Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 15 post(s) |
Mme Pinkerton
United Engineering Services
|
Posted - 2010.04.23 11:08:00 -
[61]
Please make spacebook functionality opt-in, not opt-out.
|
chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.04.23 11:17:00 -
[62]
Edited by: chatgris on 23/04/2010 11:25:50 Default privacy settings should be NO PILOTS! From the sounds of it, alliance/corp set NAPS will show up as excellent standing (and since you merged contacts and standings, everyone there will be a mutual contact if their alliance blued you back!?)
Therefore, all it takes is one person in your corp to slip up and leave the default settings as they are, then your NAP partners can pretty much see all your corp standings via the mutual stuff?
Even if I'm wrong, unless you've *really* thought this through: Eve standings are a mechanism for target identification: Trying to bastardize that into some spacebook thing (we can already use facebook if we want to) is just going to lead to headaches.
The rallying cry: OPT-IN NOT OPT-OUT! BEFORE THIS GOES ON SISI ON THE 27th!
One final note: Yes, you've got some forum minority (since IIRC most people don't check the forums) whining on the forums about this: But the fact that we're already on the forums shows that we're already some of the MOST SOCIAL people in eve! We're not angry sociopathic hermits trying to nuke your nice "lets find friends" spacebook page - We're social players seeing you take a mechanism for war (who do I shoot, and who do I not, and many times your "not shoot" are *not* friends) and turning that into a social networking site.
|
|
CCP Karuck
|
Posted - 2010.04.23 11:52:00 -
[63]
EVE Gate only uses personal standings for privacy and security checks, your corp or alliance contact lists don't affect EVE Gate at all.
Regarding that 5 levels are not enough for personal standings and you need folders back, I can tell you this: Post release we will create labels for contacts, which will allow you to group your contacts any way you like. It will basically be the same system you see in mail already. We do not have a time frame for this feature yet, but summer-ish is a safe bet.
|
|
Sowaatua Nega
Anuran Origin Holding Anuran Origin
|
Posted - 2010.04.23 11:57:00 -
[64]
One thing, though... Does that mean that NAP members will have same colour as alliance members? Not my prefered option, I must say. I do not hold people I have influence on/know of the same standing as people I don't.
But suppose that depends on what you understand by NAP. NAP as the word says, or rather "Coalition"?
Mostly curious, slightly anxious.
|
Maya Lingno
|
Posted - 2010.04.23 12:01:00 -
[65]
Edited by: Maya Lingno on 23/04/2010 12:01:24 Hi CCp and dev`s and who else ever...
I`m not interested in such "social Networking give all informations away things" I`m not planig to log in in EvE gate or so And i dont want any Informations about or from me (in and outgame) there
So, will there be an way to avoid any infos getting there?
|
Catari Taga
Centre Of Attention Rough Necks
|
Posted - 2010.04.23 12:28:00 -
[66]
Originally by: CCP Karuck Post release we will create labels for contacts, which will allow you to group your contacts any way you like. ... We do not have a time frame for this feature yet, but summer-ish is a safe bet.
I'm speechless. I think all kinds of bad things (the worst things really) about your collective (in)ability to code and design interfaces but even I did not believe you would dare to release it without an ability to group contacts.
You really must have a SCRUM team tasked exclusively to create major annoyances and bugs, find the last working features and break them, too. Seems to be the only one of your teams actually doing its work like it should.
Please ban me, saves me finding the cancel subscription button...
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2010.04.23 12:32:00 -
[67]
Originally by: oil make it so that no info shows up on my chars except in cases where i ecplicitely tell the site to do it.
THIS |
Paknac Queltel
Standards and Practices
|
Posted - 2010.04.23 13:00:00 -
[68]
Originally by: CCP Karuck We do not have a time frame for this feature yet, but summer-ish is a safe bet.
Given the relative simplicity of this feature, can we assume the problem is not "we don't know how long this will take" but "we don't know when we'll get around to doing it"? - Paknac Queltel
|
Jarne
Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations Vivisection.
|
Posted - 2010.04.23 13:00:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Mme Pinkerton Please make spacebook functionality opt-in, not opt-out.
Yeah, please do. Everything else is silly.
Also two points about the change:
1.) You are changing alliance "standings" to a number between -10 and 10, so it get's inline with corporate standings. You are changing personal standing to the discrete system... WTF? Ever heard about consistency? Why not just make personal standings the same. If you know of some basic software design idioms (but maybe you don't?) this will make better code... (code reuse)
2.) So outpost calculations (docking, fees etc.) are based on the HIGHEST of the three possible standings from outpost (corp or alliance, depending on the outpost settings) to the person willing to dock/use services etc. What if I as an outpost holder like an alliance but don't like a particular corporation or person in that alliance? I see standings towards a corp as a specialization of the standing towards that corps alliance. So if corp standing is set, it should override alliance standing, not take the highest of the two. At last, I can allow one corporation of an alliance to dock while the rest isn't allowed to, but I can't deny one corporation the docking rights if I granted them to the alliance. Time to finally change that. - Success=Achievements/Expectations
|
Dragon Greg
|
Posted - 2010.04.23 13:31:00 -
[70]
Originally by: CCP Karuck EVE Gate only uses personal standings for privacy and security checks, your corp or alliance contact lists don't affect EVE Gate at all.
Regarding that 5 levels are not enough for personal standings and you need folders back, I can tell you this: Post release we will create labels for contacts, which will allow you to group your contacts any way you like. It will basically be the same system you see in mail already. We do not have a time frame for this feature yet, but summer-ish is a safe bet.
What is so hard to understand here. Privacy > all. It's a principle point of origin for any considerations. It's given even more weight because of the nature of EVE and the gameplay it furthers in excess.
Let me put it this way. What would be the exact problem with having Opt-out as the default state. Obviously aside of how such a principle does not go well with marketing concepts. We're talking functionality here. What is in the way of doing it the right way.
On the second point, please avoid references to iterations and such |
|
chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.04.23 13:38:00 -
[71]
Edited by: chatgris on 23/04/2010 13:45:30
Originally by: CCP Karuck EVE Gate only uses personal standings for privacy and security checks, your corp or alliance contact lists don't affect EVE Gate at all.
I am very glad to hear that. However, the idea of merging target identification and friends is still very flawed, for example:
I have friends who were in the Gallente militia with me, who later joined pirate alliances. These people are set red to me for target identification (in fleets we'll often shoot at each other, and blues are off the combat overview), but we still share chat channels and in fact we will often informally help each other out in space away from our respective groups.
These people I would love to add to eve gate in a social networking fashion, but not expose my in game target selection to. These are the people I talk to.
Similarly, the differentiation between dark blue and light blue is used for many many things: Space controlling entities may have light blue for people who are allowed to pass through a system, and dark blue for ratting/mining privileges. These people are NOT friends, you don't want them gathering intel on you with these standings being used in spacebook. Maybe you've got a gentleman's agreement with a militia war target and you've set their neutral logistics blue. There are endless uses for these settings.
TL;DR what is the effect of merging target identification and social networking? You are forcing people to choose between IN GAME functionality (playing the game), and social networking. Guess what most people will choose? Target identification. The mantra will be "NO PILOTS NO PILOTS NO PILOTS".
In summary, merging in game targets and friends means - Choosing between social networking and playing the game -- To use both, you are taking away the ability to use dark blue in game for many things - Lots of intel leaked by people who don't understand all this. "NO PILOTS" will be the advice everyone gives people in newbie chat
I know there's not time/no resources to change this, and there's probably tons of scenarios people haven't thought of - the safe option is NO PILOTS as default, and let us slowly understand and enable what we can safely enable without impacting our gameplay, instead of just forcing this on us - A race to the disable button after launch.
Now that's I've shown what's wrong: The Solution?
EVE GATE STANDINGS ARE INDEPENDENT OF IN GAME STANDINGS. Some of our best friends are often the people we shoot.
I leave you with this:
Just because we shoot someone does not mean they are not a good friend. Just because we have an agreement NOT to shoot someone does not mean they are even someone we remotely like.
|
Pwnzorator
|
Posted - 2010.04.23 14:03:00 -
[72]
Originally by: CCP Karuck
Originally by: Latex Sandals
You are forcing people to log onto this thing so that they can protect their privacy and that is illegal in many places and certainly illogical in any place.
By default I think our privacy settings are pretty safe
Bear in mind that some of us (me included) will have the entire database sc****d within an hour of the patch going live. You sure about those defaults?
|
Zendoren
Aktaeon Industries United Star Federation
|
Posted - 2010.04.23 14:34:00 -
[73]
Quote: As your current alliance standings are set on a discrete level they map differently: NAP will become a solid ten and ENEMY a solid negative ten. COMPETITOR and FRIEND are then the negative five and positive five respectively.
Any other Alliance or Ex-Alliance leader find something wrong with this statement????
CCP: I demand perfection, know your game better ROFL
|
Moresco
I.D.I.O.T. Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2010.04.23 14:48:00 -
[74]
The basic idea of Eve Gate is quite fine. Publicising any kind of profile information by default is NOT as already mentioned.
The possibility to spy and datamine Accounts not using Eve Gate (reason-independently) is just the tip of the iceberg only.
Setting "No Pilots" by default to all settings should be obligatory in the interests of all pod pilots, especially to the ones not using or knowing Eve Gate.
Just my 2 cents...
|
|
CCP Prism X
Gallente C C P C C P Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.04.23 15:09:00 -
[75]
Obviously a FRIEND relationship is above a NAP. I believe most of us have an implicit non-aggression agreement with people we consider friends.
Thank you for quickly spotting that and calling it out: Mea culpa. ~ Prism X EvE Database Developer Relocating your character to a cozy, secure container since 2006. Relocating your cozy, secure container to the EVE cemetery since 2008. |
|
AdmiralJohn
The Unknown Bar and Pub Elysium Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.04.24 00:20:00 -
[76]
You know, it would be nice to get a response to this that has more meat to it than "Yeah we know your concerns, but it won't happen", because I don't buy that BS for a second.
|
Ping Bong
|
Posted - 2010.04.24 04:20:00 -
[77]
i still dont get what eve gate is about but from the pics it looks like eve-facebook thing which is liek lol.
|
ULTImatio
|
Posted - 2010.04.24 06:45:00 -
[78]
Edited by: ULTImatio on 24/04/2010 06:46:43 I need my contact folders back NOW. What is wrong with you at CCP man? You think I know which pilot is which pilots ALT from my head. You think I know the difference between old enemies or friends you totally nuts. |
iP0D
|
Posted - 2010.04.24 08:16:00 -
[79]
Edited by: iP0D on 24/04/2010 08:16:36
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2010.04.24 08:35:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Bellum Eternus There is only one change that matters with respect to the entirety of Eve Gate:
IF YOU SELECT WAR TARGETS (STATE) ON YOUR OVERVIEW AND REMOVE ALL OTHERS (STATES), WILL ONLY WAR TARGETS SHOW UP?
If this doesn't work, your entire effort is a waste of time. Yes, call caps is necessary.
I'm betting you didn't fix it. Am I right?
CCP Karuk-
The above- YES or NO?
YES or NO? Still awaiting a dev reply please. Or do you only like answering the easy questions, and questions you have a 'yes' answer for?
This one detail is extremely important to empire war participants everywhere. -
Originally by: Bellum Eternus That is the beauty of Eve, it's a crucible in which great minds are formed and the rest are ground to dust.
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. |
|
Kanatta Jing
|
Posted - 2010.04.25 02:43:00 -
[81]
Originally by: iP0D The social networking part of the site is for the most part a waste of time until you provide integration with external long existing and established third party social networks which predate even the potential or selective need for such a phenomenon in EVE with quite a few years.
Why do I need to allow EVE spies to gain access to my REAL name?
This is EVE, a virtual world where we foster real grudges and genuine hate.
No one is going to opt in they have to allow people their enemies and victims to stalk them genuinely to do it.
|
iP0D
|
Posted - 2010.04.25 09:26:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Kanatta Jing
Originally by: iP0D The social networking part of the site is for the most part a waste of time until you provide integration with external long existing and established third party social networks which predate even the potential or selective need for such a phenomenon in EVE with quite a few years.
Why do I need to allow EVE spies to gain access to my REAL name?
This is EVE, a virtual world where we foster real grudges and genuine hate.
No one is going to opt in they have to allow people their enemies and victims to stalk them genuinely to do it.
I know. But that wasn't the primary point. I should perhaps train Advanced Irony a level higher. Btw, you say "no one is going to opt in", you don't have a choice. It is enabled by default.
Here's the thing. EVEgate is a case of reinventing the wheel, in a timeframe where players have already shown their absolute focus and drive to excess. It's social networking designed to function as both social networking and social engineering. The challenge of "privacy vs. virtual privacy" is largely irrelevant, since regardless of, it is a concept applied to clients, as such the default state should be off, until the client decides he or she wants to engage in it. Opt out enabled by default, so to speak.
The reference to integration with external social networking frameworks wasn't aimed so much as linking the character to the human being behind it, but to function as an analogy. I probably missed the target there, considering your response. Btw, yeah, that would be horrible to see happen, but it will happen since it is part of player driven focus to tie the ends together in metagaming. It is a logical conclusion that we will datamine evegate and add on top any further networking finds. To think otherwise, is considering EVE's history pretty naive.
Thing is, EVEgate is only interesting in the current format to serve as a communications framework parallel to existing frameworks. It's only interesting if it is passively adopted, since to leave out choice is to take quite a big risk in adoption of marketing inspired concepts. Some people call that "enforced", but that's a bit over the top imo. Either way, if it were opt out by default, it would have an insanely long adoption curve, even among new subscribers, and would end up being a niche product. Nothing wrong with that, EVE is a collection of such products, embedded in a larger framework of interaction. It's a matter of having a little faith in the product.
Expanding on EVEgate means iterations. Something for which there just is no real basis of such faith anymore. It's unfortunate, but it is not an uncommon phenomenon.
Regardless of this, EVEgate really should have had at least a secondary focus of being useful. Tangible direct use, beyond the presentation of concepts which may or may not be adopted by players. Right now, EVEgate does not compete on this level with any of the solutions to communication / automation / administration that players themselves have put together over time. So what's left of EVEgate when you take such feature sets out of both the equasion and the potential? Nothing more then a Facebook for metagaming.
|
Keen Linden
Special Service
|
Posted - 2010.04.25 13:17:00 -
[83]
Edited by: Keen Linden on 25/04/2010 13:19:05 This whole concept is disingenuous and the fact you MUST be a member and MUST take action to protect your information is complete BS. What kind of bright ideas do you have about selling us junk and posting advertisements on this crap? Because that is what this whole system is really about, right? I mean, why go to all the trouble of making something that has nothing to do with your game, if your not planning on soaking us for some more cash.
And like others have said, where is all this follow-up development you keep promising? Remember when wormholes were the big news. What did you do to follow up on development of WH space or fix their bugs? How is T3 ship development coming along? You haven't fixed stupid UI problems in existing systems that go back to Red Moon, but now you're going to start a web social site?
Is that going to let you post some marketing BS about how cutting edge you are?
Take a good hard look at yourselves. You are not as clever as you think you are.
|
Evan Batarr
|
Posted - 2010.04.26 09:38:00 -
[84]
Originally by: CCP Gecko All three drop downs have the "No Pilots" option. Note, as states above, all information that is already available in the "Show Info" window will be available to all players using EVE Gate as it is available in game.
You are aware that this "feature" makes it easy to crawl all these data - which isn't possible with the same IG-data? Making it pretty easy to find out all the members of a company by name.
I still want an opt-out for those who don't want to jump this idiotic social media bandwagon.
|
|
CCP Karuck
|
Posted - 2010.04.26 13:51:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Bellum Eternus There is only one change that matters with respect to the entirety of Eve Gate:
IF YOU SELECT WAR TARGETS (STATE) ON YOUR OVERVIEW AND REMOVE ALL OTHERS (STATES), WILL ONLY WAR TARGETS SHOW UP?
If this doesn't work, your entire effort is a waste of time. Yes, call caps is necessary.
I'm betting you didn't fix it. Am I right?
CCP Karuk-
The above- YES or NO?
YES or NO? Still awaiting a dev reply please. Or do you only like answering the easy questions, and questions you have a 'yes' answer for?
This one detail is extremely important to empire war participants everywhere.
I haven't replied simply because I do not know the answer to your question. I have forwarded it to another dev which should reply to you shortly.
|
|
Seth Ruin
Minmatar Ominous Corp Primary.
|
Posted - 2010.04.26 15:28:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Evan Batarr Edited by: Evan Batarr on 26/04/2010 09:58:44 Edited by: Evan Batarr on 26/04/2010 09:47:37
Originally by: CCP Gecko All three drop downs have the "No Pilots" option. Note, as states above, all information that is already available in the "Show Info" window will be available to all players using EVE Gate as it is available in game.
You are aware that this "feature" makes it easy to crawl all these data - which isn't possible with the same IG-data? Making it pretty easy to find out all the members of a company by name.
Okay, and?
I'm failing to see why this is a security risk.
|
Marchocias
Silent Ninja's
|
Posted - 2010.04.26 17:50:00 -
[87]
Originally by: Seth Ruin ...I'm failing to see why this is a security risk.
Because, making a bot to mine data from Eve Gate is a thousand times easier than a bot to mine data straight from Eve... plus it wouldn't be breaking the EULA (or at least, it wouldn't be so obviously breaking it).
---- I belong to Silent Ninja (Hopefully that should cover it). |
Seth Ruin
Minmatar Ominous Corp Primary.
|
Posted - 2010.04.26 19:15:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Marchocias
Originally by: Seth Ruin ...I'm failing to see why this is a security risk.
Because, making a bot to mine data from Eve Gate is a thousand times easier than a bot to mine data straight from Eve... plus it wouldn't be breaking the EULA (or at least, it wouldn't be so obviously breaking it).
Right, I understand it would make it easier and all, but... So? What advantage do I have by having a list of characters in a corporation? Considering you can already set standings to an entire corporation (thus you are alerted in local and by overview) and you can already see a member count in the corporation information.
|
AdmiralJohn
The Unknown Bar and Pub Elysium Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.04.26 19:56:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Seth Ruin
Originally by: Marchocias
Originally by: Seth Ruin ...I'm failing to see why this is a security risk.
Because, making a bot to mine data from Eve Gate is a thousand times easier than a bot to mine data straight from Eve... plus it wouldn't be breaking the EULA (or at least, it wouldn't be so obviously breaking it).
Right, I understand it would make it easier and all, but... So? What advantage do I have by having a list of characters in a corporation? Considering you can already set standings to an entire corporation (thus you are alerted in local and by overview) and you can already see a member count in the corporation information.
Because knowing their name lets you run locators on every single one of them, and knowing when every single one of them is online, at what times.
|
gargars
|
Posted - 2010.04.26 20:25:00 -
[90]
Originally by: Latex Sandals EvE-Gate needs to be Opt-IN. Not Opt-out.
You are forcing people to log onto this thing so that they can protect their privacy and that is illegal in many places and certainly illogical in any place.
I agree with this. I find the idea of my information showing unless I take the time (or even know of a need to) go block it is pretty outrageous. It doesn't matter if some CCP person (or anyone else) thinks this is an over-reaction... it's my info and my decision... not something I should have to fix because CCP just decides it's ok to do.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |