These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at

EVE General Discussion

  • Topic is locked indefinitely.

GM clarification on rewording of the Terms of Service

First post First post First post
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#461 - 2013-09-11 18:27:22 UTC
How loudly do we have to yell that this TOS wording sucks and it needs to be changed?
Blawrf McTaggart
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#462 - 2013-09-11 18:27:33 UTC
Hello I am Blawrf McTaggart director of recon and intelligence in the Goonswarm Federation.

My group, GS Recon, hilariously puts "Blawrf McTaggart alt" in their bios to impersonate me and insinuate that the much vaunted and esteemed GS Recon is simply one man poopsocking many socks

my question is thus: is my squad gonna get banned and should i start recruiting :(?
Treyan Argund
Goonswarm Federation
#463 - 2013-09-11 18:28:35 UTC
Goonwaffe is impersonating Goonfleet.

Do we have to disband now?
Captain Santos
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#464 - 2013-09-11 18:30:25 UTC
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.

Hi, I'm Mr Omniblivion.

This is stupid. The in-game way to verify whether or not I'm actually Mr Omniblivion is to invite Mr Omniblivion into the conversation to confirm. Or to check my alliance title that says I'm Mr Omniblivion (via the Exec Corp of the Alliance). Or to check the alliance Description that shows that I (and Mr Omniblivion) are both characters to contact to rent. Or by checking either one of our in game profiles where we link the other character stating that they are alts.

There are plenty of ways to verify authenticity- if someone is too lazy to do any research whatsoever, how can you hold the other party at fault?

How could this be a serious rule - about all characters are seen as their own, independent entity - yet you can suicide gank in empire down to -10.0, and then after a few hours of ratting in null be friendly again with CONCORD. I mean c'mon, if we're not allowed to say we are are own alts and there is "no in-game way to verify", then how can such an un-realistic mechanic be allowed to exist? We're going for realism here, right? Each character is an individual that has their own independent interests, right?

I think this is just poor explanation of the rules. GMs say that it doesn't affect scamming, but then the "definition" clearly bans pretty much every type of scamming. Then to expand that to honest representation (for those of us that don't scam)- that's ridiculous.
Lottie Spider Hive
#465 - 2013-09-11 18:30:32 UTC
We didn't want that metagame anyway --CCP

wait no don't ba-
Clean Head
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#466 - 2013-09-11 18:30:56 UTC
I think EVE needs more russian players...
Sunshine and Lollipops
#467 - 2013-09-11 18:33:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Kismeteer wrote:
How loudly do we have to yell that this TOS wording sucks and it needs to be changed?

^^ More or less this.

If this is supposed to be a “clarification” rather than what it actually is (a massive change) and the TOS has actually always said what you're saying that it now says, then what needs to happen now is not any more clarification expansion, but rather an actual change to where it says what it has always actually been enforced as.

Even if you're going to go with the cop-out of “yes, technically this or that will now be against the TOS, but in application we will obviously never do that because that would be stupid”, what you're actually saying is “the TOS is stupid”. So rather than clarifying it, what you need to do is change it to be… *drumroll*… not stupid. Because that's where your problem lies, and not with the level of clarity.
Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#468 - 2013-09-11 18:34:02 UTC
Captain Santos wrote:

Hi, I'm Mr Omniblivion.

Sorry, I can't confirm or deny this statement as:

GM Karidor wrote:
there is no in-game way to verify

Ministry of Furious Retribution
#469 - 2013-09-11 18:34:05 UTC
Clean Head wrote:
I think EVE needs more russian players...

Hey I'm Russian!

oh... no... wait... what are you doing with that hammer? no!... PLEASE!!! DON'T BAN M...
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#470 - 2013-09-11 18:34:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Vatek
All my EVE characters are beautiful strong independent characters that don't need no man.
Lottie Spider Hive
#471 - 2013-09-11 18:34:27 UTC
Or maybe CCP saw PGI's MechWarrior and thought that being mocked ruthlessly by your own core audience was good for business?
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#472 - 2013-09-11 18:35:07 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Rhes wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
So if I'm reading this right the "clarification" bans scamming and most of the metagame. Two huge sources of free advertising for CCP, why is this a good idea now?

I think it's good for the GM team who are apparently tired of dealing with scam-related petitions.

The easiest answer to that is a button that replies to a petition with this then closes it:

Dear (insert scammed capsuleer here),

You have been scammed, this is a good lesson for you please learn from it. Do not petition this again.


(GM team)

You just impersonated a GM.

EVE is a game about spaceships and there's an enormous amount of work to do on the in-space gameplay before players (or developers) are ready to sacrifice it for a totally new type of gameplay - CCP Rise

James Fnord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#473 - 2013-09-11 18:35:53 UTC
For additional yelling, may I direct everyone to the bottom of CCP's website?

It has contact numbers for various offices of theirs. And skype is cheap.

Also, this apparent change is the most pants-on-head ******** thing I've seen all week. And less than 24 hours ago I literally saw someone put their pants on their head.
Lottie Spider Hive
#474 - 2013-09-11 18:37:55 UTC
Oh man, look at all this publicity we're getting! Spying and intrigue! Real newspapers are picking up the stories! That's terrible, we should remove it. --CCP
Eram Fidard
#475 - 2013-09-11 18:39:21 UTC
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
Captain Santos wrote:

Hi, I'm Mr Omniblivion.

Sorry, I can't confirm or deny this statement as:

GM Karidor wrote:
there is no in-game way to verify

I can neither confirm nor deny that GM Karidor may or may not have any idea what eve online: the massively multiplayer online butterfly simulation actually is.

Poster is not to be held responsible for damages to keyboards and/or noses caused by hot beverages.

Georgina Parmala
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#476 - 2013-09-11 18:41:10 UTC
Heimdallofasgard wrote:


should I have used a courier contract? I'm pretty pissed off with myself for scamming me, I think myself should be banned but I don't believe I should be.

How do I legal?

I like bashing this stupidity as much as the next guy, but lets have some common sense for a minute.

The clarifying post clearly clarified that the person in impersonation is defined as a character. A opposed to the player behind it, or an arbitrary entity such as an account.

Lets say Solstice Project makes an alt. [ISMETA] wardecs a corporation. He approaches the corporation with the alt and says "I'm Solstice project's alt, give me 100 mil and I drop the dec". They pay up and contact Solstice about the transaction. He says no, that's not my alt you got scammed.

What the nice GM is saying is that it does not matter that the alt is in fact the same player, or even on the same account as the main character. He falsely spoke on behalf of the main with malicious intent. So the alt gets a name change and a time out.

Science and Trade Institute [STI] is an NPC entity and as such my views do not represent those of the entity or any of its members

Sparkle Motion.
#477 - 2013-09-11 18:41:15 UTC
Presumably CCP staff can't play the game anymore? Because they were always allowed to on the basis they never really told you who they were .. but now you're not allowed to do that.
Or are they allowed to play the game with a separate set of rules attached?

Either scenario is rather ****** up, BTW.

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Katie Corb
Corb's Emporium of Catgirls and Cynosural Fields
#478 - 2013-09-11 18:41:46 UTC
pls no


Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#479 - 2013-09-11 18:43:21 UTC
Copypasta wrote:
Or maybe CCP saw PGI's MechWarrior and thought that being mocked ruthlessly by your own core audience was good for business?

There may or may not be no such thing as bad publicity right?
Rena Senn
Halal Gunnery
#480 - 2013-09-11 18:44:52 UTC
I would like to apologize to the person who bought Oura Madusaari from me. Sorry to make your life difficult.

Actually I take that back. I would like to express sympathy with no admission of association or liability to the person who bought the character formerly known as Oura Madusaari from the previous account holder of the character, whomevery that might be.