EVE Search - Concerning the Recent Allegations of Developer Misconduct

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

Concerning the Recent Allegations of Developer Misconduct

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)
Jacob Majestic GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.02.07 16:34:00 - [1] Edited by: Jacob Majestic on 07/02/2007 16:34:17 Originally by: Sinlare Originally by: Prydeless I dont see how anyone can say how nothing was found. Kierons original post might as well of been locked for no content... If a glass is empty it's empty, it can't magically be full just because you wish it is. Without "spamming corp members" this misconduct would have never been brought to light. How long are you going to be satisfied "playing BoB's game" when there is evidence that the game has been rigged? Originally by: The Mittani There absolutely, utterly, should never be any devs leading the capital fleet of a 0.0 alliance who also happen to donate all their t2 bpos to their corporation after being outed as a dev and forced to leave. It should also be noted that these events were alleged to occur in 2005. Anyone who plays EVE knows that it takes money to make money. Any ill-gotten gains that were worth X in 2005 probably have made an impact of 2X or even 3X now that we're in 2007.
Jacob Majestic GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.02.07 16:47:00 - [2] Edited by: Jacob Majestic on 07/02/2007 16:46:02 Edited by: Jacob Majestic on 07/02/2007 16:45:30 Originally by: Gneiss Phace Originally by: kieron In both cases, these accusations were recently brought forward when a player revealed the identity of numerous CCP employee characters. Since these play characters are known to belong to CCP employees, they will be removed from the game. Many of them have been around since the creation of EVE and it is most unfortunate that these developers are now forced to end their relationships with their in-game friends, but that is our policy when the anonymity of staff members has been compromised. Oh noes! Devs will have to buy new uber characters and rejoin their old corps! With un-traceable and unaccountable character names! The horror. The horror. Like relationships end when toons die.... Oh yea, and if they have cash flow problems, they can spawn officer-fitted Scorpions and fly them into a BoB gatecamp! Not like CCP GMs would ever consider doing something like that. Oh wait.
Jacob Majestic GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.02.07 16:51:00 - [3] Originally by: Avon If I was leaving Eve I would give my stuff to BNC. What would you do with your stuff? You don't think CCP devs should be held to a higher standard of ethics with regard to their interaction with in-game alliances? Interesting.
Jacob Majestic GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.02.07 16:54:00 - [4] Originally by: Avon Originally by: Jacob Majestic Originally by: Avon If I was leaving Eve I would give my stuff to BNC. What would you do with your stuff? You don't think CCP devs should be held to a higher standard of ethics with regard to their interaction with in-game alliances? Interesting. What is unethical about giving your corp your stuff? Would you ask questions if an employee of the US Mint died and left his descendants stacks of consecutively-numbered $100 bills?
Jacob Majestic GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.02.07 17:11:00 - [5] Originally by: Fi T'Zeh To be completely frank with you, I don't find it odd at all. That might be because I've only ever existed in one corp, which works on a communist model. Our members regularly kill officer spawns and hand over the modules for sale for corp benefit. In the last week we have been running at 100% corp tax and in the history of Evolution I would estimate that up to 50% of our BPOs have come from our members winning them in the lottery and presenting them to the corp. That's how we work. So to reiterate, no I don't find it odd. Not everyone is motivated by personal gain in this game. 1. That sort of asset distribution is the exception, not the rule. 2. Whether or not the assets became personally-owned after the transfer, the assets were still valuable. If the assets were improperly acquired, the alliance in question would have received substantial improper advantage. 3. It has been alleged that there were payments made to alts of the dev in question by the alliance in question for use of the BPOs that were turned over. If these allegations are true, the dev in question continued to profit from the relationship with the alliance in question even after the relationship was formally dissolved.
Jacob Majestic GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.02.07 17:22:00 - [6] Originally by: Logan Feynman Edited by: Logan Feynman on 07/02/2007 17:10:08 Originally by: Jacob Majestic Originally by: Fi T'Zeh To be completely frank with you, I don't find it odd at all. That might be because I've only ever existed in one corp, which works on a communist model. Our members regularly kill officer spawns and hand over the modules for sale for corp benefit. In the last week we have been running at 100% corp tax and in the history of Evolution I would estimate that up to 50% of our BPOs have come from our members winning them in the lottery and presenting them to the corp. That's how we work. So to reiterate, no I don't find it odd. Not everyone is motivated by personal gain in this game. 1. That sort of asset distribution is the exception, not the rule. 2. Whether or not the assets became personally-owned after the transfer, the assets were still valuable. If the assets were improperly acquired, the alliance in question would have received substantial improper advantage. 3. It has been alleged that there were payments made to alts of the dev in question by the alliance in question for use of the BPOs that were turned over. If these allegations are true, the dev in question continued to profit from the relationship with the alliance in question even after the relationship was formally dissolved. As to 1) RKK is a communist corp. As to 2) and 3) ... that's a lot of ifs. 1. RKK may be a communist corp, but it has been alleged that payments were made to an alt of the dev in question anyway. As for 2 and 3, you're right, that is a lot of "if"s. However, if you work for the US Mint and the police finds $10,000 in marked bills in your house, the police should start making allegations and asking questions that involve "if", shouldn't they? The fact of the matter is that a dev with the power to create and destroy in-game assets was forced to leave an in-game alliance and allegedly transferred in-game assets to corp members before he left, assets which he allegedly continued to profit from after his separation with the corp. Explain to me why exactly I should give the dev in question the benefit of the doubt.
Jacob Majestic GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.02.07 17:39:00 - [7] Originally by: Logan Feynman He left BPOs. There was a finite and precise number of BPOs of each type given. Each BPO in game is accounted for. Especially those owned by dev characters. We can be pretty sure they were not "a bunch of marked bills", so the argument should just stop there. How do you know that every BPO in the game is accounted for? How can you trust who is doing the accounting? When I make assumptions and allegations, I clearly state that I am doing so. You are assuming a lot of things to be true that, if the allegations are correct, we can no longer assume. You are asking me to give someone who has the power to spawn arbitrary in-game items and perhaps even has SQL UPDATE access rights to the TQ database the benefit of the doubt in a case where he is alleged of improperly transferring assets. To use my $10,000 in marked bills analogy one last time, if you were a defense lawyer and made that same argument to a judge as to why the case should be thrown out, you'd get laughed out of court.
Jacob Majestic GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.02.07 19:09:00 - [8] Edited by: Jacob Majestic on 07/02/2007 19:08:30 Originally by: Elve Sorrow I see where this is going. "Let's post absolutely nothing, allow the community to flame for 24 hrs then close topic." We knew that from the first post: Originally by: kieron we have not been able to confirm nor deny the veracity of these allegations That's polispeak for "**** off".
Jacob Majestic GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.02.07 19:41:00 - [9] Edited by: Jacob Majestic on 07/02/2007 19:38:34 Originally by: j0sephine Frankly, it's sad to see people hell-bent on raking t20 over the coals in this thread. He's perhaps most dedicated out of them all to provide community on the whole with extra info -- these 3rd party websites with item browsers, jump planners, manufacturing tables etc? They work based on data dumps provided by none but t20. He's been also about the only one to openly (in another thread on this forum) talk how it is to be a dev who plays the game on regular account... i.e. the only person who can be seen as giving some of that "transparency" people scream for. What he gets for that transparency? His own quotes thrown back at him as "evidence of guilt". Yeah, that kind of reaction will work swimmingly in convincing CCP to be more transparent with their playerbase. I agree that t20 is a good person and an asset to the community. I also agree that many of the people who are squaking the loudest (Goonswarm, among others) might be construed to have a conflict of interest. However, good people can do bad things. For someone in t20's position, a little temporary impropriety can have long-lasting in-game effects. If kieron had conducted the investigation and reported the results transparently, I wouldn't be as frustrated as I am. However, kieron has shown no interest in transparency. His statement is instead a declaration that CCP intends to sweep this episode under the rug. This is why I feel this scandal has effects that transcend in-game political affiliation. The sociopolitical fabric of the game depends fundamentally on the concept that in-game assets are acquired fairly. (Think about what would happen to mineral markets if someone found a way to dupe Megacyte, or what would happen to T2 markets if someone found a way to run reactions in station rather than in a POS.) The mere appearance of impropriety on t20's part is a direct attack on this fundamental assumption. Mind you, this is the effect of the mere appearance of impropriety. If any actual improper actions took place as alleged the sociopolitical and economic consequences are profound. This is why I'm squawking. -dbp
Jacob Majestic GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.02.07 22:11:00 - [10] Originally by: Pravest Dall If anybody should be banned - it's should be Goons and AAA for their shameless attempt to manipulate this non-event to try and weaken their enemies in the game. It's ironic that the biggest asshats and exploiters in eve should be screaming the loudest and at the same time demonstrate that their reading comprehension is zero and their logic deduction non-existent. To all the tin-foil hatters leaving - good riddance. To the devs, good luck in re-establishing your characters. PS. Not a bob alt, bob pet alt, bob fanboy, ect ... but you ****heads won't believe that anyway. I'm going to keep posting this until people read it and understand it. I agree that many of the people who are squaking the loudest (Goonswarm, among others) might be construed to have a conflict of interest. However, good people can do bad things. For someone in t20's position, a little temporary impropriety can have long-lasting in-game effects. If kieron had conducted the investigation and reported the results transparently, I wouldn't be as frustrated as I am. However, kieron has shown no interest in transparency. His statement is instead a declaration that CCP intends to sweep this episode under the rug. This is why I feel this scandal has effects that transcend in-game political affiliation. The sociopolitical fabric of the game depends fundamentally on the concept that in-game assets are acquired fairly. (Think about what would happen to mineral markets if someone found a way to dupe Megacyte, or what would happen to T2 markets if someone found a way to run reactions in station rather than in a POS.) The mere appearance of impropriety on t20's part is a direct attack on this fundamental assumption. Mind you, this is the effect of the mere appearance of impropriety. If any actual improper actions took place as alleged the sociopolitical and economic consequences are profound. This is why I'm squawking.

Jacob Majestic GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.02.07 22:31:00 - [11] Edited by: Jacob Majestic on 07/02/2007 22:28:32 Originally by: Galea Wildfang - DB Preacher There hasn't been any evidence of him buying a character for out of game currencies or any other violation of the EULA - SirMolle Has violated the EULA by posting RL Information about another gamer. He edited his post short after to remove said information. This will result in a temporary ban. Any further posting of RL informations about another player will result in permanent bans, not only for SirMolle - Kugu..... Gets his accounts permanently banned for releasing RL informations of a CCP employee. The only problem with making a list of people to ban is that the EULA is quite nebulous. For example, the EULA is not a legal document, it is an EULA violation to "break laws," whatever that means. As another example, if the allegations are true that t20 directly oversaw RKK's capital operations, he would be privy to intimate knowledge of massive account sharing. Take a second and study the EULA. I'm sure if you look hard enough you'll find a way to get banned. This makes it even more important that we be able to trust that CCP devs and GMs will adjucate the rules fairly. For example, when you petition you trust that the GMs that read your petition will decide your petition in a clear and consistent manner. Kieron's lack of transparency makes me wonder if CCP's culture is changing for the worse. -dbp edit Not enough carriage returns.
Jacob Majestic GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.02.07 22:46:00 - [12] Originally by: Hectic Some of my friends are gone. I hope at least some of you whiners realize what that means. Is this a parody post? My sarcasm detector is broken.

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.