These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Domanique Altares
Rifterlings
#261 - 2013-09-11 14:18:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Domanique Altares
Murk Paradox wrote:



*in a game where lying is encouraged.


Apparently not anymore. Then again, I could be reading the GM statement wrong; I don't want to misrepresent that I understand what that poorly worded wall of text pretends to mean.
Yeep
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#262 - 2013-09-11 14:19:14 UTC
So who decides whether I represent a player group or not?

Say I go around offering to sell PL mercenary contracts even though I'm not an in game member of PL. If I get petitioned now a GM has to go find someone in PL and check whether I was actually authorized to sell (or attempt to sell, or scam by pretending to sell) PL mercenary contracts. Which person do you ask? Do I need to get permission from the CEO of the holding alliance? If not does the GM then have to check the line member I got permission from wasn't misrepresenting themselves as someone able to give me permission to sell PL mercenary contracts?

What if PL retroactively decides I'm awesome for scamming people by selling fake merc contracts? Do I still get banned?
Domanique Altares
Rifterlings
#263 - 2013-09-11 14:24:59 UTC
Yeep wrote:
So who decides whether I represent a player group or not?

Say I go around offering to sell PL mercenary contracts even though I'm not an in game member of PL. If I get petitioned now a GM has to go find someone in PL and check whether I was actually authorized to sell (or attempt to sell, or scam by pretending to sell) PL mercenary contracts. Which person do you ask? Do I need to get permission from the CEO of the holding alliance? If not does the GM then have to check the line member I got permission from wasn't misrepresenting themselves as someone able to give me permission to sell PL mercenary contracts?

What if PL retroactively decides I'm awesome for scamming people by selling fake merc contracts? Do I still get banned?


Go do exactly what you're saying, and let us know. The GMs aren't going to say here, and speculating might mean that we are falsely representing ourselves as CCP GMs.
Deep DonkeyPunch
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#264 - 2013-09-11 14:26:39 UTC
Having to play a game where every time you rename your ship/pos/station you have to send a petition in and wait a couple days to see if naming your machariel "machariel" is a bannable offense
nothx

#freebarracuda #freedeesnider

Yeep
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#265 - 2013-09-11 14:29:22 UTC
Deep DonkeyPunch wrote:
Having to play a game where every time you rename your ship/pos/station you have to send a petition in and wait a couple days to see if naming your machariel "machariel" is a bannable offense
nothx


Thats clearly fine because you aren't misrepresenting your Machariel. Now if you called it "Shuttle" all bets are off.
Aryth
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#266 - 2013-09-11 14:32:28 UTC
It seems many missed this hilariously stupid new rule that you cannot impersonate yourself.

He clearly stated that you can be banned for impersonating your main while logged into your on alt, even if that alt is on the same account. Like, really? This is the dumbest thing to come out of CCP in years.

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#267 - 2013-09-11 14:32:55 UTC
GM Karidor wrote:

In summary, with the exception of the most obvious Character impersonations, each impersonation report will usually have to be decided on a case by case basis, taking all things and contexts that we can reliably verify into account. Standings between entities are usually not taken into consideration, as those are being used in wildly differentiating contexts. Generally speaking, if you're claiming to act on behalf of a player run in-game entity, you should be a member of said entity. Acting with a character on behalf of another entity (NPC or player run) that the character is not a member of can, and will, be interpreted as impersonation within our policies in cases of conflict, even if the player eventually has a member alt. Again, this comes down to the fact that there are no in game possibilities of verification.


I'm sorry but I don't think you have any idea what you're talking about. If I claim to represent another entity it is absolutely trivial to verify they're in the alliance: "sure, send me a evemail from your [alliance] alt". Or get info on the character and determine "you know this guy isn't even in that alliance why am I even talking to them".

I mean goddamn, we have been able to do this for a decade now fairly routinely. It is an absolutely normal part of 0.0 living to figure out how you contact an alliance and we all have been able to do it entirely successfully: you check if the character is actually in the alliance, you then check the alliance description to see if they're listed as a diplo or a contact, and if you're still willing to proceed despite that, you check their character info and see if they have titles that back up their story.

Not only that, but you've now actually made it potentially bannable if I use one of my alt characters to represent myself. I may be on another character on my main account, and use another Goonwaffe character and identify myself as a weaselior alt. The fact you've just made it bannable for one character actually owned by a player to correctly represent themselves as an alt of another player actually owned by that player.

If I am on my character in our renter alliance, I can now be banned for - correctly - representing that I am Weaselior. If I am on Weaselior, I can now be banned for - correctly - representing that I am a full director in our renter alliance. And this isn't something that I'm making up as a crazy application of the rules, this is another new rule you've suddenly announced during your "we are not actually changing any rules" 'clarification'. You need someone who actually understands this game to be sanity-checking these policies because they're atrocious.

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Sam Alkawe
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#268 - 2013-09-11 14:36:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Sam Alkawe
Aryth wrote:
It seems many missed this hilariously stupid new rule that you cannot impersonate yourself.

He clearly stated that you can be banned for impersonating your main while logged into your on alt, even if that alt is on the same account. Like, really? This is the dumbest thing to come out of CCP in years.


I don't think they missed it. I think most think that it must be a joke and this is Fool's Day, or something. It has to be a joke, since anybody could be banned even if they don't scam as long as you follow what the TOS says. I hope it is a joke.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#269 - 2013-09-11 14:37:25 UTC
This parade of actively insane interpretations of the rules that no sane person would think are banned is why "everything is handled on a case by case basis" is not a good enough answer, because nobody can even comprehend what principles might suddenly be applied in this case by case basis and wind up banned because they quite reasonably assumed that telling people you are you was not impersonation.

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#270 - 2013-09-11 14:38:51 UTC
Since one character cannot impersonate another will all of my characters with "weasel" in their names be banned, because you know they might be falsely impersonating me and we can't have that, even if they are me.

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Orakkus
Southern Cross Monopoly
Flying Dangerous
#271 - 2013-09-11 14:40:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Orakkus
If you change this:

GM Karidor wrote:

So, onwards to the ToS, which now contains the following after the change:

8. You may not impersonate or present yourself to be a representative of CCP or an EVE Online volunteer. You may not impersonate or falsely present yourself to be a representative of another player, group of players, character or NPC entity.
...


to just this:

Quote:

8. You may not impersonate or present yourself to be a representative of CCP or an EVE Online volunteer.


Then this whole argument goes away, AND the very essence of Eve Online is again preserved.

Your change to the TOS goes directly against the "HTFU" mantra that has been the lifeblood of culture in Eve Online. Understand, this isn't a little "clarification", this is a major change to a gameplay mechanic AS WELL AS a direct assault on player content. Eve Online probably WOULD NOT HAVE BECOME AS POPULAR OR RESILIENT IF IT WEREN'T FOR THE ABILITY / CHALLENGE of DECEIT that has always been allowed.

This is a game-killing change. You have no other choice but to remove it. It may take a while, but if it remains, it will happen. See, what will happen is now you are going to get some considerable GM overreach, and lets be clear.. the GM department at CCP isn't well known for its consistency. Eventually you will frustrate people into leaving the game because actions that were not only allowed, but even glorified publically.. even used as points to show how amazing Eve Online is over games like World of Warcraft or LOTRO, or whatever, are now suddenly illegal and will get you banned.

I don't know who proposed this change, but there is now an obligation to the players to remove that sentence AND let us know who the person is who pushed the change. The reason for this last request is obvious. Whoever is pushing this change doesn't "get" Eve Online and has already shown the potential to inadvertently destroy the game due to their clumsy viewpoint. I don't want them fired or harrassed, but I want to make sure that until they "get" Eve Online, they don't get to have input on major game changing activities.

He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander

Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#272 - 2013-09-11 14:42:44 UTC
"A player lacks the means to verify whether you are communicating with them via another one of your own characters so we're just going to go ahead and treat that as impersonation. We're completely removing trust between players from the equation and opening even more avenues for using the GM team towards metagame goals. Thankfully this policy was sanity checked by an expert shortly before he left for a round of electroconvulsive therapy"

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Sirane Elrek
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#273 - 2013-09-11 14:45:25 UTC
With every post you make, you add new rules to this so-called "ToS clarification". First it was "no policy changed at all", then "well you can't claim you represent other people", now we're at "you can't claim you are your own alt". Where is this going? Will we get a post by people who actually think about what they write, or is this just the outflow of some bored intern with nothing better to do? Can you please stop claiming that you're just "restating policy", if it's blatantly obvious you're trying to shoehorn completely new rules into the ToS?
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#274 - 2013-09-11 14:47:27 UTC
To be honest it's even more troubling that these insane interpretations of the rules were the status quo, and only didn't come to light because nobody was crazy enough to petition someone who said they were an alt of someone else when they actually were.

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Malcolm Shinhwa
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#275 - 2013-09-11 14:47:47 UTC
Yeep wrote:
So who decides whether I represent a player group or not?

Say I go around offering to sell PL mercenary contracts even though I'm not an in game member of PL. If I get petitioned now a GM has to go find someone in PL and check whether I was actually authorized to sell (or attempt to sell, or scam by pretending to sell) PL mercenary contracts. Which person do you ask? Do I need to get permission from the CEO of the holding alliance? If not does the GM then have to check the line member I got permission from wasn't misrepresenting themselves as someone able to give me permission to sell PL mercenary contracts?

What if PL retroactively decides I'm awesome for scamming people by selling fake merc contracts? Do I still get banned?


We've asked that question in various forms in all of the zillion threads on the matter and still have not gotten an answer. I don't expect one now.

[i]"The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental[/i]."

Daniel Plain
Doomheim
#276 - 2013-09-11 14:48:58 UTC
GM Karidor wrote:
Where does Customer Support draw the line for impersonation?
As much as we'd love to be able to draw a clear line, it is quite impossible.

this is bullshit. "you may try to impersonate any ingame character or organization, other than those officially affiliated with CCP." there you go, a clear line. it may not be drawn where you want it to be but it is clear as day.

as i have already stated on page one, this whole situation is just a total disaster.

I should buy an Ishtar.

Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#277 - 2013-09-11 14:51:21 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
To be honest it's even more troubling that these insane interpretations of the rules were the status quo, and only didn't come to light because nobody was crazy enough to petition someone who said they were an alt of someone else when they actually were.


It really does seem unbelievable that absolutely fundamental and defining aspects of the game have been played "wrong" for ten years.

I don't know how to suggest that this issue be taken over by someone who actually knows what they're talking about without hurting people's feelings, but it needs to be done. This is now beyond ridiculous, and obviously far beyond the purview and competence of the GM team.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal

Aryth
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#278 - 2013-09-11 14:55:17 UTC
Yeah, I tend to agree. Can we get someone more senior in CCP to chime in here? This has descended into bizzaro land at this point.

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.

Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#279 - 2013-09-11 14:57:44 UTC
Andski wrote:
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.


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.


If the current situation stays, you will have the duty of proving your alt is indeed the alt of Andski for example.

From CCP's point, it's probably "If you can't provide a proof that you are the alt of X, how do you expect other people to find if you really are his alt?

More work to be done on your side than on the other side to be safe.
Xolve
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#280 - 2013-09-11 14:58:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Xolve
So does this mean I cannot sardonically refer to myself (in jest) as someone's alt when I am accused or insinuated to be the alt of another player?

Does this also mean- that if someone says that I am the alt of another person, and I am quite obviously NOT the alt of said person; that the accuser in said situation is in violation of this new hilariously stupid rule?

Yet again- if someone asks me who my alts are, am I required to divulge such information? Since refusing to answer would mean I am not actually the alt of anyone, which isn't actually true and would be a misrepresentation of self.



How much disclosure does this new 'rule' call for?