EVE Search - Regarding IPOs and Scams

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Regarding IPOs and Scams

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)
Avon	Posted - 2006.06.14 18:50:00 - [31] Originally by: Rod Blaine Quote: If there was a revenge system in the game, none of this would have been needed :\ Oh, adn to add to my above post. I'm sure that the above-quoted truism probably plays a major role as well. It's another inevtiable recurring problem however. Unless CCP finally make the big leap and deal with the alt-acountability problem. Ultimately that is the only thing which allows this situation to exist. The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur
Liu Kaskakka	Posted - 2006.06.14 18:51:00 - [32] The possibility of losing a great deal of ingame wealth (time and effort invested acquiring it) is what makes Eve unique. Remove the penalty for stupidity and Eve will become like all the other crappy games out there. King Liu is RIGHT!!
Scorpyn	Posted - 2006.06.14 18:51:00 - [33] Please don't ever change the rules after enforcing them again. It is not something that can be easily forgiven without an extremely good reason.
Requiem XIII	Posted - 2006.06.14 18:52:00 - [34] Originally by: Mag's So where do you draw the line? And what kind of recourse could CCP possibly give the scammees? I draw the line at any scam or crime. what sort of recourse, well some ideas I had were players getting a reputation marker, and someone who's done something like scammed for 25bn gets set to Welsher :) Maybe the person flagged as a scammer gets taxed by the NPC market ? Maybe Concord freezes there assets to they can't transfer ISK to another character ? I dunno, those are some ideas, I'd like to see what CCP propose. Personally a flag on the character that warns you if you try and trade with them in-game, and makes them pay 100% extra tax would be great Can you hear me now ? Can you feel ?
Avon	Posted - 2006.06.14 18:54:00 - [35] Originally by: Requiem XIII Originally by: Mag's So where do you draw the line? And what kind of recourse could CCP possibly give the scammees? I draw the line at any scam or crime. what sort of recourse, well some ideas I had were players getting a reputation marker, and someone who's done something like scammed for 25bn gets set to Welsher :) Maybe the person flagged as a scammer gets taxed by the NPC market ? Maybe Concord freezes there assets to they can't transfer ISK to another character ? I dunno, those are some ideas, I'd like to see what CCP propose. Personally a flag on the character that warns you if you try and trade with them in-game, and makes them pay 100% extra tax would be great Any penalty must be player imposed and enforced, not an NPC punishment dished out by game mechanics. The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur
The Enslaver	Posted - 2006.06.14 18:55:00 - [36] Simply put, these GM actions go directly against what EVE is. The core principle of EVE has been betrayed by these actions, and if CCP truely love their creation, they will protect it by reversing these GM actions and ensuring it doesn't happen again... I have faith in CCP over this matter, I honestly believe this was a GM that was new to the job and didn't understand everything properly. --------
Rod Blaine	Posted - 2006.06.14 18:55:00 - [37] Nah, those are all regulted for you by the game. Come up with something that makes us players relgulate the consequences by taking direct action, then we can talk. Old blog
Sir Juri	Posted - 2006.06.14 18:57:00 - [38] Originally by: Requiem XIII Originally by: Mag's So where do you draw the line? And what kind of recourse could CCP possibly give the scammees? I draw the line at any scam or crime. what sort of recourse, well some ideas I had were players getting a reputation marker, and someone who's done something like scammed for 25bn gets set to Welsher :) Maybe the person flagged as a scammer gets taxed by the NPC market ? Maybe Concord freezes there assets to they can't transfer ISK to another character ? I dunno, those are some ideas, I'd like to see what CCP propose. Personally a flag on the character that warns you if you try and trade with them in-game, and makes them pay 100% extra tax would be great bad idea and wouldnt work. damn need to make a new sig...
The Cosmopolite	Posted - 2006.06.14 18:58:00 - [39] Originally by: Jacob Majestic I think what needs to happen is that we need to have a ingame mechanic for IPOs and reintroduce the EVE stock market. However, IPOs are and will remain a trust-based transaction, whether or not they are supported by ingame tools. Absolutely. Which is why those ingame tools would be good if some of them helped in the establishment of trust such as accounting transparency for shareholders and even, on a voluntary basis, such available to be offered to potential investors. Ongoing trading and investment is also an issue, not just the IPO. No tool is going to protect someone from an individual or group deliberately failing to make good on a promise though. Nor should any policy seek to underwrite the promises of players between one another. That has a far wider application than even isk-based matters and just would make a nonsense of the game. Cosmo Jericho Fraction
Oxymoronic	Posted - 2006.06.14 18:59:00 - [40] Eve needs an inbuilt stock exchange with ticker to make stuff like this easier to manage.
Argenton Sayvers	Posted - 2006.06.14 18:59:00 - [41] Since Serenity's post was closed with a link to this post: You basically summed up everything that needs to be said. Changing trust into something that can be petitioned for is just pathetic. I want to add another angle to the discussion however that may support CCPs action, disgusting as it may be: By allowing GTC for ISK sales, CCP sanctions the conversion of real money into ISK. Even without GTCs, a conversion is clearly possible. While it is against CCPs rules, it may not be agains the LAW. A scam happening on CCP forums that involves ISK may very well leave the domain of "in-game" and end right in court. If CCPs lawyers dont fear getting sued over this, there is absolutely no reason to bother GMs with watching over forums. Let mods close obvious scam threads for spamming- thats it. You know perfectly well that we will find ways to abuse this system beyond your wildest dreams. I already mentioned a "contract" in form of a sell order post in another thread.
Vincent Gaines	Posted - 2006.06.14 19:03:00 - [42] The only problem with the scam is that there is no recourse. the people scammed don't need to be reimbursed, however the scammer shouldn't just be able to start fresh and be a goody-goody with 25bil wired to his wallet. you do the crime, good job.....but there has to be a way for it to have consequences, just as a real scammer would have.
Mag's	Posted - 2006.06.14 19:04:00 - [43] Originally by: Sir Juri Originally by: Requiem XIII Originally by: Mag's So where do you draw the line? And what kind of recourse could CCP possibly give the scammees? I draw the line at any scam or crime. what sort of recourse, well some ideas I had were players getting a reputation marker, and someone who's done something like scammed for 25bn gets set to Welsher :) Maybe the person flagged as a scammer gets taxed by the NPC market ? Maybe Concord freezes there assets to they can't transfer ISK to another character ? I dunno, those are some ideas, I'd like to see what CCP propose. Personally a flag on the character that warns you if you try and trade with them in-game, and makes them pay 100% extra tax would be great bad idea and wouldnt work. I have to agree, they are bad ideas tbh. Please remember, we all knew the penalty system, but someone moved the goal posts. Home goals 4tl.
Requiem XIII	Posted - 2006.06.14 19:05:00 - [44] Originally by: Sir Juri bad idea and wouldnt work. Just to clarify, you're quite content for people to Scam other people with no repercussions ? Can you hear me now ? Can you feel ?
Havelcek	Posted - 2006.06.14 19:05:00 - [45] Edited by: Havelcek on 14/06/2006 19:04:49 Unfortunate that the internal discussions are after-the-fact.
Avon	Posted - 2006.06.14 19:06:00 - [46] Originally by: Requiem XIII Originally by: Sir Juri bad idea and wouldnt work. Just to clarify, you're quite content for people to Scam other people with no repercussions ? Technically it is the characters doing it, not the players. The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur
Miki Fin	Posted - 2006.06.14 19:07:00 - [47] I have one question. How would the GM's have responded "if" the isk scammed was used to buy GTC's immediatly?
0August0	Posted - 2006.06.14 19:08:00 - [48] Originally by: SolApathy thats not the point, the only risk in IPO's should be a failed business not the business owner skips town and runs off. Actually in Eve the scammer doesn't even have to leave town or run off anywhere. They are free to live and travel around in empire space as if they were under the guarenteed protection of the authorities. . . . Regards, August Soldier of the Gooch
Tabet Saens	Posted - 2006.06.14 19:08:00 - [49] ok well I don't know why my first post was deleted, but here goes: I don't think that the forums should be considered a completely separate entity from the game. If you can smear someone's reputation on the forums, whether it is deserving or not, then the forums is most definitely a part of the game. As such, I don't see much difference between scams started on the forums, and scams started in the game. One and the same, IMO.
Requiem XIII	Posted - 2006.06.14 19:11:00 - [50] Edited by: Requiem XIII on 14/06/2006 19:12:27 Originally by: Avon Technically it is the characters doing it, not the players. Yeah yeah, but the same point applies, do you think it's ok for a character to scam other characters without the risk of repercussion ? Can you hear me now ? Can you feel ?
spurious signal	Posted - 2006.06.14 19:11:00 - [51] Originally by: Avon Originally by: Requiem XIII Originally by: Sir Juri bad idea and wouldnt work. Just to clarify, you're quite content for people to Scam other people with no repercussions ? Technically it is the characters doing it, not the players. I could only accept that "technical" qualification if different characters owned by the same player were unable to transfer isk or assets bewteen each other
Ariu Devine	Posted - 2006.06.14 19:12:00 - [52] I for one am glad there is discussion and that we have at least heard something. If one thing was for certain, most everyone was rather confused as to why and what will happen for the future. As someone who does invest RL, playing the stock market is full of risks as it is. And it is run and rewarding. But what is not fun is sitting here knowing every other IPO could and would probably be a scam. The way it was going, no one would end up playing around with an exciting addition to Eve. Not only would a field that was safer to play in like this be beneficial for those who enjoy investing, but it would also allow smaller companies to compete on the big playing field of retail. A very competitive market would benefit everyone, including the consumer. -- Always Seeking. Never Finding.
Rod Blaine	Posted - 2006.06.14 19:13:00 - [53] Edited by: Rod Blaine on 14/06/2006 19:15:48 Originally by: Requiem XIII Originally by: Sir Juri bad idea and wouldnt work. Just to clarify, you're quite content for people to Scam other people with no repercussions ? Honestly ? I'd rather have a situation in which scams happen without (remotely easy) repercussions then a situation in which they can't happen at all. Call it a preference for playing in a harsh environment, it nicely explains my being here for the last three years On the other hand, I have a massive preference for allowing scams AND repercussions however, even if it'd mean that independent untraceable alts become history (Although I firmly believe there should be a better way, just haven't seen or made the right proposal yet). What I do not want to see is no scams AND no (player enacted) repercussions. That would remove another large peice of the harshness of Eve and invariably lead to me cancelling somewhere along the road to World of Starcraft. Old blog
Rod Blaine	Posted - 2006.06.14 19:14:00 - [54] Originally by: Miki Fin I have one question. How would the GM's have responded "if" the isk scammed was used to buy GTC's immediatly? Probably permanban for the scammer. I actually wouldn't have minded that tbh. thats scamming to earn rl cash equivalent wealth, no good that. Old blog
Kim Chee	Posted - 2006.06.14 19:16:00 - [55] Originally by: Vincent Gaines The only problem with the scam is that there is no recourse. the people scammed don't need to be reimbursed, however the scammer shouldn't just be able to start fresh and be a goody-goody with 25bil wired to his wallet. you do the crime, good job.....but there has to be a way for it to have consequences, just as a real scammer would have. I agree with this. I'm not sure what a "good" solution is though. My first instinct is to link all the characters of any single account, so you can see all the alts' names in the info of any one of them. The problem though, is that it limits role playing, and it also prevents disguises. It may not be honest, but using an alt to spy on enemy movements is a legitimate tactic. Also, there's nothing preventing one from just buying multiple accounts... especially if one of the scams yields rewards, since 100 million ISK a month isn't that hard to come by. Right now, we must rely on our own skills in spotting similar messaging styles, similar actions, and personalities to detect the multiple facets of the scammer. I'm sure similar ideas are being tossed around between drinks over at CCP, so we'll just have to see what they come up with. :) <=----=> *Vila Restal: I'm entitled to my opinion. Kerr Avon*: It is your assumption that we are entitled to it as well that is irritating.
Mag's	Posted - 2006.06.14 19:17:00 - [56] Originally by: spurious signal Originally by: Avon Originally by: Requiem XIII Originally by: Sir Juri bad idea and wouldnt work. Just to clarify, you're quite content for people to Scam other people with no repercussions ? Technically it is the characters doing it, not the players. I could only accept that "technical" qualification if different characters owned by the same player were unable to transfer isk or assets bewteen each other This is where the 'Draw the line' question arises again. If an alt does a similar scam, who get hit with the repercussions? The main? What if the player has multiple accounts, do they all get hit?
Apertotes	Posted - 2006.06.14 19:18:00 - [57] this is such a good time to get rid of alts... oh, and local too pd: how are those contracts doing? still on the oven? Apertotes, the Guybrush Threepwood of New Eve
Naphtalia	Posted - 2006.06.14 19:18:00 - [58] Originally by: Avon Technically it is the characters doing it, not the players. Right "very in-character": Originally by: Janette Janette > 1) fallback = my brother has access to it all, and will take care of it if anything might happen Quote: EMFi Manager > are there any really big figure heads that know you well? EMFi Manager > or even IRL? Janette > do you know xxxxxxx? As soon as someone is referencing other characters (alts) as references, or Real Life connections to brothers/friends, especially on the forums it is no longer the character or an in-character action. EMFI General IPO is Closed!
Alisha Lewarx	Posted - 2006.06.14 19:18:00 - [59] i'd like to start off by saying that everything has been said already in other threads. but since some people keep repeating erroneous logic like a mantra, i guess some things have to be repeated here 1) why don't you mention embezzlement as a risk in a real IPO? 2) the risk for a scammer is that he does all his scamming work and noone falls for it. 3) the justification for scamming is that it is an integral part of the game. 4) "risk vs reward" is the reason why investments should not work as an i-win button. some people here seem to miss the point that making money in eve is a little bit easier than in reallife (because of unlimited resources available in eve). the only way to lose money in eve is fighting (and losing). since 99% of business ventures don't engage in fights, they can't lose money. right now the only risk involved in investments is investing in the wrong person. remove that and you remove the risk. 5) to the devs: introducing a new rule and then applying it to an incident that happened before the introduction goes against the most basic principles of lawmaking. Originally by: Kylania There's Risk for Investors in a real IPO. Will it make money? Will it tank? Will you make your investment back? There's reward for Investors and CEOs in a real IPO as well. So there's your Risk Vs Reward. There's nothing but Risk for Investors in a scam IPO. There's no reward for Investors and only reward for the CEO. There's also no risk for the CEO if there's no chance a GM will stop the scam. Using "Risk vs Reward" to jutify scamming is wrong.
Requiem XIII	Posted - 2006.06.14 19:20:00 - [60] Originally by: Mag's This is where the 'Draw the line' question arises again. If an alt does a similar scam, who get hit with the repercussions? The main? What if the player has multiple accounts, do they all get hit? This is why I'm glad I'm not a GM, I don't know the answer to that. Can you hear me now ? Can you feel ?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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.