| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Sol Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
455
   |
Posted - 2014.12.19 17:57:33 -
[1] - Quote
Hey, while we're at it ...
Can I have a button that sends a command to the other client,
without me having to need to switch focus?
No information would be sent automatically or multiplexed,
as I still have to control each client individually.
Oh. I answered my question all by myself.
Sheesh, how did I do that ? |
Sol Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
455
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 18:05:57 -
[2] - Quote
Well, anyhow ....
- I presume it is OK for me to map the keypad on the side of the mouse to the function keys (1=F1, 2=F2 etc) to allow me to activate modules when flying a ship. Can this be confirmed?
Confirming.
- I presume it is NOT OK for me to map a macro to the keypad (1=F1, pause 2 seconds, Press F1) to "pulse" a module. Can this be confirmed?
Confirming again. You may use any button you like for any input you want,
as long as it's only one [unit of action] you personally trigger at one single client.
What's verboten, is multiplexing and automation.
Multiplexing means that you trigger one [unit of action] and software turns it into multiple.
This unit would get sent to several other clients.
Automation is when the computer initiates a unit all by himself.
Save the GMs the time, you don't need the petition. |
Sol Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
531
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 22:48:33 -
[3] - Quote
Ydnari wrote:CCP Logibro wrote:If you want clarification for anything like this, the best thing to do is to file a support ticket and ask the GMs. Any other answer will be non-authoritative. Why not clarify publicly? It's against the rules to post GM communication for others to see, so should everybody in EVE petition it to find what the rules are? Surely a clear, public statement of the rules against input automation would be better.
It's already clear enough for those who are capable of reading and understanding.
Wanting to avoid a pointless discussion on the forums on a workday is a completely different matter. |
Sol Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
540
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 02:32:55 -
[4] - Quote
Ydnari wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:Ydnari wrote:
Why not clarify publicly? It's against the rules to post GM communication for others to see, so should everybody in EVE petition it to find what the rules are?
Surely a clear, public statement of the rules against input automation would be better.
I hear the EULA is the best public statement for such things. If you can't understand the EULA then you should ask privately as you are asking for legal advice. And it says no, you can't. So why not just say no instead of the wishy-washy statements.
Because it's written in the EULA and you have to accept it.
If you have issues with the EULA, then don't and leave.
Asking the devs to talk with you about what's written in it is nonsense,
especially because it is pretty obvious that you do not understand the EULA in the first place.
This thread should be locked,
because you are a pest.
Because you are unwilling or unable to accept that you are in no way or form entitled to know more,
not entitled to a response, nothing. You accepted the EULA and if you do not want to, then leave.
If you have questions about the EULA, file a petition.
A case by case basis means exactly that. If you lost your arms and ask for them to allow you to use
your special software that allows you to control the computer using your eyes and that leads to
small amounts of automation (imagine F1-F8) ... then I am certain that they will allow it!
Why? Because it's a case where it makes sense!
To understand the EULA you have to use your brain. You, though, have a very good reason why you
want to know in the first place. Whatever it is ... I doubt you have good intentions.
This thread should be locked, because the OPs question already got answered by people who
are able to read and understand the EULA. The fact that devs tell you to submit a ticket,
means that they do not and will not start a pointless discussion about something beyond reach. |
Sol Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
554
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 07:35:52 -
[5] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:According to a strict reading of the EULA, just about every 3rd party program and website that uses the EVE cache in one way or another is in violation. The EULA's been ignored, dismissed, and even been contradicted by CCP employees (Devs and GMs) in the past with often no warning between "It's ok, you're fine" and "It's banned, and so are you!". Asking for CCP to put a tiny one paragraph statement somewhere where you can reference it when you petition a GM for wrongful ban is not asking too much.
Incursions ey?
Botters.
|
Sol Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
567
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 10:35:02 -
[6] - Quote
Serene Repose wrote:Sol Project wrote:
Automation is when the computer initiates a unit all by himself.
Why not HERself, HUH? How do YOU know computers are guys, HUH HUH HUH?? Cars are girls. Airplanes are girls. So...ODDS ARE!!!  :D
I love you too, honey. :) |
Sol Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
567
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 10:43:11 -
[7] - Quote
Jessica Lanson wrote:J'Poll wrote:
If you read the rules closely, it also states that petitions are dealt with on a case by case situation.
Hence no fixed answer to it...
As it does matter under which circumstances stuff happens.
Then they need to publish the (anonymised) decisions. It's completely ridiculous that the laws of the land are not publically available. If the circumstances of the case are similar to an existing case, then the GM decision should be the same. I should not need to ask a policeman or judge if I can do XYZ. I should be able to determine this beforehand using public materials. The only reason to keep it secret is to allow the application of different rules based on who you are.
And that bothers you ... why?
See my former post for an example of "case by case". If you feel that you could somehow be left out,
or be at a disadvantage compared to others, then the issue is with you and not the EULA.
I doubt you have sincere intentions. I also doubt that you are incapable of understanding why
there is a case by case ruling. You know it makes sense, because it allows the GMs to adapt to
varying situations, like the case I mentioned for example.
There is no possible way to deal with this otherwise ...
... and there is no need to "clarify" something that's clear enough already.
No multiplexing, no automatation.
That's all there is to it. If you feel like having a special case,
you too are free to file a petition.
|
Sol Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
568
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 11:32:13 -
[8] - Quote
This thread is a hilarious reflection of "modern" western societies. |
Sol Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
704
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 14:31:16 -
[9] - Quote
It's interesting to sed an incursioneer be angry about this.
Kind of makes it obvious who is the greedy nogood here...
Funny christmas video
|
Sol Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
738
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 20:01:52 -
[10] - Quote
lol all the idiots ...
Funny christmas video
|
| |
|