These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Announcement regarding rewards and prizes to fansites and third-party contributors

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
raven666wings
Cyber Chaos Crew
#1021 - 2013-10-18 15:48:19 UTC  |  Edited by: raven666wings
Handsome Feller wrote:

You're going round in circles. No point continuing. It's summarised thusly:

I suggest CCP can say that holding lottery that you must enter in order to be able to buy a character is flouting the no "lottery style" rule when buying characters.

You say, He's doing exactly the same as Somer (which he isn't because *character*) or it doesn't matter because there are additional steps between lottery and character buying.

The End.



Lol you definitely should have read the thread before fallin here in a parachute. It's is not me or the guys who are setting up raffles that "are going in circles", It was Somer Blink and others. We're simply using our right to engage in the same conduct that has not only been unsanctioned but also supported and advertised by CCP.

PS - You should consider writing english in further posts. What you wrote after "you're going in circles" didn't make any sense.
Frying Doom
#1022 - 2013-10-18 15:48:53 UTC
Handsome Feller wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Handsome Feller wrote:


17. Lottery style sales are not permitted. Auctions and buyouts are the appropriate method for selling a Attentioncharacter.Attention

Not sure I can do any more than that.

Maybe list the part in the EULA where it states that rather than in the rules for a forum would be a good start.


But you'll still equate the rules around / Ts&Cs around ship lotteries to the rules for selling a character because that's what you've done thus far. I can't help you anymore until you realize that CCP treat these things differently.

There is a section in the EULA on character transfers and another on RMT.

Maybe you would like to quote the section on character transfers rather than forum rules as it is more relevant.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Trebor Daehdoow
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1023 - 2013-10-18 15:53:22 UTC
Mordachai wrote:
A) Will the outcome of those surveys be presented to the public ?

B) How will people get to know about those surveys if they arent forum warriors ?
(maybe eve-mail the whole community like ccp did with the CSM voting)

C) Will the changes(if any) just come as a tiny fine print in the EULA that nobody reads or will it be announced so people will know about it?

A) The forum one, for sure. CCP's version, I hope so, but it's up to them.

B) We are working on getting some messaging on the forum version.

C) I'm sure it will be announced.

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery
Money Makin Mitch
Paid in Full
#1024 - 2013-10-18 15:57:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Money Makin Mitch
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
Mordachai wrote:
A) Will the outcome of those surveys be presented to the public ?

B) How will people get to know about those surveys if they arent forum warriors ?
(maybe eve-mail the whole community like ccp did with the CSM voting)

C) Will the changes(if any) just come as a tiny fine print in the EULA that nobody reads or will it be announced so people will know about it?

A) The forum one, for sure. CCP's version, I hope so, but it's up to them.

B) We are working on getting some messaging on the forum version.

C) I'm sure it will be announced.

why do i feel like the 'winter summit' plans are now going to be pushed up to... say, this coming week? Twisted

'watch what they do, not what they say'... people are starting to vote with their wallets now.

as for the survey, no thanks. some of us have very little faith that the survey will present the real issues and ask non-biased/skewed questions.
Argus Sorn
Star Frontiers
Brotherhood of Spacers
#1025 - 2013-10-18 16:00:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Argus Sorn
Shai 'Hulud wrote:
CCP Falcon wrote:
This thread is being moved to the Ingame Events and Gatherings sub-forum.

Our customer support team is also in the process of reviewing this particular style of raffle to ensure it conforms with our rules and policies.

Smile



CCP Falcon wrote:
Moving your thread is not endorsement, it's making sure that it's in the correct forum for the topic.

Right. Allowing his raffle to proceed to it's completion was in no way an endorsement Roll

By admitting that you are reviewing these practices, you acknowledged it is not currently considered a rules violation. If it was, you would shut down SOMER's RMT and you wouldn't need to have a ******* discussion.

The clock is ticking CCP... our balls are in your court.



The primary argument of the FTC RMT'ers have given to defend the validity of their practice is that CCP hasn't stopped it. And I have to say, I agree with them - unless CCP was ignorant of it then the fact that nothing has been done thus far to stop it basically amounts to approval.

You had every chance to stop DNSBlack's auction, but instead you moved it to the proper forum. It is not that ridiculous to assume then, that at the time you moved his post - you saw no potential violation of the EULA. If you had, you would have coursed stepped in and stopped it no?

CCP - I hope you realize that even though the issue has turned to RMT, your biggest mistake in all this was endorsing SOMER in the first place.

You failed to stay above the fray. You failed to remain untouchable and aloof. You failed to remain objective adjudicators of your own game. To use an EVE analogy: you set SOMERblink blue. CCP has no business setting anyone blue; they have no business picking winners.

You may not have noticed it, but you are being trolled, smacked, and jabbed at on these forums just like we do to each other. Your players are treating you as equals, rather than the respected and objective judge of all things. You jumped into the fray, and when you jump into a fray - you're likely to get hit.
Sal Landry
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1026 - 2013-10-18 16:14:36 UTC
Argus Sorn wrote:

The primary argument of the FTC RMT'ers have given to defend the validity of their practice is that CCP hasn't stopped it. And I have to say, I agree with them - unless CCP was ignorant of it then the fact that nothing has been done thus far to stop it basically amounts to approval.

Considering that there have been 3 separate endorsements of Somer by CCP (community spotlight, 5-of-a-kind Somer-branded SoE ships, and secret scorpions) that CCP might not have bothered to check what Somer actually does would be hilarious to me.

I'm not sure which would be worse, their blatant hypocrisy if they did know, or the gross incompetence of every single person involved if they didn't.
Frying Doom
#1027 - 2013-10-18 16:24:43 UTC
Sal Landry wrote:
Argus Sorn wrote:

The primary argument of the FTC RMT'ers have given to defend the validity of their practice is that CCP hasn't stopped it. And I have to say, I agree with them - unless CCP was ignorant of it then the fact that nothing has been done thus far to stop it basically amounts to approval.

Considering that there have been 3 separate endorsements of Somer by CCP (community spotlight, 5-of-a-kind Somer-branded SoE ships, and secret scorpions) that CCP might not have bothered to check what Somer actually does would be hilarious to me.

I'm not sure which would be worse, their blatant hypocrisy if they did know, or the gross incompetence of every single person involved if they didn't.

Them not knowing would at least be as funny as hell. As opposed to the other.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Anya Klibor
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1028 - 2013-10-18 17:04:45 UTC
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:

A) The forum one, for sure. CCP's version, I hope so, but it's up to them.


So you're not going to push for it? And yes, saying "I hope so" means you aren't going to say anything, you are hoping it will be. A better response would have been, "The CSM will do everything in its power to make sure that CCPs survey(s) will be made public and nothing is redacted." At least make us think you have a pair.

Leadership is something you learn. Maybe one day, you'll learn that.
raven666wings
Cyber Chaos Crew
#1029 - 2013-10-18 17:12:20 UTC  |  Edited by: raven666wings
Hey guyz, look at me, I'm a Somer Blink shill Blink

But.. but.. others cannot do what I do because they will break my RMT monopoly!!! Oops CCP should write a EULA rule saying that only I can RMT.

The End. Twisted
Money Makin Mitch
Paid in Full
#1030 - 2013-10-18 17:19:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Money Makin Mitch
CCP just locked 2 or 3 of the RMT threads but left DNSBlack's alone. so, it does look like an implicit acknowledgement that what he is doing is above board for now under the current EULA.

EDIT: DNSBlack's thread is still open, it seems Dolan has said that the ETC must go through an authorized reseller first but he raised no issue other than that.
DarkDecay
Real money traders
#1031 - 2013-10-18 17:31:01 UTC  |  Edited by: DarkDecay
Money Makin Mitch wrote:
CCP just locked 2 or 3 of the RMT threads but left DNSBlack's alone. so, it does look like an implicit acknowledgement that what he is doing is above board for now under the current EULA.

EDIT: DNSBlack's thread is still open, it seems Dolan has said that the ETC must go through an authorized reseller first but he raised no issue other than that.


lol, that means that only DNS (the winner) and me (second aint bad) got to sell stuffz? edit: of course the big winners are the real rmt'ers like somer...

edit: and mine did go through an authorised reseller...
Anya Klibor
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1032 - 2013-10-18 17:39:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Anya Klibor
Unfortunately, there's a very good chance that the people who bought these characters (assuming this isn't a massive joke based off the EULA) that CCP is going to ban these characters almost immediately. Part of the TOS is that your account/characters can be banned at any time, for any reason or no reason at all.

EDIT:

However, my law professor who specializes in contractual law pointed out something about this: I won't go into specifics, but she mentioned that there is already an issue with legality in the United States concerning this, as well as in South Korea. In essence, the issue stems from transactions between both real-world currency and virtual currency. Second, assuming the people who have the accounts banned can prove that it was due to an inability to understand the EULA--which, I might add, is very plausible given the fact CCP can't simplify it for us in a ******* month--then there's a breach of contract on CCP's part for refusing to adequately and fairly, in an impartial manner, execute compliance with the contract.

Long story short: if CCP does this, someone (or some people!) are going to make far more than $2,500 in a court of law.

Leadership is something you learn. Maybe one day, you'll learn that.
DNSBLACK
Dirt Nap Squad
#1033 - 2013-10-18 17:50:03 UTC
Anya Klibor wrote:
Unfortunately, there's a very good chance that the people who bought these characters (assuming this isn't a massive joke based off the EULA) that CCP is going to ban these characters almost immediately. Part of the TOS is that your account/characters can be banned at any time, for any reason or no reason at all.

EDIT:

However, my law professor who specializes in contractual law pointed out something about this: I won't go into specifics, but she mentioned that there is already an issue with legality in the United States concerning this, as well as in South Korea. In essence, the issue stems from transactions between both real-world currency and virtual currency. Second, assuming the people who have the accounts banned can prove that it was due to an inability to understand the EULA--which, I might add, is very plausible given the fact CCP can't simplify it for us in a ******* month--then there's a breach of contract on CCP's part for refusing to adequately and fairly, in an impartial manner, execute compliance with the contract.

Long story short: if CCP does this, someone (or some people!) are going to make far more than $2,500 in a court of law.


http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=t8RCQDDsMpU&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Dt8RCQDDsMpU

IS WHAT I HAVE TO SAY TO CCP IF THEY DO THAT
DNSBLACK
Dirt Nap Squad
#1034 - 2013-10-18 17:52:06 UTC
Anya Klibor wrote:
Unfortunately, there's a very good chance that the people who bought these characters (assuming this isn't a massive joke based off the EULA) that CCP is going to ban these characters almost immediately. Part of the TOS is that your account/characters can be banned at any time, for any reason or no reason at all.

EDIT:

However, my law professor who specializes in contractual law pointed out something about this: I won't go into specifics, but she mentioned that there is already an issue with legality in the United States concerning this, as well as in South Korea. In essence, the issue stems from transactions between both real-world currency and virtual currency. Second, assuming the people who have the accounts banned can prove that it was due to an inability to understand the EULA--which, I might add, is very plausible given the fact CCP can't simplify it for us in a ******* month--then there's a breach of contract on CCP's part for refusing to adequately and fairly, in an impartial manner, execute compliance with the contract.

Long story short: if CCP does this, someone (or some people!) are going to make far more than $2,500 in a court of law.


Believe me I know laws and contracts. My job requires it.
DarkDecay
Real money traders
#1035 - 2013-10-18 17:54:56 UTC
Sean DT
Revered Mining Corp
#1036 - 2013-10-18 18:01:21 UTC
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
Mordachai wrote:
A) Will the outcome of those surveys be presented to the public ?

B) How will people get to know about those surveys if they arent forum warriors ?
(maybe eve-mail the whole community like ccp did with the CSM voting)

C) Will the changes(if any) just come as a tiny fine print in the EULA that nobody reads or will it be announced so people will know about it?

A) The forum one, for sure. CCP's version, I hope so, but it's up to them.

B) We are working on getting some messaging on the forum version.

C) I'm sure it will be announced.



Trebor Daehdoow Im a bit disappointed that you answer posts regarding the survey idea so selectively. I actually wrote a post on page 44 (#874Posted: 2013.10.17 12:42) about it that I really wanted to hear your input to but so far you have simply skipped it or missed it despite it being a serious-meant add to the discussion regarding the use of surveys. Idea

I would really love to hear your thoughts on it and to know if the survey decision is already set in stone which may be why you didn't bother reading/replying/thinking about what I wrote? UghArrow

Regards.
Sean
Argus Sorn
Star Frontiers
Brotherhood of Spacers
#1037 - 2013-10-18 18:06:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Argus Sorn
DarkDecay wrote:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3755340#post3755340

Another ccp post on this topic.



DNSBlack has done community work. Why can't he offer a small bonus? Who decides what bonus is acceptable? Who decides who does adequate community work? Is running an in game corporation well community work? DNSBlack decidely does community work then, as does The Mittani, etc.?

And devs are suddenly offering their "opinions" in the middle of all this? Seriously?

You guys need a primer on crisis management.
Kuni Oichi
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#1038 - 2013-10-18 18:07:13 UTC
DarkDecay wrote:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3755340#post3755340

Another ccp post on this topic.


The key line is 'Obfuscating this fact by constructing complex cases that are not in the slightest relevant to any current practice can be considered trolling at best, direct RMT at worst. '

Only CCP's favourite RMT site can RMT, can't have competition with them.
Trebor Daehdoow
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1039 - 2013-10-18 18:10:03 UTC
Sean DT wrote:
1. A survey result is only as good as its interpretation and many questions can be interpreted differently both by the survey maker (CSM/CCP) and by the players answering the question.

We are working hard so that the surveys address this issue. Typically if there is a question "Is X OK?" there will be questions such as "Is X+A OK?", "Is X+B OK?", is "X+A+B OK?" and so on.

Quote:
2. If you need a suvey now when does it stop? Does the CSM then need a player-base-wide survey every time they have to deal with the CCP?

No, not every time. But this is an important issue, and it's worth taking the time to drill down on the issues. As I said previously, data trumps opinions.

Quote:
3. You have 40+ pages in this thread, granted with quit a bit of repetitive opinions, some hysteria/rage, but ultimately with a clear indication of the problem at hand and suggestions for its solution by many many different voices, not just a few repeaters. I as a normal player have read through the majority of this entire stack of posts and the least I expect from the CSM is that they do that too even if it isn't much fun. Grab a cold beer, bring in a box of cookies, and start reading. Make sure you take a pee break and have a smoke, then come back. Use a pen and a paper to note down the key points of the most interesting posts (there are several in between). Now you don't need the survey.

I hope that when you do the survey yourself, you will find that it has been designed to shed further light on the topic in an organized way.

Quote:
4. A lot of people are not going to answer a survey, it will get lost in the mail.

CCP has lots of experience doing email surveys, they know the response rates, they know about multiple accounts, etc. The data from an email survey won't be perfect, but it will be more representative of the general community, as opposed to the active forum community. I'd like data from both groups.

Feel free to continue pushing for a fast resolution. If you get one, it will be one you won't like, because that's the easy option.

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery
Frying Doom
#1040 - 2013-10-18 18:13:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Argus Sorn wrote:
DarkDecay wrote:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3755340#post3755340

Another ccp post on this topic.



DNSBlack has done community work. Why can't he offer a small bonus? Who decides what bonus is acceptable? Who decides who does adequate community work? Is running an in game corporation well community work? DNSBlack decidely does community work then, as does The Mittani, etc.?

And devs offering their "opinions" in the middle of all this?

Do you guys need a primer on crisis management?

I actually took "Offering a (small) ISK bonus for doing community work in a provable way is from my personal perspective fine. Please note that this is my personal opinion and not official ruling" to be in relation to TMCs employees, a conversation I have actually had nothing to do with.

But I am confused personally as to "Obfuscating this fact by constructing complex cases that are not in the slightest relevant to any current practice can be considered trolling at best, direct RMT at worst." as I am not sure what he meant. Did he mean I had constructed an argument or the whole sale side of it out of thin air.

Just a bit lost as to whether he is actually aware that Somer has a buy a GTC get free isk deal, tbh.

edit: Ok bring on the survey.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!