EVE Search - Alliance rename issue

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Alliance rename issue

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 4 post(s)
ry ry	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:35:00 - [31] Goonswarm + chums are only up in arms about this because it's a chance to score glorious internet victories over ken/bobr/whatever. if CCP had changed the alliance name against ken/bobr/whatever's wishes goons would be queuing up to demand that it isn't changed back.
Mr M Legion of Illuminated Social Rejects	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:35:00 - [32] Originally by: Montasque Instead of trolling can you please add some constructive criticism one way or another? OH THE IRONY! It will break the forum. EVEgeek\|Eden Underground Radio
Sunglasses InSpace	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:35:00 - [33] Originally by: Mr M Yet another emo whine thread from Goons? Please go back to CAOD. There's a reason why I don't read that and I don't what to see your whining here. This isn't about Goons vs BoBR, this is about CCP breaking their own rules.
dropouthighschoolteacher	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:36:00 - [34] CCP, if I give you a hug will this change your feelings towards my petition to get my salvage back? I want you to feel that I should not suffer.
Pnuka GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:36:00 - [35] Thanks for the timely reponse. Here in America, we follow rules and laws to the exact letter, part of the reason we are so god damn good at everything. Your US based clients are just not as sensitive as myself to the Euroasia way of doing things is all.
Ankhesentapemkah Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:36:00 - [36] Originally by: Agent Known Is it seriously THAT big of a deal...? That's what I wonder too. I for one am certainly not going to get involved in any CSM topic about this stuff. ---
Slaveone	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:37:00 - [37] Originally by: Tobruk I don't think CCP has a full appreciation of how dangerous a situation like this is to their game. It is so ungodly frustrating to fight an entity in game that has developer support, its like your fighting the game itself. How long will we tolerate this **?? Is it time for another open letter to CCP? no, its already gone past that point. Frankly I find this ** too hard to stomach: - spawning BPOS - Handing out motherships - Changing the titan memorial rules when molles titan died - refunding titans after saying they never would 2 Titans in game died to "broken mechanics" 1 AZN and 1 D2 both pilots petitioned the loss but no exception was given. A good policy. The game has rules, they can change, but until then we live, fly, and die by them. People care that its BOB you did it for, because you have a LONG history of doing them special favors, but it really doesnÆt matter that its BOB, most people recognize that. It matters that YOU broke the rules and gave someone special treatment. WhatÆs even more insulting is that you changed their name to Band of Brothers Reloaded, as though, by not giving them their original name back somehow it would be ok. How stupid do you think we are? What a disgusting insult. This action is shameful beyond words CCP. Your failure to act last time and your continued, blatant cheating is a slap in the face to every person who plays the game. this NOT CA. NOT AN ALT. JUST A FAN OF THE BADEST ALLIANCE IN THE GAME ;)
Kuar Z'thain Fraser's Finest	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:37:00 - [38] Originally by: Pnuka Thanks for the timely reponse. Here in America, we follow rules and laws to the exact letter, part of the reason we are so god damn good at everything. Your US based clients are just not as sensitive as myself to the Euroasia way of doing things is all. Ahh, there's the trolling we missed.
Gefunkt GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:38:00 - [39] Originally by: GM Grimmi We have previously changed names provided a petition was created within a reasonable timeframe and the situation warranted such action. I have two questions. 1. What are the previous name changes? I remember CoW but that wasn't really their fault. 2. What situations warrant such action? I realize there is no simple answer to this question, but some sort of guidelines, some rubric would help. Right now the process is very opaque and looks like favoritism.
Agent Known	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:38:00 - [40] Originally by: Kuar Z'thain Originally by: Pnuka Thanks for the timely reponse. Here in America, we follow rules and laws to the exact letter, part of the reason we are so god damn good at everything. Your US based clients are just not as sensitive as myself to the Euroasia way of doing things is all. Ahh, there's the trolling we missed.
Eventy One Magellan Exploration and Survey	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:39:00 - [41] I have no doubt, this name change was done with great trepidation, and with full knowledge of its consequence, by CCP.
Cendaliaa	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:39:00 - [42] Originally by: Agent Known Originally by: Cendaliaa Originally by: Agent Known Is it seriously THAT big of a deal...? you new to the game or just acting as a troll? like every gm said to any alliance that wanted to change their name "disband" and create a new alliance, so what happens when you disband an alliance and have sov? I'm actually new to the game, but whatever... From what I've read BoB DID lose sov when the alliance was disbanded and had to start over. Their name was taken so it was petitioned, but it took until now to actually get it changed. So...I don't think this is favoritism or any of that sort, but I'm not 100% sure until CCP gives examples of doing this for other alliances. Original BoB was disbanded due to trenchancy within BoB, all allowed and nothing outside the game mechanics. Now old bob joined an pet alliance named kenzoku. instead of creating a new alliance which would have been much smarter from the start. BoB petitioned, we dont like our name we want to change it, but that aint allowed and no other alliance in game has gotten special treatment. It really dosent mater that it was bob but since this isnt the first time GM have cuddled with BoB and still does it just shows how one sided the gms are in favor of BoB.
onymous GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:40:00 - [43] Originally by: Agent Known Edited by: Agent Known on 24/03/2009 15:35:31 Originally by: Cendaliaa Originally by: Agent Known Is it seriously THAT big of a deal...? you new to the game or just acting as a troll? like every gm said to any alliance that wanted to change their name "disband" and create a new alliance, so what happens when you disband an alliance and have sov? I'm actually new to the game, but whatever... From what I've read BoB DID lose sov when the alliance was disbanded and had to start over. Their name was taken so it was petitioned, but it took until now to actually get it changed. So...I don't think this is favoritism or any of that sort, but I'm not 100% sure until CCP gives examples of doing this for other alliances. Edit: I don't believe KenZoku had sov when they first petitioned for their name back, so it wouldn't be fair to have to lose what they gained simply because the petition took so long. They had the option of reforming under whatever name they wanted, but they chose to go with KenZoku, an existing pet alliance. They could have used the usual in game mechanics to get whatever name they wanted, but instead they have GMs bend the rules for them months after the fact. Besides the naming rules explicitly stating that names will not be changed, no one else can think of any examples of GMs renaming alliances due to petitions, even those filed 'within a reasonable timeframe'. The point here is the continued favoritism for this particular group of players. If you're new to the game then you may not know that there is a long history of this sort of thing which is informing the current outrage.
ToTheCore Angels. Acid.	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:41:00 - [44] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Originally by: Agent Known Is it seriously THAT big of a deal...? That's what I wonder too. I for one am certainly not going to get involved in any CSM topic about this stuff. And why the **** not? This is an issue the players clearly care about, so unless you were only using the CSM as a platform to advance ideas that you cared about (suicide ganking, for instance), there is no reason why you and the CSM shouldn't have a discussion about this. ---
Hanabi Kazan GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:43:00 - [45] Originally by: GM Grimmi Any other corporation or alliance finding themselves in the same situation would get the same treatment. Please name one example of this happening to somebody other than KenZoku.
Mr M Legion of Illuminated Social Rejects	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:44:00 - [46] Originally by: Tobruk It is so ungodly frustrating to fight an entity in game that has developer support, its like your fighting the game itself. If CCP helped BoB, why doesn't it show? EVEgeek\|Eden Underground Radio
Gone'Postal Void Engineers	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:44:00 - [47] Originally by: Hanabi Kazan Originally by: GM Grimmi Any other corporation or alliance finding themselves in the same situation would get the same treatment. Please name one example of this happening to somebody other than KenZoku. Given it's written in the future context, are you asking CCP to forsee the future? Originally by: masternerdguy Officer mods arent spread out because the bpos are innacesible to 99% of eve.
Lelu Tarkenton	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:45:00 - [48] Grimmi, you are missing the point entirely and it reflects poorly on CCP. Bobr were not "forced" to join Kenzoku. They could have easily formed another alliance. The reason that they are petitioned for this is that they want to avoid the consequences of changing alliance because they disliked something about their current alliance (loss of sov). As requested earlier in this thread please cite examples where you have done name changes in the past for alliances in similar circumtances. I believe the response to the Stain alliance was to reform when they made a spelling mistake. How is this quantitatively different?
elohllird Destructive Influence Band of Brothers Reloaded	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:45:00 - [49] Originally by: Hanabi Kazan Originally by: GM Grimmi Any other corporation or alliance finding themselves in the same situation would get the same treatment. Please name one example of this happening to somebody other than KenZoku. think this might be the first example and so if it happened again this would be the precedent , but yeah an example would be good.
Ix Forres Caldari Vanguard Frontiers Sc0rched Earth	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:47:00 - [50] Originally by: LaVista Vista words, snipped for thread brevity Completely agree. If they had formed a new alliance and then petitioned, and your policies were in agreement (Why aren't GM policies public? What is there to hide?) with this situation, fair enough. But Kenny was an old altalliance, not a brand new alliance. Other alliance renames have only been done on typo/misspelling grounds. Complete changes are, as far as I know, without precedent. This comparison with other renames is therefore moot, as this is an unprecedented action. The handling of this event was poor to say the least. I do hope that other CSM representatives will step up to the plate and challenge this decision, or at the very least bring this exact decision process under public scrutiny, as it is evidently flawed and should be corrected. -- Ix Forres EVE Application Developer ISKsense \| EVE Metrics (NEW) \| I Tweet
Lelu Tarkenton	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:47:00 - [51] Originally by: Gone'Postal Originally by: Hanabi Kazan Originally by: GM Grimmi Any other corporation or alliance finding themselves in the same situation would get the same treatment. Please name one example of this happening to somebody other than KenZoku. Given it's written in the future context, are you asking CCP to forsee the future? Because there are examples in the past where they have clearly NOT followed the policy, eg.. Stain alliance mispelling.
Dmian Gallente Gallenterrorisme	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:48:00 - [52] Edited by: Dmian on 24/03/2009 15:55:38 I understand GoonSwarm point (but not thanks to the GSs themselves and the CAOD thread, which is shameful, but thanks to LaVista Vista who put things clearly for me to understand.) But I have a question: How much sov did Kenzoku had at the time of the "takeover" by the ex-BOB? Because, if most of the sov was gained after BOB was disbanded (and the petition was made,) and the existing Kenzoku sov was negligible, then it would be a case of CCP just asking for 1B ISK and change the frakking name. Case closed. But if Kenzoku had almost the same sov it holds right now, then I agree with the questions raised by LaVista Vista. Anyway, the only part with full knowledge to understand this affair (precise data, reasoning on the petition, etc.) is CCP. I'd like to have further information about it. BTW: have Goons sent an email to Internal Affairs yet due to his? Edit: I mean, if you have no sov to loose it's the same if you use an existing alliance of make a new one. ---- Originally by: Anne M. Lindbergh There is no sin punished more implacably by nature than the sin of resistance to change
ry ry	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:49:00 - [53] Edited by: ry ry on 24/03/2009 15:50:44 Originally by: ToTheCore Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Originally by: Agent Known Is it seriously THAT big of a deal...? That's what I wonder too. I for one am certainly not going to get involved in any CSM topic about this stuff. And why the **** not? This is an issue the players clearly care about, so unless you were only using the CSM as a platform to advance ideas that you cared about (suicide ganking, for instance), there is no reason why you and the CSM shouldn't have a discussion about this. it's a non-issue. the only people who care what bob are called are bob and, predictably, goons. Since goons have nailed their colours to the whole "we got bob renamed lolololbrosef aren't we terrible~~~~" thing it'd be a bit disappointing for them if all their victory archived was to append the word 'reloaded' onto the end of bob's name. plus it's an excuse to churn up some internet drama. lolololol CCP are terrible at eve brosef~~~~ Bob don't want to be called Ken because it's a funking awful name and they really didn't think very carefully about it as they scrambled to fix the disbanding mess. i'd be disappointed if the CSM dedicate more than 5 minutes to discussing this nonsense.
Vuk Lau 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:49:00 - [54] And the throne of the most fail CCP dept. goes back to Grimmi crew. Sry ISD guys.
OldPueblo DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:51:00 - [55] In what way was their gameplay prohibited under the name Kenzoku? They chose it. They used it to their advantage as a shortcut to gain sov. They fought as Kenzoku for months. There was no need or precedent to change it, period. You are acting like this is about sov when it's not. It's about strict policy being bent for only one entity to suit their whims. By making this statement you have simply made it go from bad to worse and have undone all progress you've made since the "early scandals." If you'd have come out and said "Sorry guys our bad" this issue would've faded into the night. You still have that chance though it's harder to swallow now. I also saw no updating of the naming policy for the rest of us, I assume we are once again back into "strict policy mode" on name changes? Of course, how could it be otherwise?
Kuar Z'thain Fraser's Finest	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:51:00 - [56] Originally by: Mr M Originally by: Tobruk It is so ungodly frustrating to fight an entity in game that has developer support, its like your fighting the game itself. If CCP helped BoB, why doesn't it show? Yeah, you'd think CCP's pet alliance would have more space. If CCP was really in BoB's pocket, they would have 'determined' that Haargoth was 'hacked' and rolled back the Alliance disbanding. But don't mind me, continue threadnaughting.
Mr M Legion of Illuminated Social Rejects	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:52:00 - [57] Originally by: Pnuka Here in America, we follow rules and laws to the exact letter Define waterboarding EVEgeek\|Eden Underground Radio
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:52:00 - [58] Originally by: ry ry it's a non-issue. the only people who care what bob are called are bob and, predictably, goons. For certain people, the whole 'say it over and over until it becomes true' thing is being applied to this. Some people care if CCP **** around inside the game world, particularly when it's a group they have such a colorful history with. The fact that this instance is minor and only cosmetic does not affect the significance of dev intervention. - DesuSigs
Bladewind	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:52:00 - [59] I would like to officially petition to have my name changed to Devhax! Is that cool?
Agent Known	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:53:00 - [60] I give up. Seems like there's no stopping this thread. Oh well.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.