Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 93 post(s) |
|
ISD Suvetar
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
949
|
Posted - 2012.11.13 03:25:00 -
[301] - Quote
Hi Salpun;
In a way you're right and I do agree with the intent of your suggestion.
We feel (in CCL) that it should be clear from the forum rules and the Website terms of service that " your post is subject to anything that CCP games and her representatives consider viable".
In a sense; anyones post is at risk, as CCP could mandate us to purge the forums right now; and they can do so if they wanted to. Ok that's an extreme example, but to break down your suggestion; having that info in the signature is a dangerous thing:
1) it's by far not the most common forum infraction. 2) Stating it verbatim detracts from our ability to use our discretion. 3) If we count that particular interpretation of the rules as Gospel, then we open ourselves up for enforcing one particular interpretation and another one*. 4) There's not enough room in the Signature! My name and role are on the same line so I could fit the recruitment link.
*that comes from hard experience; if we define one action then people will argue about the edge cases - this is why CCL volunteers are hand picked after a strong vetting processing to try and ensure that they know the forums and its mood swings. It's the same reasoning for the fact that all GM posts about definitive actions state that your petition will be handled on a case by case basis. ISD Suvetar,-áCaptain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department We are hiring! |
|
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
443
|
Posted - 2012.11.13 04:37:00 -
[302] - Quote
ANONYMOUS wrote:Posters need to know that their posts are at risk if they quote someone elses . Might be a good sig for ISD personel.
or we can all quote others in a way using the scripting language so its not traceable to see where we got the quotes from...
Meta-gaming for NULL SECCers: Whine on the forums until CCP gets sick of you and hands you everything you ask for just to shut you up. Typical NULL SEC arguement to NERF HI SEC: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csPPqdbcVwM |
|
ISD Suvetar
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
949
|
Posted - 2012.11.13 05:00:00 -
[303] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote: or we can all quote others in a way using the scripting language so its not traceable to see where we got the quotes from...
hey - I don't want to get heavy here, especially in this thread but you got to know that that using the system in a way that was not intended and/or encouraging other users to do so is considered to be a very serious offence here.
You know .. you could work *with* the system instead of trying to *play* the system. If you gave us a chance, you'd be amazed at how lenient we are.
ISD Suvetar,-áCaptain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department We are hiring! |
|
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
443
|
Posted - 2012.11.13 07:12:00 -
[304] - Quote
ISD Suvetar wrote:DarthNefarius wrote: or we can all quote others in a way using the scripting language so its not traceable to see where we got the quotes from...
hey - I don't want to get heavy here, especially in this thread but you got to know that that using the system in a way that was not intended and/or encouraging other users to do so is considered to be a very serious offence here. You know .. you could work *with* the system instead of trying to *play* the system. If you gave us a chance, you'd be amazed at how lenient we are.
lol actually I didn't know about the buttons for quite a while & just learned it by teaching myself the language & would often misquote peeps using the CCP Hilmar wrote: scripts like above I didn't know until a few hours ago in this thread that the quote scripts can be deleted over multiple threads by ISD or CCP except manually Meta-gaming for NULL SECCers: Whine on the forums until CCP gets sick of you and hands you everything you ask for just to shut you up. Typical NULL SEC arguement to NERF HI SEC: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csPPqdbcVwM |
Graic Gabtar
The Lemon Party
496
|
Posted - 2012.11.13 09:04:00 -
[305] - Quote
ISD Suvetar wrote:hey - I don't want to get heavy here, especially in this thread but you got to know that that using the system in a way that was not intended and/or encouraging other users to do so is considered to be a very serious offence here.
You know .. you could work *with* the system instead of trying to *play* the system. If you gave us a chance, you'd be amazed at how lenient we are.
Sorry, just to confirm this.
You are saying - and I quote, that it is a "very serious offence" to edit quote tags on this forum?
If you are confirming that this will need to be specified in the forum rules clearly as that is a fairly obscure "serious offence" and one can only presume it comes with serious consequences.
When I once posted in other parts of this forum I would often just have a series of copy/paste quote blocks edited for whatever reason at the time.
And what constitutes "encouraging other users" anyway by this definition? Doing it? Posting that you do it and why? Blogging about it? This "very serious offence" seems to have a very vague trigger.
Also, what is the definition of someone attempting to "*play*" the system anyway? This should specified clearly as I can see hypothetical situations that this rule could be applied very subjectively on customers in a negative way.
Quote:12. Spamming, bumping and pyramid quoting are prohibited. Spam is defined as the repetitive posting of the same topic or text or nonsensical posts that have no substance and are often designed to annoy other forum users. This includes GÇ£firstGÇ¥ and GÇ£go back to another game" posts. Bumping posts in order to keep them near the top of the list is also prohibited. Petitions or "/signed" posts are a version of bumping and likewise are not permitted. Pyramid quoting is a response to a forum thread that contains the quotes of four or more previous posters, sometimes with additional spaces added unnecessarily. Posts of this nature are not conducive to community spirit and are unwelcome. This is the only reference to quotes I could find in the rules (the emphasis is mine) so I am curious as to which part of the rules this "offense" falls under? Could you confirm that this may be n fact be an undocumented "offense"?
If so how many other forum activities are regarded as a "very serious offence" that forum members would have absolutely no idea they could be committing before they are possibly banned? WARNING: The current poster is erratic, prone to error and generally blissfully unaware due to the taking of many hard drugs over the course of many years - most of them legal. |
|
CCP Eterne
C C P C C P Alliance
341
|
Posted - 2012.11.13 10:03:00 -
[306] - Quote
It seems apparent that Suvetar was not referring to doing sensible cleanup or editing out potentially offensive content from a quote, but rather specifically using the quote function in a manner to deliberately deceive or mislead. CCP Eterne | Community Representative
@CCP_Eterne |
|
Graic Gabtar
The Lemon Party
496
|
Posted - 2012.11.13 11:00:00 -
[307] - Quote
CCP Eterne wrote:It seems apparent that Suvetar was not referring to doing sensible cleanup or editing out potentially offensive content from a quote, but rather specifically using the quote function in a manner to deliberately deceive or mislead. Well with respect it is not that apparent to me as it seems to be something that has no grounding in the forum rules as they are presented and seems to be something open to endless interpretation.
That can not be good for customers using this forum.
I refer firstly to rule 12. There is a prescriptive clause in there with regards to "pyramid quoting". Not two, not three but FOUR pyramid nquotes is the trigger for a breach of this rule.
On the other hand you now say that, I quote you and the other poster - "using the quote function in a manner to deliberately deceive or mislead" is a "very serious offense".
If this is so "serious" how can there simply be no mention of it in the forum rules?
And why have you now expanded this "serious offense" from:
- using the system in a way that was not intended-á - and/or encouraging other users to do so
To now include:
- using the quote function in a manner to deliberately deceive or mislead
This is what I am generally finding to be the problem with Moderation on these forums. Definitions of "rules" seem to be incredibly vague and as demonstrated here include two variants that anyone would have to agree are very, very different.
I also note that it continually seems a curiously difficult task to receive basic answers to straight forward questions in this thread.
Overall, it's quite disturbing that a simple example of quoting posts on this forum reveals serious deficiencies in what could be regarded as a breach of a seemingly undocumented, but "serious offense".
If this is the kind of ambiguity one encounters here in the public gaze, one shudders to think potentially what explanations a customer could receive in the confines of a "petition" with no openess of process.
Hypothetically speaking all this would be of little comfort to people banned for these kind of "very serious" offenses when they are not actually documented-á- and depending on who you speak to, why. WARNING: The current poster is erratic, prone to error and generally blissfully unaware due to the taking of many hard drugs over the course of many years - most of them legal. |
MailDeadDrop
Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities
107
|
Posted - 2012.11.13 16:04:00 -
[308] - Quote
CCP Eterne wrote:It seems apparent that Suvetar was not referring to doing sensible cleanup or editing out potentially offensive content from a quote, but rather specifically using the quote function in a manner to deliberately deceive or mislead. Graic Gabtar wrote:Well with respect it is not that apparent to me as it seems to be something that has no grounding in the forum rules as they are presented and seems to be something open to endless interpretation.
I'll grant you, Graic, a half point in that Suvetar's statement was (on its face) overbroad. If he had to do it again, I suspect his wording would be a bit more precise. But at this point, Graic, you seem to be getting into an "internet lawyer" type of argument. This is a losing play on your part for a couple of reasons:
- CCP owns the playing field and gets to set the rules however it suits them. One of the principle rules is "CCP (and agents) is almost always right." If Suvetar says that misusing ("using ... in a way that was not intended") the forum software is a serious infraction, then it is.
- Eterne then steps in to add precision to Suvetar's statement, and your reply is to say that Suvetar's original statement was not apparent to you. Eterne wasn't saying it was apparent to you, only that it was apparent presumably to the average Eve forum participant. That it wasn't apparent to you says more about you than it says about Suvetar's original statement.
- You also replied that Suvetar's original statement wasn't grounded in the forum rules. I refer you to rule #15:
Forum rules wrote:Impersonating another forum user, moderator, volunteer, administrator or CCP employee is strictly prohibited. Misusing the forum software to cause the quote feature to indicate that another forum participant wrote something other than what they actually wrote is definitely impersonation.
Graic Gabtar wrote:This is what I am generally finding to be the problem with Moderation on these forums. Definitions of "rules" seem to be incredibly vague and as demonstrated here include two variants that anyone would have to agree are very, very different. Overly prescriptive rules would stifle the forums -- there must be some vagueness to allow the moderators to have the freedom to act to maintain the forums. There have been some issues with moderators being heavy-handed, which CCP has acknowledged. I believe they are making a good-faith attempt to adjust the moderation in those cases. This thread is a place where CCP is asking for player participation in that adjustment. You've claimed that a particular moderator's pronouncement is neither apparent nor supportable. CCP mostly disagrees with the former, and I definitely disagree with the latter.
When interpreting the forum rules, I suggest that one keep in mind the overarching purpose of those rules: don't be disruptive. (And no, I'm not claiming you, Graic, are being disruptive here.)
Thank you for your participation.
MDD
|
Harbingour
EVE Corporation 690846961
3
|
Posted - 2012.11.13 18:29:00 -
[309] - Quote
I guess there is an unpublished forum rule that talk about percieved CCP Bias or Favourtism is also verboten. It somehow now is being enforced under the trolling provision for those internet lawyers.
CCP Falcon wrote:Thread cleaned somewhat. Cut the discussion of CCP Bias, the forums are not the place for it. If you have genuine concerns about CCP Favouritism, then you need to contact Internal Affairs. This thread will stay open for now, any more posting of this nature and it gets locked. Have fun.
Meta-gaming for NULL SECCers: Whine on the forums until CCP gets sick of you and hands you everything you ask for just to shut you up. Typical NULL SEC arguement to NERF HI SEC-á-á http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csPPqdbcVwM
|
MailDeadDrop
Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities
110
|
Posted - 2012.11.13 19:13:00 -
[310] - Quote
I am not privy to the discussion of which you speak, but would assume that accusing a Dev, GM, or ISD of bias constitutes a violation of one or more of these rules:
5. Ranting is prohibited 6. Personal attacks are prohibited 7. Trolling is prohibited 20. Post constructively 29. Personal attacks and abuse of CCP staff 30. Rumor threads and posts
I believe that CCP (the corporate entity) expects Devs, GMs, and ISD to be unbiased in their dealings with the players. Allegations otherwise should be investigated by CCP and dealt with appropriately. I can't see how a public discussion of those allegations would be helpful, and can easily see how they could fall under rules 29 and 30.
CSM are not CCP staff. I am unaware of any CCP position regarding the expectation of bias on the part of CSM members. Provided you don't run afoul of the rules (specifically the ones I listed above), I'd think that bias accusations against CSM members would be fair game for the forums. Disclaimer: I am in no way associated with CCP or ISD, except as a current player of Eve Online.
Speaking more generally, do you (Harbingour) think it is necessary for "accusations of bias" to be specifically cited in the rules? I get the impression that the prohibited behaviors listed in the rules are there because they happen often enough that CCP chose to be explicit as to their permissibility.
When interpreting the rules, keep the overarching purpose in mind: don't be disruptive.
MDD |
|
Harbingour
EVE Corporation 690846961
3
|
Posted - 2012.11.13 19:17:00 -
[311] - Quote
MailDeadDrop wrote: I can't see how a public discussion of those allegations would be helpful,
I can to wit: it shown a light on T20's misuse of BPO's Meta-gaming for NULL SECCers: Whine on the forums until CCP gets sick of you and hands you everything you ask for just to shut you up. Typical NULL SEC arguement to NERF HI SEC-á-á http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csPPqdbcVwM
|
MailDeadDrop
Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities
110
|
Posted - 2012.11.13 19:25:00 -
[312] - Quote
MailDeadDrop wrote: I can't see how a public discussion of those allegations would be helpful,
Harbingour wrote:I can to wit: it shown a lighton T20's misuse of BPO's
I was speaking to the current situation.
The T20 debacle predates both your and my experience in Eve (based on your character birth date). It also predates the Internal Affairs department at CCP. The IA department was created specifically to investigate allegations of bias. At the time, there did not exist a mechanism to deal with T20. The public disclosure of T20's bias triggered the creation of IA; the public discussion of it did nothing good. Now that IA exists, I can't see how even public disclosure of (allegations of) bias would have any positive impact. CCP's rules seem to correlate that impression (see: "don't disclose communications with CCP" rule).
MDD |
Harbingour
EVE Corporation 690846961
3
|
Posted - 2012.11.13 20:04:00 -
[313] - Quote
MailDeadDrop wrote: the public discussion of it did nothing good. MDD
Incorrect without the public discussion of it it would never have came out.
Meta-gaming for NULL SECCers: Whine on the forums until CCP gets sick of you and hands you everything you ask for just to shut you up. Typical NULL SEC arguement to NERF HI SEC-á-á http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csPPqdbcVwM
|
James Amril-Kesh
RAZOR Alliance
1234
|
Posted - 2012.11.14 00:19:00 -
[314] - Quote
ISD Suvetar wrote:You know .. you could work *with* the system instead of trying to *play* the system. If you gave us a chance, you'd be amazed at how lenient we are.
So lenient, posts disappear with less warning than Soviet generals. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
|
ISD Suvetar
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1016
|
Posted - 2012.11.14 02:29:00 -
[315] - Quote
Hi James;
I've covered this in another post:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2172329#post2172329
Particularly in reference to the 'To Mallak' part of that post. As I noted, there's a suggestion as to what to do if you don't think this scenario applies.
ISD Suvetar,-áCaptain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department We are hiring! |
|
|
CCP Falcon
740
|
Posted - 2012.11.14 10:59:00 -
[316] - Quote
Keep conspiracy theories, allegations of CCP bias and wild, baseless accusations out of this thread.
Last friendly warning.
CCP Falcon -á-á||-á-áEVE Community Team -á|| -á-áEVE Illuminati -á || -á-á@CCP_Falcon -á || -á-á@EVE_LiveEvents
-á-- Disciple Of The Delicious Tea -- |
|
|
CCP Dolan
C C P C C P Alliance
105
|
Posted - 2012.11.14 11:03:00 -
[317] - Quote
Dear Posters in this Thread,
Please stop making bad posts. In the future, before you make a post, ask yourself if it is a bad post. If you think there is a possibility that it is a bad post then I would suggest not posting it. Every time you make a bad post a kitten dies. If you think you need help improving your posting, feel free to send a petition to community and I will be your posting sensei. CCP Dolan | Community Representative
Twitter: @CCPDolan
Gooby pls |
|
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
89
|
Posted - 2012.11.14 14:56:00 -
[318] - Quote
ISD Suvetar wrote:To Mallak:
When we are forced to delete a post, the forum software automatically links all posts that have quoted the one to be deleted, as it makes no sense to keep replies that are in direct response to something that was removed.
The forum software is buggy as hell then because I see posts all that time where quotes of deleted entries still remain. When I find one I smile because I get to read what was deleted - satisfied that there is at least some transparency, even if accidental.
As far as the current opinion wave - Companies only understand revenue. If you don't like what the petition said or didn't get a heads up on what you did, tell it to CCP in petition, then vote with your money and leave. That's what you would do with any other company you deal with every day- except maybe the water company, but you can make their life miserable with your local utility board. Wasting hours typing at them is as productive as spitting in the wind - they hold all the cards, except the revenue one.
|
MailDeadDrop
Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities
110
|
Posted - 2012.11.16 22:03:00 -
[319] - Quote
When locking threads as duplicates, is there a rule to determine which of the threads should remain unlocked? I would've thought that the older thread would remain unlocked, as the younger thread is clearly the one duplicating the other. But this pair of threads seems to be the other way around:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=172648 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=173086
MDD |
|
CCP Falcon
867
|
Posted - 2012.11.16 22:48:00 -
[320] - Quote
I made the choice to lock the older one and leave the newer one in place is it has more relevant content, and was updated with a post clarifying the rules regarding bumping
CCP Falcon -á || -á EVE Community Team -á || -á EVE Illuminati -á || -á-á@CCP_Falcon -á || -á-á@EVE_LiveEvents
-- Disciple Of The Delicious Tea -- |
|
|
Large Collidable Object
morons.
2037
|
Posted - 2012.11.17 01:57:00 -
[321] - Quote
So, a rather pitifully amusing petition later, I decided to provide some constructive Criticism.
There should be a CC of warnings sent to the specified characters evemail box so you receive warnings in a timely manner.
The point of a warning is to deter someone from continuing from what he does which is rendered pointless if you get the message a month later or not at all.
Yes - checking ones mail is someones own liability, but I have important things to do and I have unimportant things to do. Thus, I don't really have email accounts I use for eveO enabled for pushing - as a matter of fact, I usually don't even check them at all.
If you effectively want to warn people, you have to make sure they receive the warning unless you're into banning people for not receiving warnings.
On a legislational basis, I'm certain your decision to send the information to the mail account only is legally correct, however, on a common sense basis, it's ridiculous.
Yes - I am aware of the fact that any trace of common sense appears to be an exclusion criterion when you decide to instate new community employees, but I'll have to admit that this is one of the oddities that keep observing this game interesting for me.
Best regards,
LCO You know... morons. |
Graic Gabtar
The Lemon Party
497
|
Posted - 2012.11.17 09:27:00 -
[322] - Quote
Large Collidable Object wrote:So, a rather pitifully amusing petition later, I decided to provide some constructive Criticism.
There should be a CC of warnings sent to the specified characters evemail box so you receive warnings in a timely manner.
The point of a warning is to deter someone from continuing from what he does which is rendered pointless if you get the message a month later or not at all.
Yes - checking ones mail is someones own liability, but I have important things to do and I have unimportant things to do. Thus, I don't really have email accounts I use for eveO enabled for pushing - as a matter of fact, I usually don't even check them at all.
If you effectively want to warn people, you have to make sure they receive the warning unless you're into banning people for not receiving warnings.
On a legislational basis, I'm certain your decision to send the information to the mail account only is legally correct, however, on a common sense basis, it's ridiculous.
Yes - I am aware of the fact that any trace of common sense appears to be an exclusion criterion when you decide to instate new community employees, but I'll have to admit that this is one of the oddities that keep observing this game interesting for me.
Best regards,
LCO I think I am now able to welcome you to the CCP "Petition" process club.
In my experience demeaning, dismissive of the customer's point of view, closed minded to common sense or logic. Any process that doesn't answer simple questions but simply paraphrases and rebounds the same thing over and over isn't a process. You would think that after complying with the wishes of CCP and not posting about your views on forum moderation you would receive some kind of common sense sounding board. I think you sum it up well, "pitifully amusing", although I tend to regard it as an attitude that is more, "willfully blind".
Not to be too specific I also have had experienced this email warning issue before. And in my case (and everyone else's) no warning via the forums, just an email account they I never really look at.
It surely can't be that hard to pop it up in EVE Gate - because a forum ban notification does. I wonder why it works like that? Seems a bit odd that CCP are capable of providing one form of notification but not the other.
I agree it would be much easier if someone could see it and give a forum member a chance to change their behavior instead of CCP staff having to send off warnings that are never read.
The whole warning/ban/"petition" apparatus as set up seems to just be a bit pointless and somewhat antagonistic. WARNING: The current poster is erratic, prone to error and generally blissfully unaware due to the taking of many hard drugs over the course of many years - most of them legal. |
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
1656
|
Posted - 2012.11.17 15:08:00 -
[323] - Quote
Large Collidable Object wrote: If you effectively want to warn people, you have to make sure they receive the warning unless you're into banning people for not receiving warnings.
Yeah, its WAY off expecting people to be notified about the game they play with the e-mail they used to register said game... That is the common sense.
Quote:Yes - checking ones mail is someones own liability, but I have important things to do and I have unimportant things to do. Thus, I don't really have email accounts I use for eveO enabled for pushing - as a matter of fact, I usually don't even check them at all.
Sooo, its your fault? Although I can agree a mail could be added to evegate along with your normal mail. But not one or the other, I use evegate way less than normal email as it tends to get flooded as I have real filter options with standard email.
I think the evegate taskbar could have a third header tracker with the mail and notifications. "Account wide warnings". This includes petitions, warnings, and global news like unexpected cluster downtimes or emergency restart news. |
Large Collidable Object
morons.
2037
|
Posted - 2012.11.18 00:14:00 -
[324] - Quote
Roll Sizzle Beef wrote:Large Collidable Object wrote: If you effectively want to warn people, you have to make sure they receive the warning unless you're into banning people for not receiving warnings.
Yeah, its WAY off expecting people to be notified about the game they play with the e-mail they used to register said game... That is the common sense.
Do you really think I check some shoddy hotmail/gmail address (that was created for the sole purpose of not having to bother with spam) each time I made a post on a gaming forum?
Quote:Yes - checking ones mail is someones own liability, but I have important things to do and I have unimportant things to do. Thus, I don't really have email accounts I use for eveO enabled for pushing - as a matter of fact, I usually don't even check them at all.
Quote: Sooo, its your fault? Although I can agree a mail could be added to evegate along with your normal mail. But not one or the other, I use evegate way less than normal email as it tends to get flooded as I have real filter options with standard email.
I think the evegate taskbar could have a third header tracker with the mail and notifications. "Account wide warnings". This includes petitions, warnings, and global news like unexpected cluster downtimes or emergency restart news.
*Sigh*, this is not about someones 'fault' or the specific ban I received but about the intransparent way these things are handled. Of course it shouldn't be either accounts email address or evemail - that's what I said when I wrote that a CC should be sent to the corresponding characters evemail inbox.
Considering the specific posts that triggered the ban, CCP and I have most likely agreed to disagree. Point taken, but we both view the other party as being wrong, No discussion here - that's forbidden and moreover, quite futile - they don't get my point and I don't get theirs. Done.
On the other hand, I was informed that I was warned for 'trolling' more than once before the actual ban.
Even after thoroughly searching all three email accounts I have associated with my eve accounts, I can only find one warning that dates from ~20 minutes before the actual ban.
Anyway: - CCP can presume someone posting on their forums is logged in to his character through evegate at that very moment.
- If they want to ensure the warning is received promptly, they'd send a CC through Evegate.
(And as always, feel free to ban all my accounts for this post.)
You know... morons. |
|
ISD Suvetar
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1064
|
Posted - 2012.11.18 01:50:00 -
[325] - Quote
Hi LCO,
The information that I have is that if you raise a petition with the Community team, using the 'Other Issues -> Community' category; they may have some detail for you.
Hope this helps. ISD Suvetar,-áCaptain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department We are hiring! |
|
Graic Gabtar
The Lemon Party
498
|
Posted - 2012.11.18 02:23:00 -
[326] - Quote
Large Collidable Object wrote:So, a rather pitifully amusing petition later, I decided to provide some constructive Criticism.
ISD Suvetar wrote:Hi LCO,
The information that I have is that if you raise a petition with the Community team, using the 'Other Issues -> Community' category; they may have some detail for you.
Hope this helps. I would express what seeing this kind of thing feels like but it's probably far too dangerous to even draw an analogy most people would regard as fair. WARNING: The current poster is erratic, prone to error and generally blissfully unaware due to the taking of many hard drugs over the course of many years - most of them legal. |
|
CCP Falcon
899
|
Posted - 2012.11.18 22:17:00 -
[327] - Quote
Large Collidable Object wrote: ...truncated post...
In the end your entire issue boils down to one fact: The fact that you don't check the email address associated with your EVE Online Account.
Pro Tip:
It is YOUR responsibility to ensure that the email address connected to your EVE Online Account is current, up to date and checked regularly to prevent things like this. It isn't our problem if you fail to see an email that we deliver to you because you can't be bothered to check your inbox.
If we need to contact anyone regarding account management issues such as petition responses from petitions submitted through the website rather than the F12 menu in game, for instance forum warnings and forum bans, we do this out of game via the email address linked to their EVE Online Accounts.
I'll repeat again: If you can't be bothered to check your email inbox for messages from us, then it isn't our problem if you miss the fact you've received a warning. We've done our duty as stipulated in our policies to inform you of action against your account.
You need to understand that we ask for your email address because this is our way of contacting you should we need to regarding account management issues, not via EVEmail.
CCP Falcon -á || -á EVE Community Team -á || -á EVE Illuminati -á || -á-á@CCP_Falcon -á || -á-á@EVE_LiveEvents
-- Disciple Of The Delicious Tea -- |
|
Large Collidable Object
morons.
2037
|
Posted - 2012.11.19 01:33:00 -
[328] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Large Collidable Object wrote: ...truncated post...
In the end your entire issue boils down to one fact: The fact that you don't check the email address associated with your EVE Online Account. Pro Tip: It is YOUR responsibility to ensure that the email address connected to your EVE Online Account is current, up to date and checked regularly to prevent things like this. It isn't our problem if you fail to see an email that we deliver to you because you can't be bothered to check your inbox.
Maybe you should actually read posts instead of truncating them .
Large Collidable Object wrote: Yes - checking ones mail is someones own liability[....]
CCP Falcon wrote: If we need to contact anyone regarding account management issues such as petition responses from petitions submitted through the website rather than the F12 menu in game, for instance forum warnings and forum bans, we do this out of game via the email address linked to their EVE Online Accounts.
Yes - I am very well aware of this. And as a matter of fact I have received all petition responses via the F12 menu ingame as well as the respective accounts email address. If you had read my post instead of 'truncating' it, you would have noticed I wasn't talking about petition responses at all.
CCP Falcon wrote: I'll repeat again: If you can't be bothered to check your email inbox for messages from us, then it isn't our problem if you miss the fact you've received a warning. We've done our duty as stipulated in our policies to inform you of action against your account.
You need to understand that we ask for your email address because this is our way of contacting you should we need to regarding account management issues, not via EVEmail.
Okay - once more and step by step for those impaired in text apprehension:
1. I do not bother with the original ban. 2. I've already made that clear in the first petition I raised. 3. The second petition was about the fact that an impendent ban was impossible to perceive from my POV. Instead I received a lengthy and obsessively compulsive reply on why I was banned in the first place, which already was already entirely irrelevant when the first petition was raised. 4. After thoroughly checking all my eve-associated mail acounts (assuming warnings work accross several accounts), I couldn't find a single warning other than the one that dates from 21 minutes before the actual ban on any account. And no, I never delete mails.
Therfore, I constructively criticise that:
- I have never received email notifications about some warnings that - accoridng to CCP - have been issued - If you want warnings to be effective, you should send a CC (thats an abbrevation for 'carbon copy', anachronistically used in email headers) to the characters evemail inbox - Sending a CC means it's a 'copy', not exclusively sending it to one address or the other. - You need to underdstand people don't check alternate webmail accounts every minute when they're busy reposting things that were deleted due to volunteer moderators illiteracy or hordes of imbeciles pushing the 'report' button. - I know that what you practice is legally correct. - I presume you want warnings to work, but what you currently practice is to start shooting at someone immediately after you sent a letter by snail mail saying 'hands up!'. - To improve warning, you should consider implementing the suggested change.
Best regards
LCO You know... morons. |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
879
|
Posted - 2012.11.19 03:29:00 -
[329] - Quote
Ok so I will put it here.
Poor Customer service.
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode wrote:
#22 Posted: 2012.11.19 03:17 | Report Quote: Warnings and bans are not to be discussed on the forum.
Such matters shall remain private between the CCP and the user. Questions or comments concerning warnings and bans will be conveyed through e-mail or private messaging. Likewise, discussions regarding moderator actions are not permitted on the forum. If you have questions regarding a post or thread, please file a petition.
Please do not start threads about moderation. There is already a thread for such a thing; you can find it here. If that is not up to your satisfaction. Have a pleasant evening.
Thread locked. ISD Dorrim Barstorlode Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department
Um what ban? or are you informing us a ban was involved? Also that was not a thread on moderation as moderation is involving closing threads or removing inappropriate threads, not discussing how bad CCP seems to have gotten AGAIN with customer service.
I was discussing the poor level of customer service by using templates that are generally rude and it gets topped off nicely with 'If that is not up to your satisfaction. Have a pleasant evening.'
How about saying something more useful like 'If our current levels of customer service are not up to your level of satisfaction please feel free to contact them on' and give an email and phone number.
And you wonder why your having trouble with player retention. World wide the highest scoring thing people are after from a product or service is customer service.
Maybe you guys just need to leak another 'Greed is Good' Memo so you start fixing your customer service skills again. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
|
CCP Falcon
904
|
Posted - 2012.11.19 09:45:00 -
[330] - Quote
Large Collidable Object wrote: ...truncated post...
Truncated, meaning to shorten so that other people don't have to re-read your post again and I'm not spamming the forums with the same thing. Truncated doesn't mean I didn't read it.
You're complaining that we're not CCing you in via EVEMail, and I'm saying the following as per my previous post :
CCP Falcon wrote:I'll repeat again: If you can't be bothered to check your email inbox for messages from us, then it isn't our problem if you miss the fact you've received a warning. We've done our duty as stipulated in our policies to inform you of action against your account.
You need to understand that we ask for your email address because this is our way of contacting you should we need to regarding account management issues, not via EVEmail.
Once again, we do not send EVEmail. The petition system is entirely different to the moderation system we use to govern the forums so the fact that you may receive an account warning in game from a GM is completely different to the fact you will not receive one from a forum warning. Forum warnings and Account warnings are two different things.
We do not send EVEmail to people regarding forum warnings and bans, this is fact and is not up for debate. Once again, it is your responsibility to ensure you check the email address associated with your EVE Online Account. Not ours.
Large Collidable Object wrote: Okay - once more and step by step for those impaired in text apprehension:
I'll also say flat out that you need to be very careful about how you're posting. Insulting members of CCP and ISD is not looked upon in a good light. You're treading very close to the edge, but I'll let it slide this time.
CCP Falcon -á || -á EVE Community Team -á || -á EVE Illuminati -á || -á-á@CCP_Falcon -á || -á-á@EVE_LiveEvents
-- Disciple Of The Delicious Tea -- |
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |