as an example of someone who's going to feel sad about a blanket ban (i.e. someone who mines and wants all his miners to have near identical names, and ends up getting them changed due to a drive-by petition), and saying that I think that bit of sadness is ok in the interest of having clear cut, clearly enforced, and therefor effective rules in place.

BTW: @CCP, clear rules do things other than invite "rules lawyering" (which can be handled by TOS 25 and 26). They also make it easier for people who want to follow the rules to actually follow them. And that's a good thing.

Hooray for agreeing right past each other.

^^^ These forums and quotes. Parse them carefully if you're going to edit inside the tags.

Other forums didn't get coded in a Quafe induced haze one Valentine's weekend.

Copied from the other thread:



First brutally honest feedback. I'll word it as politely as possible without sacrificing honesty.

This is the biggest knife in the heart of EVE's gameplay and culture of 'spies and deception are everywhere' since the Incarna debacle. I have no confidence in the ability of the people behind this change to understand EVE, let alone implement reasonable policies or rules.

It appears that any deceptive behaviour at all that involves a declaration that "X is my alt" or "I am working in conjunction with X" is against the rules, and by extension, and outsourcing of core activities of a corporation, alliance or 'entity' now has CCP enforcing the honesty of such dealings.

For instance, under the new rules Goonswarm Federation retain the CCP endorsed right to scam people interested in renting space from them. However, in the unlikely situation that Goonswarm were to appoint me (a non-member of the alliance) as a third party to act on their behalf in rental deals, I would not be allowed to scam and and deliberate scamming by me of renters would be an account-ban offence. (A similar situation would occur if I were to collude with a 'renter' that intended to not pay but instead use their 'rented space' as a staging ground to attack GSF interests).

Particularly relevant to sovereign nullsec is that one of the major vectors for inserting spies into hostile entities, applying to multiple corps saying "I am XYZ's alt", fishing for one that is not vigilant enough to API verify this information, is no longer legal.

What you should be doing is the following:

- Ban names that are deceptively close to existing character, corporation or alliance names. GM discretion applies when it's unclear (Currln Trading is clearly deceptively close to Currin Trading; while 'Avengers of the South' would not be deceptively close to 'Southern Avengers')
- Ban deceptive conduct carried out on CCP hosted websites other than the official EVE forums
- Change the font so that capital 'o' and 'zero' look more different ingame than the presently do. Likewise for capital 'i' and lower case 'l'.
- Remove all reference to 'entities'. The game client recognises corporations and alliances. It doesn't recognise coalitions, the New Order or other such 'entities'.
- Explicitly allow players to lie about their affiliation to in-game corporations and alliances and to other characters, as long as they do not do so in ways that 'trick' the in-game methods for checking this information. Disallowed would be misuse of CCP websites and any form of API falsification. (Providing information and saying 'this is what my API says' should be fine; altering what the API actually says should be a banhammer).