EVE Search - [evenews24.com] iskbank.com exposed

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

[evenews24.com] iskbank.com exposed

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 4 post(s)
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.09 13:27:00 - [1] Originally by: Patient 2428190 At least we get to the beta test the Twilight MMO No we don't. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.09 13:39:00 - [2] Edited by: Tippia on 09/03/2011 13:39:52 Originally by: Patient 2428190 Oh wait, its a graphics engine that is completely unrelated to anything EVE has been for the past decade. You're missing the point. We're not beta-testing a Twilight MMO. We're beta-testing WoD. WoD is to Twilight what EVE is in relation to the Star Wars Chrismas Special. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.09 13:57:00 - [3] Edited by: Tippia on 09/03/2011 13:58:00 Originally by: Patient 2428190 WoD = A terrible, cliche , unoriginal Pen and Paper game created for teenage nerds about vampires and werewolves. Not quite. àmaybe you just had a bad ST. Quote: Innovation and vampires go together as well as fire and paper. Surprising how well the two were combined in WoD then. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.09 14:52:00 - [4] Edited by: Tippia on 09/03/2011 14:52:04 Originally by: Whitehound What is more ~~worrying~~ encouraging, and likely more interesting for CCP, is the scale all this anti-RMT movement is taking on. Fix'd. Cheaters need to die. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.09 15:00:00 - [5] Originally by: Zhim'Fufu Nerd rage best rage imho. I suppose that is a good explanation for why he's so negative about it. Bad GMs/STs/DMs/whatevers can bring out that rage like few other things. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.09 15:20:00 - [6] Originally by: Zhim'Fufu I thought I had died and gone to rpg heaven when the first gold box dnd games came out for the c64. Oh the glorious adventures my trusty party of six daring adventurers had plus you could let your friends play by passing the controller. No more dice rolls and charts and overbearing gm's! \o/ waxes nostalgic Pff. Wasteland > all, especially some silly D&D. Originally by: Malcanis Watching the Cockroaches scuttle for cover as the light is suddenly snapped on is going to be absolutely hilarious. àor, as I said in some other thread that tried to create FUD over what would happen without bots: anyone who complains after an Unholy Rage-style campaign needs to be investigated for thought-crime. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.09 15:28:00 - [7] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Corozan Aspinall TBH I don't see why CCP doesn't just make their isk competatively priced. CCP have overheads that the RMTers dont. Taxes for one thing. More to the point, RMTs sell ISK for cash and can adjust the exchange rate; CCP does not, and it's the players who set the exchange rate between PLEXes and ISK. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.09 15:38:00 - [8] Originally by: Whitehound Stop fixing my comments, you ~~troll~~ truth-sayer No. Especially since it is encouraging to see people finally getting upset enough about this cheating to start kicking the cheaters in the teeth. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.09 16:02:00 - [9] Originally by: Whitehound What makes this worse is that these players will not get killed for lulz, but because you think they are cheaters, that they deserve it and that it is right and justified! His point is that if they get killed, it's right and justified regardless. Quote: Did you check if your name is not on this list? I think I saw it somewhere on it. I ~~could be~~ am wrong though. Fix'd. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.09 16:08:00 - [10] Originally by: Whitehound Originally by: Tippia Quote: Did you check if your name is not on this list? I think I saw it somewhere on it. I am wrong though. Fix'd. There. Look. If you know something is wrong, why post it? Correcting someone's obvious (and probably deliberate) errors is not the same as trolling. Deliberately posting something that is wrong, on the other handà ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.09 17:12:00 - [11] Edited by: Tippia on 09/03/2011 17:13:28 Originally by: Whitehound But how do you know that these items were actually bought with real money? The same way they tell in all other instances: by following the money trail back to the farmer (or RMT courier, should he be known). Quote: For example: you run an alliance with your own forum. [à] How could you tell the difference? Presumably, you've not done this constantly and consistently for the last two years and you've never figured in any other RMT investigations. Also: woo! Three in a row! ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.09 17:32:00 - [12] Originally by: GM Grimmi A presentation is scheduled at FanFest later this month where these matters will be discussed in some detail. Make sure to schedule a camera crew (and good audio) for that one, because I have a sneaking suspicion that it'll be the presentation that the most non-attendees will be interested inà ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.09 20:34:00 - [13] Originally by: Hermosa Diosas OK OK Firstly you have to stop calling these guys cheaters and scum yada yada. No we don't. Mainly because they are ù unquestionably ù cheating scum. They (both buyers and sellers) are breaking the game rules to get ahead. They cheat. In doing so, they ruin the game for everyone else. They're scum. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.09 21:00:00 - [14] Originally by: Pham Lai Whats the different between buying isk with real money and buying PlEXthensellingPLEXforisk with real money? What's the difference between probing someone out and then shooting him with guns, and using a /travelto command and then a rapid-fire exploit? One is legal. One is not. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.09 21:12:00 - [15] Originally by: Whitehound If they had each player's credit card information, too, then it still would not be proof of a real money transfer, but it can be considered a "grim indicator" and an important link in the evidence chain, because one cannot get such information easily. àof course, none of that matters since they don't need the CC information. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.09 21:21:00 - [16] Edited by: Tippia on 09/03/2011 21:21:14 Originally by: Whitehound Nonsense. If the names on this list match with CCP's own information then it is merely a happy coincidence, a fun fact, but nothing of value to CCP's efforts. They cannot even use this information to pat themselves on their backs, because the list is not one of their own efforts, it cannot be trusted and therefore not used for a verification. I wonder if you can understand this ... àand I wonder if you understand that they don't need the CC information to ban people for RMT. And they most certainly can use that list in their efforts. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.09 21:37:00 - [17] Originally by: Whitehound 8 pages have past you undiscovered. Maybe you should read them, then, instead of banging on about something CCP has no need of in order to ban people for RMT:ingà ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.09 21:42:00 - [18] Originally by: Whitehound why do you think I mention these 8 pages? Any ideas?? Because you're trying to deflect the issue from the fact that no CC information is needed for CCP to ban people for RMT:ing and that they most certainly can use the information in that list to pursue people suspected of it. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.09 21:53:00 - [19] Originally by: Whitehound No, I am not deflecting from it. I wrote several pages earlier that CCP can do whatever they like, because it is their game. So why do you call it nonsense when I tell you exactly that? Why do you get so defensive when others point out that what you apparently say yourself is not nonsense? ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.09 21:58:00 - [20] Originally by: Dorian Tormak You mad because you can't afford it? No, they're mad because RMT:ers are a bunch of cheating scumbags. And they should be banned for it ù far more so than they are right now. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.10 14:02:00 - [21] Originally by: dexington You don't seem to understand that someone broke into computer system and stole the database. Just because the database contain information on people buying isk and it would be in the best interest of the eve community does'nt not mean CCP can sit aside all rules and laws and freely use the data. You are not allowed to break the rules just because it's in your owne best interest. And what you don't seem to understand is that they don't have to break any rules to act on this data. Note the word: "act", not "use". ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.10 17:37:00 - [22] Originally by: General Mujahideen Husseni Your claim is that merely because something is labeled as fictitious by its creator, it cannot be held under copywrite? No. His claim is that since they've sad "that is not our database" they cannot later say "they've copied our database." ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.10 18:10:00 - [23] Edited by: Tippia on 10/03/2011 18:13:30 Originally by: General Mujahideen Husseni Even so, it'd be assumed proprietary material of that website. àwhich they've offered everyone (including CCP) along with a "have fun!" As for the impropriety, that's something the individual "customers" have to go after EN24 about ù IskBank and CCP are not involved in that particular scuffle. Of course, none of this matters because it's no different than someone putting in a petition and saying "I think character X is RMT:ing" and CCP launching an investigation based on that. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.10 18:25:00 - [24] Originally by: General Mujahideen Husseni Uhhh, because in Western constitutional democracies there are protections against unlawful procurement of evidence i.e. wiretapping or hacking (unlawful access). àand since this is not a case of unlawful procurement of evidence, CCP can enforce their policy against engaging in RMT just fine. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.10 19:10:00 - [25] Originally by: Linda Flamewalker Why do people assume CCP will make judgements based solely on this?! Because that assumption opens a tiny window of hope, where proving the list as inadmissible or illegal to use would mean that their alts are safeà ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.10 19:41:00 - [26] Edited by: Tippia on 10/03/2011 19:42:13 Originally by: Barakkus Nice selective reading...Read the section titled: "PROPRIETARY RIGHTS" Allow meà 11. PROPRIETARY RIGHTS B. Rights to Certain Content You have no interest in the value of your time spent playing the Game, for example, by the building up of the experience level of your character and the items your character accumulates during your time playing the Game. Your Account, and all attributes of your Account, including all corporations, actions, groups, titles and characters, and all objects, currency and items acquired, developed or delivered by or to characters as a result of play through your Accounts, are the sole and exclusive property of CCP, including any and all copyrights and intellectual property rights in or to any and all of the same, all of which are hereby expressly reserved. Your account is "yours" in the same way as a car you rent is "your rented car". Originally by: dexington Wow you really know what you are talking about, lol Actually, he does. Btw, this is why you're not allowed to sell or transfer the account you're using: because it's not your account to sell. This is also why you're not allowed to buy or sell ISK ù because it's not yours. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.10 20:13:00 - [27] Originally by: stoicfaux The list can't be proven to be accurate/truthful. It doesn't have to be. The list is just a bunch of names with a "these people are RMT:ing (we think)" note attached. It's no different than me submitting a petition where I say "I think X is RMT:ing". My being able to prove it is entirely irrelevant as far as CCP decision to investigate and then ban X (or not) is concerned. Quote: If CCP acts against the listed people, CCP could be threatened with a class action lawsuit or defamation lawsuit. No they couldn't, as CCP has nothing to do with the publication of said list. Someone might be able to go after EN24, though, but that's another thing. CCP investigating people after receiving tips from their players does not really count as "defamation". Quote: Meaning, if CCP catches them making RMT purchases now, then the listed people can make the claim that CCP targeted them based on a leaked list of dubious validity instead of from the recent RMT purchases, thus scaring off CCP with the thread of expensive court procedures. àexcept that there is no grounds for a procedure. CCP is well within their rights to nuke any account at any time for any reason. They're particularly within their rights if they investigate an account and come up with proof of wrongdoing. Again: CCP will not ban people based on the list. They will ban people based on improper behaviour (viz. RMT) once the GM:s have found enough evidence for it while investigating an account. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.10 21:46:00 - [28] Edited by: Tippia on 10/03/2011 21:46:36 Originally by: Whitehound Originally by: Malcanis Go on, I challenge you to make the same request, along with the waiver which you accidentally forgot to mention on your reply. Do it. After all, you've got nothing to hide, right? Yes. Well, that explains why you were so afraid of eve-board before everyone explained to you (eight times over) that it wouldn't give away anything compromising. Originally by: Malcanis Second, I spend all my pocket money on cognac and deli. Damn this font! At first I though it said "dell", not "deli", and was about to give you an earfulà ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.10 22:03:00 - [29] Originally by: Whitehound I was afraid of EVEBoard giving out my information? Yes. Quote: Where do you just get your infos from? From you. Quote: Pretending to be innocent? [à] You have been caught and your tears are tastier than ever!!1! Ah, there's the non-sequitur champ we all know. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.10 22:17:00 - [30] Originally by: Whitehound No. I raised the question to the community, not because it was a question I had for myself. Riiightà àso that's why you didn't accept the community's answer. Wait what? Quote: It was meant to get you thinking. No it wasn't, since the answer was obvious. Weee! 600. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.13 21:33:00 - [31] Originally by: Whitehound No. To lose it you first need to posses it. No you don't. Quote: No. Speeding tickets are not a punishment but a fine. A fine is a punishment. That's two more words we can add to the list of things you don't know the full meaning of, alongside "passive". OH, and good to see you're still falling back on ad hominems when you can't formulate a cohesive argument. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.13 21:50:00 - [32] Originally by: Whitehound If I may ask, what is your problem? That you are white-knighting cheaters and argue that they don't need to be punished. Quote: you just think I am an RMT and that I am trying to defend my business or something? Why else would you not want to see cheaters punished? ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.14 15:14:00 - [33] Originally by: Whitehound This is all good, but it does not justify why thousands of players should now get banned. Yes it does. ~~Push button, receive bacon~~ Break EULA, receive ban. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.14 16:39:00 - [34] Originally by: Whitehound No, this is not a justification. Why on earth is breaking the rules of the game ù cheating ù not a justification for a ban? ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.14 17:05:00 - [35] Originally by: Whitehound So why do you so desperately need to see thousands of players banned from the when you do not have proof of their guilt? Strawman argument. No-one is saying that. Why is breaking the rules of the game ù cheating ù not a justification for a ban? ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.14 18:20:00 - [36] Originally by: Whitehound You get banned for what you did, not for breaking rules. Quite the opposite. You do not get banned for what you did, you get banned for breaking the rules. As it happens, what you did broke the rules. By breaking the rules, you open yourself to a ban. Quote: For example, you break a rule and you did not know about it. Ignorance is not a defence or an excuse. Quote: You will not like such an answer Why not? What you're asking is one step removed from the question at hand. "Because of rule #42" is all the justification that is ever need it, whether you like it or not. If you want an explanation why X is Y, then you're free to ask, but that is not in any way required to justify a ban. So again: why is breaking the rules of the game ù cheating (you knowà doing something you're not supposed to do) ù not a justification for a ban? Quote: And why does it need an investigation of a list full of player names? For the same reason they need to investigate petitions. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.14 18:48:00 - [37] Edited by: Tippia on 14/03/2011 18:49:56 Originally by: Whitehound You do get banned for what you did. If it says that harassment is not allowed then you get banned, because you harassed someone, not because there is a rule telling you not to. Eh. No. If harassment is not allowed, you get banned for breaking the rule that says harassment isn't allowed. You get banned because the rules say you can get banned for breaking that particular rule. If harassment is allowed, you don't get banned for what you did, because it's allowed. Quote: Wrong. If there was no rule can they still ban you regardless of the existence of such a rule. No. He is 100% right. If there was no rule against harassment, you couldn't be banned for harassment. You can still be banned, and it would still be entirely within the rules (rules you agreed with, btw), but it won't be due to the "no harassment" rule. In fact, can you come up with an example where they have banned people without those people having broken the rules? ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.14 19:18:00 - [38] Originally by: Whitehound I consider it to be a major issue to ban thousands of players because they appear on some list. There is no proof of RMT. What issue would that be, especially considering thatà Quote: CCP can ban you for almost anything and do not first need to put it up as a rule. Just because they can ban you for not liking your face doesn't mean that your rule-breaking isn't the reason they ban you when you break the rules. However, none of that matters. What we're talking about here is people breaking the rules. Since they break the rules, they will get banned for breaking the rules. Because they broke the rules. What they did was rule-breaking, which makes them subject to the rule that breaking the rules get you banned. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.14 21:02:00 - [39] Originally by: Whitehound No. You can get banned, and because of what you did. Incorrect. You can get banned. Period. If that's the view you want to take, then it doesn't matter what you did. If you get banned for breaking the rules, then guess what: you got banned because you broke the rules. What you did was against the rules, and it was the rule-breaking that got you banned. Either way, what "what you did" is more or less of zero relevance as far as justifying your ban. Even so: provide an example of someone getting banned without breaking the rules. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.14 21:17:00 - [40] Originally by: Whitehound For individual cases is this acceptable. It would however be political suicide for CCP to ban thousands of players in this cat and mouse game between them, RMTs, a parasitic press and the players. àand you're back to the same old strawman. These are individual cases. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.14 22:02:00 - [41] Edited by: Tippia on 14/03/2011 22:02:48 Originally by: Whitehound Again, it is what you did that can get you banned. How do you know, when the fact of the matter is that you broke the rules and that it got you banned? Quote: You do not ban people, because they broke some stupid rule of yours Of course you do. Especially if you state that breaking the rules gets people banned. Quote: Maybe you need to see it like this, but it really is an agreement between CCP and you as a person - not as a player - and it is about how you treat other people and as well as their property. Yes, maybe you should look at it that way. And if you break the rules of the agreement, you get bannedà per the agreement. Quote: Thousands of players on one, single list is not an individual case. Of course they are individual cases. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.14 22:28:00 - [42] Originally by: Whitehound Then read what it says under the Terms of Service. Ok: Failure to comply with these regulations can result in the immediate termination of your account and you will forfeit all unused access time to the game. [à] YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU AGREE TO THESE RULES AND WILL ABIDE BY THEM. YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT TERMINATION OF YOUR ACCOUNT BY CCP OR ONE OF ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES MAY RESULT FROM FAILURE TO ABIDE BY THESE RULES. àthey talk an awful lot about breaking the rules for not using rule-breaking as a justification for bans. Quote: it further says that you will be held responsible for what you did. So CCP will not ban you for breaking one of their rules. Wrong. What it actually says is: YOU AGREE THAT YOU WILL BE HELD PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONSEQUENCES (WHICH CAN INCLUDE ACCOUNT TERMINATION) THAT MAY RESULT IF ANY SUCH PERSON BREAKS THE RULES DESCRIBED HEREIN. So no. You are held responsible for breaking the rules. Quote: It is called a collective case. Doesn't keep them from being individual cases. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.14 22:45:00 - [43] Originally by: Whitehound No. Read again. It says "you will be held personally responsible for the consequences" àof breaking the rules. Quote: No. They are all on the same list and all are being accused of the same. Doesn't keep them from being individual cases. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.14 22:55:00 - [44] Edited by: Tippia on 14/03/2011 22:56:29 Originally by: Whitehound You mean you will be held responsible by CCP for getting a ban? No. I don't mean anything. What the ToS means is that if you get banned for breaking the rules, it's your fault. Quote: It is the consequences of what you did! That's not what the ToS says. Quote: No, silly. You have nothing that makes one different from the others. Incorrect. They are easily separated into individual cases. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.14 23:09:00 - [45] Originally by: Whitehound He could have received the ISKs from a friend as a donation, in which case the ISKs will still get removed. "Could have"à maybe. But that's not what had happened in that particular case. àoh, and he was an ISK buyer. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.14 23:15:00 - [46] Edited by: Tippia on 14/03/2011 23:15:39 Originally by: Whitehound It is exactly what it says Prove it. I quoted the passage you were referring to and it said pretty much the opposite of what you claim. Quote: This is not what makes them individual cases. Sure it is. àin fact, come to think of it: what on earth makes them a collective case, seeing as how they're separated into individual buyers? ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.14 23:28:00 - [47] Originally by: Whitehound It however does not prove that the player did pay real money for the ISKs or that he knew who the sender was. That's just it: it did. That was what was so fun about that case. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.14 23:32:00 - [48] Originally by: Whitehound You mean he played innocent and then confessed of having bough the ISKs? No. He played innocent and then stopped when it was proven that he got the ISK from an ISK seller. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.14 23:51:00 - [49] Edited by: Tippia on 14/03/2011 23:51:57 Originally by: Whitehound Oh yes you will be bummed. You only do not know it yet. It does not need you to buy ISKs to receive them from an RMT. Oh no he won't. After all, as you are so fond of pointing out, just receiving ISK from an RMT is not enough, and if you do, you can still simply follow the rules and thus not get hit with anything. You see, the problem is if you don't follow the rulesà Oh, and as for the collective case: they're different counts. Thus not a collective case. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.15 02:30:00 - [50] Edited by: Tippia on 15/03/2011 02:32:54 Originally by: Aeronwen Carys Hey Tippia, are you enjoying this as much as I am? Shh! Also: 1k:th reply (if not 1k:th post)! \o/ ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.15 11:00:00 - [51] Originally by: Whitehound No. I never said that receiving ISKs from someone who is running bots is not enough to remove the ISKs again. That's not what I said either. You need to stop with these strawmen because they only prove you have no argument and/or that you have confused yourself to the point where you no longer know what you're talking about. Quote: So he will be bummed when the ISKs get removed. He may not have bought them, but he did receive them nevertheless. No he won't, as long as he's following the rules. Quote: So you do not know what a collective case is. It is all you needed to say. Yes I do, and that's why I can tell you that these are individual cases. So I'll ask you again: why on earth would it be a collective case. Quote: You can get banned for what you did. Again: the "what you did" part is entirely irrelevant. You can get banned for not doing anything as well. What we're discussing here, though, is people being banned for breaking the rules. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.15 17:09:00 - [52] Originally by: Whitehound Stop thinking of your strawmen. You better learn that there are no strawmen. Yes there are. You are one of their prime producers. Quote: I am still saying that you can get banned for what you did. What you did is of little to no relevance. You can get banned for anything (including nothing). It is particularly of no relevance when people are breaking the rules, because that in and of itself is grounds for a ban. Quote: So for example when you make racial remarks and get banned can you not just say that you broke the rules of the game. You will need to say that you made racial remarks. Not really needed, no. Quote: Yes, he will and because he is full of prejudices and then gets to experience it for himself. àand what you keep misunderstanding is that by following the rules, he won't really experience anything. Quote: I already told you. They are all accused of the same and there is nothing that makes one case different from the others. You mean apart from being different accounts that pay different amounts at different times? In other words: they are not taking part in the same offence. Each individual case has to be investigated on an individual basis because there is no collective or communal entity or grouping that "the the bad thing." Quote: A future situation may change this, but for now it stays a collective case. I am guessing you already found them guilty. Other way around: right now, they are individual cases. After the individual investigations, it may turn out to be the case that a whole bunch of those are the same guy doing repeat offences, or that they somehow put in a group order and divvied up the cash (but good luck on proving that one). Only then can anything remotely resembling a collective case be constructed. Quote: Wrong again. What you did or did not do is entirely relevant, even when you only think for yourself of what you did as breaking a rule Seeing as how you can get banned for nothing, it most certainly is relevant because if you break the rules, they can justify the ban by saying that "hey, you broke the rules". ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.15 18:24:00 - [53] Originally by: Whitehound @Tippia: I am done telling you. You do not want to listen. I get it. I can't listen if you tell me nothing. If you want to say that you're done before you've started, that's your problem. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.15 18:45:00 - [54] Originally by: Whitehound You are joking, right? Are you telling me now that you do not think they are guilty? I thought you were one of the lynch mob people. That's just one more of your legion of strawmen ù something you've invented for yourself so you can yell at people. And if you ever want to actually say something, I'll listen. You refuse (because you have nothing to say, because you know you have no argument and because you have been proven wrong on every single thing you've claimed), so there is nothing to listen to. It's up to you to change this. Until you do, you only have yourself to blame for the tears you're now shedding. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.15 19:46:00 - [55] Originally by: Whitehound @Tippia: I am done telling you and I will also not listen to you any further. I do not care for you any more. Get yourself a parrot and talk to it instead. And when you do make a video of it. You say this a lot. It's never been true so farà If you actually backed up your claims with arguments, rather than abuse, and if you provided examples and proof, rather than innuendo and strawmen, maybe people would listen to you. You should try it ù it works wonders. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.15 20:13:00 - [56] Originally by: Whitehound Would you listen if I told you that telling is not the same as saying? I would listen if you provided an argument rather than a claim. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.03.15 20:22:00 - [57] Originally by: Whitehound So you would not listen if I told you saying and telling is not the same. I would listen if you provided an argument rather than a claim. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki

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.