These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Update from Team Security (graphs within!)

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#61 - 2014-07-29 13:25:40 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
All I can say is that whenever CCP champions how wonderful they are in their "kill the RMT'ers" PR campaigns, the majority of their verbage is about buyers.
You haven't considered that maybe this is because they're talking to potential buyers rather than potential sellers? They're the ones that need to be told that, “no, this is not a good idea and look at the statistics, we will catch you.” No such rhetoric works for sellers since they have no illusions about what they're doing.

Quote:
Nailing sellers would shrink RMT activity faster than nailing buyers.
What makes you so certain that they're not nailing sellers?

Quote:
And outing BOTH sides would do wonders for credibility.
No, it would not because it would breach all kinds of privacy laws and agreements. Doing that just to assuage your rampant paranoia is not a good recipe for credibility — quite the opposite.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#62 - 2014-07-29 13:35:51 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Yeah, sounds more and more like "the war on drugs".
So you keep hammering the buyer.
How about posting explicit data on how many sellers you nailed, and the value of that chunk of ISK?
How about their ingame affiliations?

Until we get full transparency on who you nailed, this kind of stuff is just more propaganda.


The problem with using the drug war analogy is that 'going after the sellers' doesn't work any more than going after the buyer. I know, I've spent a career arresting both.

Knock down 1 low level seller, 2 more take his place. Ignore (or turn) the low level sellers to get to the 'connect' (the middle man between the street level seller and the main supplier/producer) and all you do is start a war over who will be the new 'connect' for the area. Go after the producer (which involves heavy law enforcement, military and intelligence forces, read that as Army, DEA, CIA and foreign governments/forces) well that gives you some measure of success....until the next drug lord/cartel pops up and having learned the lessons of the failed/killed/arrested kingpin, does the job better than before and becomes harder to kill.

Attacking the supply side is a losing battle as long as DEMAND remains. CCP did the best thing you can do in this situation by legalizing drugs creating PLEX (lol) but as in the real world where there will always be a black market for some things because there is a demand for that thing as cheap as possible, there will always be some form of RMT in any game with an ingame economy. Law Enforcement (in game and out) is about minimizing crime and it's consequences, nothing can ever truly defeat it.

TL;DR no Dinsdale, CCP isn't going to kill the Goons for you.
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#63 - 2014-07-29 13:37:31 UTC
Sorry Tippia but what kind of privacy laws and agreements are you talking about when RMT participants are concerned?

Invalid signature format
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#64 - 2014-07-29 13:46:22 UTC
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
Sorry Tippia but what kind of privacy laws and agreements are you talking about when RMT participants are concerned?

The same ones that ensure that CCP does not give out all your information. The EULA has a fairly long section on the topic.
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#65 - 2014-07-29 13:51:05 UTC
Oh c'mon, nobody expects them to give out RL addresses and personal info they have but character name with corp and alliance? Where's the law against 'name and shame' in-game pixels?

Although I guess since people know each other in RL some could get ganked on their doorsteps after this. We are RL psychos and degenerates after all.

Invalid signature format
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#66 - 2014-07-29 13:52:53 UTC
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
Oh c'mon, nobody expects them to give out RL addresses and personal info they have but character name with corp and alliance? Where's the law against 'name and shame' in-game pixels?
Right in the EULA.
Naming and shaming, as the name suggests, is shameful in and of itself.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#67 - 2014-07-29 13:54:26 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
All I can say is that whenever CCP champions how wonderful they are in their "kill the RMT'ers" PR campaigns, the majority of their verbage is about buyers.
You haven't considered that maybe this is because they're talking to potential buyers rather than potential sellers? They're the ones that need to be told that, “no, this is not a good idea and look at the statistics, we will catch you.” No such rhetoric works for sellers since they have no illusions about what they're doing.

Quote:
Nailing sellers would shrink RMT activity faster than nailing buyers.
What makes you so certain that they're not nailing sellers?

Quote:
And outing BOTH sides would do wonders for credibility.
No, it would not because it would breach all kinds of privacy laws and agreements. Doing that just to assuage your rampant paranoia is not a good recipe for credibility — quite the opposite.


Your privacy is still there as long as they don't link directly to you. Saying they banned 80 players from allaince "RMTer's are us" does not reveal who those players actually are.
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#68 - 2014-07-29 13:56:01 UTC
So god forbid fragile RMT guy got his feelings hurt by social ostracism.

Invalid signature format
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#69 - 2014-07-29 13:56:16 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
Oh c'mon, nobody expects them to give out RL addresses and personal info they have but character name with corp and alliance? Where's the law against 'name and shame' in-game pixels?
Right in the EULA.
Naming and shaming, as the name suggests, is shameful in and of itself.


The same EULA the player already breached by participating in RMT? Why am I supposed to care about the privacy of a banned character/account? It's not the personal information that I want but only the in-game one.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#70 - 2014-07-29 13:57:13 UTC
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
Oh c'mon, nobody expects them to give out RL addresses and personal info they have but character name with corp and alliance? Where's the law against 'name and shame' in-game pixels?

Although I guess since people know each other in RL some could get ganked on their doorsteps after this. We are RL psychos and degenerates after all.


In the EULA it is explicitly pointed out that CCP OWNS everything about your chars in-game, including the names of the chars.
So you are correct, there are zero legal roadblocks stopping CCP from releasing imaginary names of pixels that reside on their servers.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#71 - 2014-07-29 13:58:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Your privacy is still there as long as they don't link directly to you. Saying they banned 80 players from allaince "RMTer's are us" does not reveal who those players actually are.

No, it does something far worse: it stigmatizes the other 9920 players in the alliance.

Quote:
The same EULA the player already breached by participating in RMT? Why am I supposed to care about the privacy of a banned character/account?
Because it's the same EULA that protects you and ensures that you are not being harassed by umpteen dingbats who can't understand the difference between broad generalisation and insinuation and their own unfounded conclusions.

Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
In the EULA it is explicitly pointed out that CCP OWNS everything about your chars in-game, including the names of the chars.
So you are correct, there are zero legal roadblocks stopping CCP from releasing imaginary names of pixels that reside on their servers.

…aside from the entire privacy section, which is there precisely to stop people like you. Catering to the mob is never a good idea.
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#72 - 2014-07-29 14:03:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Schmata Bastanold
And Tippia, I know you will convince me wrong by the power of your logic but sometimes world is just black and white and here case is simple: either you play within rules or not. It's not RL with subtleties and crimes of passion and whatever: buying in-game assets with out-of-game RL currency is a choice and consequences should be as severe as making offenders' character names public.

Invalid signature format
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#73 - 2014-07-29 14:05:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
And Tippia, I know you will convince me wrong by the power of your logic but sometimes world is just black and white and here case is simple: either you play within rules or not.
…which is exactly why they can't name and shame, no matter how much the neandethal mob with pitchforks would love a good lynching. Other players have exactly zero business knowing who CCP goes after because it is solely between CCP and that party — that's all there is to it.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#74 - 2014-07-29 14:08:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Tippia wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Your privacy is still there as long as they don't link directly to you. Saying they banned 80 players from allaince "RMTer's are us" does not reveal who those players actually are.

No, it does something far worse: it stigmatizes the other 9920 players in the alliance.

Quote:
The same EULA the player already breached by participating in RMT? Why am I supposed to care about the privacy of a banned character/account?
Because it's the same EULA that protects you and ensures that you are not being harassed by umpteen dingbats who can't understand the difference between broad generalisation and insinuation and their own unfounded conclusions.

Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
In the EULA it is explicitly pointed out that CCP OWNS everything about your chars in-game, including the names of the chars.
So you are correct, there are zero legal roadblocks stopping CCP from releasing imaginary names of pixels that reside on their servers.

…aside from the entire privacy section, which is there precisely to stop people like you. Catering to the mob is never a good idea.


Well said. People get really short sighted when the issue comes up about other people's rights or the consequences of ignoring those things (such as, as you mention, people being unfairly stigmatized because someone with the same alliance or corp ticker did something wrong, and also because someone will figure out how to 'frame' people in other alliances by using their spies in that alliance to RMT then get caught).

It's why in real life we have such wonderfully useless things like Sex Offender registration and notification (which btw correlates with a rise in Sex crimes lol, oops) and 'Amber Alerts'. People should leave the 'law enforcement' activities to the professionals in this matter, Team Security.
Lister Dax
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#75 - 2014-07-29 14:09:09 UTC
What can CCP do to sellers exactly? Can they get them shut down? Doesn't that just cause a slight inconvenience whilst they pop up somewhere else?
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#76 - 2014-07-29 14:09:24 UTC
Yeah, I know. It's all for my protection when I get stupid enough to get into RMT. Oh wait, I won't.

Invalid signature format
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#77 - 2014-07-29 14:12:09 UTC
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
Yeah, I know. It's all for my protection when I get stupid enough to get into RMT. Oh wait, I won't.

You don't **** about with privacy, at all, regardless.

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#78 - 2014-07-29 14:12:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Lister Dax wrote:
What can CCP do to sellers exactly? Can they get them shut down? Doesn't that just cause a slight inconvenience whilst they pop up somewhere else?

Pretty much. They'll set back their activities by however much trade goods they had in storage, and quite possibly blow their entire customer network out of the water, but yes, they'll be back — there's real money to be earned, after all.

Schmata Bastanold wrote:
Yeah, I know. It's all for my protection when I get stupid enough to get into RMT. Oh wait, I won't.

No, it's for your protection, period. RMT isn't a factor.
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#79 - 2014-07-29 14:13:53 UTC
Privacy of pixel people? C'mon, Ralph.

Invalid signature format
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#80 - 2014-07-29 14:15:57 UTC
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
Yeah, I know. It's all for my protection when I get stupid enough to get into RMT. Oh wait, I won't.

It could be considered a legitimate playstyle by some, perhaps not by CCP, but then that would be the point, I guess.

Oh god.