Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Freelancer117
So you want to be a Hero
96
|
Posted - 2013.12.10 22:30:00 -
[1] - Quote
Ripard Teg, Vice-Chairman CSM8, nailed it right on the head in his blog post We as customers should know what to expect from CCP when it concerns high decree acts.
To quote Ripard Teg:
Quote:The transparency/consistency issue does remain. CCP's most recent annual stockholder briefing book includes the following text about one of their cornerstone principles, transparency:
We earn trust through honesty and openness. We are open-minded and respectful of our customers and co-workers. We confront problems directly and discuss issues in a straightforward manner.
Like many corporate mission statements, these are words that often have a lot more to do with CCP's actions in an ideal world as opposed to the real one. As players remind CCP again and again, actions speak louder than words.
With the recent ToS / Eula issue about interpersonating others, the issue about TRANSPARANCY still stands:
Quote:Every general norm like the ToS rules has to be interpreted on a case by case basis.
In real life after a few hundred years most democratic constitutional states got these interpretation procedures written down.
So the general public knows what to expect, and these interpretation procedures are not like written law (like the ToS in eve).
These interpretation procedures are called Custom in law, which are the established pattern of behavior that can be objectively verified within a particular social setting (in our case: within the New Eden Universe)
As a small part of the eve general public I want to know the GM's interpretation procedures,
to further my consumer rights towards CCP games.
Since a CCP banning is a high decree act, we as their customers should have high decree of transparency.
PS: at the minimum give the CSM these GM interpretation procedures concerning the ToS since they have signed the NDA
source: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3637147#post3637147
Hope Ripard Teg will get some answers even if it is covered by NDA, and won't be shared. Please do keep us up-to-date IF or WHEN you get any answers from CCP.
PS: So far the GM staff have been profession, timely, often helpful to me This post is about transparency rules not against the GM staff. Eve rule no.1: The players will make a better version of the game, then CCP initially plans.
http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg
|
Snow Axe
Atwater Capital
1377
|
Posted - 2013.12.11 04:15:00 -
[2] - Quote
So you want to know why a company not known for transparency isn't being more transparent, and your solution is to lobby a group of people whose entire value has become dependent on special access granted to them by said company? Access that they would otherwise have no right to?
I can't see how this could possibly go wrong! "Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread[" |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
1814
|
Posted - 2013.12.11 06:02:00 -
[3] - Quote
Is this about shirts for female avatars?
dirty perv Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
597
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 09:26:00 -
[4] - Quote
Custom in Law is how lawyers make their money arguing based on this or that case. And actually adds extra layers to the rules. |
Signal11th
Northern Coalition.
1281
|
Posted - 2014.02.10 16:36:00 -
[5] - Quote
it's all clear now. Powered by-áreaTh-áFilter V1.23 "All posts by this pilot are personal held views and not representitive of-áany-ácorp or alliance I am currently a member of. Like I'd give a-ásh*t anyway. God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster. |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
1231
|
Posted - 2014.02.10 20:37:00 -
[6] - Quote
Ripard Teg is a ********, you have to take that into consideration when you read is blogs. The Tears Must Flow |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
13830
|
Posted - 2014.02.10 22:25:00 -
[7] - Quote
Freelancer117 wrote:Ripard Teg, Vice-Chairman CSM8, nailed it right on the head in his blog postWe as customers should know what to expect from CCP when it concerns high decree acts. To quote Ripard Teg: Quote:The transparency/consistency issue does remain. CCP's most recent annual stockholder briefing book includes the following text about one of their cornerstone principles, transparency:
We earn trust through honesty and openness. We are open-minded and respectful of our customers and co-workers. We confront problems directly and discuss issues in a straightforward manner.
Like many corporate mission statements, these are words that often have a lot more to do with CCP's actions in an ideal world as opposed to the real one. As players remind CCP again and again, actions speak louder than words.
With the recent ToS / Eula issue about interpersonating others, the issue about TRANSPARANCY still stands: Quote:Every general norm like the ToS rules has to be interpreted on a case by case basis.
In real life after a few hundred years most democratic constitutional states got these interpretation procedures written down.
So the general public knows what to expect, and these interpretation procedures are not like written law (like the ToS in eve).
These interpretation procedures are called Custom in law, which are the established pattern of behavior that can be objectively verified within a particular social setting (in our case: within the New Eden Universe)
As a small part of the eve general public I want to know the GM's interpretation procedures,
to further my consumer rights towards CCP games.
Since a CCP banning is a high decree act, we as their customers should have high decree of transparency.
PS: at the minimum give the CSM these GM interpretation procedures concerning the ToS since they have signed the NDA source: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3637147#post3637147Hope Ripard Teg will get some answers even if it is covered by NDA, and won't be shared. Please do keep us up-to-date IF or WHEN you get any answers from CCP. PS: So far the GM staff have been profession, timely, often helpful to me This post is about transparency rules not against the GM staff.
Actually, we did have a pretty thorough session with a senior GM and an IA representative, and the discussion got... quite heated.
Come to think of it the summary of what they told us probably isn't even NDA. However I'm not going to tell you it unless you can prove to me that you understand the difference between "decree" and "degree".
1 Kings 12:11
|
Freelancer117
So you want to be a Hero
129
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 15:20:00 -
[8] - Quote
Malcanis wrote: Actually, we did have a pretty thorough session with a senior GM and an IA representative, and the discussion got... quite heated.
Come to think of it the summary of what they told us probably isn't even NDA. However I'm not going to tell you it unless you can prove to me that you understand the difference between "decree" and "degree".
Sorry about that, something got lost in the translation, using the right wording is often important like like **** vs crap vs kaka.
Edit: hope to see that session in the winter summit minutes, if not NDA-ed, anyone else who gives a crap, oh kaka, ARG OH **** (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decree) Eve rule no.1: The players will make a better version of the game, then CCP initially plans.
http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg
|
Freelancer117
So you want to be a Hero
156
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 22:14:00 -
[9] - Quote
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4405525#post4405525
CCP Falcon wrote:
CCP, in collaboration with the CSM, have agreed and would like to state in the strongest possible terms and in accordance with our existing Terms of Service and End User License Agreement, that real life harassment is morally reprehensible, and verifiable examples of such behavior will be met with disciplinary action against game accounts in accordance with our Terms of Service.
Still waiting on Malcanis summary of what they told the CSM, that probably isn't even NDA, concerning Transparancy with that thorough session with a senior GM and an IA representative Eve rule no.1: The players will make a better version of the game, then CCP initially plans.
http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |