Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 56 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 17 post(s) |
Vera Algaert
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1047
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 20:57:00 -
[91] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Arbitrary is a legal word for "unfair", TIL arbitration is literally unfairness. |
Utremi Fasolasi
La Dolce Vita
271
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 20:58:00 -
[92] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Utterly pointless hand-waving; might as well have not posted anything.
The new wording does not at all reflect past policy with reference to representing yourself as a member of a group. Come back and try again when you've actually addressed the community's concerns.
How would you know when the ongoings in petitions are not released to outside parties? |
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
671
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 20:59:00 -
[93] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:I'm Murk Paradox and I can sell any moon in the game to you. Contact me for details. This cannot be a scam since I am in fact representing myself and not under false pretenses (I really am me!) since that would be a TOS violation.
Let me sell you a moon!*
*The above is an example of a perfectly acceptable scam because of the wording as opposed to the inferred intent.
This is most likely what the scams will have to look like to pass the judgement. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3738
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:01:00 -
[94] - Quote
Utremi Fasolasi wrote:Varius Xeral wrote:Utterly pointless hand-waving; might as well have not posted anything.
The new wording does not at all reflect past policy with reference to representing yourself as a member of a group. Come back and try again when you've actually addressed the community's concerns. How would you know when the ongoings in petitions are not released to outside parties?
There is this place where a lot of us post about EVE outside of EVE where we can freely discuss such things. The guy who was sitting next to me in the first nullsec round table who had obviously not had a shower since before boarding his flight to Iceland, you really stank. You know who you are. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami The Cursed Few
471
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:02:00 -
[95] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:I'm Murk Paradox and I can sell any moon in the game to you. Contact me for details. This cannot be a scam since I am in fact representing myself and not under false pretenses (I really am me!) since that would be a TOS violation.
Let me sell you a moon!*
*The above is an example of a perfectly acceptable scam because of the wording as opposed to the inferred intent. This is most likely what the scams will have to look like to pass the judgement.
Yea it's terrible.
Another one would be
Hi! I'm Murk, and thank you for contacting me in regards to your desire to join (enter corp name here) Corporation! If you allow me to present you to your intended new home, I can, for the small deposit of 500 million isk, facilitate the transfer of your goods to your new destination! I can, also with your permission, contact the designated corp and help get you settled in! Please contact me or list your name and intended corp you wish to app to in the description of your isk deposit! Thank you and have a successful life in your new home!
just, terrible. "But my favourite visual experience in Eve was a pipebombing run on a digital projector. Sure, the aliasing can never match the perfection of a 2160p image - but you can't beat a five metre space volcano on your wall." - Lord Maldoror(RnK)
|
Ganque
Ganque's Squad
1
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:03:00 -
[96] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:The change in the wording of the TOS was massive and there was no basis for adding the bolded section here: Quote:You may not impersonate or falsely present yourself to be a representative of another player, group of players, character or NPC entity. Claiming you're Goonwaffe by registering the corporation Goomwaffe is one thing. Claiming you're The Mittani's Space Lawyer (go ahead and ask!) and are authorized to negotiate on his behalf is another so just send all that isk to my wallet and I'll move you into Deklein tomorrow. The TOS above bans the first. Until now, it didn't ban the second.
:applause:
It just makes no sense to ban player interaction of this kind, if I claim to be Mittani's lawyer to steal Weasilor'sexample ( and I am, check with him, I can get you a system in FCC held space for the low price of 2bn Isk per month, exclusivity guaranteed ) anyone can easily check this by asking mittens, if you don't check, well there are consequences to that. This is normal gameplay for eve.
Revoke these unwanted changes now :ccp:
|
Jonah Gravenstein
Sweet Sensations Radical Industries
13671
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:04:00 -
[97] - Quote
What I got from this is; CCP altered the ToS to make it even more ambiguous, we, the players, made our concerns about the alterations abundantly clear, CCP said they'd look at our concerns and decided to ignore them and fob us off.
Do I have that about right? Smacks of the initial CCP response to our concerns about Incarna tbh, ignore it and hope it'll go away. That worked out well for them last time. I am furnishing this post "as is". I do not provide any warranty for the post whatsoever, whether express, implied, or statutory, including, but not limited to, any relevance or fitness for a particular purpose or any warranty that the contents of the post will be error-free.
|
Lady Areola Fappington
New Order Logistics CODE.
467
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:06:00 -
[98] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:I'm Murk Paradox and I can sell any moon in the game to you. Contact me for details. This cannot be a scam since I am in fact representing myself and not under false pretenses (I really am me!) since that would be a TOS violation.
Let me sell you a moon!*
*The above is an example of a perfectly acceptable scam because of the wording as opposed to the inferred intent.
I think I see a TOS violation, Murk.
You are "falsely representing or impersonating a person" (those words are there in the clause) who can actually sell.is willing to sell those moons. Don't worry miners, I'm here to help!
|
DisBeyotch
Scifried Strategic Military Industries
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:06:00 -
[99] - Quote
I can't help but feel that a big part of this problem revolves around the fact that TOS violations of this nature don't have a clearly defined penalty.
How many people out there that participate in the emergent game-play (i.e. scamming) would be less concerned with this if we knew without any doubt that the first violation would not result in a permaban?
Bots (that are detected/reported) get multiple opportunities to clean their acts up, but CCP GM's have already set the precedence that they are ready willing and able to issue permabans to accounts that are reported for these sorts of violations.
So in the specific instance of impersonation, which one could argue is an established, cherished, and oft times celebrated tradition in Eve Online, this TOS violation is treated more severely than botting.
If the rules aren't clearly defined, which I think we can all agree they are not, they we need some assurance from the GM team that they will not issue permabans to first time offending parties. I don't think that's an unreasonable request. |
Saila Sarai
Sirens Song Mining Salvaging and Extracting
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:10:00 -
[100] - Quote
The issue is that rules that are neither clear nor has the public the option of checking on precedents thereby getting an understanding how rules are interpreted. Which means nothing less that the GMs get a Get out of jail free card, regardless how they act.
Now, it is understandable that GMs won't talk in public about individual cases. That however makes having clear rules with a limit of how wriggle room a GM has necessary.
The only consequence of this whole disaster is that the only way to protect your account is not to scam at all. Which is ironically the same like in the cache scraping fiasco a couple of months ago. It might work out for CCP in the end but its certainly not a best practice situation. Also you really don't really want to make the ruling on whether to ban an account or not on how good the candidate is in skirting the edge of the rules.
I'm not gonna say i'm cancelling my accounts, ofc i won't. But like others i echo the feeling that ccp is slowly back on pre incarna mode and that's pretty sad. Moreover with this ruling the trend to limit the sandbox and to police players where it isn't necessary continues. |
|
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami The Cursed Few
471
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:14:00 -
[101] - Quote
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:I'm Murk Paradox and I can sell any moon in the game to you. Contact me for details. This cannot be a scam since I am in fact representing myself and not under false pretenses (I really am me!) since that would be a TOS violation.
Let me sell you a moon!*
*The above is an example of a perfectly acceptable scam because of the wording as opposed to the inferred intent. I think I see a TOS violation, Murk. You are "falsely representing or impersonating a person" (those words are there in the clause) who can actually sell.is willing to sell those moons.
That's not true. I am representing myself, and I can gladly accept isk. I cannot, unfortunately, sell the sov space that moon resides in (sov isn't in question) nor does a moon be possessed by anyone (only the tower in place) as it is a celestial in the game.
And since I gave myself permission, I am not using any false pretenses!
(You cannot actually a sell a moon just fyi) "But my favourite visual experience in Eve was a pipebombing run on a digital projector. Sure, the aliasing can never match the perfection of a 2160p image - but you can't beat a five metre space volcano on your wall." - Lord Maldoror(RnK)
|
Khanh'rhh
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2106
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:15:00 -
[102] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:GM Grimmi wrote:We cannot go into specifics as each report is different and this will just end up leading into a circular argument of GÇ£ifsGÇ¥ and GÇ£butsGÇ¥. We will say that impersonation cases are handled on a case by case basis by experienced GMs and there is no change in how such cases will be handled from now from how they were handled a year ago. Then why is there a need for a change? Surely if there's no change, there's no need for a rules change. More importantly, previously you stated this was not allowed: Quote:Recruitment scams using your own corp/alliance are fine, claiming to be working on behalf of players/groups of players you're not affiliated with is considered impersonation and a violation of our policies. As far as I'm aware, this was not previously banned. It's not impersonating anyone. It's not falsely claiming to be another identifiable EVE player. I would have confidently told anyone in our alliance this was allowed. I see no reason it should not be allowed. As a result, I'm really not confident in "trust us, we'll interpret it correctly and there's no changebut can't tell you how" because you've just suddenly declared that lying about the authority you have is actually lying about your identity.
It's almost like you're showing an example, here, of GMs not knowing the rules they're trying to apply to show why a GM saying "we will know how to apply the rules" is still an issue and this thread/OP does nothing to alleviate these concerns.
The new wording means the exact scenario here, can and will happen:
1) I scam someone in a manner which could be actionable under the new, very wide ruling. I get petitioned, nothing happens. 2) I scam someone in a manner which could be actionable under the new, very wide ruling. I get petitioned, nothing happens. 3) I scam someone in a manner which could be actionable under the new, very wide ruling. I get petitioned, nothing happens. 4) I scam someone in a manner which could be actionable under the new, very wide ruling. I get petitioned, I get banned.
Under the letter of CCP's rules this is consistent with policy, because it's a case-by-case analysis. GMs will then hide behind the letter of the (newly broadened) rules to show they've done nothing wrong. If you've ever put in a petition to CCP about issues with rules, you might be nodding your head right about now.
Oh, and I can't warn people that scenario 4), though something apt to be considered legit, got me banned, because the rules don't let me discuss it.
I'm not even really against this change, it's just another mess CCP has gotten itself into which can only make me laugh at how woefully awful their internal procedures are, even after 10 years of trying to get it right.
How do I do the emoticon of the ccp guy hitting himself on the head with a hammer over and over on Eve O? "Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual, issued in the 1930 |
Dave Stark
3628
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:16:00 -
[103] - Quote
came expecting clarification; left even more confused.
so, what is and isn't allowed now in comparison to before? the GMs say all is the same but the ToS change clearly contradicts that.
could we get a GM and a ToS that agree with each other? |
Georgina Parmala
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
154
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:16:00 -
[104] - Quote
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:I'm Murk Paradox and I can sell any moon in the game to you. Contact me for details. This cannot be a scam since I am in fact representing myself and not under false pretenses (I really am me!) since that would be a TOS violation.
Let me sell you a moon!*
*The above is an example of a perfectly acceptable scam because of the wording as opposed to the inferred intent. I think I see a TOS violation, Murk. You are "falsely representing or impersonating a person" (those words are there in the clause) who can actually sell.is willing to sell those moons.
Technically since "fake" organizations like coalitions are considered a protected group of players, moon owners could or could not also be considered such a group. Depending on how the particular GM who reviews the particular case feels, since none of this is clearly defined.
And when it comes down to it, the sell offer is misrepresenting the group of players "moon owners" with malicious intent of new owners showing up at their doorstep. |
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1033
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:19:00 -
[105] - Quote
Let me make this example as clear as I can.
Illegal Before:
Saying you are the mittani or making a char name or other such methods to impersonate him.
Illegal Now:
Saying you are the mittani OR saying you are a goon director.
The latter was not illegal before, yet now is, and they claim nothing has changed when the wording clearly has to encompass that. Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal - Representing Goonswarm Federation, Goonwaffe, CFC Finance, Greater Economic Co-Prosperity Sphere, CFC Rental Program, Burn Jita, CFC Supply, and who knows what else.-á Vile Rat: You'e the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve. |
Khanh'rhh
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2106
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:21:00 -
[106] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:That's not true. I am representing myself, and I can gladly accept isk. I cannot, unfortunately, sell the sov space that moon resides in (sov isn't in question) nor does a moon be possessed by anyone (only the tower in place) as it is a celestial in the game. When I call myself, as an alt, "not a PL guy" and I am in "nothing to do with pandemic legion at all corp" I am representing myself. If I then try to sell someone PL space by saying "I AM TOTES LEGIT SALES MAN FOR PL BRO JUST ASK ANYONE LOL!" I am falsely representing an organization (now against the rules) despite the fact I am being myself.
Hopefully it's clear why the new rules can theoretically be used to ban many, many scam types no matter who you say you are. "Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual, issued in the 1930 |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3738
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:22:00 -
[107] - Quote
Aryth wrote:saying you are a goon director.
RIP recruitment scam, although I guess we could just give everyone a director title. The guy who was sitting next to me in the first nullsec round table who had obviously not had a shower since before boarding his flight to Iceland, you really stank. You know who you are. |
Poetic Stanziel
Paxton Industries Gentlemen's Agreement
1947
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:23:00 -
[108] - Quote
GM Grimmi wrote:There are no magic catch-all rules and policies to cover every eventuality so they must interpret the rules we have in place and apply them to the issue at hand in order to keep the peace. Except the rules changed yesterday ... and we would like to know how these new rules will be interpreted in a variety of situations that were legal the day before.
Amarr Militia - Fweddit - http://fweddit.com Poetic Discourse - http://poeticstanziel.blogspot.com |
FullFrontal
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:27:00 -
[109] - Quote
mynnna wrote:Ali Aras wrote:Grimmi, thanks for posting. Just to clarify, because I think this was the crux of a lot of the remaining confusion yesterday:
If I, Ali Aras, member of Valkyries of Night and Of Sound Mind, represent myself as a CFC rental agent (a title I do not hold in a coalition I am not a member of), is this a violation of the TOS as changed and impersonation policies as historically implemented? Confirming that this was in fact at the center of yesterday's confusion/ire. Players feel this sort of thing was allowed in the past, and that if you can convince someone you're a member of a group you clearly are not (such as in Ali's example), you and they both deserve everything coming to you. They're concerned that what is now coming to them is a ban, that you're forbidding sandboxy play in the form of lying, smooth talking and cleverness (as opposed to outright impersonation like naming yourself "CHRlBBA") and you've done little to address that concern.
I am glad you think so - unfortunately that is not how the GM's have been handling live cases. Based on what has happened to actual players recently, implying/smoothtalking/inferring, but not directly stating or name = Perma Ban. No exceptions. Whoever has the final decision on EULA/TOS policy in this regards is a complete joke. It's more like a kid making up rules to his own game with no basis or reason behind it. Make up your minds and try to enforce it as black and white as possible. Leaving this grey pretty much ruins what EVE has been up until now.
Aryth wrote:Let me make this example as clear as I can.
Illegal Before:
Saying you are the mittani or making a char name or other such methods to impersonate him.
Illegal Now:
Saying you are the mittani OR saying you are a goon director.
The latter was not illegal before, yet now is, and they claim nothing has changed when the wording clearly has to encompass that.
Also illegal now is inferring that the mittani, or goon directors are aware of your actions or has/have sanctioned your actions. Inference is literally the same thing now. CCP has already acted on this.
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:What I got from this is;
- CCP altered the ToS to make it even more ambiguous.
- We, the players, made our concerns about the alterations abundantly clear.
- CCP said they'd look at our concerns.
- CCP decided to ignore our concerns and fob us off.
Do I have that about right? Smacks of the initial CCP response to our concerns about Incarna tbh, ignore it and hope it'll go away. That worked out well for them last time.
And that is exactly how they handled one of the prime cases that led this this new EULA change.
"We swear we read what you sent to us, but we don't really care because your actions have emotionally hurt one of our web developers, please leave our wiki alone, enjoy never playing eve again even though you have not broken any listed rules."
As usual - GM's making up rules ex post facto.
Face it capsuleer's. CCP can ban you whenver they want for whatever they want, and there isn't jack you can do about. |
asdasdada dadadadsada
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:29:00 -
[110] - Quote
SOUNDWAVE IS GONE FOR 1 MINUTE AND ITS ALL GOING TO HELL.
WE'RE GOING TO STATE A NEW RULE, BUT WE CANT GO INTO SPECIFICS SO ENJOY YOUR BAN WHEN IT COMES BECAUSE WE DIDNT CLEARLY OUTLINE WHAT WE ACTUALLY MEANT.
CPP REPRESENTATIVE ASDASDADA DADADADSADA |
|
BadAssMcKill
Love Squad
354
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:30:00 -
[111] - Quote
n1 ccp
gg no re http://i.imgur.com/6j6cIZE.gif-á |
Georgina Parmala
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
154
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:31:00 -
[112] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Aryth wrote:saying you are a goon director. RIP recruitment scam, although I guess we could just give everyone a director title.
Hi Mallak,
As a long standing member, I can sponsor you into [STI] for a 500 mil application fee. My sponsorship guarantees your application will be accepted. A director will review your application within 24 hours.
Ah hell, now I'm gonna get banned - for misrepresenting a non-existing director of an NPC corp. But that should work fine for the average goon. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami The Cursed Few
471
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:31:00 -
[113] - Quote
Khanh'rhh wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:That's not true. I am representing myself, and I can gladly accept isk. I cannot, unfortunately, sell the sov space that moon resides in (sov isn't in question) nor does a moon be possessed by anyone (only the tower in place) as it is a celestial in the game. When I call myself, as an alt, "not a PL guy" and I am in "nothing to do with pandemic legion at all corp" I am representing myself. If I then try to sell someone PL space by saying "I AM TOTES LEGIT SALES MAN FOR PL BRO JUST ASK ANYONE LOL!" I am falsely representing an organization (now against the rules) despite the fact I am being myself. Hopefully it's clear why the new rules can theoretically be used to ban many, many scam types no matter who you say you are.
I intentionally did not claim to be the sov or tower owner for that very reason.
I am NOT saying "I can sell CFC Sov at a discounted rate because The Mittani gave me the go ahead". "But my favourite visual experience in Eve was a pipebombing run on a digital projector. Sure, the aliasing can never match the perfection of a 2160p image - but you can't beat a five metre space volcano on your wall." - Lord Maldoror(RnK)
|
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
4184
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:35:00 -
[114] - Quote
I'm pretty sure you guys aren't clear on what "clarification" means. If you are going to be taking *very harsh* actions, you need to be *very clear* on where the lines are. People should know *exactly* what is and isn't allowed.
Perhaps next time you want to post something like this, you might consider running it by the CSM first? That seems like it might have saved you a whole lot of trouble. CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
|
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
3464
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:35:00 -
[115] - Quote
CCP where is your Community Rep?!
Wharr??!! The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the ho's and politicians will look up and shout 'Save us!' and I'll look down, and whisper 'Hodor'. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami The Cursed Few
471
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:35:00 -
[116] - Quote
Also, for the low price of 15mil isk, I can allow you into Dodixie through the Vylade gate. For a monthly rate of unlimited access it would be 80mil, and for lifetime a mere 350mil isk. Please contact me for details. "But my favourite visual experience in Eve was a pipebombing run on a digital projector. Sure, the aliasing can never match the perfection of a 2160p image - but you can't beat a five metre space volcano on your wall." - Lord Maldoror(RnK)
|
Khanh'rhh
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2107
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:36:00 -
[117] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:Khanh'rhh wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:That's not true. I am representing myself, and I can gladly accept isk. I cannot, unfortunately, sell the sov space that moon resides in (sov isn't in question) nor does a moon be possessed by anyone (only the tower in place) as it is a celestial in the game. When I call myself, as an alt, "not a PL guy" and I am in "nothing to do with pandemic legion at all corp" I am representing myself. If I then try to sell someone PL space by saying "I AM TOTES LEGIT SALES MAN FOR PL BRO JUST ASK ANYONE LOL!" I am falsely representing an organization (now against the rules) despite the fact I am being myself. Hopefully it's clear why the new rules can theoretically be used to ban many, many scam types no matter who you say you are. I intentionally did not claim to be the sov or tower owner for that very reason. I am NOT saying "I can sell CFC Sov at a discounted rate because The Mittani gave me the go ahead". Yes, so you're saying you now have fewer options available to you to scam / metagame with, which is the entire complaint that is being made.
So, you agree? "Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual, issued in the 1930 |
Remiel Pollard
Stirling Iron Society
1714
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:36:00 -
[118] - Quote
GM Grimmi wrote:For all practical purposes there has been no change in how impersonation issues will be handled compared to the last few years.
GM Grimmi wrote:We cannot go into specifics as each report is different and this will just end up leading into a circular argument of GÇ£ifsGÇ¥ and GÇ£butsGÇ¥. We will say that impersonation cases are handled on a case by case basis by experienced GMs and there is no change in how such cases will be handled from now from how they were handled a year ago.
This seems to me to say what I've been saying all along. There's no change to the TOS, just a change to the wording. In other words, if you could do it before, you can still do it now. If you couldn't do it before, you still cannot do it now. That pretty much addresses the issues to me. I don't care either way, though. I'm not trying to scam anyone. You don't scare me. I've been to Jita. |
asdasdada dadadadsada
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:36:00 -
[119] - Quote
I wonder when all scams will be against the rules and if you say **** in local you get muted...oh wait.
Why don't you just stop wasting every bodies time and implement a word filter and ban market/contract scams so we can all quit the game already and you can keep working on your side projects that have all failed. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami The Cursed Few
471
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 21:38:00 -
[120] - Quote
Khanh'rhh wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:Khanh'rhh wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:That's not true. I am representing myself, and I can gladly accept isk. I cannot, unfortunately, sell the sov space that moon resides in (sov isn't in question) nor does a moon be possessed by anyone (only the tower in place) as it is a celestial in the game. When I call myself, as an alt, "not a PL guy" and I am in "nothing to do with pandemic legion at all corp" I am representing myself. If I then try to sell someone PL space by saying "I AM TOTES LEGIT SALES MAN FOR PL BRO JUST ASK ANYONE LOL!" I am falsely representing an organization (now against the rules) despite the fact I am being myself. Hopefully it's clear why the new rules can theoretically be used to ban many, many scam types no matter who you say you are. I intentionally did not claim to be the sov or tower owner for that very reason. I am NOT saying "I can sell CFC Sov at a discounted rate because The Mittani gave me the go ahead". Yes, so you're saying you now have fewer options available to you to scam / metagame with, which is the entire complaint that is being made. So, you agree?
I'm saying you have to be so entirely specific with your wordings because of the new wording to the TOS, it's dumbed down to a redundant level.
Yes, I definitely agree it sucks. "But my favourite visual experience in Eve was a pipebombing run on a digital projector. Sure, the aliasing can never match the perfection of a 2160p image - but you can't beat a five metre space volcano on your wall." - Lord Maldoror(RnK)
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 56 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |