Originally by: GM Grimmi

---

We will be contacting the CSM for input regarding our naming policies.

---

Originally by: BiaXia

---

Originally by: Garathyal

---

Edited by: Garathyal on 25/03/2009 19:53:47
CCP-Swarm responds with the usual bollox.

It is a cave in to the usual spam most of us can see that.

---

I'll indulge you, let's say we do have devs. If that were the case, do you think a name change would have happened in the first place?

---

Originally by: The Qat

---

Originally by: Garathyal

---

Originally by: GM Grimmi

---

We will be contacting the CSM for input regarding our naming policies.

---

How many of those are Goons and goon alts?

---

1-2? If you really think we have undue influence on CCP then you are stupid

---

Originally by: Orree

---

Originally by: ArmyOfMe

---

dear god, sad to see goons can pressure ccp into everything they want like this.
clearly showes that if you spam enough on the forums you get your will

---

Nevermind what was done was wrong and reversing it was the correct thing to do, right?

C'mon, man...think about it.

I have no doubt that some of the people who had a problem with it did or said what they did out of spite, but there were a good number of people who were appalled at the action as being on contravention of the rules related to name changes (mainly that they simply rarely, if ever, allow them). The action that was taken circumvented game mechanics.

If Kenny wanted a new alliance name, all they had to do was pay the billion, form the alliance and have their corps join it...just like everyone else.

The number of Goon postings on the subject really has no bearing on the matter at hand other than perhaps being annoying.

---

Originally by: Tom Gunn

---

The winner in all of this is the prevalance of Truth and Justice.

---

Originally by: Elo Behram

---

Edited by: Elo Behram on 26/03/2009 11:53:09
if you think this change was reversed because it piѕѕed off GOOOOONS you're wrong

it was reversed because not only did it piѕѕ off GOOOOOONS and allies, it piѕѕed off every pubbie who has ever wanted to change the name of their character, corp, or alliance, and been told it is either impossible or ridiculously costly

people with no opinion or knowledge of anything in 0.0 were posting and petitioning about this, not just GOOOOONS

---

Originally by: Jade Constantine

---

So we have COW = alliance disbanded and BOB = alliance disbanded.

(these things are the same.)

In COW's case an enemy took the opportunity to register the name Cult of War to prevent the COW founders from re-establishing their alliance name.

In BOB's case an enemy took the opportunity to register the name Band of Brothers to prevent the BOB founders from re-establishing their alliance name.

(these things are also the same).

In COW's case the founders decided to petition CCP to get their name back.

In BOB's case the founders decided to petition CCP to get their name back.

(these things are still the same.)

But then we get a critical difference:

In COW's case the GM's decided to rename the offending blocking alt corp and allow COW to reform with their chosen alliance name restoring equilibrium and resolving the matter.

In BOB's case the GM's decided to wait 2months and then change a completely different alliance into Band of Brothers Reloaded while allowing the offending blocking alt corp to remain as a "trophy" inside of the Goonswarm alliance directly triggering the scandal and froth of the last few days.

This is the critical difference.

Why was this different? Thats the question that needs to be answered. Why was the offending corp in COW's case renamed and yet the Goonswarm alt corp was not? This is not equal and transparent decision-making it looks like bias and improper resolution.

---

Originally by: Shinma Apollo

---

Sorry, I missed out on the internet lawyering debate, but Avon, your analogies seem like a falacy of composition. CCP had a longstanding precedent on this matter (assuming you were going by english common law) and it would be presumptuous to assume that they'd break it, simple stare decisis is what people were harping about.(A matter adjudicated by the courts should not be re-opened for non-latin types)

Granted, your situation is not an amicable one, but it is one that fit well enough into past precedent that you can't reasonably expect a different resolution. I'm not sure why you're so against playing by the rules and just creating a new alliance though, it's been a bit since I've cared about the sov maps but there's no real lynch pin, and you probably wouldn't lose sov ticking in 49-.

---

Originally by: Hubris

---

Originally by: Sinsalura

---

You're a ****ing joke CCP

---

you so don't get bat phone privileges anymore.

---

Originally by: YuuLike FryLice

---

You mean the history of clandestine support for BoB, for which retractions and apologies happened only after massive ****-storms of negative public sentiment? Goonswarm throws tantrums because tantrums are the only thing that effectively alerts the general Eve community to CCP's malarkey.

---