|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kalrand
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.01.28 09:29:00 -
[1]
Unfortunately, even ISIN's are cryptic but necessary because of the sheet number of bonds issued every day.
Here in EvE online, we have one big bond a month, and a few small ones at most every week.
Something that anyone with a spreadsheet can keep track up. I like the thought behind the idea, but it seems like its tacking on something just for the sake of tacking it on. A solution in search of a problem.
|
Kalrand
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.02.01 20:30:00 -
[2]
Why is faction even a component in this?
I wouldn't even know what to pick for anything that I do.
|
Kalrand
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.02.02 11:33:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Imagine you are in VFK-IV (player owned 0.0) and issue a bond. Click on Sovereignty and it'll say:
Deklein/VW7-YN/VFK-IV Dominant Sovereignty Holder: Goonswarm Federation.
You put GS (GF is taken by Gallente Federation) as first two letters or you wait for the next NEISIN release where you can just select "Goonswarm Federation" and the program will do all for you.
Lets say, for example, the CEO of the executor corp of my alliance decides to kick everyone out, and the vast majority of people reform under a new alliance.
Lets call this new alliance SOLODRAKBANSOLODRAKBANSO, and then wait a few months, and decide that everyone needs to leave that alliance and join a third alliance.
Assuming I had issued bonds early on in this process, what would I do in the intervening times.
|
Kalrand
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.02.02 12:22:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Cyaxares II
If you want to keep that field for compatibility I would suggest to use the bond manager's race, not his current location or political allegiance.
If you are at all serious about this, drop the idea of "Sovereignty" or the bond manager's race, and start it with the ticker of the issuing corp.
Yes, I know this takes it away from how the real-world ISIN works, but if you're going to insist on finding a solution to a non-existent problem, at least make it intuitive to use. |
Kalrand
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.02.02 16:13:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Kalrand on 02/02/2011 16:14:02
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Quote:
If you are at all serious about this, drop the idea of "Sovereignty" or the bond manager's race, and start it with the ticker of the issuing corp
It's actually already in there, it's the second field.
In the example above, the issuer was: "Vahrokh Financial Technologies [VAHFT]" and the resulting code is: MRVAHFTFF016.
The question wasn't "why isn't the ticker in there". The question was "why are you including this extraneous information that doesn't matter and makes it more confusing?"
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Quote:
Yes, I know this takes it away from how the real-world ISIN works, but if you're going to insist on finding a solution to a non-existent problem, at least make it intuitive to use.
1) Breaking the standard (an thus breaking how the checksum is calculated due to that) is out of question. It'd become something non standard only few have the "knowledge" to manage.
2) Anyone that can't understand how an ISIN is made should not be considered competent to hold any public money.
This and other posts demonstrate me how - exactly like in RL, people are quick to talk about stuff they did not even try first hand.
Making things overly complex for complexities sake is kind of ridiculous. Pretending that because your two week old "standard" is set in stone is also so.
Look, the idea of a standard CorpTicker+WhatItIs+VersionNumber isn't all that bad of an idea. But it should be slightly more intuitive than it is now.
|
|
|
|