Did you dumbbells just frigging ban awoxing with this dumb TOS update?

Where's my goddamn butterfly effect????????????

So if I'm reading this right the "clarification" bans scamming and most of the metagame. Two huge sources of free advertising for CCP, why is this a good idea now?

The easiest answer to that is a button that replies to a petition with this then closes it:

Dear (insert scammed capsuleer here),

You have been scammed, this is a good lesson for you please learn from it. Do not petition this again.

Best,

(GM team)

On the contrary, the new explanation (the one by GM Karidor) lays out the reasoning behind the TOS change and quotes the other policy that the TOS is being brought into line with. It's pretty clear to me now what CCP's views on impersonation are; while the specifics of any particular scheme are a bit fuzzy, I'm content with knowing that as long as I'm not doing something blatantly out there, I won't get instabant.

The clarification by GM Karidor sums up quite well everything the CSM has heard in internal conversations. Given the clarification, it's now clear that the TOS change is consistent with previous policy, and confusion about that stems from people's (mis)understanding of previous enforcement. After all, it's easy to go from "recruitment scamming for GSF as a Goon is okay" to "recruitment scamming for GSF as a TEST pilot is okay" without feeling like you've made a leap of logic. This is the stated reason behind the update-- players were confused.

With all that said, this thread has made clear that there remains some unhappiness with the policy as written and intended by CCP. This unhappiness has been noted by the CSM, and we can and will follow up on the policy itself. However, that process is a longer one that will take place internally; rioting in this thread is unlikely to be effective. Given the way the CSM process has worked so far and the success we've had in other conversations, I look forward to future productive discussions with CCP, and hope to be able to share results of those in the future.

I was unaware that posting acknowledging concerns and promising to use the tools at my disposal to work to resolve them constituted a "brush-off". I meant what I said when I said that I'd seen a lot of good come out of the CSM process, more than just "a devblog once in a while". The fact that we work primarily under NDA and outside of the public eye can make it hard to see, especially when our efforts avert a crisis instead of responding to one.

What about selling hot dogs to spectators?

As someone else said earlier.. this situation is now above just having a random dev stopping by to "clear things up". The CSM, as per CSM Member Ali Aras indicated they were given forenotice of this and from the way it sounds, by and large the CSM was okay with the results. Now, you'll notice that none have really responded on Twitter about this issue.. in fact they seem to be especially quiet. While that could be them busily talking with CCP about fixing this issue (which is so simple to do its absurd), having no communication from them about this issue does worry me. Particular since, in my opinion, the effects of this change are damaging enough that it is worth breaking any NDA over this issue.

Not quite as embarrassing as the CCP response though.

I have no idea what CCP is thinking any more...

seriously, i kinda feel bad for the GM's in this thread. they obviously did not write the new version of the TOS (they probably had some input but they definitely don't have the authority to make these decisions) but seriously can we get a dev to step in and give an official response to these changes. no offence to the GM's but you are only enforcing these policies, i'm not mad at you guys, but i would like to have words with the author of these changes.