These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Don't try this at home!

First post First post
Author
gfldex
#61 - 2014-05-19 21:25:01 UTC
I endorse of this forum warfare by CCP Grimmi.

If you take all the sand out of the box, only the cat poo will remain.

Estella Osoka
Perkone
Caldari State
#62 - 2014-05-19 21:31:38 UTC
Enforce the rule ISD!! It is what they hired you for! Fair and balanced!
Erica Dusette
Division 13
#63 - 2014-05-19 21:39:55 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
CCP Grimmi wrote:

Crafty as they are, they have a weakness. It's money.


Much like the company you work for.

How about set an example and stop selling ISK yourselves?

-Remove PLEX.
-Keep GTC but make them non tradable. Game Time Code, not ISK generators.
-ISK for game time is a direct transaction in-game via the market to CCP. Like skill books.

Mr Epeen Cool


Glad I'm not the only one who noticed the terrible choice in Grimmi's analogies lol

Here's a guy getting paid by the hour, sitting at work, talking about how the bad guys are crafty and do "anything for money".

Stopping RMT is a good cause, but I'd caution against forum-chest-beating when your own is hollow. Blink

Jack Miton > you be nice or you're sleeping on the couch again!

Part-Time Wormhole Pirate Full-Time Supermodel

worмнole dιary + cнaracтer вιoѕвσss

Dirk MacGirk
Specter Syndicate
#64 - 2014-05-19 21:43:18 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Marsha Mallow wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Blah blah...
Sorry. while I applaud your efforts, this sounds more every day like the zany ideas of the united states' "War on Drugs".
I will take you seriously when you start naming names, and outing char names, corps, and alliances.

It is utterly ludicrous to suggest that IMAGINARY names, which according to the EULA, CCP owns anyway and has complete and utter control over, are somehow protected by "privacy concerns".

You start posting names, and quantities of ISK, and that will go a long way to establishing credibility.

Naming names is counter-productive as it targets the entity rather than the individual(s), and creates a witch hunt which bypasses the real problem: buyers. Point of this thread. Don't buy dirty money.

Everyone wants to finger wag at botters and RMTers, but the reality is the buyers are the problem. Let's see some stats on those scrubs.

As with any crime, whether done out of ignorance or greed, they create the market. And we all suffer the consequences.

Let's have a wall of shame for the buyers too, eh.


I have no problem with CCP outing buyers, just as long as they are equal opportunity, and out sellers.

But like the u.s. war on drugs, targeting buyers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate, many for small pot amounts) does not work.

Bottom line, naming anyone is NOT an infringement of any privacy, since we are discussing char names that only exist in the Eve universe, and CCP owns all rights to anyway.


Would naming anyone lead to better results?
Lady Areola Fappington
#65 - 2014-05-19 21:50:51 UTC
Dirk MacGirk wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Marsha Mallow wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Blah blah...
Sorry. while I applaud your efforts, this sounds more every day like the zany ideas of the united states' "War on Drugs".
I will take you seriously when you start naming names, and outing char names, corps, and alliances.

It is utterly ludicrous to suggest that IMAGINARY names, which according to the EULA, CCP owns anyway and has complete and utter control over, are somehow protected by "privacy concerns".

You start posting names, and quantities of ISK, and that will go a long way to establishing credibility.

Naming names is counter-productive as it targets the entity rather than the individual(s), and creates a witch hunt which bypasses the real problem: buyers. Point of this thread. Don't buy dirty money.

Everyone wants to finger wag at botters and RMTers, but the reality is the buyers are the problem. Let's see some stats on those scrubs.

As with any crime, whether done out of ignorance or greed, they create the market. And we all suffer the consequences.

Let's have a wall of shame for the buyers too, eh.


I have no problem with CCP outing buyers, just as long as they are equal opportunity, and out sellers.

But like the u.s. war on drugs, targeting buyers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate, many for small pot amounts) does not work.

Bottom line, naming anyone is NOT an infringement of any privacy, since we are discussing char names that only exist in the Eve universe, and CCP owns all rights to anyway.


Would naming anyone lead to better results?



It would confirm the Dinspiracy, one way or the other.

Either complete proof that CCP, controlled by the nullsec cartels, is deviously hiding Goon RMT gains by blatantly not prosecuting cartel level RMT lords OR;

Complete proof that the nullsec cartels are RMTing ill-gotten gains (with CCP approval).


It would depend on the content of the list, which line you pick. The former if you can't show grrgoons involvement, the latter if you can.

7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided. --Eve New Player Guide

Marsha Mallow
#66 - 2014-05-19 21:59:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Marsha Mallow
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
I have no problem with CCP outing buyers, just as long as they are equal opportunity, and out sellers.

But like the u.s. war on drugs, targeting buyers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate, many for small pot amounts) does not work.

Bottom line, naming anyone is NOT an infringement of any privacy, since we are discussing char names that only exist in the Eve universe, and CCP owns all rights to anyway.

Thank you for replying, I thought you had me blocked (which would be sad because I see some merit in your remarks, but tbf it's usually late at night).

We need more stats, either to balance perspectives, or prevent people from abusing raw numbers to further their (highly biased) agenda. I'd like to point out that as a former nullsec CEO the last time an ISK-buyer list was leaked and one of mine showed up, everyone in corp was annoyed. We pursued everyone in alliance suspected of these types of activity, and every corp/alliance I've been in since has operated a no-tolerance approach. Publically. Which undermines the idea entire groups are engaged. It's a select few (particularly in wider RMT rings), so punish those, not the unaware.

I haven't watched that 55min presentation (did view some charts) but tbh I just want a summary. Here it is:
Is it being dealt with?
Can we help?
How?
Is there anything useful I can do to prevent/curtail this activity [elephant in the room]: don't buy derty isk, for a start?
Do my pre-conceptions and bias facilitate the use of bots and accentuate the problem?
How can players who operate amongst a sea of faceless, solo players who behave exactly like bots, ever be expected to present a realistic perspective? Given that they are explicitly opting out of interraction.
If those solo/casual players have already opted out, how much effect does it have on them anyway? Other than providing competition/inflation in the non-interractive farmer market?

Ripard Teg > For the morons in the room:

Sweets > U can dd my face any day

Dirk MacGirk
Specter Syndicate
#67 - 2014-05-19 22:09:34 UTC
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:
Dirk MacGirk wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Marsha Mallow wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Blah blah...
Sorry. while I applaud your efforts, this sounds more every day like the zany ideas of the united states' "War on Drugs".
I will take you seriously when you start naming names, and outing char names, corps, and alliances.

It is utterly ludicrous to suggest that IMAGINARY names, which according to the EULA, CCP owns anyway and has complete and utter control over, are somehow protected by "privacy concerns".

You start posting names, and quantities of ISK, and that will go a long way to establishing credibility.

Naming names is counter-productive as it targets the entity rather than the individual(s), and creates a witch hunt which bypasses the real problem: buyers. Point of this thread. Don't buy dirty money.

Everyone wants to finger wag at botters and RMTers, but the reality is the buyers are the problem. Let's see some stats on those scrubs.

As with any crime, whether done out of ignorance or greed, they create the market. And we all suffer the consequences.

Let's have a wall of shame for the buyers too, eh.


I have no problem with CCP outing buyers, just as long as they are equal opportunity, and out sellers.

But like the u.s. war on drugs, targeting buyers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate, many for small pot amounts) does not work.

Bottom line, naming anyone is NOT an infringement of any privacy, since we are discussing char names that only exist in the Eve universe, and CCP owns all rights to anyway.


Would naming anyone lead to better results?



It would confirm the Dinspiracy, one way or the other.

Either complete proof that CCP, controlled by the nullsec cartels, is deviously hiding Goon RMT gains by blatantly not prosecuting cartel level RMT lords OR;

Complete proof that the nullsec cartels are RMTing ill-gotten gains (with CCP approval).


It would depend on the content of the list, which line you pick. The former if you can't show grrgoons involvement, the latter if you can.


I don't think CCP has to confirm or refute any conspiracy the average monkey in game brings up. Linking names wont do a damn thing to turn those people into believers. It's a red herring. Like trying to compare this to the US War on Drugs.
Domanique Altares
Rifterlings
#68 - 2014-05-19 22:15:16 UTC
ISD Ezwal wrote:
I know my place...Smile


Stamping out injustice everywhere it is found!

Don't fear the forum tags, Ezwal. You are the hero GD needs right now.
Lady Areola Fappington
#69 - 2014-05-19 22:23:32 UTC
Marsha Mallow wrote:

Thank you for replying, I thought you had me blocked (which would be sad because I see some merit in your remarks, but tbf it's usually late at night).

We need more stats, either to balance perspectives, or prevent people from abusing raw numbers to further their (highly biased) agenda. I'd like to point out that as a former nullsec CEO the last time an ISK-buyer list was leaked and one of mine showed up, everyone in corp was annoyed. We pursued everyone in alliance suspected of these types of activity, and every corp/allaince I've been in since has operated a no-tolerance approach. Publically. Which undermines the idea entire groups are engaged. It's a select few (particularly in wider RMT rings), so punish those, not the unaware.

I haven't watched that 55min presentation (did view some charts) but tbh I just want a summary. Here it is:
Is it being dealt with?
Can we help?
How?
Is there anything useful I can do to prevent/curtail this activity [elephant in the room]: don't buy derty isk, for a start?
Do my pre-conceptions and bias facilitate the use of bots and accentuate the problem?
How can players who operate amongst a sea of faceless, solo players who behave exactly like bots, ever be expected to present a realistic perspective? Given that they are explicictly opting out of interraction.
If those solo/casual players have already opted out, how much affect does it have on them anyway? Other than providing competition/inflation in the non-interractive farmer market?



I've spent some time trolling around the whole botting/RMT world (I help admin a couple of BF4 servers, the FPS bot scene and MMO botting scene overlap a lot). You find out really quickly that CCP has quite the rep when it comes to prosecuting botters and RMTers. The terms "ruthless", "harsh", and "Big Brother" get thrown around a lot to describe them. I'd say CCP is having an impact on those operations.


Throwing around "CCP should focus on X space" is kind of silly, in the end. CCP is focused on killing bots and such regardless of the sec status they're in. The figures shown have a lot less to do with "CCP focus" and more to do with simple population distribution. Lots of bots get killed in Caldari highsec space. Lots of people reside in Caldari highsec space. It's just a matter of numbers.

Now, an interesting data set that I don't think CCP has released would be average number of bots per player, divided up by region. That would be a little more telling than just looking at a raw number.

7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided. --Eve New Player Guide

Zack Korth
Livid CO.
#70 - 2014-05-19 22:28:12 UTC
so how do they get all that ISK to sell anyway? i could use a few hundred billion
Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#71 - 2014-05-19 22:33:42 UTC
Zack Korth wrote:
so how do they get all that ISK to sell anyway? i could use a few hundred billion


Well, you'd probably get banned if you tried to use their methods of acquiring ISK

Twitter: @EVEAndski

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

Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#72 - 2014-05-19 22:57:31 UTC
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:
Marsha Mallow wrote:

Thank you for replying, I thought you had me blocked (which would be sad because I see some merit in your remarks, but tbf it's usually late at night).

We need more stats, either to balance perspectives, or prevent people from abusing raw numbers to further their (highly biased) agenda. I'd like to point out that as a former nullsec CEO the last time an ISK-buyer list was leaked and one of mine showed up, everyone in corp was annoyed. We pursued everyone in alliance suspected of these types of activity, and every corp/allaince I've been in since has operated a no-tolerance approach. Publically. Which undermines the idea entire groups are engaged. It's a select few (particularly in wider RMT rings), so punish those, not the unaware.

I haven't watched that 55min presentation (did view some charts) but tbh I just want a summary. Here it is:
Is it being dealt with?
Can we help?
How?
Is there anything useful I can do to prevent/curtail this activity [elephant in the room]: don't buy derty isk, for a start?
Do my pre-conceptions and bias facilitate the use of bots and accentuate the problem?
How can players who operate amongst a sea of faceless, solo players who behave exactly like bots, ever be expected to present a realistic perspective? Given that they are explicictly opting out of interraction.
If those solo/casual players have already opted out, how much affect does it have on them anyway? Other than providing competition/inflation in the non-interractive farmer market?



I've spent some time trolling around the whole botting/RMT world (I help admin a couple of BF4 servers, the FPS bot scene and MMO botting scene overlap a lot). You find out really quickly that CCP has quite the rep when it comes to prosecuting botters and RMTers. The terms "ruthless", "harsh", and "Big Brother" get thrown around a lot to describe them. I'd say CCP is having an impact on those operations.


Throwing around "CCP should focus on X space" is kind of silly, in the end. CCP is focused on killing bots and such regardless of the sec status they're in. The figures shown have a lot less to do with "CCP focus" and more to do with simple population distribution. Lots of bots get killed in Caldari highsec space. Lots of people reside in Caldari highsec space. It's just a matter of numbers.

Now, an interesting data set that I don't think CCP has released would be average number of bots per player, divided up by region. That would be a little more telling than just looking at a raw number.


I would welcome as much data that CCP is willing to give.
CCP has very extensive breakdowns on just about any mechanism or action you can imagine inside Eve.
Some they are willing to share quite openly, when it suits their purpose.

As much as I would love to believe it, just like the latest sub numbers, I don't see CCP releasing any really hard data analysis about this topic. But when opportunities like this dev started thread about RMT are presented, I will make every opportunity to take advantage of it to hammer at CCP for some transparency.

That being said, there is a certain hockey game about to start I cannot miss, so no more posting for a while.
CraftyCroc
Fraternity Alliance Please Ignore
#73 - 2014-05-19 23:20:22 UTC
Show us some stats!
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#74 - 2014-05-19 23:20:35 UTC
I Love Boobies wrote:
Admit it, your mom lets you use her credit card, right? You might even live in her basement? I mean, you don't appear to understand real life, and the need to have a place to live or to eat aren't really problems at all.


If you're earning over $75k pa, you're in the comfort zone: you no longer worry about money. $15 for a beer? $30 for a cocktail? Serve me up, bartender! Of course some reporters claim that $75k is the salary that "buys you happiness" when it's merely the salary that buys you a worry-free financial future.

But the point is, for some people the $150/month for ten accounts is a non-worrying expense. It's not like they have to give up a loaf of bread or a visit to the doctor: they have money to spend.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#75 - 2014-05-19 23:22:31 UTC
Dirk MacGirk wrote:
Would naming anyone lead to better results?


It depends if you consider witch-hunts, public lynchings and the associated interpersonal drama to be a "better result."
Arronicus
The Untraceable
M A R A K U G A
#76 - 2014-05-19 23:23:46 UTC
Lisa Gentilette wrote:
Ahost Gceo wrote:
Would be nice if PLEX wasn't 723 million. People right now are just going to pay for subs because the prices are ridiculously high. Of those who find "plexing" too daunting a prospect, a good portion are just going to go inactive. Straight


Eve is 15 bucks a month, less if you pay for a year.
If you have trouble paying *roughly* 15 bucks a month (0.50 cts a day) for your favorite game then you have bigger problems then the price of PLEX.






While I in no way endorse RMT, I, and many others, like to run many accounts, in my case, up to 10. This is completely justifiable for me via plex, where I can make the money to pay for 6 accounts with plex or 10 in the same amount of time. We don't have trouble paying 15 bucks a month for our favourite game, we have issue with paying 90, 150, 300 for some. Of all my current assosciates in Eve, I think I know fewer with 1 account than those with 4+.
Arronicus
The Untraceable
M A R A K U G A
#77 - 2014-05-19 23:25:40 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Dirk MacGirk wrote:
Would naming anyone lead to better results?


It depends if you consider witch-hunts, public lynchings and the associated interpersonal drama to be a "better result."


Not to mention that it directly violates CCP's privacy policies, including not name-and-shaming.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#78 - 2014-05-19 23:35:50 UTC
Arronicus wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
Dirk MacGirk wrote:
Would naming anyone lead to better results?


It depends if you consider witch-hunts, public lynchings and the associated interpersonal drama to be a "better result."


Not to mention that it directly violates CCP's privacy policies, including not name-and-shaming.


The underlying assumption would be that CCP decides to override that policy for reporting RMT operations.

For the moment, CCP's priority is to help RMTers get back on the straight and narrow. The presentation at Fanfest indicated that most RMT happens with players that are days to a couple of months into the game, who are looking for a quick financial boost. This is why I offer my Buddy Invitees the PLEX reward that I get from them subscribing. I'd love to have some word from CCP about whether giving them a lot of ISK up-front works as a preventative measure, but I'll happily cruise on in ignorance for the meantime.
Dirk MacGirk
Specter Syndicate
#79 - 2014-05-19 23:41:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Dirk MacGirk
Arronicus wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
Dirk MacGirk wrote:
Would naming anyone lead to better results?


It depends if you consider witch-hunts, public lynchings and the associated interpersonal drama to be a "better result."


Not to mention that it directly violates CCP's privacy policies, including not name-and-shaming.


I have no need for names to be made public. Mine was a question directed at the guy with 3,000 likes that seems to think the only way CCP can prove (or needs to prove) anything is by making it all public. What he doesn't realize is they don't need to prove a damn thing to the average forum lurker and that naming and shaming people who have been banned won't actually make people stop breaking the rules. It's a sham argument.
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#80 - 2014-05-19 23:41:40 UTC
ISD Ezwal wrote:
Officially this entire thread is against the forum rules, but oh well, even I know my place...Smile



This post cracks me up.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com