These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Nice Job CCP. Now Can We All Get 17m Free Skillpoints Also?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#181 - 2013-11-08 23:57:02 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Kate stark wrote:

CCP are simply inconsistent in it's enforcement of the rules.

Tell me something, do you think an organization that is "inconsistent in it's enforcement of the rules" will somehow change its inconsistency based off of one trivially insignificantly case? Do you honestly think that such an inconsistent organization uses such trivial events as precedents for later action?

CCP doesn't follow precedent, never has. Don't believe me? They flip-flop on whether a dozen decloak cans on a gate is either allowed or a bannable repeat offense on an almost weekly basis. CCP does not follow precedent on anything. If they did, they would never have given out rare blueprints again after T20.


In other words you can't be bothered to object.

Things are only impossible until they are not.
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#182 - 2013-11-09 00:03:32 UTC  |  Edited by: PotatoOverdose
masternerdguy wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Kate stark wrote:

CCP are simply inconsistent in it's enforcement of the rules.

Tell me something, do you think an organization that is "inconsistent in it's enforcement of the rules" will somehow change its inconsistency based off of one trivially insignificantly case? Do you honestly think that such an inconsistent organization uses such trivial events as precedents for later action?

CCP doesn't follow precedent, never has. Don't believe me? They flip-flop on whether a dozen decloak cans on a gate is either allowed or a bannable repeat offense on an almost weekly basis. CCP does not follow precedent on anything. If they did, they would never have given out rare blueprints again after T20.


In other words you can't be bothered to object.

K, threadnaught for every tiny little thing Erotica digs up in his publicity stunt for his CSM run. CCP completely ignores the player base thereafter. Gotcha. Roll

BTW The next threadnaught should complain about smart bombing the Jita IV-4 undock. It's a bannable offense, you know. Only station in eve off which smart bombing will get you a ban. Way-inconsistent, and blatant favoritism for the Jita residents. Roll

See you guys in the next publicity-stunt threadnaught, same time tomorrow? Or do we wait a couple days?
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#183 - 2013-11-09 00:04:56 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
masternerdguy wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Kate stark wrote:

CCP are simply inconsistent in it's enforcement of the rules.

Tell me something, do you think an organization that is "inconsistent in it's enforcement of the rules" will somehow change its inconsistency based off of one trivially insignificantly case? Do you honestly think that such an inconsistent organization uses such trivial events as precedents for later action?

CCP doesn't follow precedent, never has. Don't believe me? They flip-flop on whether a dozen decloak cans on a gate is either allowed or a bannable repeat offense on an almost weekly basis. CCP does not follow precedent on anything. If they did, they would never have given out rare blueprints again after T20.


In other words you can't be bothered to object.

K, threadnaught for every tiny little thing Erotica digs up in his publicity stunt for his CSM run. CCP completely ignores the player base thereafter. Gotcha. Roll

BTW The next threadnaught should complain about smart bombing the Jita IV-4 undock. It's a bannable offense, you know. Only station in eve off which smart bombing will get you a ban. Way-inconsistent, and blatant favoritism for the Jita residents. Roll

See you guys in the next publicity-stunt threadnaught, same time tomorrow? Or do we wait a couple days?


This is bigger than Erotica 1.

This is about standing against carebear entitlement.

Something that obviously isn't important to you.

Things are only impossible until they are not.
Frying Doom
#184 - 2013-11-09 00:07:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
It would be nice to go back to a quiet period where

CCP were not shitting in the Sandbox all of the Time
The CSM was actually the voice of the players
And the game was about to get a real expansion.

I fear however that this is now years in the past and will never be seen again.Sad

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#185 - 2013-11-09 00:13:42 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:

This is bigger than Erotica 1.

This is about standing against carebear entitlement.

Something that obviously isn't important to you.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAAAAA
*Gasp*
AHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
*Wheeze*
AHahhhhahahaahahahhahahahahahah.....

Oh man that was good.

You haven't been paying attention. CCP drove thousands of carebears into multiple gatecamp slaughterhouses the other day. Their tears are still running all over the forums (BTW CCP, absolutely glorious event). You think CCP cares about carebear entitlement.....oh that's funny.

Like I said, see you guys in Erotica's next publicity stunt threadnaught.
Praetor Meles
Black Mount Industrial
Breakpoint.
#186 - 2013-11-09 00:15:00 UTC
TigerXtrm wrote:
...get podded over 50 times and ...


KnowUsByTheDead wrote:
81 pods. If you are going to sperg all over the forums, at least get facts right.


Confirming: 81 pods is still over 50 pods.

[insert random rubbish that irritates you personally] is further evidence that Eve is dying/thriving*

  • delete as required to make your point
Frying Doom
#187 - 2013-11-09 00:17:03 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Like I said, see you guys in Erotica's next publicity stunt threadnaught.[/b]

Personally I don't think anyone should bother to vote in the next election.

CSM7 and 8 are hardly what I would call a reason to be bothered voting for the voice of the players.Lol

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#188 - 2013-11-09 00:17:30 UTC
Agent Kailethre wrote:

Wow, this idiot just got scammed and lost a bunch of SP. Let's just interfere in our player driven game where we actively encourage this kind of activity.

It was his fault and it should be his responsibility to retrain or cease playing. CCP should not be interfering.


What most of you geniuses fail to comprehend is that CCP is a business.

As a player of a sandbox game that is popular for being harsh I too would say; 'The idiot had it coming, screw him. No-one that stupid should even be playing this game.'

However, for CCP this person, no matter how stupid, is a paying customer. If a slight interference will ensure he remains a (happy) paying customer then so be it. When it comes to the bottom line that's an easy decision to make. As long as it doesn't affect the game's economy or otherwise tips the balance in someone's favor.

What you people label as a 'scandal' is in reality just a business trying to keep its customers happy the best it can. You really need to keep a firm eye on where the game sandbox ends and CCP as a real world company with real world employees to pay begins. Those two don't always go together.

The term 'player driven' is exactly that. Driven. EVE is not player created or player managed. It's player driven. The reality is that CCP gets the final say in absolutely everything, including the decision to give some poor smuck his SP back. Agree with it or don't, luckily it really doesn't matter a tiny little bit.

My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!

My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
Anomaly One
Doomheim
#189 - 2013-11-09 00:18:58 UTC
Masternerdguy wrote:
This is bigger than Erotica 1.


This is bigger than us

http://goo.gl/ohPobf
Frying Doom
#190 - 2013-11-09 00:21:31 UTC
TigerXtrm wrote:
Agent Kailethre wrote:

Wow, this idiot just got scammed and lost a bunch of SP. Let's just interfere in our player driven game where we actively encourage this kind of activity.

It was his fault and it should be his responsibility to retrain or cease playing. CCP should not be interfering.


What most of you geniuses fail to comprehend is that CCP is a business.

As a player of a sandbox game that is popular for being harsh I too would say; 'The idiot had it coming, screw him. No-one that stupid should even be playing this game.'

However, for CCP this person, no matter how stupid, is a paying customer. If a slight interference will ensure he remains a (happy) paying customer then so be it. When it comes to the bottom line that's an easy decision to make. As long as it doesn't affect the game's economy or otherwise tips the balance in someone's favor.

What you people label as a 'scandal' is in reality just a business trying to keep its customers happy the best it can. You really need to keep a firm eye on where the game sandbox ends and CCP as a real world company with real world employees to pay begins. Those two don't always go together.

The term 'player driven' is exactly that. Driven. EVE is not player created or player managed. It's player driven. The reality is that CCP gets the final say in absolutely everything, including the decision to give some poor smuck his SP back. Agree with it or don't, luckily it really doesn't matter a tiny little bit.

Ummm we are all paying customers....

Doesn't that mean we should all be getting 'slight interference' to the tune of 17,000,000 SP to keep us happy?

This is where your argument falls down, where one paying customer is treated better than the rest or is allowed to ignore the rules.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Agent Kailethre
Tengoo Uninstallation Service
#191 - 2013-11-09 00:22:17 UTC
TigerXtrm wrote:
Agent Kailethre wrote:

Wow, this idiot just got scammed and lost a bunch of SP. Let's just interfere in our player driven game where we actively encourage this kind of activity.

It was his fault and it should be his responsibility to retrain or cease playing. CCP should not be interfering.


What most of you geniuses fail to comprehend is that CCP is a business.

As a player of a sandbox game that is popular for being harsh I too would say; 'The idiot had it coming, screw him. No-one that stupid should even be playing this game.'

However, for CCP this person, no matter how stupid, is a paying customer. If a slight interference will ensure he remains a (happy) paying customer then so be it. When it comes to the bottom line that's an easy decision to make. As long as it doesn't affect the game's economy or otherwise tips the balance in someone's favor.

What you people label as a 'scandal' is in reality just a business trying to keep its customers happy the best it can. You really need to keep a firm eye on where the game sandbox ends and CCP as a real world company with real world employees to pay begins. Those two don't always go together.

The term 'player driven' is exactly that. Driven. EVE is not player created or player managed. It's player driven. The reality is that CCP gets the final say in absolutely everything, including the decision to give some poor smuck his SP back. Agree with it or don't, luckily it really doesn't matter a tiny little bit.



They are a business that claim to offer a service that grants players a freedom of action and choice. Heavy Rayne made the choice to get podded 81 times. He was not forced.
And now he wants CCP to make the big bad world all better and kiss his sadness away. With free SP.

i think i am pretty kawaii =333
Zazz Razzamatazz
Bad Touches
#192 - 2013-11-09 00:22:48 UTC
It doesn't matter who lost what, or how...

Both brothers should be banned.

Bro #1 could not have accessed bro #2's account unless they had traded passwords.

Obviously a premeditated violation of the EULA.

Which also states that:
"You are responsible and liable for all activities conducted through your Account, regardless of who conducts those activities." (emphasis mine)


I'm sure this SP award will be revoked upon further review by CCP and the GMs.


-Zazz



-E1-4-CSM-
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#193 - 2013-11-09 00:25:16 UTC
Zazz Razzamatazz wrote:
(stuff)
-Zazz

-E1-4-CSM-

Emphasis mine.Twisted
Agent Kailethre
Tengoo Uninstallation Service
#194 - 2013-11-09 00:26:39 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Zazz Razzamatazz wrote:
(stuff)
-Zazz

-E1-4-CSM-

Emphasis mine.Twisted


That's a movie title right there.

Make it happen.

i think i am pretty kawaii =333
TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#195 - 2013-11-09 00:36:25 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:

Ummm we are all paying customers....

Doesn't that mean we should all be getting 'slight interference' to the tune of 17,000,000 SP to keep us happy?

This is where your argument falls down, where one paying customer is treated better than the rest or is allowed to ignore the rules.


Welcome to the real world. Please name one business that does not work like this?

Go into Wallmart, complain about something and if the manager thinks it's economically justified to give you a gift card for your troubles then that's what he does. But the manager might just as well tell the guy to get lost and lose a customer. That's his decision and his decision alone. Coincidentally you have the same type of people in Walmart as on these forums. Person A got a gift card so logically person B should get one too because it's only fair Roll

So tell me, if you get a gift card from Walmart for some kind of inconvenience, you think every customer of Walmart should get a gift card too? What world do you live in?

My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!

My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
Frying Doom
#196 - 2013-11-09 00:41:48 UTC
TigerXtrm wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

Ummm we are all paying customers....

Doesn't that mean we should all be getting 'slight interference' to the tune of 17,000,000 SP to keep us happy?

This is where your argument falls down, where one paying customer is treated better than the rest or is allowed to ignore the rules.


Welcome to the real world. Please name one business that does not work like this?

Go into Wallmart, complain about something and if the manager thinks it's economically justified to give you a gift card for your troubles then that's what he does. But the manager might just as well tell the guy to get lost and lose a customer. That's his decision and his decision alone. Coincidentally you have the same type of people in Walmart as on these forums. Person A got a gift card so logically person B should get one too because it's only fair Roll

So tell me, if you get a gift card from Walmart for some kind of inconvenience, you think every customer of Walmart should get a gift card too? What world do you live in?

The manager is probably working on how bad a stink it is likely to cause, if that person may have the right to sue and whether or not any other recent incidents like it have occurred.

It is not about favoritism it is about money. In a case like this they need to way up exactly the same questions and in this case was making 1 person happy likely to give them more money compared to the loss they may suffer because of another case of them ignoring the EULA?

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Boom Boom Longtime
EVE Corporation 6908469858
Heroes and Villains.
#197 - 2013-11-09 00:43:44 UTC
On evaluation of the evidence put forth by the OP, it would appear on paper that CCP have "gifted" a random player 17m SP back after the aforementioned player lost them to what would be considered "permissable" mechanics.

I was not aware that there had been any amendments to the Eula to reflect this new policy.

Never the less, based on the evidence available, I might assume that the claim I have now duly submitted to have skillpoints re-imbursed, for prior SP loses on my alternative characters will not be turned down by CCP and I will indeed receive these back?

I make these assumptions based on the principle that if I do not, then outwith changes to the EULA, or a feasible explanation as to why this re-imbursement has occured given the SP was lost to "permissable mechanics", then I can only assume CCP has decided one player is above the rules all others have to abide by?

"Special treatment", "Golden Scorpians", "Indirect RMT suggested as legit", "High Sec Bears being led Lambs to Slaughter".

When will this madness end ?

Is the train out of control ?

Concord Approved Trader
Alt Two
Caldari Capital Construction Inc.
#198 - 2013-11-09 00:44:36 UTC
TigerXtrm wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

Ummm we are all paying customers....

Doesn't that mean we should all be getting 'slight interference' to the tune of 17,000,000 SP to keep us happy?

This is where your argument falls down, where one paying customer is treated better than the rest or is allowed to ignore the rules.


Welcome to the real world. Please name one business that does not work like this?

Go into Wallmart, complain about something and if the manager thinks it's economically justified to give you a gift card for your troubles then that's what he does. But the manager might just as well tell the guy to get lost and lose a customer. That's his decision and his decision alone. Coincidentally you have the same type of people in Walmart as on these forums. Person A got a gift card so logically person B should get one too because it's only fair Roll

Don't give the guy any SP and lose 1 customer, vs Give the guy 17M SP and lose more than 1 customer(*).. Great business decision CCP Ugh

*) Yes I made that up with no facts at all to back it up. But I'm betting that at least 2 people will ragequit because of this :)

Quote:
So tell me, if you get a gift card from Walmart for some kind of inconvenience, you think every customer of Walmart should get a gift card too? What world do you live in?

If CCPmart had caused the inconvenience then sure, compensate him. But since it was all his own doing why should he be rewarded for it?
Barkaial Starfinder
Brazilian Vultures
Ferrata Victrix
#199 - 2013-11-09 00:45:24 UTC
How is this troll so successful? Shocked
TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#200 - 2013-11-09 00:47:15 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:

It is not about favoritism it is about money. In a case like this they need to way up exactly the same questions and in this case was making 1 person happy likely to give them more money compared to the loss they may suffer because of another case of them ignoring the EULA?


That's exactly what I was saying (apparently we agree after all). And apparently someone at CCP weighed the options and felt that his would be the best result. And he's probably right. Because out of all the people who have been screaming 'IMMA UNSUB' for the past few weeks, how many do you think actually will? 80% of GD is pure trolling anyway and the other 20% will have forgotten this ever happened by the time their sub expires.

My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!

My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums