| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Ricdic
Caldari
   |
Posted - 2009.03.07 04:19:00 -
[61]
 Originally by: Liisa
So if somebody defaulted you would have given isk, gotten cash and it is okay because you would have used the cash to buy GTCs?
Exactly, in turn those GTC's would be converted back to ISK and everyone is happy. I get my ISK investment back (in the form of ISK), and there has been no RMT trade. In the event the person doesn't default they simply get their cash back upon loan completion. |
The ChurchWarden
|
Posted - 2009.03.07 04:40:00 -
[62]
I am curious exactly what is being debated in this thread particularly. Is it the community stance on such things or CCPs stance. If it's CCP stance then wouldn't the thread that appeared in assembly hall be more appropriate. If it's the communities stance I would suppose like most things that involve change and more people thinking of the abuse of a change rather then the benefit, it will be widely frowned upon.
|
Kazzac Elentria
|
Posted - 2009.03.07 04:42:00 -
[63]
Ric, I love you man. But I think you're skirting a fine line (in the personal sense) with doing what you described.
I don't agree with it ethically, but I won't rail on you since technically its within guidelines. |
Shar Tegral
|
Posted - 2009.03.07 05:14:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Kazzac Elentria
Ric, I love you man. But I think you're skirting a fine line (in the personal sense) with doing what you described. I don't agree with it ethically, but I won't rail on you since technically its within guidelines.
Senator: Oh, my God! Oh, my God! Oh, my God! Oh, my God! I don't know what happened! Peter: Whoa, it's okay, it's okay, Senator. This girl didn't have a family. It'll be like she never existed. Now grab a hold of yourself. All right. Now, listen. You may have killed her when you shoved those dollar bills down her throat. You may have killed her when you hit her with the stool. I don't know. I'm not a doctor. But I'll tell you what didn't kill her. Smoking! I guess this method of debate does actually work.
My old mercenary(PVP) corp is recruiting again. Would you believe I'm giving them my signature block for free? |
Kazzac Elentria
|
Posted - 2009.03.07 05:18:00 -
[65]
You're not allowed to do that when I've been drinking  |
Ricdic
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.03.07 05:21:00 -
[66]
Like I said though, I will do anything within the guidelines of the EULA to protect my investments. Some may not approve but it has thus far achieved a 100% success rate. |
Kazzac Elentria
|
Posted - 2009.03.07 05:26:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Ricdic
Like I said though, I will do anything within the guidelines of the EULA to protect my investments. Some may not approve but it has thus far achieved a 100% success rate.
Fair enough, more or less just intellectual differences that really aren't worth going to blows over teh intertubes. 
It just fears me that there may be Pablo Escobars of the EVE world out there taking advantage of such mechanics. |
Shar Tegral
|
Posted - 2009.03.07 10:27:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Ricdic
Like I said though, I will do anything within the guidelines of the EULA to protect my investments. Some may not approve but it has thus far achieved a 100% success rate.
PS: Sorry Ric, this was pure humor.
My old mercenary(PVP) corp is recruiting again. Would you believe I'm giving them my signature block for free? |
LaVista Vista
|
Posted - 2009.03.07 10:55:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Shar Tegral
Originally by: Ricdic
Like I said though, I will do anything within the guidelines of the EULA to protect my investments. Some may not approve but it has thus far achieved a 100% success rate.
PS: Sorry Ric, this was pure humor.
I laughed 
|
Joss Sparq
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.03.07 13:14:00 -
[70]
I don't know if LaVista Vista or anyone else has mentioned or linked this yet, but LVV has raised this elsewhere for those who are interested or who haven't seen it yet.
|
|
|
Liisa
|
Posted - 2009.03.07 13:21:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Kazzac Elentria
It just fears me that there may be Pablo Escobars of the EVE world out there taking advantage of such mechanics.
This is what worries me more that Ricdic securing a few loans. Oh course I wonder why he needs to secure isk loans with anything but ingame assets, but then he is probably one of those "srs busnis" people.
However the problem is that the same argumentation can be used to cover RMT trading. I wonder if CCP will accept "he defaulted on a loan, honest" as an excuse when they go to ban somebody for RMT.
|
Joss Sparq
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.03.07 15:24:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Liisa
However the problem is that the same argumentation can be used to cover RMT trading.
Except that RMT is going to happen with or without an amendment to the EULA about this - if anything, such a prohibition could potentially drive more players to RMT vendors.
Proscribing against this is only going to hurt legitimate game players who are otherwise only attempting to acquire a loan under a different set of circumstances compared to most other players.
Originally by: Liisa
I wonder if CCP will accept "he defaulted on a loan, honest" as an excuse when they go to ban somebody for RMT.
If someone uses "he defaulted on a loan, honest" as an excuse when CCP has banned them - well, presumably CCP have much more refined criteria to identify ISK sellers than just their making a single transfer of ISK to somebody else in-game.
Otherwise we're all royally screwed 
|
Shar Tegral
|
Posted - 2009.03.07 15:31:00 -
[73]
Quote:
It is better to ask forgiveness than permission.
I don't know who said that but I think this applies to this whole situation. It is one thing to say that it is unenforceable. Even unknowable. All true and valid. It is another to come here and openly admit to it. To say, "Because you can't stop us, don't bother telling us no." Have you ever tried something like that with your parents? How do you think "authority" is going to view the matter? Not spitefully, thought it is not beyond possibility, but without a doubt challenging authority where on its doorstep is much like bearding a lion. Positive resolution is not likely. Thus I can't fathom why people are so flagrant with something that actually may be actionable. I mean, seriously, just because they can't prove is no reason to go about admitting to it either. I'm bold but I draw the line at stupid. I'm just surprised so many people don't.
My old mercenary(PVP) corp is recruiting again. Would you believe I'm giving them my signature block for free? |
Ricdic
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.03.07 15:59:00 -
[74]
So you are saying you actively break the EULA but think it's ok because CCP doesn't know about it. Good to know Shar.
What I have done is not breaking the EULA, it's protecting my own investment. I do the same with DBANK, in case you didn't notice I have been invested there for about 6 months now. |
Joss Sparq
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.03.07 16:03:00 -
[75]
Edited by: Joss Sparq on 07/03/2009 16:04:14
Originally by: Shar Tegral
Quote:
It is better to ask forgiveness than permission.
I don't know who said that but I think this applies to this whole situation.
I don't have absolute surety of this but a quick Google search took me to a page which in turn indicated Rear Admiral Grace Murray Hopper as a possible candidate.
EDIT: Your >justify< tags drive me insane sometimes 
|
Ricdic
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.03.07 16:09:00 -
[76]
Anyway my opinion has been said on the matter. I have my methods, you guys have yours. My methods are proven and have saved a considerable potential loss. If the EULA changes as a result so too will my methods. If you guys check the assembly hall thread Shar has tried to tell people that I run EBANK this way. I have stated here repeatedly that this has absolutely nothing to do with EBANK, it's just Shar lying to suit his cause.
Anyway you guys talk amongst yourselves. |
Shar Tegral
|
Posted - 2009.03.07 16:22:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Ricdic
stuff
You are clever enough to start trouble but to dumb to realize how transparent you are. First, there is nothing you can say that will diminish or destroy my reputation. There is no amount of poking and prodding that will get me to sell my integrity for so small a sum as someone as puny as you are. Can't say the same for you as we've all seen you lie or betray confidences time and time again. Secondly, you can say over and over again that you have not violated the EULA. However until CCP say this you are just guessing and playing with fire. It doesn't make a difference how much you are protecting your investment, any loan shark can be expected to do the same. However when you say that no cash actually leaves the system you are missing one key ingredient: the transit method. If someone sends you collateral cash via paypal, paypal charges for the transaction. When you return the cash via paypal, paypal charges for the transaction. So, like any smart business person, you raise your rates to include any processing fees by third parties. Thus, someone has gotten paid for the activity of exchanging virtualized Eve items and real life currency. By the way, what cash denomination do you require? What is your rate of exchange? How many such loans have you done? How do you trade the isk? Do you hold the isk in an interest bearing bank account while you have it? Do you pass that interest on to the borrower? If you keep the interest, do you report this income? If you did, how would you do so? As a business? Or capital investment? These are just many legitimate but complicating questions. And it is most definitely not about you Ric. You just decided to jump front and center and dominate the limelight. Not my choice, yours.
My old mercenary(PVP) corp is recruiting again. Would you believe I'm giving them my signature block for free? |
Ricdic
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.03.07 16:25:00 -
[78]
honestly Shar, you just aren't worth my time. |
Joss Sparq
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.03.07 16:26:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Shar Tegral
It doesn't make a difference how much you are protecting your investment, any loan shark can be expected to do the same.
You missed a golden opportunity to link those Stewie Griffin YouTube videos again, Shar 
... okay, now I'm going to bed.
|
Shar Tegral
|
Posted - 2009.03.07 16:27:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Ricdic
honestly Shar, you just aren't worth my time.
Thank you. Shall I take this as a cease fire agreement?
My old mercenary(PVP) corp is recruiting again. Would you believe I'm giving them my signature block for free? |
|
|
Xeoniya
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 23:32:00 -
[81]
Edited by: Xeoniya on 23/03/2009 23:32:58
There is an easy way around it, the borrow buys enough plexs to cover the loan and uses them as collateral, if they repay the loan then they can use the plex for their account or sell it, if they don't the lender uses or trades them.
Or, just sell the plexes in the first place, but from a high road game purity stand point I would say buy the plexes, use them for collateral and then use them for someone's subscription.
|
Business Ethics
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 01:25:00 -
[82]
Ok so how meta can this get before CCP flips out and bans everyone involved?
Could someone start a website designed to facilitate real $ "loans" between the guys with the isk and the guy with the $20?
You'd have someone with 20 billion on the block "I will loan you this 20 billion for $500 and if you don't pay the isk back in 30 days I'll be forced to default you " and what could CCP ever really do here? I'm afraid to even speculate how big a mess this could make.
|
LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 06:55:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Business Ethics
Ok so how meta can this get before CCP flips out and bans everyone involved?
Could someone start a website designed to facilitate real $ "loans" between the guys with the isk and the guy with the $20?
You'd have someone with 20 billion on the block "I will loan you this 20 billion for $500 and if you don't pay the isk back in 30 days I'll be forced to default you " and what could CCP ever really do here? I'm afraid to even speculate how big a mess this could make.
Due all respect, while you make a good point, you are asking the wrong question:
How meta can this get before governments flips out and tries to regulate virtual worlds like EVE?
|
Kylar Renpurs
Dusk Blade
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 13:40:00 -
[84]
Edited by: Kylar Renpurs on 24/03/2009 13:42:09
Originally by: LaVista Vista
Due all respect, while you make a good point, you are asking the wrong question:
How meta can this get before governments flips out and tries to regulate virtual worlds like EVE?
Already tried. Old article I know, but yet another reason why I pretty much despise any conversion system for RL dollars to ingame items/currency.
On a complete aside, I wonder what would happen if one of the great unwashed so to speak noticed this thread and posted in GD "EBank Runner deals in RMT".
Enough of a ****-storm started when an Ebank ad was on the login screen.
|
LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 14:06:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Kylar Renpurs
Edited by: Kylar Renpurs on 24/03/2009 13:42:09
Originally by: LaVista Vista
Due all respect, while you make a good point, you are asking the wrong question:
How meta can this get before governments flips out and tries to regulate virtual worlds like EVE?
Already tried. Old article I know, but yet another reason why I pretty much despise any conversion system for RL dollars to ingame items/currency.
On a complete aside, I wonder what would happen if one of the great unwashed so to speak noticed this thread and posted in GD "EBank Runner deals in RMT".
Enough of a ****-storm started when an Ebank ad was on the login screen.
Well. It's probably just question of time really.
EBANK is obviously in a tight spot when it comes to this kind of thing. That's why we take it seriously and get in touch with CCP when we notice any kind of questionable behavior.
|
Dzil
Caldari
TankSox Industries
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 14:39:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Hexxx
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
We can only give assistance where the items or services provided are in game.
Mitnal,
I think that's fair enough, but there is a problem here. If the loan is created with the intention of defaulting, then you all of the sudden you have a way to exchange in-game ISK for a RL item. It wouldn't take long for people to offer RL cash as collateral (after all, you don't have to pay anything for shipping).
So, let's get right to it;
Person A asks for a loan.
Person A sends RL collateral (in this case RL cash) to Person B (who holds it in escrow).
Person C sends Person A the ISK desired for the loan.
Person A defaults on the loan.
Person B sends the RL cash collateral to Person C.
Let's add one more thing into this scenario. Let's say that Person A and Person C knew all along that the loan would default.
Now...is THIS against the EULA?  Further, by introducing a third-party into the whole ISK for cash problem, have we found a loophole in the EULA?
This is a hard line to toe Hexxx. For example, Ebank takes isk in exchange for bumping numbers on a website. Is that a EULA violation? Would it be a EULA violation for you to then offer to change those numbers for real money?
It's a loophole, sure. But sealing it would really pinch the metagame community that Eve's members have created around it.
|
Kylar Renpurs
Dusk Blade
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 21:12:00 -
[87]
Edited by: Kylar Renpurs on 24/03/2009 21:13:12
Quote:
This is a hard line to toe Hexxx. For example, Ebank takes isk in exchange for bumping numbers on a website. Is that a EULA violation? Would it be a EULA violation for you to then offer to change those numbers for real money?
It's a loophole, sure. But sealing it would really pinch the metagame community that Eve's members have created around it.
It's actually pretty simple, and not really a loophole that you demonstrate.
EG. Regarding someone paying ISK to (for example) me, to advertise on a website is one transaction.
Money received from whatever website I use to 'power' the ads on my site is a completely separate transaction from a third party, and in no way related to my receipt of ISK for advertisment.
Regarding the Vent server mentioned before, if I give someone ISK for a vent server, well, kinda fine I suppose (it's actually pretty grey in my mind). If I sell that for RL money to a third party,, it's ok too because once again, the two were unrelated.
If I sold it back for RL money to the person I bought it off, *that's* grey. I suppose if it was found the intent was to facilitate RMT, then I suppose the ISK could be justifiably stripped. Good luck finding that out though
Quote:
EBANK is obviously in a tight spot when it comes to this kind of thing. That's why we take it seriously and get in touch with CCP when we notice any kind of questionable behavior.
The final example of the situation I pointed out before,
Receipt of RL currency in exchange for ISK, whether it was un/intended to return that currency or not, that's RMT right there (Real-Money Trade if you forgot). Buying GTC with that currency might make you feel better, but it was still RMT.
If this was OK'ed by CCP, I'd question just how seriously they take their own EULA, but since I (hope) Ricdic isn't running a huge RMT washing operation, pulling him up for it probably wouldn't affect the RMT situation much, pebble in the river so to speak,,, and given EBanks notoriety, it'd just cause another threadnaught more than likely.
Notionally, nothing tangible would be allowed to be purchased/sold for ISK for the very reasons why the vent-server thing is grey. Otherwise, hey, I'll buy that house off you with ISK because it has an internet connection which allows me to play EVE. Later I'll sell that house and make hundreds of thousands.
Regardless, RMT exists and it can go ahead and shove it.
|
Sphynx Stormlord
Gallente
Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 00:42:00 -
[88]
Quote:
B. Selling Items and Objects
You may not transfer, sell or auction, or buy or accept any offer to transfer, sell or auction (or offer to do any of the foregoing), any content appearing within the Game environment, including without limitation characters, character attributes, items, currency, and objects, other than via a permitted Character Transfer as described in section 3 above. You may not encourage or induce any other person to participate in such a prohibited transaction. The buying, selling or auctioning (or any attempt at doing so) of characters, character attributes, items, currency, or objects, whether through online auctions (such as ebay), newsgroups, postings on message boards or any other means is prohibited by the EULA and a violation of CCP's proprietary rights in the Game.
This is what the EULA actually says about transfering, buying, selling or auctioning stuff.
Aparently every transaction on the eve market is against the EULA (they are all at least at the level of 'transfere').
Basically, since just playing the game normally and doing any sort of trading, or loans, or secondary market etc is actually against the EULA, then the only real issue is what CCP is going to enforce. Which can be as arbitary as they like.
|
Nadarius Chrome
Celestial Horizon Corp.
I.C.C Industrial Drive Yards
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 01:40:00 -
[89]
I can't see any of this being allowed by CCP, whether it's stated specifically in the rules or not. To CCP it would only be visible in the same way as "real" ISK-selling, and I wouldn't expect them to give you the chance to argue that it was a loan backed by out-of-game assets.
I'm disappointed that no more of an official statement has been made though. Maybe they're first drafting up an official guideline and while they're at it, taking out anyone that looks to be involved in similar "ventures". After all, there's always the "We own this game, you have no rights at all beyond what we decide to give you. We can ban you for any reason we like." clause that's present in all MMO EULAs. |
Ricdic
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 02:36:00 -
[90]
CCP should remove mining because it's exploited by macro miners
That's basically what people are saying here. Because the system can be abused by some it should be removed in it's entirety.
The interesting fact here is that virtually every person here has been involved in something that has skirted on the EULA or broken it in the past. Most haven't been RMT but they would have been considered unsavoury by some.
* How many of you have logged onto a friends account to change his skill at his request, to move some funds, sell a bpo etc?
* How many of you have sold an account for isk (with 1 toon on it) to avoid the character transfer fee?
None of these are RMT. The reason they are against the EULA is they are a pain in the ass for CCP to govern. Now I do agree 100% that backing ingame isk with RL funds/assets can be abused. It definitely can. But realistically how could CCP stop it even if they wanted too? They could add a clause to the EULA. Would that really stop it from happening? Of course not. It just means CCP is not liable for any fallout that occurs as a result of the change-over.
Point is, people are breaking the EULA daily. CCP don't care unless it's RMT as its not bothering them. The only way CCP could combat this would be to screen every chat conversation, install trojans in the Eve client to also monitor email and communications software. CCP choose not to cover this because they have already covered their asses saying if anything outside the realms of Eve occurs it is out of their hands.
Direct player to player agreements are always occuring. Anyone who can say they have never experienced or seen the above points occur on at least one occasion is lying. At least 4 people who have posted in this very thread I first handedly know have done so.
This may very well inject new life into this thread or cause one of the EBANK staff to say OMFG in EBANK forums but I am saying this right now as a standard player. Before you reply I want you to stop, consider how you have breached the EULA in the past and then post accordingly. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |