These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Novah Soul
#701 - 2013-09-11 22:05:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Novah Soul
I am pretty much as big a carebear as they get in the game and I find these ToS changes outright garbage. I have yet to scam, or attempt to scam anyone.

But the removal of even a small portion of a players ability do do this is garbage. The very fact that EvE has/had the reputation of being a cruel game... where players could backstab, steal, and otherwise be a downright d*ck is what appeals to me in this game, and with it becoming more difficult to do so without predefined boundaries just reeks of BS and unless more clarification is given I don't see myself continuing my subscription past this month....

Sincerely,
Disgruntled PAYING CUSTOMER

A man is known by the quality of his friends. - Lex Luthor
Petrus Justinianus
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#702 - 2013-09-11 22:06:42 UTC
Echo Echoplex wrote:
All larfs aside, I don't even know this game well yet and even I can foresee that a veritable Vesuvius of tickets submitted due to the fuzziness of this TOS.

If the EULA can't be reworded or applied more succinctly than "case-by-case" on such a fundamental game mechanic as this one, then I'm picturing people being pulled from every department to handle the insane flurry of nonstop petitions which, being "case-by-case" will each take up-what?- at least 10-30 minutes apiece to handle and relay? And be coming in at the rate of maybe a kazillion an hour? Petitioning would become the new meta.

This is already the hardest game to master. Now I have to try to master the EULA too?



quick everyone petition your alts for impersonating you!
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#703 - 2013-09-11 22:07:41 UTC
Petrus Justinianus wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
So if I get this right under the new "old" rules:

If 2 players get recruitment scammed for membership to an alliance, the 1st by a member and the 2nd by a non-member, the 2nd can potentially be reimbursed even though the recruiter not being affiliated with the alliance was easier to view in game which should have been a greater cause for concern than the recruiter the 1st dealt with?



nope they both get reimbursed! because unless they were being scammed by an official recruiter of the entity, the "recruiter" was misrepresenting himself as a representative of the entity.

RIP in peace scamming in eve.

Edit: but this all depends on the GM's mood that day, and how they want to interpret the TOS.

I based my conclusion regarding the first to the following:
GM Karidor wrote:
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
Which I interpreted to mean member of the alliance in this case, but I can see how it could easily be further restricted to only card carrying recruiters. Yay restrictive ambiguity.

So wait, does that now mean the people with the job of recruiting are the ones you should trust the least?
Georgina Parmala
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#704 - 2013-09-11 22:08:08 UTC
Echo Echoplex wrote:
I'm picturing people being pulled from every department to handle the insane flurry of nonstop petitions which, being "case-by-case" will each take up-what?- at least 10-30 minutes apiece to handle and relay? And be coming in at the rate of maybe a kazillion an hour? Petitioning would become the new meta.

TBH a petition blizzard will probably get us further than shooting statues.

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

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=276984&p=38
Georgina Parmala
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#705 - 2013-09-11 22:11:32 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

So wait, does that now mean the people with the job of recruiting are the ones you should trust the least?

Hi, I'm an official recruiter. Says so in corp info. 500 mil application fee.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1xzoOpv8xY

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

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=276984&p=38
Echo Echoplex
#706 - 2013-09-11 22:11:52 UTC
Georgina Parmala wrote:
Echo Echoplex wrote:
I'm picturing people being pulled from every department to handle the insane flurry of nonstop petitions which, being "case-by-case" will each take up-what?- at least 10-30 minutes apiece to handle and relay? And be coming in at the rate of maybe a kazillion an hour? Petitioning would become the new meta.

TBH a petition blizzard will probably get us further than shooting statues.

Reported! Bear

Untutored courage is useless in the face of educated bullets. Gen. George S. Patton
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#707 - 2013-09-11 22:12:30 UTC
Georgina Parmala wrote:
Echo Echoplex wrote:
I'm picturing people being pulled from every department to handle the insane flurry of nonstop petitions which, being "case-by-case" will each take up-what?- at least 10-30 minutes apiece to handle and relay? And be coming in at the rate of maybe a kazillion an hour? Petitioning would become the new meta.

TBH a petition blizzard will probably get us further than shooting statues.

But not as pretty, and doesn't attract mainstream news outlets and youtube hits.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#708 - 2013-09-11 22:13:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Kidd
Eternal Error wrote:
At least come out and say that you are trying to ban scams that have been legal for years. If that it is in fact NOT your intention (which I don't think anyone believes at this point), then maybe try posting a clarification that actually clarifies something.

This is BS and not what Eve is about.


Clarifications don't mean squat. The problem with a clarification is that it is not legally binding. The TOS and EULA make up the contract between CCP and its customers. So, if you were to litigate a wrongful ban due to misrepresentation or impersonation of another player with that player's permission you'd have no legs to stand on because the TOS/EULA are the official contract, not the clarification which would at best be considered the erroneous statement of an employee by CCP's lawyers if CCP really wanted to ban you regardless of the situation or cover its ass if some drunk GM decided he didn't like you.

And that's why the TOS is so overtly broad as to cover any circumstance that would allow CCP to terminate the contract without culpability.

But really, I see this TOS change more about preferential treatment. Obviously with such a broad TOS statement and a more narrow clarification CCP is basically saying "We'll apply the TOS unfairly and at our whim and there's nothing you can do about it."

Me thinks this might have something to do with a certain Revenant that died recently.

Don't ban me, bro!
Storm Novah
Yada Industries
#709 - 2013-09-11 22:14:33 UTC
Novah Soul wrote:
I am pretty much as big a carebear as they get in the game and I find these ToS changes outright garbage. I have yet to scam, or attempt to scam anyone.

But the removal of even a small portion of a players ability do do this is garbage. The very fact that EvE has/had the reputation of being a cruel game... where players could backstab, steal, and otherwise be a downright d*ck is what appeals to me in this game, and with it becoming more difficult to do so without predefined boundaries just reeks of BS and unless more clarification is given I don't see myself continuing my subscription past this month....

Sincerely,
Disgruntled PAYING CUSTOMER


I have to agree with my esteemed other half... while we have never engaged in such activities as these changes affect there still needs to be considerably more clarification to these changes. IMHO this should also include an explanation of WHY they made these changes to begin with. There is WAY too much room for interpretation on the part of the individual GMs and is disturbing to myself and many in the extreme.

Barring a satisfactory explanation... we will be taking our money elsewhere.
Echo Echoplex
#710 - 2013-09-11 22:14:41 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Georgina Parmala wrote:
Echo Echoplex wrote:
I'm picturing people being pulled from every department to handle the insane flurry of nonstop petitions which, being "case-by-case" will each take up-what?- at least 10-30 minutes apiece to handle and relay? And be coming in at the rate of maybe a kazillion an hour? Petitioning would become the new meta.

TBH a petition blizzard will probably get us further than shooting statues.

But not as pretty, and doesn't attract mainstream news outlets and youtube hits.

Wait, I heard rioting never works. Color me confused!

Untutored courage is useless in the face of educated bullets. Gen. George S. Patton
Georgina Parmala
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#711 - 2013-09-11 22:15:36 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Georgina Parmala wrote:
Echo Echoplex wrote:
I'm picturing people being pulled from every department to handle the insane flurry of nonstop petitions which, being "case-by-case" will each take up-what?- at least 10-30 minutes apiece to handle and relay? And be coming in at the rate of maybe a kazillion an hour? Petitioning would become the new meta.

TBH a petition blizzard will probably get us further than shooting statues.

But not as pretty, and doesn't attract mainstream news outlets and youtube hits.

Could always start shooting, then report people in local who are not as impersonating players that care about the game (or being market bots, or impersonating market bots).

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

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=276984&p=38
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#712 - 2013-09-11 22:17:50 UTC
Echo Echoplex wrote:
All larfs aside, I don't even know this game well yet and even I can foresee a veritable Vesuvius of tickets submitted due to the fuzziness of this TOS.

If the EULA can't be reworded or applied more succinctly than "case-by-case" on such a fundamental game mechanic as this one, then I'm picturing people being pulled from every department to handle the insane flurry of nonstop petitions which, being "case-by-case" will each take up-what?- at least 10-30 minutes apiece to handle and relay? And be coming in at the rate of maybe a kazillion an hour? Petitioning would become the new meta.

This is already the hardest game to master. Now I have to try to master the EULA too?

Yes, I see. A real step-up in difficulty above the standard MMO.

Legal mechanics

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Doris Dents
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#713 - 2013-09-11 22:18:15 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

So wait, does that now mean the people with the job of recruiting are the ones you should trust the least?

Silliest thing about this change is verifying someone's claimed identity is about the easiest thing in EVE. If I claim to be working for Shamis Orzoz and say I can get you into PL for 1bn it's ridiculously simple to verify my claims by just EVEmailing Shamis. Restricting the sandbox for such an easily avoided pitfall is just dumb. Especially as it'll have a huge chilling effect on not just scamming but meta-gaming in general because people don't like risking their accounts based on "We know this is really broad but trust Random GM#92312 to apply it sensibly ok?"
Deep DonkeyPunch
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#714 - 2013-09-11 22:20:18 UTC
Chribba is ruining this game for everyone, Just leave chribba and be with mintchip.

#freebarracuda #freedeesnider
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#715 - 2013-09-11 22:33:02 UTC
Doris Dents wrote:
Silliest thing about this change is verifying someone's claimed identity is about the easiest thing in EVE. If I claim to be working for Shamis Orzoz and say I can get you into PL for 1bn it's ridiculously simple to verify my claims by just EVEmailing Shamis. Restricting the sandbox for such an easily avoided pitfall is just dumb.

Especially as it'll have a huge chilling effect on not just scamming but meta-gaming in general because people don't like risking their accounts based on "We know this is really broad but trust Random GM#92312 to apply it sensibly ok?"

Maybe this is what eve needs and we're the bad guys here

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Bayushi Tamago
Sect of the Crimson Eisa
#716 - 2013-09-11 22:34:08 UTC
So, jita monument getting shot yet? If not, why not?
Tak149
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#717 - 2013-09-11 22:34:56 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Echo Echoplex wrote:
All larfs aside, I don't even know this game well yet and even I can foresee a veritable Vesuvius of tickets submitted due to the fuzziness of this TOS.

If the EULA can't be reworded or applied more succinctly than "case-by-case" on such a fundamental game mechanic as this one, then I'm picturing people being pulled from every department to handle the insane flurry of nonstop petitions which, being "case-by-case" will each take up-what?- at least 10-30 minutes apiece to handle and relay? And be coming in at the rate of maybe a kazillion an hour? Petitioning would become the new meta.

This is already the hardest game to master. Now I have to try to master the EULA too?

Yes, I see. A real step-up in difficulty above the standard MMO.

Legal mechanics


See, this explains so much. CCP is just adding new play styles to the game. It's so obvious now!

Who needs capital pilots when you can decimate enemy alliances with brigades of petitioners! They can't show up for those timers when they've all been banned for misrepresentation. Crush logistical chains under a flurry of JF alt bans. Be the white knight you were always meant to be banning all those who enter Jita for scamming!

You too can master the arts of the EULA and become King of SPACEEEEEEE
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#718 - 2013-09-11 22:36:46 UTC
Echo Echoplex wrote:
Wait, I heard rioting never works. Color me confused!


Rioting never works, so we should use civil discourse, but of course civil discourse on the official forums for EVE related discourse is considered rioting...

"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
CuteKitten
Perkone
Caldari State
#719 - 2013-09-11 22:43:17 UTC
Welp, pack it in; we've all been impersonating this dude all along:

https://gate.eveonline.com/Profile/EvE%20Online%20Player


Guess I'll have to petition everyone I see.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#720 - 2013-09-11 22:46:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
CuteKitten wrote:
Welp, pack it in; we've all been impersonating this dude all along:

https://gate.eveonline.com/Profile/EvE%20Online%20Player


Guess I'll have to petition everyone I see.

All of the NPC alt shitposters are impersonating https://gate.eveonline.com/Profile/NPC%20alt

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack