EVE Search - Words from the GM Team, a new Dev Blog

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

Words from the GM Team, a new Dev Blog

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 8 post(s)

kieron	Posted - 2007.02.20 17:37:00 - [1] The first in a short series of Blogs from the GM team to help the community understand some of the rules and policies that we must all abide by while participating in the EVE Community and to provide some insight into the day to day activities of the Customer Support team, Senior Game Master Nova has written a blog concerning one section of the End User License Agreement (EULA) and account information sharing. Sharing is caring, unless it's account sharing. Check it out and please keep discussion on-topic. kieron Community Manager, EVE Online

Paddlefoot Aeon Neogen Industries Serenity Fallen	Posted - 2007.02.20 18:10:00 - [2] Edited by: Paddlefoot Aeon on 20/02/2007 18:14:10 First (first ever time... yay!) With the GM cue backed up the way it is, its a shame that account sharing takes up so much of their time. I know ppl who have had petitions pending for weeks, and gotten no response. Please post the characters who are guilty of sharing, and let the player base monitor itself... hopefully with the F1-F8 keys! -----------------------------------------------
Velsharoon Gallente The Black Rabbits Fatal Persuasion	Posted - 2007.02.20 18:17:00 - [3] How about realising why Account Sharing happens and do something about it? Have the ability to queue a second skill for people going on holidays, address why "cynonets" exist. Personally I dont have first hand experience with them but I understand the reasons behind them. And can every Dev and GM honestly say their spouse/friend has never had access to their accounts? I dont care either way tbh (I have no life and dont need people to run my accounts and have seperate accounts for different things) but it just seems slightly hypocritical.
phillie blunt State War Academy	Posted - 2007.02.20 18:19:00 - [4] so the cynonet thing is illegal?
NobodyHere	Posted - 2007.02.20 18:24:00 - [5] Some day I'll read the EULA I promisse p.s. I just want to play the game
Gnulpie Minmatar Miner Tech	Posted - 2007.02.20 18:27:00 - [6] Originally by: phillie blunt so the cynonet thing is illegal? Account sharing is not allowed. If the cynonet is based on account sharing, then it is illegal also. Everything which involves account sharing is strictly forbidden. The EULA and the blog are very clear about this.
Dunedon	Posted - 2007.02.20 18:36:00 - [7] Does this policy also mean that using tools that store your username and password to retrieve information about your character from the myeve website are also illegal? Is there a differance if it's a local utility, or an external website that is using this information? Or am I reading to much into this? - Dunedon

kieron	Posted - 2007.02.20 18:47:00 - [8] Originally by: Dunedon Does this policy also mean that using tools that store your username and password to retrieve information about your character from the myeve website are also illegal? This pertains to account information sharing among users who are not in the immediate family and living in the same household. Some tools such as EVEMon have been given a stamp of approval by CCP. Walking through the office, you would probably be amazed at the number of workstations that have a familiar blue icon residing in their trays. kieron Community Manager, EVE Online

Max Hardcase Art of War Cult of War	Posted - 2007.02.20 18:48:00 - [9] I hope you CCP guys know that that EULA stuff is worth a gnats fart in the EU ?
Br0wn 0ps	Posted - 2007.02.20 18:56:00 - [10] Clearly, you need to either address the reason why CynoNets are there, or simply allow them with corp/alliance GTC purchased accounts. I mean, if an entity is paying for an account, that entity should be allowed to use it, correct?
Valeo Galaem InterGalactic Corp. Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2007.02.20 19:09:00 - [11] Originally by: Max Hardcase Edited by: Max Hardcase on 20/02/2007 18:51:18 Edited by: Max Hardcase on 20/02/2007 18:47:35 I hope you CCP guys know that some parts of that EULA stuff is worth a gnats fart in the EU ? The EULA is a contract that says CCP may grant you access to the game as they like in exchange for a fee. If you click accept, you've signed it, and from that point CCP has the legal right revoke / change that access. It has nothing to do with your own national laws or legality, and if the EU doesn't recognize formal contracts then that's something new. You break the terms of the EULA, CCP bans your account. Thats how it works. Thar be Pirates You are not authorised to hack into CONCORD's mainframe Your Wallet has been emptied! CONCORD Encryption Methods
Gut Punch Gallente The Revenant	Posted - 2007.02.20 19:12:00 - [12] I find it very funny that you spend some time reminding us "common" people about the EULA, yet you continue to let BoB stand with cynonets... It just strikes me as comical... PS. How/Why do you make the distinction between sharing accounts with other people and sharing account info with 3rd party programs? How come that is given "CCP's stamp of approval"? --- --- How many more devs play in BoB? Why did it take 6 months for you to tell us? WHEN WILL YOU TELL US THE FULL STORY?
Andrue Amarr	Posted - 2007.02.20 19:17:00 - [13] Originally by: Max Hardcase Edited by: Max Hardcase on 20/02/2007 18:51:18 Edited by: Max Hardcase on 20/02/2007 18:47:35 I hope you CCP guys know that some parts of that EULA stuff is worth a gnats fart in the EU ? Which bits and why does it matter? If you're talking about some right to privacy or freedom of speech then you're way off base. Such things relate to the EU itself and have no bearing within a private domain. CCP has every right to place restrictions on its players exactly as a publican or shopkeeper has the right to deny you access or throw you out. But enlighten us, which bits of the EULA don't you like? -- (Battle hardened industrialist) [Brackley, UK] Please don't read this signature.
Azerrad InExile	Posted - 2007.02.20 19:28:00 - [14] Originally by: Gut Punch PS. How/Why do you make the distinction between sharing accounts with other people and sharing account info with 3rd party programs? How come that is given "CCP's stamp of approval"? Originally by: EULA anyone The term "anyone" (as opposed to "anything") clearly implies a person. If you are sharing it with a person then it is not in compliance with the EULA. If you are sharing it with a program (i.e. not a person; not "anyone") it is ok. Note that this doesn't mean that giving your account login details to a mining macro to mine for your while your away is ok just because the macro is not a person. Macros and such are still not in compliance with the EULA, but that is covered in a different section. Note that this analysis of the EULA is my personal opinion and is in no way intended to represent CCP's views on the EULA, and those are the only ones that matter in the end. t20: "So Let us play and enjoy the game you and I both love on the same level."
Shamus Kain	Posted - 2007.02.20 20:10:00 - [15] Originally by: Gut Punch I find it very funny that you spend some time reminding us "common" people about the EULA, yet you continue to let BoB stand with cynonets... It just strikes me as comical... You absolutly right. CCP please ban every pilot that has ever flown for Bob, MM, Rzr, D2, RA, LV, Outbreak, Ka-Tet, and every other aliance that owns a cyno-net Obviously its not fair that every big alliance in that game including bob uses this.
Riothamus FinFleet Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.20 20:11:00 - [16] Being a serviceman (one among many that play Eve), it is not uncommon for me/us to be sent on fairly long term out-of-area commitments. Since many of us live alone, what are the chances that the facility to queue skill training could be introduced? Doing our job can entail that you be disadvantaged enough, without it happening in Eve, a pastime that we all (I am sure) very much enjoy.
Anaire Cirden	Posted - 2007.02.20 20:21:00 - [17] If you must 'break the rules' and share, surely the practice of changing your password would go a long way towards protecting you afterwards?
hazeb Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.02.20 20:24:00 - [18] What about... http://www.eve-online.com/pnp/namepolicy.asp Item 1.c Quote: EVE Online subscribers are responsible for protecting the confidentiality of their account information. Any authorized use of a subscriberÆs account by another individual is the responsibility of the account holder. The subscriber is responsible for the behavior of others who are permitted to use his or her account. Therefore, account holders are strongly urged not to share accounts or account information with others.
IHaul4U	Posted - 2007.02.20 20:24:00 - [19] If this is CCPs stance on things then I suggest you look at some of the common reasons for account sharing and figure out a way to solve them. 1) Scheduling of Skills. As long as the account is active let the user select what skills they want to train. This way when people go on vacation etc and don't really have a long skill to train they can just set several smaller skills to be ready when they get back. This needs to be tied to the account being paid. Training while the account is inactive is just lame. 2) Cyno Chars - Something needs to be done about these. How do you move a capital ship and have no friends online at the current moment. (And without buying another account) 3) Corporate Capital Pilots - I can understand the issue with this in some regard.... Though on the other side of things if the issue is for the small corps that might only have one carrier. If you can't share your account you delegate that one person to the fun detail of jumping the carrier all over the place. Plus other things as well. Maybe we can have a lock down option on capital ships. Meaning that unless voted on by the shareholders only the person who it was locked down to is allowed to use it and cannot sell or trade it.... Only issue might be to self destruct it for insurance money or something.... But maybe if it's locked down then the money goes to the corp and self destruct won't work. 4) Freighter Pilots - See #3 5) Pos Manager Chars - Same as #3 but I could see some corporations using this as well to fill up their pos. Not sure how to solve this issue tbh 6) Hauler characters. Some people have only one account and use a friends account to haul when they are not online. Only way around this is for that person to get another account which means more money for CCP which I guess is what you want but it's not really fair. 7-100 - Too lazy to keep up with more examples tbh. My suggestion to CCP would be to change the policy to allow account sharing but at your own risk... Meaning if you allow someone to use your account then that person steels your stuff then guess what... Your SOL... Sorry but it's just like if someone left their keys in the ignition and went to bed or something. The only issue would be hacking which will take up your time even with the current policy so imo that doesn't change anything. An other option would be to allow corporations to purchase accounts that can be shared. While this doesn't solve all the problems it does help somewhat. CCP I encourage you to change your mind on this issue...
IHaul4U	Posted - 2007.02.20 20:26:00 - [20] Originally by: hazeb What about... http://www.eve-online.com/pnp/namepolicy.asp Item 1.c Quote: EVE Online subscribers are responsible for protecting the confidentiality of their account information. Any authorized use of a subscriberÆs account by another individual is the responsibility of the account holder. The subscriber is responsible for the behavior of others who are permitted to use his or her account. Therefore, account holders are strongly urged not to share accounts or account information with others. Oops... More doublespeak from CCP... So which is it... Allowed or not allowed???
Rutoo Gallente Interstellar eXodus R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.02.20 20:31:00 - [21] I don't think a skill training queue should ever be introduced. Unless you don't train skills on a deactive account. that means they can go away for a year come back and have all the skills trained they wanted. Which is stupid. As for account sharing, i understand that there is a possibility of someone doing the sort of thing mentioned in the blog, but thats the risk. I personally pay for 3 accounts but let my best friend (Who pays me in cash cause he doesn't have a credit card) use an account. Is this considered account sharing? Illegal? And how often to you track down and punish people who are doing this but not petitioning becuase they are best friends in real life in? Is it Tracked? you see logs of which IP's connected to which account on one day? What if i goto my other friends house and log in there? does it pop up a flag that says warning account IP changed? goes in a log? Just for a rainy day? I think it should be mentioned that yes, it's illegal, but it's not something thats overly inforced. Just incase of the situtation's above. There is a huge difference in sharing an account with your Best Friend in Real Life, and Sharing an account with your Corp-Mates ingame. Unless of Course if your Corp-Mates ingame is also your BestFriend in RealLife. _________________________________________________________ My Second EvE Video Club Seals Not Sandwichs

GM Nova	Posted - 2007.02.20 20:45:00 - [22] Originally by: Paddlefoot Aeon With the GM cue backed up the way it is, its a shame that account sharing takes up so much of their time. I know ppl who have had petitions pending for weeks, and gotten no response. Please post the characters who are guilty of sharing, and let the player base monitor itself... hopefully with the F1-F8 keys! Account sharing is not the single thing which is creating a load on CS. There are many contributing factors and this is one which can be influenced directly by the player. We are not going to publish any names because this is not about punishment. As I wrote in the blog, it is about shared responsibilities and how you the players can directly affect the level of service through enlightenment. Originally by: Velsharoon How about realising why Account Sharing happens and do something about it? Have the ability to queue a second skill for people going on holidays, address why "cynonets" exist. Personally I dont have first hand experience with them but I understand the reasons behind them. And can every Dev and GM honestly say their spouse/friend has never had access to their accounts? I dont care either way tbh (I have no life and dont need people to run my accounts and have seperate accounts for different things) but it just seems slightly hypocritical. I am glad you bring a constructive opinion into your reply and I urge you to post your ideas on queued skilltraining in Features and Ideas discussions. We can not proactively seek out accounts that might be shared, that would even waste more of our time. We can only hope that players reading this blog and thread realize the reasons behind our policy and that we are rewarded accordingly. I can honestly say that I am the only person in the history of mankind that has ever logged into my account. I can not answer for other CCP staff members though as you can imagine. I hardly think that this thread is the correct forum for making accusations and passing judgement based on suspicion and speculation. Originally by: Br0wn 0ps Clearly, you need to either address the reason why CynoNets are there, or simply allow them with corp/alliance GTC purchased accounts. I mean, if an entity is paying for an account, that entity should be allowed to use it, correct? We know the purpose of cynonets and yes, sharing accounts in order to create them is a violation of our EULA. We can hardly go on a hunt after prospective EULA violators on a mere suspicion. Cynonets are sadly not the topic of this thread and thus I will not comment on it again. Regarding your second question, then I'm afraid you are wrong on that one. The person registered for the account is the owner of the account, regardless of who is paying for it. GM Nova

Vladimir Tinakin Caldari Hadean Drive Yards Archaean Cooperative	Posted - 2007.02.20 20:45:00 - [23] So certain 'communist' corps that require you to hand over logon information as part of the deal are....not complying by the EULA? Shocking. ----------------------------------------------- Adm Vladimir Tinakin CFO / Acting Logistics CO Hadean Drive Yards
Rutoo Gallente Interstellar eXodus R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.02.20 20:52:00 - [24] Originally by: Vladimir Tinakin So certain 'communist' corps that require you to hand over logon information as part of the deal are....not complying by the EULA? Shocking. If a corp that i was going to join asked me for log in details i would tell them the shove it. If it caused me not to join...then fine. _________________________________________________________ My Second EvE Video Club Seals Not Sandwichs
Tarminic	Posted - 2007.02.20 20:56:00 - [25] Have you guys at CCP considered doing something like creating a "Corporate" account for eve? This special account could be accessed by certain other characters that players could add in-game or through the website? That way there could be a way for CCP to provide an official means to allow character-sharing without said character having to give their login information out in-game, and allows the player in question to control who can access their character. It wouldn't solve every problem, but it would help alot. It's true, I swear.

GM Nova	Posted - 2007.02.20 21:03:00 - [26] Originally by: Rutoo I personally pay for 3 accounts but let my best friend (Who pays me in cash cause he doesn't have a credit card) use an account. Is this considered account sharing? Illegal? And how often to you track down and punish people who are doing this but not petitioning becuase they are best friends in real life in? Is it Tracked? you see logs of which IP's connected to which account on one day? What if i goto my other friends house and log in there? does it pop up a flag that says warning account IP changed? goes in a log? Just for a rainy day? It is not illegal, it is a violation of our policies. I am however not going to show up in the morning with a PostIt stapled to my forehead saying, "Remember to ban Rutoo. He is a scumsucking EULA violator." Not at all. The good thing is that now you know clearly the reasoning behind the policy and that your sharing your account details can have bad consequenses. Don't think we have not seen players shaft their best friend, co-worker, boss at work, brother, sister and yes even their father. GM Nova

Ankanos Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2007.02.20 21:19:00 - [27] Edited by: Ankanos on 20/02/2007 21:17:59 -a short sighted response: i suppose telling any petitioner "sorry, account sharing is a against the EULA, therefore we cannot help you in this matter since you gave out your info willingly.." -thus freeing the que rather nicely...? ( i relize this might tarnish your outstanding support, but what would be the downside of this type of response?) edit: (i am guilty of sharing on occasion, but i myself would never bother support if had been shafted.. i know the risk...i accept the consequenses..and would handle it, "internally") -ank ---
Dronte Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.20 21:26:00 - [28] Originally by: GM Nova It is not illegal, it is a violation of our policies. I am however not going to show up in the morning with a PostIt stapled to my forehead saying, "Remember to ban Rutoo. He is a scumsucking EULA violator." Not at all. The good thing is that now you know clearly the reasoning behind the policy and that your sharing your account details can have bad consequenses. Don't think we have not seen players shaft their best friend, co-worker, boss at work, brother, sister and yes even their father. GM Nova I fully understand the reasons for having this in the EULA/ToS/ToU etc. but since this is the policy from CCP, shouldnt you amend the User policy, which clearly states in its opening paragraph: Originally by: User Policy c. EVE Online subscribers are responsible for protecting the confidentiality of their account information. Any authorized use of a subscriberÆs account by another individual is the responsibility of the account holder. The subscriber is responsible for the behavior of others who are permitted to use his or her account. Therefore, account holders are strongly urged not to share accounts or account information with others. It is understandable that players will get confused about what is and what isnt allowed (remember, not everyone reads the dev blogs). And while Im on the subject, please, please, please make it a bit more transparant what is and isnt allowed. Make a short list of the regular "Do's and Dont's" you as a GM encounter on a daily basis. Asking your users to read not just the EULA, but the Terms of Service, the Terms of Use, the Naming Policy, the Forum Rules, the Chat Rules and possibly the Ban Policy, just isnt the right thing to do, in my opinion. By all means, i know and support there being rules, but it should really have to a lot easier to get the jist of them in a quick and easy way, not by having to read litteraly pages on pages of rules and regulations, especially the EULA which, lets face it, cant be a daunting task for people who have english as their first language, let alone people who doesnt. Having to dig through pages of legal "mombojumbo" english is hardly a user friendly thing :) Last but not least, i honestly think you should allow account sharing, but with the following changes. Any petitions regarding missing funds, items etc. should of course be checked by a GM/ISD/whoever does it at CCP, for "legit" hacking. But a quick reference of IP's which accessed the account and how many times said account has been accessed for the IP, and I "know" you save this info. If the offending IP address have access the account numerous times, you can fairly certain assertain that the account info had been shared willingly by the account holder since, lets face it, if you had an enemy's login info would you login constantly just to check, and risk the target getting kicked off etc, cause you logged in. I know this isnt a perfect solution, since you would still get cases on a daily basis about this, but if the procedure for handling this could be a single click of a button or two in some interface, you could dismiss the case without having to do tons of work. I know there will false positives but that risk will always be there, no matter which way you choose to do it. I think, that doing it this way would reduce the number of cases, needing serious investigations.
Sun Sliver Minmatar Shinra Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.20 21:31:00 - [29] Originally by: GM Nova Don't think we have not seen players shaft their best friend, co-worker, boss at work, brother, sister and yes even their father. GM Nova I can see it now. 'OK Honey we got evrything worked out for the divorce...except our Eve accounts.' 'Screw you a-hole that's my account, you should have kept your cyber peepee out of my all girl corp and stuck to your bros!' 'You are such a prude!' 'Me prude? hmmm [logs in the hubby's acct] how's this for prude - i just logged in as you re-enacted the valentine's day graphic with your Avatar and told all your worst enemies to come have a blow at my hangar!' 'Oh noes...my...pooor...titan...' ...teeheehee

GM Nova	Posted - 2007.02.20 21:37:00 - [30] Originally by: Dronte It is understandable that players will get confused about what is and what isnt allowed (remember, not everyone reads the dev blogs). And while Im on the subject, please, please, please make it a bit more transparant what is and isnt allowed. Make a short list of the regular "Do's and Dont's" you as a GM encounter on a daily basis. Asking your users to read not just the EULA, but the Terms of Service, the Terms of Use, the Naming Policy, the Forum Rules, the Chat Rules and possibly the Ban Policy, just isnt the right thing to do, in my opinion. I really like this idea. How about creating a sort of ten commandments which is neatly displayed every time you log in?

Dronte Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.20 21:52:00 - [31] Edited by: Dronte on 20/02/2007 21:48:44 Originally by: GM Nova I really like this idea. How about creating a sort of ten commandments which is neatly displayed every time you log in? Im a firm believer in not showing stuff down people's throat every day, but at least when ever you create an account i think you should have a short intro from Aura (ship computer) which you are NOT able to cancel. That way you can be 100% sure that ALL players have read the rules, since the player simply cannot bypass it. This way it has been announced to the player, both in text and voice and therefor the player has no excuses to not knowing the rules. But fail that, and yes, i think a News ticker like menu on the character selection screen would be an ok alternative, though it has the possibility of cluttering the interface too much in the lower resolutions at which EVE defaults. fixed some quote'age problems :)
Don Temujin Mothers of EVE	Posted - 2007.02.20 21:56:00 - [32] Quote: EVE Online subscribers are responsible for protecting the confidentiality of their account information. Any authorized use of a subscriberÆs account by another individual is the responsibility of the account holder. The subscriber is responsible for the behavior of others who are permitted to use his or her account. Therefore, account holders are strongly urged not to share accounts or account information with others. From what I understand, this clause is there to cover two separate issues: Accounts registered by an adult and played by a kid under their responsibility/supervision ; investigations of petitionned account abuse/hacking, which is the usual reason for CCP CS to look into the 'sharing' of an account. In the first case, it makes clear that even though registering an account for the benefit of a minor, the responsability for the way the account is used ultimately rests on the registrant. In the second case, it gives CCP CS something to point to for the education of someone whose account gets abused as a result of the account holder sharing his/her accounts details. I don't see a contradiction between those terms. While I don't think prohibiting account sharing as a matter of principle is a good idea, the EULA as it is pretty much reads like this: You are not supposed to share your account details. If your account gets abused by someone, you can call on CS to assist you. If CS comes to the conclusion you created the circumstances for the abuse to take place, by sharing your account details, CS has grounds to decide you basically voided your claim to this account and they don't have to help your further, just as you forgo your right to complain if the account is deleted. Simple enough ? Now, that sounds fairly practical to me, and is my understanding of how it routinely works, but I'd like to see it laid out clearly. People should be allowed to share their account(s) under the provision of an additional EULA clause where they declare which accounts are shared and with whom, and acknowledge their extended responsibility for the account(s) they share (much like is the case already for accounts used by underage players). Corporate Accounts should be acknowledged and accepted as such, using the corporation name as account holder in the "My account" "Account Details" on secure.eve-online.com, and holding the corporation's current CEO acountable for the in-game behaviour of those accounts. (more on this below) Some game features that currently 'force' people into account sharing should be looked into (more below). [Continued below...] Mothers of EVE: We do it for the children. Some words of encouragment for EVE.
Don Temujin Mothers of EVE	Posted - 2007.02.20 21:57:00 - [33] [Continued from above] Corporate Accounts: Corporate Accounts should be implemented in game as corporation assets, based on a specific role per Corp Account to be granted (only by the CEO) to one or several members. A random password for each such corporate account could be generated daily by the server during maintenance and evemailed to the relevant corp members after d/t, tying the account access to in-game roles with a 24h latency. CEO would obviously receive the password evemails for all Corporate Accounts of his corp to avoid 'stranded accounts'. Ideally, Corporate Accounts could be implemented at a lower level and reflect on the client login window, with an additional button loading a Corporate Accounts character selection screen (lots of security issues here, may be tricky). The corp ticker could be automatically added to Corporate Accounts characters's name, to avoid confusion. Features that 'force' account sharing: Capital ships (with jump drive): Those currently require more than one account online to move around, and many characters available for any extended route. Anchorable, hardly-scannable cyno 'buoys' could allow someone to prep for a capital move ahead of time without a cyno-ship. Cyno buoys would hold enough LO for one cyno to run for 3-5 minutes, be triggered remotely by their owner, and be destroyed after they end their cycle. Coming with a shorter run time, they are one-shot only, and to be run 'blind' in most cases (without a friendly pilot to check the surroundings for hostiles) balancing risk/benefits compared to ship-generated cynos. Possibly could be deployable 'for corp' or only 'for self'. Freighters: Those aren't jump-drive capable, but in the eyes of most players are a corp-level tool rather than a personal ship, and the pilots trained for freighters in most small corps tend to be few, for obvious reasons. Reducing the skill requirements for those ships should go a long way, maybe by reducing the secondary skill requirement from Racial Industrial 5 down to 4. POS management: This is more of an indirect effect of POSes being spread accross various systems, being high maintenance (and whimsical) assets, and because of the lack of remote monitoring capacities, that some corps use shared alts to keep tabs on POS status. Adding remote monitoring to POSes should go a long way. Skill switching: Fairly obvious. Not everybody has a lot of lvl5 rank 14 skills waiting to be training when they go on holidays, and not everybody is always able to foretell a short (read couple days) leave from EVE. That fosters account sharing to simply play on par with the no-lifers in EVE, skills-wise. Adding a training queue should cover most situations: either automatic (will auto swicth to the next level in same skill, then shortest training skill in same field, then next field etc.) or based on a dual training system (dispatch SP/H among two simultaneously training skills). I think the above should pretty much cover the issue, and would in fact make easier for CCP CSR to investigate claims of account abuse by not encouraging users to feed them half-truths as I suspect is the case under the current rule. Mothers of EVE: We do it for the children. Some words of encouragment for EVE.
Dronte Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.20 22:10:00 - [34] Originally by: Don Temujin From what I understand, this clause is there to cover two separate issues: Personally i fully understand that account sharing is prohibited, even though i disagree with the reasons for that. My "problem" is that for regular Joe Blow, the rules are imo, ambigous at best. CCP needs to make it very clear, what is and isnt allowed. CCP need to amend the Naming Policy to disambiguate the disputed paragraph to include some kind of information that the only allowed type of "sharing" is when an adult purchases the account for their child. Its simply not enough to have it written on some other part of the site, cause if people just google's to find out if its allowed, and comes upon that page as the first hit, they might understand that as it is allowed but at your own risk. When the possible outcome is a permanent ban there must be NO ambiguity at all in any part of the rules Originally by: Don Temujin Freighters: Those aren't jump-drive capable, but in the eyes of most players are a corp-level tool rather than a personal ship, and the pilots trained for freighters in most small corps tend to be few, for obvious reasons. Reducing the skill requirements for those ships should go a long way, maybe by reducing the secondary skill requirement from Racial Industrial 5 down to 4. SIGNED!. I know the freighter is a capital ship, but it is the logical extension to the industrial ship class. Just as Cruiser skills only require level 4 frigate, and Battleships require level 4 cruiser, the freighter need to "only" need Industrial 4 (even if that means to bump the rank from 1 to 2 on the skill). It makes no sense to me that both Transports and Freighters needs level 5 industrial. Transport ships are the Tech 2 equivelant of Industrials, Freighters are "merely" a new class of ships.
Third Down Hard Rock Cafe	Posted - 2007.02.20 22:27:00 - [35] Put your money where your mouth is and ban the BoB cynonets, then.
Dronte Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.20 22:35:00 - [36] Originally by: Third Down Put your money where your mouth is and ban the BoB cynonets, then. Im pretty sure the CCP stance on this, as Nova also commented on earlier, is that the do not intend to hunt down account sharers, but only act on petitions. So if you have some evidence for CCP that members of BoB have been account sharing, file a petition, otherwise, please stop trolling/derailing this thread. And no, im not a BoB sympathizer, i'd love to see them crash and burn, but the witch hunt mentality isnt the way to go, even though we may not agree with CCP's outcome on the matter.
DHU InMe Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2007.02.20 22:41:00 - [37] Originally by: GM Nova Originally by: Dronte It is understandable that players will get confused about what is and what isnt allowed (remember, not everyone reads the dev blogs). And while Im on the subject, please, please, please make it a bit more transparant what is and isnt allowed. Make a short list of the regular "Do's and Dont's" you as a GM encounter on a daily basis. Asking your users to read not just the EULA, but the Terms of Service, the Terms of Use, the Naming Policy, the Forum Rules, the Chat Rules and possibly the Ban Policy, just isnt the right thing to do, in my opinion. I really like this idea. How about creating a sort of ten commandments which is neatly displayed every time you log in? The kind of warning like: Are you sure you want to put ammo in the gun ? Are you sure you want to jump in low security ? Are you sure you want to jump in 0 security ? Are you sure you want to jettison those item ? Are you sure you want to accept this mission ? Are you sure you want to quit the game ? Are you sure you want to... Are you sure ? __ UI Overhaul Eve Links http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&thread
Dronte Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.20 22:45:00 - [38] DHU InMe: No, Im not talking about Windows(TM) kinda interface, but simply a one time introduction ingame of the "ten commandments" as Nova put it, simply to make sure EVERYONE has been told the most important ones, at least once. Then no-one would have an excuse for not knowing that account sharing is prohibited
0raven0 Dark-Rising Fallen Souls	Posted - 2007.02.20 23:18:00 - [39] Two questions 1. What are the rules on if a real life friend, like someone you knew well before you started playing the game, got bored of the game and wanted to give you his account no strings attached. You "say" that the reason that account sharing is wrong because of accounts getting taken back and stuff. In this situation that wouldn't happen so would that be allowed? This isn't account sharing so not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I do have a friend that plans on stopping playing and says he will give me his account as long as its legal. 2. What are Cynonets?(think thats how ya spell them) and are they legal/illegal? When I first heard the term I thought it had something to do with a network of alts place in systems to set up cyno fields so capital ships could go though space quickly and easily, but now that it has been brought up when talking about account sharing I am utterly confused. Petition for "Align to" button, please come and sign!
Dronte Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.20 23:34:00 - [40] Originally by: 0raven0 Two questions 1. What are the rules on if a real life friend, like someone you knew well before you started playing the game, got bored of the game and wanted to give you his account no strings attached. You "say" that the reason that account sharing is wrong because of accounts getting taken back and stuff. In this situation that wouldn't happen so would that be allowed? This isn't account sharing so not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I do have a friend that plans on stopping playing and says he will give me his account as long as its legal. According to the rules, it would still be account sharing. As soon as you give your login information to another person, provided it isnt your (minor) child, it is account sharing in the eyes of CCP. Well at least thats the way ive interpreted the EULA, rules and CCP employee responses :) Originally by: 0raven0 2. What are Cynonets?(think thats how ya spell them) and are they legal/illegal? When I first heard the term I thought it had something to do with a network of alts place in systems to set up cyno fields so capital ships could go though space quickly and easily, but now that it has been brought up when talking about account sharing I am utterly confused. A CynoNet is a network of alts (secondary characters / accounts), which are shared amongst a corp, alliance etc. These characters would be placed at strategical positions throughout the universe, allowing your capital fleet to "instantly" move from one end of the region / universe to the other. The name CynoNet comes from the name of the Cynosural Field module, which generates a, you've guessed it, cynosural field. As you could find out by looking up the ingame description of the module its thing you use for capital pilots to jump drive to you. The advantage of having this CynoNet is that you do not have to worry about the logistics involved in moving your capital ship fleet to the system of the battle, you can just log into your cyno characters one by one, and generate the cyno field. And you can place these characters weeks or even months in advanced, even before anyone suspects an upcoming war, which greatly minimizes the risks of getting spotted and loosing capital ships
0raven0 Dark-Rising Fallen Souls	Posted - 2007.02.20 23:44:00 - [41] Originally by: Dronte Originally by: 0raven0 Two questions 1. What are the rules on if a real life friend, like someone you knew well before you started playing the game, got bored of the game and wanted to give you his account no strings attached. You "say" that the reason that account sharing is wrong because of accounts getting taken back and stuff. In this situation that wouldn't happen so would that be allowed? This isn't account sharing so not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I do have a friend that plans on stopping playing and says he will give me his account as long as its legal. According to the rules, it would still be account sharing. As soon as you give your login information to another person, provided it isnt your (minor) child, it is account sharing in the eyes of CCP. Well at least thats the way ive interpreted the EULA, rules and CCP employee responses :) I would like to hear CCP tell me its wrong AND explain why. Originally by: Dronte Originally by: 0raven0 2. What are Cynonets?(think thats how ya spell them) and are they legal/illegal? When I first heard the term I thought it had something to do with a network of alts place in systems to set up cyno fields so capital ships could go though space quickly and easily, but now that it has been brought up when talking about account sharing I am utterly confused. A CynoNet is a network of alts (secondary characters / accounts), which are shared amongst a corp, alliance etc. These characters would be placed at strategical positions throughout the universe, allowing your capital fleet to "instantly" move from one end of the region / universe to the other. So I was right. Petition for "Align to" button, please come and sign!
Chronus26 Gallente Vale Heavy Industries SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.20 23:54:00 - [42] Interesting read. Sadly, I think the mindset of the community today means that instead of: "Oh noes, BillyCorpmate totally cleaned out my account when I let him have the login because he said he needed a hauler. Ohsnap, I guess I shouldn't have violated the EULA - my loss." Your gonna end up with a whole heap of: "OMG! I let BillyCorpmate have my login details and he totally cleaned me out!! What am I gonna do? I know!! I'll petition, if I say he 'hacked' my details I might get my stuff back!! I'm a clever monkey I am!" The way I see it, people have a 'Petition first, ask questions later' attitude, which doesn't seem to help anybody. I look forward to reading more from you and the GM team, hopefuly you can go some way to change peoples attitudes and make life easier for everybody. -----
Weirda Minmatar Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.21 00:05:00 - [43] interesting blog. give us the 10 commandments! Originally by: 0raven0 Originally by: Dronte Originally by: 0raven0 Two questions 1. What are the rules on if a real life friend, like someone you knew well before you started playing the game, got bored of the game and wanted to give you his account no strings attached. You "say" that the reason that account sharing is wrong because of accounts getting taken back and stuff. In this situation that wouldn't happen so would that be allowed? This isn't account sharing so not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I do have a friend that plans on stopping playing and says he will give me his account as long as its legal. According to the rules, it would still be account sharing. As soon as you give your login information to another person, provided it isnt your (minor) child, it is account sharing in the eyes of CCP. Well at least thats the way ive interpreted the EULA, rules and CCP employee responses :) I would like to hear CCP tell me its wrong AND explain why. they explained in blog. you friend come back, say he want his account. you don't give it to him, he petition as stolen account and the account is permabanned. it is wrong because you put CCP in position of dealing with you and you friend's personal crap. Quote: Originally by: Dronte Originally by: 0raven0 2. What are Cynonets?(think thats how ya spell them) and are they legal/illegal? When I first heard the term I thought it had something to do with a network of alts place in systems to set up cyno fields so capital ships could go though space quickly and easily, but now that it has been brought up when talking about account sharing I am utterly confused. A CynoNet is a network of alts (secondary characters / accounts), which are shared amongst a corp, alliance etc. These characters would be placed at strategical positions throughout the universe, allowing your capital fleet to "instantly" move from one end of the region / universe to the other. So I was right. yes you were. the account sharing part is the fact that the logins for all these alts are available to 'everyone' (not really, but enough people in each timezone)... and thus, account sharing. __ Weirda Nosferatu - Time for Change
0raven0 Dark-Rising Fallen Souls	Posted - 2007.02.21 00:38:00 - [44] Originally by: Weirda interesting blog. give us the 10 commandments! Originally by: 0raven0 Originally by: Dronte Originally by: 0raven0 Two questions 1. What are the rules on if a real life friend, like someone you knew well before you started playing the game, got bored of the game and wanted to give you his account no strings attached. You "say" that the reason that account sharing is wrong because of accounts getting taken back and stuff. In this situation that wouldn't happen so would that be allowed? This isn't account sharing so not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I do have a friend that plans on stopping playing and says he will give me his account as long as its legal. According to the rules, it would still be account sharing. As soon as you give your login information to another person, provided it isnt your (minor) child, it is account sharing in the eyes of CCP. Well at least thats the way ive interpreted the EULA, rules and CCP employee responses :) I would like to hear CCP tell me its wrong AND explain why. they explained in blog. you friend come back, say he want his account. you don't give it to him, he petition as stolen account and the account is permabanned. it is wrong because you put CCP in position of dealing with you and you friend's personal crap. My friend played for 3 weeks and decided he hated the game. He paid for 6 months worth of subscription which is what he really would be giving me. I really would like to hear CCP directly on this because it would be a shame to waist that 6 months of subscription. Petition for "Align to" button, please come and sign!
WredStorm Gallente Garoun Investment Bank	Posted - 2007.02.21 00:41:00 - [45] Edited by: WredStorm on 21/02/2007 00:41:02 Erased original post, I'm in a bad mood.
Azerrad InExile	Posted - 2007.02.21 01:04:00 - [46] Originally by: 0raven0 My friend played for 3 weeks and decided he hated the game. He paid for 6 months worth of subscription which is what he really would be giving me. I really would like to hear CCP directly on this because it would be a shame to waist that 6 months of subscription. It is quite clearly against the EULA, not sure what more you want there. Read the EULA. As far as wasting time, sure it is a shame, but thats your friends fault for paying for 6 months worth of service when he wasn't sure that he would actually use it. t20: "So Let us play and enjoy the game you and I both love on the same level."
Satal Sonshi Minmatar Purgatorial Janitors Inc. Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.21 02:01:00 - [47] I want to take this opportunity to make a point to the CCP Game Devs: If people gain any sort of in-game advantage from account sharing, they are going to do it. Period. This will always be the case. Doesn't matter if it's against EULA and it makes GM life challenging... This is not a question of the community sharing 'responsibility'. The reward of main sharing, in most instances, seems worth the risk. Alt account sharing would be even easier to secure! Create a bunch of alts, give them minimal assets and zero access, and then share the details among your allies. (A cynonet...) If CCP wishes to minimize the amount of people doing account sharing, you have to entice those people away from it. Attacking sharers will only harm your goodwill, because it goes after people instead of problems. Give us in-game functionality that removes many of the reasons that people account share, and your petitions will decrease. One of the main reasons that people share main accounts are for skilltrains, right? So let's give the gamers functionality that makes sharing unnecessary in this situation! I feel so odd quoting a whole post like this, but I feel it is a poignant response and deserves a second look. These are the reasons people account share; It's up to you - the developers - to help solve them. If you guys can't come up with solutions on your end, then sharing will never slow... -= Satal =- Originally by: IHaul4U If this is CCPs stance on things then I suggest you look at some of the common reasons for account sharing and figure out a way to solve them. 1) Scheduling of Skills. As long as the account is active let the user select what skills they want to train. This way when people go on vacation etc and don't really have a long skill to train they can just set several smaller skills to be ready when they get back. This needs to be tied to the account being paid. Training while the account is inactive is just lame. 2) Cyno Chars - ... How do you move a capital ship and have no friends online at the current moment. (And without buying another account) 3) Corporate Capital Pilots - I can understand the issue with this in some regard.... Though on the other side of things if the issue is for the small corps that might only have one carrier. If you can't share your account you delegate that one person to the fun detail of jumping the carrier all over the place. Plus other things as well. Maybe we can have a lock down option on capital ships. Meaning that unless voted on by the shareholders only the person who it was locked down to is allowed to use it and cannot sell or trade it.... Only issue might be to self destruct it for insurance money or something.... But maybe if it's locked down then the money goes to the corp and self destruct won't work. 4) Freighter Pilots - See #3 5) Pos Manager Chars - Same as #3 but I could see some corporations using this as well to fill up their pos. Not sure how to solve this issue tbh 6) Hauler characters. Some people have only one account and use a friends account to haul when they are not online. Only way around this is for that person to get another account which means more money for CCP which I guess is what you want but it's not really fair. 7-100 - Too lazy to keep up with more examples tbh. My suggestion to CCP would be to change the policy to allow account sharing but at your own risk... Meaning if you allow someone to use your account then that person steels your stuff then guess what... Your SOL... Sorry but it's just like if someone left their keys in the ignition and went to bed or something. The only issue would be hacking which will take up your time even with the current policy so imo that doesn't change anything. An other option would be to allow corporations to purchase accounts that can be shared. While this doesn't solve all the problems it does help somewhat. CCP I encourage you to change your mind on this issue... __________________
Annatar The Galactic Empire Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.21 02:04:00 - [48] I really think a list of the "Top-10" DO or NOT DO One at a Time schould be easy to display inside the Character Selection screen, below the Chars. Like Hints or Tipps in Other games appeards while there are Loading screens. Just give each a number and an arrow to scroll them if you want to. The need for an Skill Queue and the Posts urging to patch that to te Cleint is as old as the Beta, or at least the Release. Additionally a nice reworked Eula in a Easy to read English and maybe also translated into the major Languages would help to reduce the CS Petition Queue. Maybe with some Additional "hint" text to click on like the Dev Blogs sometimes have. ahh when i just read all this possebilitys i know eve only can get better. -------------------------------------------- Never argue with an Idoit, they will drag you down to their Level and beat you with experience.
Audri Fisher Caldari The Keep THE R0CK	Posted - 2007.02.21 02:57:00 - [49] Originally by: Riothamus Being a serviceman (one among many that play Eve), it is not uncommon for me/us to be sent on fairly long term out-of-area commitments. Since many of us live alone, what are the chances that the facility to queue skill training could be introduced? Doing our job can entail that you be disadvantaged enough, without it happening in Eve, a pastime that we all (I am sure) very much enjoy. If it is for a long deployment, I would transfer the character. Do you have other members in your unit that play eve? put 2-3 chars on an acount, and have one person train up your skills. Remember, make sure that person is non-deployable! Have the login name/password saved in a safe place. I can't speak for CCP, but I am sure if you ask them very nicely, the might make an exception, since there is a very valid risk of 3 persons accounts being lost due to somebody forgeting to duck. Completely OOC: Fight the good fight,and remeber to keep your chin up, and your head down! IC: DIE
Vidar Kentoran Minmatar Provenance.	Posted - 2007.02.21 03:15:00 - [50] Quote: The good thing is that now you know clearly the reasoning behind the policy and that your sharing your account details can have bad consequenses. Don't think we have not seen players shaft their best friend, co-worker, boss at work, brother, sister and yes even their father. YARRRR!! This is EVE, not World of Warcraft. Things like massive scams and truly difficult to detect espionage is perpetrated every day, and you guys are worried about protecting people from who they choose to trust with their account info? Seriously: It's not CCP's or the GM staff's business to tell people who they should be able to trust. If you trust the wrong person, and lose your assets, the answer should be too bad, just like it is for every other breach of trust in the game. As long as the game has numerous mechanics that make account sharing a requirement to operate in the most efficient manner, then it's going to continue whether it's against the fairytale unrealistic rules or not. You cannot stop players from doing something by telling them they're not allowed to, you can only stop them by eliminating the reason they do it.
Azerrad InExile	Posted - 2007.02.21 03:54:00 - [51] Originally by: Vidar Kentoran You cannot stop players from doing something by telling them they're not allowed to, you can only stop them by eliminating the reason they do it. Or by punishing them when they don't follow the rules... t20: "So Let us play and enjoy the game you and I both love on the same level."
Altaree Red Frog Investments Daikoku Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2007.02.21 04:32:00 - [52] GM's, Please just take a hard line on account sharing. Completely ignore its existence. If an account is stripped through account sharing it is the user's fault. They should have known better. Lesson learned. Why should you guys have to waste your time fixing the account of someone that broke the rules?
Jas Dor Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.21 04:32:00 - [53] Originally by: kieron Originally by: Dunedon Does this policy also mean that using tools that store your username and password to retrieve information about your character from the myeve website are also illegal? This pertains to account information sharing among users, not tools themselves. Some tools such as EVEMon have been given a stamp of approval by CCP. Walking through the office, you would probably be amazed at the number of workstations that have a familiar blue icon residing in their trays. Once the "entity" starts to pay for something then likely their is an "entity" that can be sued. Under the legal systems of most countries becoming an "entity" without planning can be a "bad thing". Names, Dates, Times, Engagements, Losses, Op-Tempo or STFU!
Cyan Nuevo Aeon Industries	Posted - 2007.02.21 05:35:00 - [54] Originally by: GM Nova I really like this idea. How about creating a sort of ten commandments which is neatly displayed every time you log in? I like it too. How about display this in the background while undocking/logging in instead of just the black screen?
Tonto Auri Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2007.02.21 06:20:00 - [55] Account sharing? Ban both/all, no reimbursement, no problem. In 99.(9)% reporter is guilty to his/her loss. That's my own statistic. I was a Senior Master Keeper of one small MMO project 1.5 year (just about 3-5k top online). -- Best mining place here <
Silvion Kodan Armada	Posted - 2007.02.21 06:26:00 - [56] A couple of things I noticed: 1) The suggestion to restrict accounts to 1 IP address is unreasonable. Not only do many players log in to change skills from multiple computers at different locations, but no computer has a permanent IP address. For example, I just moved across country, and when I setup my new Internet access I got a new IP. A restricted IP/account system would've forced me to petition to allow me to log into my account. 2) Account Sharing is clearly prohibited by the EULA. Does that stop people from doing it? No. I agree that some of the causes of account sharing (i.e. skill changing during a vacation or other absence) could be resolved by other additions to the game (most of which are already being planned). Removing some of the causes for account sharing will reduce the amount that it happens, but will not eliminate it entirely. However, I believe CCP should take a more hard line with players who falsely petition that their account has been hacked after the person they gave the account information to robs them blind. Our CS staff in EVE is very busy all the time, and falsifying a petition should have the most severe punishments. After all, isn't a false petition a form of exploit? My personal opinion is that you should get 1 warning for a false petition, the 2nd offense your account is banned, permanently. 3) As a side note, since this thread is about the rules in general, I would like to voice my opinion that overall the GMs have been fairly easy on large scale exploiters. EVE has rules of conduct in place that define what is permitted and prohibited, and when a violation occurs by an individual the punishment is on par with the offense. However, there are situations where large organizations, both corporations and alliances, have benefited from 1 or more members' violations. I suggest a system where CCP CS has the legal authority to fine (in ISK and/or assets purchased with ISK gained from the violation) both corporations and alliances for misconduct of members according to the EULA and other guidelines for players. This will discourage mass exploits like the one involving Tech 2 Blueprints several weeks ago by forcing Corporations and Alliances to ensure that their members obey the regulations laid out by CCP in the EULA. I realize that many players will disagree with this suggestion, however CCP is limited in its manpower and I believe this will lighten their load.
JForce N.W.A Soldiers of the Forgotten Abyss	Posted - 2007.02.21 06:48:00 - [57] Why on EARTH are you pandering to these people? It's a simple question to potentially eliminate a **load of those petitions. Q) Did you at any time give this person your username/password? A) Umm, well, yeah we were best mates and... BZZZZZT. Thanks for playing. You win the solid gold out of luck, and a round the world trip flying it's your own fault for being a punk-ass *** airlines. It's real simple. You give it away, you take the risk. Game over. Nothing else needs to be said. IF they claim they NEVER gave details, then sure investigate a hacking etc. Otherwise sharing is fine BUT the person takes the damn risk. Jeez, I can't understand the hand-holding required over this...
Azerrad InExile	Posted - 2007.02.21 07:31:00 - [58] Originally by: Silvion 1) The suggestion to restrict accounts to 1 IP address is unreasonable. Not only do many players log in to change skills from multiple computers at different locations, but no computer has a permanent IP address. For example, I just moved across country, and when I setup my new Internet access I got a new IP. A restricted IP/account system would've forced me to petition to allow me to log into my account. You could look for constantly changing localities based on IP though. For example, you login with an IP address registered to an ISP in Florida. Two hours later the same account logs in with an IP address registered in Germany... then California, then Japan, etc. It wouldn't be too hard to establish a pattern that way. t20: "So Let us play and enjoy the game you and I both love on the same level."
Hon Kovell Gallente Intaki Peace	Posted - 2007.02.21 07:58:00 - [59] Originally by: GM Nova I really like this idea. How about creating a sort of ten commandments which is neatly displayed every time you log in? If it was displayed while the client loads it could be something to read on those days when it takes ages to log in.
maarud Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.02.21 10:36:00 - [60] The majority of "account sharing" happens when ppl need a skill changed. If people are stupid enough to not change thier password before and after doing something like that, they deserve what they get. This could however, all be fixed if we were just given some way to change skills out of game, like via the web or a eve lite tool, that logs you into the game, but the only thing you see is your char sheet. Maarud. Proudly a Ex-BYDI member
Eta Carinea British Space Corporation	Posted - 2007.02.21 10:42:00 - [61] How about different levels of access, Not sure if this is achievable. It would make sense however to have an account that links to your main or you can select another player to allow for skill changes something like a proxy access. But is not allowed access to wallet or items or corp resources. And most importantly account information. Eta Quid Si Coelum Ruat

Ginger.	Posted - 2007.02.21 10:45:00 - [62] I dont mean to derail this important discussion in any way. But I am forced to say one thing. GM Nova is a hotty.

Pesadel0 Vagabundos	Posted - 2007.02.21 11:08:00 - [63] So are you telling me that you are going to ban all the accounts in the alliances cyonets?
Dronte Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.21 11:26:00 - [64] Originally by: Pesadel0 So are you telling me that you are going to ban all the accounts in the alliances cyonets? The exact opposite really. They're saying they dont have the man power to actively hunt down people sharing accounts. They can investigate it when someone petitions it, in a proper manor, meaning no: Originally by: Sample Petition omg omg omg omg (BoB\|LV\|Goons\|RAZOR\|D2) are sharing accounts for a cynonet, omfgomfgomfg, fiiiiiix1!1!1! Would be very surprised to see CCP staff doing anything but just closing such a petition. Its fine to suspect stuff, but without any proof youre basicly up the creek, without a paddle :)
Big Al Ki Shoda	Posted - 2007.02.21 12:18:00 - [65] Originally by: Dronte Would be very surprised to see CCP staff doing anything but just closing such a petition. Its fine to suspect stuff, but without any proof youre basicly up the creek, without a paddle :) Looks like just another chance to play favorites to me. Last account expires on March 8. Peace.
Krayd Devre Genos Occidere Fatal Persuasion	Posted - 2007.02.21 12:42:00 - [66] Edited by: Krayd Devre on 21/02/2007 12:40:28 maybe this is somewhat off topic, but what exactly are these cynonets discussed so much lately? edit: nvm this was explained perfectly on previous page..
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes The OSS	Posted - 2007.02.22 16:20:00 - [67] Originally by: GM Nova In these cases the account typically gets banned permanently. Originally by: GM Nova We can not proactively seek out accounts that might be shared, that would even waste more of our time. Originally by: GM Nova We know the purpose of cynonets and yes, sharing accounts in order to create them is a violation of our EULA. We can hardly go on a hunt after prospective EULA violators on a mere suspicion. I hate to say it but only three words come to mind: selective witch hunt If you are not going to look for it then don't ban accounts that cross your path; your policy could be very easy, clear and honest: 1. Original owner claims account back? He get's it back. 2. Shared account abused? Can't help em. Fight the causes of the problems not the symptoms: 1. Make character transfer free or simply make account owner transfer system. 2. Allow training of multiple characters on one account or change skill system in such a way that all content can be accessed/enjoyed without having to have multiple accounts (lower max. skil req. for anything lvl 4). 3. Allowed queued training so that you can go on holiday. Saying that someone needs to go post their ideas into dev null err ideas and development whilst those ideas have been posted over and over and over and over and over and over and over is not really fair either. Ty for spending time to do a blog however, you sure managed to pick a flame baiter though. Topic suggestion for next blog "We're unable to grant you the reimburse request due us being unable to confirm what happened in the serverlogs, and yes we dont care that you provided clear clientsided proof"? ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery
lu kim	Posted - 2007.02.22 17:21:00 - [68] how can you make sure someone shares his account all the time. some people don't have 1 ip, or people like me log in from different locations. btw I think it's eve gamerules force people to share accounts. eve is bassed on playing together, but it forces people somethimes to take multiple accounts to something big, ccp should let it rest or make the game more playable on people with 1 char.
Nev Clavain Wise Guys Rogue Method Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.22 18:49:00 - [69] Edited by: Nev Clavain on 22/02/2007 18:48:20 Originally by: lu kim how can you make sure someone shares his account all the time. some people don't have 1 ip, or people like me log in from different locations. Yes of course but an IP can denote a geographical location. If someone from a UK IP address logs into an account, plays for 10 hours, and logs out. Then 5 minutes later an Australian IP logs into the same account and plays for another 10 hours. Pretty clear what is going on here. It would take 5 minutes to check. GMs saying checking this is a waste of their time means the EULA isnt worth wiping my arse on. Basically they would encourage me to waste my time petitioning account sharing, but they aren't going to even check it out because thats 'a waste of their time'. Great public relations. "Thanks for your petition about this obvious EULA breach EVE customer, we aren't going to do anything about it because it is 'a waste of our time.'" Therefore if you play by the rules you are at a disadvantage, and if you cheat you won't get caught. More tacit endorsement of cheating and EULA breaches by CCP. Hooray. [ 2005.08.15 22:00:10 ] t20 > .... there is no such thing as taking sides, favouritism or whatmaynot.
Brian Kith	Posted - 2007.02.22 19:22:00 - [70] One of the main points I see for sharing account info is to allow "friends" to train skills for you. A great (imo) solution to this would be to allow a program like EVEMon to switch your training for you from outside the game. If I could use EVEMon to switch my training from outside, it would certainly take away any inclination I might have toward allowing someone else to log me on just to switch training for me.

GM Nova	Posted - 2007.02.22 23:14:00 - [71] Wow, what a great bunch of replies. I so happy that none of you have taken some items from the blog out of context to serve your own agenda. Lets get some things clear. This blog and thread is not about T20 or CynoNets. This blog is about players sharing their accounts, getting things stolen, and crying, "help me, my account has been hacked/stolen, and the villain emptied the corp wallet as well. And self destructed. Thrice." Nice. I bang my head on the table. Most players brake the rules because they do not know the rules are there. Believe me, I know. Bottom line; Giving someone your account details is an invitation for trouble. You might be trying to find every possible reason for legitimizing it now, until you get shafted for it by a close "friend," and ask us to help you out. And yes, we will probably help you out, since your account might be totally ruined. It also means that other players with legitimate issues have to suffer for it. Account sharing is rampart, we know that. We simply can not go on a hunt for those who share their accounts when there are so many players waiting in line to have their issues solved. This only becomes a problem when trust is abused. What we are asking is that we all shoulder some responsibility for the wellbeing of the greatest game ever made. So that in the future, you can say to your grandchild, "Yes I was there, and I did my part." I am a hottie. Trust me on that one.

Silvion Kodan Armada	Posted - 2007.02.23 06:52:00 - [72] Edited by: Silvion on 23/02/2007 06:49:53 Nova, I understand your frustration. The fundamental issue here is that sharing account information leads inevitably to theft of ISK and assets. Is there any way to stop this from happening? Not entirely. Removing some of the causes of it will remove most sharing, but people will always share account information. And I'd like to point out that most of the fixes suggested (especially the skill training que) are already in the works. The PROBLEM is that when people do something stupid and give their buddy their password and pay the price for it, they often will LIE to the GMs in order to get their stuff back. How to stop it? Punish the LIARS. Make it so costly to lie in a petition (oh no my buddy took all my stuff I'll say I was hacked!) that the risk of getting caught outweighs the potential benefits. Enforce bans on accounts who are found to have not been hacked. We as players do have some improving to do as well. All too often players instantaneously petition anything that doesn't go our way. As was said above, WE AS PLAYERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR OUR OWN ACTIONS, FOR GOOD OR ILL. Petitions should be reserved for when something goes severely wrong due to a glitch (rare for me but does happen) or for technical support. Period. End of story. CCP isn't responsible for a player's stupidity. So in other words my fellow players, it is time for us as a community to step up. You know what you are doing when you give your buddy your password. You know the risk. If you choose to take the risk and get burned don't cry. Its no different than giving that person access to corp assets and then he takes those assets. This is a grown-up game (and thank you CCP for that!), so act like a grown-up.
Jaggeh Gallente Furious Angels	Posted - 2007.02.23 12:20:00 - [73] I have 1 account but up until recently i was paying for 5 as my friends dont have credit cards. one of them is a housemate and doesnt have a working pc so he plays on his account,from my pc, while im in work. would this be considered account sharing as we both use the same pc? --------------------------------------- Furious Angels are recruiting Carpe Pugya Pyga - Seize the Buttocks
Jonas O'Fall	Posted - 2007.02.23 13:18:00 - [74] Why not just write a script that examines the last five IP addresses and log-in/log-out times of an account at every log-in? If they're from vastly different ranges with extremely short transit times then flag for GM examination and follow-up. For example, Player X logged out 4 hours ago in the UK, but is now logging in from Australia. That's obviously very improbable and would warrant further investigation/the banhammer. Or, Player Y logged off 5hrs ago from the East Coast of the US and is now logging in from the West Coast. True, he could be logged in via free airport wi-fi, so let that one slide or send an email to the account holder. Maybe take it a step further and assign a unique number/code to each installation of EVE. If an account has been accessed by more than 3-4 different installations of EVE in a set period of time then something definitely needs to be investigated. Especially if this data is also examined with the login/logout and IP address data, since that would help filter out a frequent traveler taking a laptop with him/her.
Jaggeh Gallente Furious Angels	Posted - 2007.02.23 13:38:00 - [75] that wouldnt really work, as i said a lot of my friends have eve. if im in my mates house having a beer and playing some console games should i be penalized for accessing my own account on his pc, to check on sales or switch skills? --------------------------------------- Furious Angels are recruiting Carpe Pugya Pyga - Seize the Buttocks
Banana Torres The Green Banana Corporation Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.23 14:26:00 - [76] Originally by: Silvion Petitions should be reserved for when something goes severely wrong due to a glitch (rare for me but does happen) or for technical support. Period. End of story. I agree, but CCP don't give us any other way of contacting them. I tried emailing Kieron, but got no response. At least with a petition you will get a response, even if it is, "Duh, I donna understand, nuthin in the logs".
Vidar Kentoran Minmatar Provenance.	Posted - 2007.02.23 15:01:00 - [77] Edited by: Vidar Kentoran on 23/02/2007 15:04:12 Originally by: GM Nova Most players brake the rules because they do not know the rules are there. Believe me, I know. No, they don't. I'm glad that GMs for this game are so deluded. Players break this particular rule because it's a laughably absurd rule that is out of touch with reality. You will never be able to stop the majority of people from account sharing. You can't do it. Stop thinking of ways you can, because you can't. It makes me very sad that the people who run this game like to stick their head in the sand so much. The correct, reasonable way to deal with this is to make an authorized, regulated way for people to share their accounts, because that's what they want to do, instead of wasting your time and our time trying to enforce absurdities that you just wrote you are completely unable to stop! Originally by: GM Nova Bottom line; Giving someone your account details is an invitation for trouble. Sorry, which game are you playing? Logging into EVE is an invitation for trouble.
Jonas O'Fall	Posted - 2007.02.23 16:40:00 - [78] Originally by: Jaggeh that wouldnt really work, as i said a lot of my friends have eve. if im in my mates house having a beer and playing some console games should i be penalized for accessing my own account on his pc, to check on sales or switch skills? Do your friends live thousands of miles away, which you travel regularly? Its when the account moves faster than a vehicle could carry a player that the script would be looking for.
Almarez	Posted - 2007.02.23 16:53:00 - [79] This is from a post I made not knowing that this one existed. Okay I understand the idea behind the rule preventing this but I would have to say that making it a black and white issue is somewhat irresponsible (for lack of a better word). I have several real life friends that play Eve and I would trust them to baby sit my 7 month old son so I think sharing a password in the case where something needed to get done with one of those guys is really quite harmless. In addition to this, one of these friends is in the military and he regularly goes on long trips. He has never asked me to change skills for him but I can't see how this would be harmful. Again, these are long time real life friends who I knew well before Eve. If you insist that password sharing, even if it's for skill changes, is against the rules then how about implementing a skill training queue where you can set up at least one more skill after your current skill is done? This way, someone could get maybe 1.5-2.5 months worth of training done without ever having to log in if they set up the right skills. How about people who leave longer than that you might ask. Well I understand that you probably have reasons to limit queue size so if that's the case then there has to be a limit and that is tough for people who travel longer times than that but at least it helps.
Crazy Nell Caldari	Posted - 2007.02.24 02:10:00 - [80] As a relatively new player to EVE, this is my first post on the forums and this subject in particular as it seems that the issues pertaining to Nova's blog and the T20/BoB scandal are inextricably linked. I'd like to preface my post with the disclaimer that although I hold no animousity towards BoB in general as I have had no prior experience concerning them, it is clear from the huge numbers of posts regarding the cheating that has occurred and been verified by CCP themselves that the subject must be addressed. I've read the EULA many times... it's pretty easy to understand and addresses the subject of "Account Sharing" to my satisfaction. It's clearly a case of "Buyer Beware"... if your foolish enough to share your account with another individual or corporation and get ripped off...tough ! The responsibility rests solely upon your shoulders, not CCP. If you get caught and banned... again, you asked for it. I'm sure that CCP could benefit greatly by expanding their workforce; but with a limited cashflow due to EVE not having hundreds of thousands of paying accounts like some other MMOG's, it has proven difficult for them to address all of the issues in the game in a timely manner. Do not misconstrue the proceeding statement as I am not "Cheer-Leading" for CCP. But from my observations, CCP's business model at the moment does not appear to support an employee expansion. As for the "T20/BoB" debacle; that clearly illustrates that CCP needs to restructure their employee's rules and come clean with all of the evidence in that matter as we, the paying customers of CCP deserve better. Perhaps CCP employees should be banned from either creating a corporation of their own, and be banned from joining a corporation and any alliance. Taking this approach, it would go far in addressing such abuses in the future. I'm sure there will be those who would argue that the CCP employees need to be able to be in corporations, etc. to test game functions and mechanics. I thought the "Test Server" was for that ? Then again, we the player base may be unwitting participants in a "Viral Marketing Campaign" instituted by CCP themselves. "BoB" for all we know may be run by CCP employees to present a potential enemy for the player base to hate and give us possible goals. We do not know for sure...
Max Tesla	Posted - 2007.02.24 02:25:00 - [81] Edited by: Max Tesla on 24/02/2007 02:22:49 Originally by: Kylania Originally by: Max Tesla The solution is simple LEAGALLY BIND ACCOUNTS TO PEOPLE For example for a small fee you can bind your account and character/s to your self. So the creator of the account and character must then of curse either pay via a credit card or auto giro, then for a one time fee he/she can bind the account and character to himself so that no matter what happens in the future the creator will always own his account. If the options was avalible I would bind my account, because I do worry that someday someone will hack my account and steal what I have spent years on building This is already how it works. The creator of the account is the owner for now and always. That's what causes some of these "hacked" issues when someone gives away an account then later says "Oh, it's mine, it was stolen". Or someone used that to deliberately scam someone. You do still have to worry and take steps on your own to prevent your account from being hacked. That'll never change. NO! that is not how it works I mean legally bind the character as well so that there can never can be any transfer ever. You legally bind the account AND THE CHARACTER so that no matter what happens in the future the character is always yours and can never be taken away. The chracter will become your property for all time no matter what. For a small fee of curse.
Richard Aiel Caldari The Funkstars Guild	Posted - 2007.02.24 17:42:00 - [82] Originally by: GM Nova Nice. I bang my head on the table. Most players brake the rules because they do not know the rules are there. Believe me, I know. So, if you dont know about the rule, you dont get in trouble for breaking it? Sorry fer being fecetious (Bah cant spell it). Most people now a days are breaking the rules cause CCP GMs arent stepping up and enforcing EULA violations like they should be Node crashes for example. I had pointed to section 7, paragraph 1 in the EULA that essentially (paraphrase) says "Thou shalt not put undue or excessive pressure or load on the System", but according to SEVERAL players in the thread I created, this doesnt pertain to node crashing because the EULA says "you" and not "your gang" or "your fleet". That even though there may be 4k people in one node, "you" arent doing anything wrong. This is usually followed by the arguments of: "Oh noes ban everyone in Jita" and "oh noes everyone with a fleet higher than 50 will be banned"... Or how the buggy POS shields are being screwey but people who exploit these bugs to their own use, the bugs are then called "undocumented features" Theres more stuff out there but i cant remember it all off hand lol Its just that the less and less the EULA and general rules are applied, the more chaotic and anarchic the game is going to become. Cheap kills, cheap tactics, and the blurring of oog/ig are getting worse and worse in the game, but nothing is apparently being done about it. Scan the General Forums and you will see post after post about people having been cheated but when they send in a petition, they are told that the GMs wont do anything about what happened. Sorry about taking part of yer post out of context to further my cause but i had to. looks around the restaurant then look at his mate "I wouldnt be greatly surprised if a little band came in and started playing hums the Star Wars Cantina theme"
Richard Aiel Caldari The Funkstars Guild	Posted - 2007.02.24 18:27:00 - [83] "News \| Help \| New Player Guide \| Dev Blog \| Patch Notes \| Support News Due to the enormous numbers of pilots, the stargates into JV1V-0 overloaded, blocking further reinforcement and causing mayhem in the system itself. The jump engines of the arriving capital ships caused a massive system-wide disruption, with spatial distortions affecting many pilots on both sides. The end result was that a large majority of ship navigations systems overloaded, rendering the Lotka defenders practically impotent against the equally troubled defenders. Due to their overwhelming numbers however, and their ability to slip past the imposing defences placed on entry into the system, the attackers managed to eventually bring the Starbase down." Wow GMs giving a RP explanation for someone crashing the node to take advantage of the fact that the defenders cant log in. Thats rediculous. Thats essentially saying that this was fine by CCP, in essence, condoning not only a possible (depending on yer take on the "you" issue) EULA breach but exploiting the weak node system in the game. This makes me very concerned about the future of this game. looks around the restaurant then look at his mate "I wouldnt be greatly surprised if a little band came in and started playing hums the Star Wars Cantina theme"

CCP Wrangler	Posted - 2007.02.24 23:41:00 - [84] Originally by: Richard Aiel "News \| Help \| New Player Guide \| Dev Blog \| Patch Notes \| Support News Due to the enormous numbers of pilots, the stargates into JV1V-0 overloaded, blocking further reinforcement and causing mayhem in the system itself. The jump engines of the arriving capital ships caused a massive system-wide disruption, with spatial distortions affecting many pilots on both sides. The end result was that a large majority of ship navigations systems overloaded, rendering the Lotka defenders practically impotent against the equally troubled defenders. Due to their overwhelming numbers however, and their ability to slip past the imposing defences placed on entry into the system, the attackers managed to eventually bring the Starbase down." Wow GMs giving a RP explanation for someone crashing the node to take advantage of the fact that the defenders cant log in. Thats rediculous. Thats essentially saying that this was fine by CCP, in essence, condoning not only a possible (depending on yer take on the "you" issue) EULA breach but exploiting the weak node system in the game. This makes me very concerned about the future of this game. IC reporters are members of the EVE Volunteer Program (ISD) and not GMs, and they don't come close to having GM powers. Further, they definately have no control over the server. The IC are tasked to create role playing news of events in EVE, and they do that well, role playing any form of malfunction is acceptable according to our standards and have been done before and will be done again. That does not mean we "condone" any problems with the server and we will of course do our best to fix whats broken and improve whats working, as we always have. If you believe there is an exploit, please submit a petition as that is something our Customer Support will handle, it is not something that anyone can help you with if you just post on the forums. Wrangler Assistant Community Manager EVE Online Contact Support - Contact Moderators - Report Bug - Submit News Leads - Knowledge Base Player Guide - Policies - Join ISD - Fan Submissions - DevFinder LiteÖ

Don Temujin Mothers of EVE	Posted - 2007.02.25 00:09:00 - [85] Nova: I feel your pain, really. The point I've made earlier in this thread, along with many others, is that the current rules are confusing for many people, and are doing you, the CSR and the community as a whole a disservice. Fuzzy rules are harder to enforce, and unenforceable rules undermine the credibility of the ruleset and those in charge of upholding it. Both direct experience and your posts point in the same direction, ie you (GM/CSR) try (and generally succeed) to apply common sense to the way you interpret/enforce a "law" that is largely disconnected from the reality of the "land". Props to you guys for that, but really, wouldn't things be better for everybody if the law was formalized clearly and understandably to be in synch with practices ? Account sharing is risky, and players do it at their own risk: have them sign a waiver stating clearly if they want to go that way, they shoulder the burden of responsibility. On the other hand, GM/CSR are committed to protect users from abuse, and should be protected themselves from ill-formed accusations of holding double standards. A clear rule showing the distinction between legit and non-legit account sharing could help tremendously in reducing the grudges over GM/CSR arbitrations. The recent integration of GTC transfer in the 'Account Management' tools is a great step in the direction of making easier to deal with the sometimes blurry borders between IG and OOG rules. Adding the same sort of tools to support responsible and accountable character/account sharing would be another decisive move showing CCP not only is committed to impartiality in the way rules are enforced, but also to fairness in the rules themselves. Cheers, Don T. PS: Can Wrangler get a warning for feeding the trolls by replying at length to off-topic stuff ? j/k Mothers of EVE: We do it for the children. Some words of encouragment for EVE.
Richard Aiel Caldari The Funkstars Guild	Posted - 2007.02.25 01:41:00 - [86] Originally by: Don Temujin Nova: I feel your pain, really. The point I've made earlier in this thread, along with many others, is that the current rules are confusing for many people, and are doing you, the CSR and the community as a whole a disservice. Fuzzy rules are harder to enforce, and unenforceable rules undermine the credibility of the ruleset and those in charge of upholding it. Both direct experience and your posts point in the same direction, ie you (GM/CSR) try (and generally succeed) to apply common sense to the way you interpret/enforce a "law" that is largely disconnected from the reality of the "land". Props to you guys for that, but really, wouldn't things be better for everybody if the law was formalized clearly and understandably to be in synch with practices ? Account sharing is risky, and players do it at their own risk: have them sign a waiver stating clearly if they want to go that way, they shoulder the burden of responsibility. On the other hand, GM/CSR are committed to protect users from abuse, and should be protected themselves from ill-formed accusations of holding double standards. A clear rule showing the distinction between legit and non-legit account sharing could help tremendously in reducing the grudges over GM/CSR arbitrations. The recent integration of GTC transfer in the 'Account Management' tools is a great step in the direction of making easier to deal with the sometimes blurry borders between IG and OOG rules. Adding the same sort of tools to support responsible and accountable character/account sharing would be another decisive move showing CCP not only is committed to impartiality in the way rules are enforced, but also to fairness in the rules themselves. Cheers, Don T. PS: Can Wrangler get a warning for feeding the trolls by replying at length to off-topic stuff ? j/k I dont agree with you so Im a troll? looks around the restaurant then look at his mate "I wouldnt be greatly surprised if a little band came in and started playing hums the Star Wars Cantina theme"
Don Temujin Mothers of EVE	Posted - 2007.02.25 01:56:00 - [87] Originally by: Richard Aiel I dont agree with you so Im a troll? I don't see us disagreeing on anything since we're apparently discussing different topics to begin with. Unless I got it wrong, this thread is intended to comment/discuss the Dev Blog about EULA as it applies to'account sharing'. I barely can see the connection with intentional crashing of nodes and ISDs roleplaying server technical issues, but to each his own. BTW, this was only meant as a harmless pun directed at Wrangler, not you, sorry if I hurt your feelings. Mothers of EVE: We do it for the children. Some words of encouragment for EVE.
Rumbaar Solitary Forsaken	Posted - 2007.02.26 03:32:00 - [88] I wonder what part of the EULA I read allowed me to use my DEVELOPER account to create BPO's for my corp .... I wasn't actually sharing my account with anyone, just my ill gotten gains ___________________ Custom banner? Click above or EVEmail
ScreamingLord Sutch Hand in Mouth	Posted - 2007.02.27 00:30:00 - [89] Originally by: GM Nova Wow, what a great bunch of replies. I so happy that none of you have taken some items from the blog out of context to serve your own agenda. I feel your pain
Rumbaar Solitary Forsaken	Posted - 2007.02.27 00:35:00 - [90] I'll have to find the part in my EULA which allows me to use my DEVELOPER account and create some BPO's for my corp/alliance. Because if that's not in my EULA I'm sure that's far worse than getting a friend change a skill than can't be scheduled properly due to poor game mechanics. ___________________ Custom banner? Click above or EVEmail
Dizirgee Amarr Rytiri Lva Xelas Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.28 20:08:00 - [91] Nice blog Nova but to be honest, as many other ppl said, majority of petitions related to this can be solved by going to devs responsible for that area and told them to implement skill queue. Plain and simple. (not saying this is only problem, also cynonets, POS/capital players etc..) But IMHO this is the most simple of all already mentioned problems here to solve. How hard it can be to implement this? 3 lines of code? I know that other solutions wont be that easy, but its 1st step in showing that you mean it serious. So I appreciate your effort to bring this to mind of us players but as many other said this can be solved by implementing new feuteres into eve by you(CCP). So why you guys wont make your life easier? Quote: Players ask an ingame friend to train skills for them. Friend keeps the login details. Friendship ends, the account is accessed and damaged. To be honest that person should space himself. I mean if i know that somebody that has my login info and i made him ****ed i`ll change it right away. Plus IF i would ask someone to change skill I change for temporary password and after that change i would switch it to my secret password again. Simple I bet that if major of situation when account sharing is "needed" will be addressed there will only left petitions like "I went to that nice site that guy proposed on local and it did look like official eve site so i logged in..."
Andrus Delai Mayven Omni Gestalt	Posted - 2007.02.28 22:09:00 - [92] If CCP is not going to investigate and eliminate major account sharing violations (cynonets, POS maint, Capital ships, etc.), then it makes no sense having an account sharing ban in the EULA. All you are doing by having that ban and not enforing it, is punishing the players how play by the rules. If you want account sharing to go away, routinely check for it and ban shared accounts. If you did that, the number of shared accounts would be vastly reduced and the load on CS would be reduced as a result. This would not be difficult for you to implement since you have already done the hard part of tracking and storing the login IP address. All that would be required is a few saved database queries and a small amount of time to analyze the results. If you don't want to police the EULA, then change it. State that if you share your account, you are SOL if anything happens to your characters or assets. This would even include character transfers to another account. A rule that is not enforced only punishes those who follow the rules. I refuse to be punished any longer.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one 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.