| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
cosmoray
Bella Vista Holdings Corp
   |
Posted - 2010.03.03 20:42:00 -
[61]
I personally think some automation would be great.
Auditing is not very difficult, its just time consuming and boring.
Both of these things are the reason people give up.
If tools could be made to make life much easier then that would be a big benefit.
|
Varo Jan
Caravanserai Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 20:58:00 -
[62]
 Originally by: Riethe
I am not sure how that is relevant to having a tool that takes current existing methods that are spread across multiple tools that forces you to load an API into one, grab what you need, load the API into another, grab what you need, etc.
Applications that focus on one area tend to be better than applications that try to do everything. Eve developers lose interest or move on for their own reasons. I have no intention of relying on one mega app. +Claro?
There are easier, more beneficial things to do.
Quote:
Not to mention the fact that because of the unnecessary complication of having to use multiple tools, there's a high margin of error.
Untrue. Where¦s the connection between EVEWalletAware, EveMon, EveSearch, in-game contract and employment history?
The largest potential margin of error lies in asset valuation, which is why I¦ve sometimes given two values.
Quote:
I believe auditors are actively making mistakes in their audits which will look very bad on their behalf (and emphasize exactly why I think there needs to be a more straight-forward way of doing it.) But this isn't an aspect I can fully detail at the moment.
Human error is always a possibility. Inexperience and API limitations are more likely to be the cause than the lack of a mega application.
|
skurv
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 22:24:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Varo Jan
Human error is always a possibility. Inexperience and API limitations are more likely to be the cause than the lack of a mega application.
as a non-auditor... API limitations, including cooldown periods seem to be the biggest issue with gathering raw data when using multiple programs. IE i believe someone said that they used 2 separate programs that required a 24 hr cooldown period and thus the minimum time for an audit would be 2 days. Until that time i thought the cooldown period for API pulls was a uniform 1 hours but now i'm not sure. However if the functions of both of those 2 programs were condensed into 1, that just saved (potentially) 1 day of wait time for a potential business owner.
Varo, You repeatedly say that someone should approach an auditor a month in advance of presenting an offering, however the truth of that scenario is that for the smaller offerings especially, TIME is exactly what most of us are trying to save by doing an offering. I, for example, launched my offering because it would have taken me several weeks to grow my businesses to the same point i got to by doing the offering.. and I profited hundreds of millions more in those weeks by doing the expansion all at once rather than by small bits and pieces.
So in your scenario, i would have contacted an auditor, waited a month, and then would have been able to launch my offering with minimal wait time due to the audit... there the logic falls through... i wouldn't need the offering if i waited a month to allow the auditor to start gathering data as i would have already slowly grown beyond the value that i was asking for. For larger offerings, your method makes a whole lot of sense. where people are asking for many billions they typically have a long history of that type (or similar) project under their belts.. and thus waiting a month wouldn't have nullified the effect of the offering.
Anyways, i'm not trying to fight about it. but varo's method for reducing wait times on audits just doesn't work for the small offerings that have been presented as of late.... larger ones yes, but smaller ones it's just not a viable solution imo.
--Skurv
|
Hel O'Ween
Men On A Mission
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 22:53:00 -
[64]
Originally by: skurv
as a non-auditor... API limitations, including cooldown periods seem to be the biggest issue with gathering raw data when using multiple programs. IE i believe someone said that they used 2 separate programs that required a 24 hr cooldown period and thus the minimum time for an audit would be 2 days. Until that time i thought the cooldown period for API pulls was a uniform 1 hours but now i'm not sure. However if the functions of both of those 2 programs were condensed into 1, that just saved (potentially) 1 day of wait time for a potential business owner.
let me try to clearify these technical aspects.
Different API calls have different "cooldown periods" (better known as API caching times). Assets, for example have a 24h caching time, before you can grab asset data again for the same char from the same IP address.
But there's a way around that limitation, if you want to grab the same data with more than one application. I seem to remember at least two dedicated EVE API proxies (both announced over in the Tech Lab forum). And EWA and other tools support grabbing API data via proxy.
What's really missing from this discussion from a developer's point of view (with no financial RL background, let alone auditing, in my case), is a clearly written application specification (more than just a few general bullet points). I would never dare to even think about creating an EVE audit tool without that and the advice of a "financial guy".
Add to that the fact that the targeted audience (auditors) isn't the biggest one and that such an application isn't trivial to code, it's no surprise to me that there isn't already one available.
--
EVEWalletAware - an offline wallet manager |
ITSAssassin
Royal Manufacturing and Blueprint Enterprises
Bar-None Nation
|
Posted - 2010.03.04 00:19:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Riethe
It's not storing specific data about what ship you trade the most, it's just breaking down total numbers over periods of time. No exposure of trade secrets.
 SCAM
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS
IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2010.03.04 00:41:00 -
[66]
so I bought some trit at market price and sold it at a few 100k to an alt.
I'm profitable!
okay that should be pretty easy to get around with some price tolerances, but I'm not 100% confident in eve-central prices.
|
Varo Jan
Caravanserai Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.03.04 01:38:00 -
[67]
Originally by: skurv
Varo, You repeatedly say that someone should approach an auditor a month in advance of presenting an offering, however the truth of that scenario is that for the smaller offerings especially, TIME is exactly what most of us are trying to save by doing an offering. I, for example, launched my offering because it would have taken me several weeks to grow my businesses to the same point i got to by doing the offering.. and I profited hundreds of millions more in those weeks by doing the expansion all at once rather than by small bits and pieces.
Everyone to their own. I¦d suggest you¦re not saving much time. I hit a billion in a month, not that I was trying to break any records. Doing it myself with no help gave me satisfaction - and taught me more.
Quote:
So in your scenario, i would have contacted an auditor, waited a month, and then would have been able to launch my offering with minimal wait time due to the audit
Yes, and you¦d have been able to borrow more.
Quote:
Anyways, i'm not trying to fight about it. but varo's method for reducing wait times on audits just doesn't work for the small offerings that have been presented as of late.... larger ones yes, but smaller ones it's just not a viable solution imo.
No fight from me either. One month would be ideal, but I understand some would not be prepared to wait that long. But one day is the other extreme, and that¦s basically what people want. One week for very small offerings/loans is realistic. It allows a better sample of trading data than just one pull hastily converted into an audit with qualifications.
|
SetrakDark
DarkCorp Holdings
|
Posted - 2010.03.04 01:40:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Varo Jan
One week for very small offerings/loans is realistic. It allows a better sample of trading data than just one pull hastily converted into an audit with qualifications
Agreed. A couple of newbie trader scams and this will become the standard pretty fast.
|
skurv
|
Posted - 2010.03.04 11:48:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Varo Jan
One week for very small offerings/loans is realistic. It allows a better sample of trading data than just one pull hastily converted into an audit with qualifications.
I would agree that a week would be not too extreme of a wait time for smaller offerings (like, less than 1b). My point was only that you were very specific with the 1 month thing over and over.. and that in some cases it just wasn't viable.
See, MD can be civil! =P
--Skurv
|
EyeCeeYou
|
Posted - 2010.03.04 17:19:00 -
[70]
This has been discussed before.
CCP should implement a menu of autogenerated corporate reporting tools, with an option to automagically publish them to the forums in a non-editable fashion for OOG browsing.
They should additionally add an option to permit the granting to Shareholders of the right to create such reports on the fly as well (with options to control what info shareholders can obtain).
This would go far towards adding transparency and would permit vastly superior analysis of investments compared to today. In addition, it would assist in creating a secondary market for the valuing and trading of corporate shares.
|
Riethe
|
Posted - 2010.03.04 17:51:00 -
[71]
Originally by: EyeCeeYou
This has been discussed before.
CCP should implement a menu of autogenerated corporate reporting tools, with an option to automagically publish them to the forums in a non-editable fashion for OOG browsing.
They should additionally add an option to permit the granting to Shareholders of the right to create such reports on the fly as well (with options to control what info shareholders can obtain).
This would go far towards adding transparency and would permit vastly superior analysis of investments compared to today. In addition, it would assist in creating a secondary market for the valuing and trading of corporate shares.
Oh?
Should CCP also tell you what ships are on the other side of a low sec gate? And where the officer spawns are? And....
The only thing CCP should do is better cover contracts and some other aspects that the API does not properly handle.
|
EyeCeeYou
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 05:28:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Riethe
Oh?
Should CCP also tell you what ships are on the other side of a low sec gate? And where the officer spawns are? And....
The only thing CCP should do is better cover contracts and some other aspects that the API does not properly handle.
lolwut?
Permitting transparency, at the targets option, has nothing to do with being able to get free intel on what ships are on the other side of a gate, or where one might find a valuable target.
Empowering users to be more transparent is not "free intel". It requires both sides to agree to the disclosure.
Besides, aren't you some kind of professional rip off guy or something?
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |