| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |

Erika Mizune
The Soul Society The Methodical Alliance
2357
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 16:42:30 -
[91] - Quote
Manella Antollare wrote:whats up with the talking about yourself in 3rd person?
Toobo does what Toobo does. 
DJ Yumene of Eve Radio | Blog | Sounds of New Eden | Eve Radio | My BPO Quest | Erika For CSM XI
|

Xylem Viliana
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
372
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 16:44:19 -
[92] - Quote
Im rather curious how much ISK assets have been removed from the game by this.
Would CCP be willing to shed a little light on what kind of figure we would be looking at? |

Obil Que
Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance
461
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 16:48:19 -
[93] - Quote
Erika Mizune wrote:Obil Que wrote:TL:DR I gave billions of my money to a guy and he got banned *tears* Why CCP, why? Did you read his post? He's talking about the players and how Eve Bet got time to properly honor last minute withdraws until the change goes in full effect but honest players on IWI didn't get the same. CCP also closed and seized Eve Casino - Which haven't even been open yet! - they haven't accepted ANY ISK yet since it was still in testing, but yet all the bankers there have had their isk seized as well? There are things that don't make sense here - I understand it's a risk to hand over your isk to these sites in the first place to feed your addiction, but they did give Eve Bet the benefit of the doubt.
EVEbet wasn't banned for RMT. IWI was banned for RMT EVE Casino was banned for other violations He, and everyone else, gave money to an RMTer who got banned So yeah, they lost their money because it wasn't their money the moment they gave it to someone else
|

Skia Aumer
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
370
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 16:54:22 -
[94] - Quote
Xylem Viliana wrote:Im rather curious how much ISK assets have been removed from the game by this.
Would CCP be willing to shed a little light on what kind of figure we would be looking at? We shall see it in the next economic report. |

Vicata Heth
Bank Of E
110
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 16:56:15 -
[95] - Quote
Urziel99 wrote:Vicata Heth wrote:Janeos wrote:Momiji Sakora wrote:Dex Cordell wrote:so if I read this correctly, me playing Hold'em with and for ISK is going to be shut down as well? I'm somehow failing to catch the drift here. Why would RMT require this kind of harsh measures against everyone in general, instead of applying the rules already in place to those caught breaking them, as it was till now? That's just gross... I think the major bit of this is that it's cost CCP a ton of money and manhours to investigate RMT in the cases named, and others. Time and again isk gambling sites seem to slip into RMT along the way - and CCP have had to investigate. Not to mention accusations true or false on these sites having to be investigated. So why not save time and just cut them out entirely. Beyond that, it's a form of income that is completely immune to in-game interdiction of any kind. They have no stations to destroy, no logistics to disrupt, no ratters to gank. They were more untouchable by capsuleers than teh HK Fortizar. Tell us where the bad bankers touched you. Ironic to see a goon posting about untouchable income, of all people. Technetium anyone? You mean the towers that could be reinforced to stop the moon mining? Apples meet oranges.
Clearly they were feasible to reinforce. That's why OTEC was taken down by players, and not nerfed by CCP themselves. I'm not denying that it's a valid method of gameplay, because if the mechanics are there and it's not against the EULA, it's valid. I'm pointing out the irony of a goon crying about untouchable income.
And let's be honest here, gambling websites aren't the only form of "untouchable" income in EVE. Station traders are another form. But in reality, all forms of income can be broken. Station traders can be broken by market PvP, and a gambling site can be broken by a good smear campaign. OTEC could have been broken as well, but the reality was it was never going to be, because it was more profitable for everyone involved to keep the status quo. |

Toobo
Project Fruit House Solyaris Chtonium
264
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 16:56:27 -
[96] - Quote
I said clearly ISK loss is not the major issue. RMTers deserve to get banned and their stuff confiscated, and any ISK given to RMTers can be removed from the game. I totally agree with that. Although I cashed out trillions from IWI, my ISK are safe as they are mine and in my hand and I have never RMTed.
But it seems you don't know how banking system worked in IWI. Bankers banked with their own ISK, within the limit they can afford with their personal ISK gained through legitimate means. But CCP confiscated all ISK from all bankers. It was a blanket punishment and players and bankers who may not have been involved with RMT suffered loss. The amount is not the issue here. It's about whether such blanket punishment is justifiable.
TOOBO RAGE.
|

Oraac Ensor
708
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:02:44 -
[97] - Quote
Robin Wren wrote:Brusanan wrote:Robin Wren wrote:Games of chance are not games of skill (poker), but as part of poker involves elements of chance where is the line ? I'm sure Eve Online Hold'Em is covered by this ban on gambling as well. I't doesn't say gambling games, it says games of chance.
Quote:gamble (-êg+ªm b+Öl)
v. -bled, -bling, n. v.i. 1. to play at a game of chance for money or other stakes. 2. to stake or risk something of value, as money, on the outcome of something involving chance.
|

Christopher Nolm
EVE University Ivy League
3
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:06:44 -
[98] - Quote
Oraac Ensor wrote:Robin Wren wrote:Brusanan wrote:Robin Wren wrote:Games of chance are not games of skill (poker), but as part of poker involves elements of chance where is the line ? I'm sure Eve Online Hold'Em is covered by this ban on gambling as well. I't doesn't say gambling games, it says games of chance. Quote:gamble (-êg+ªm b+Öl)
v. -bled, -bling, n. v.i. 1. to play at a game of chance for money or other stakes. 2. to stake or risk something of value, as money, on the outcome of something involving chance.
They have just used that terminology to mirror how the law defines things. |
|

Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire
15662
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:06:54 -
[99] - Quote
I'm interpreting this as running external sites that deals with ISK/items etc is prohibited.
Is me securing supercap trades against the rules?
Is running a lottery for a titan, using the "Sell Orders" forum against the rules?
Is running an auction for a titan, using the "Sell Orders" forum against the rules?
/c
GÿàGÿàGÿà Secure 3rd party service GÿàGÿàGÿà
Visit my in-game channel 'Holy Veldspar'
Twitter @Chribba
|
|

Toobo
Project Fruit House Solyaris Chtonium
266
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:07:33 -
[100] - Quote
I'll put it in simple terms to make things clear.
Let's say you sold a titan for 100b to some dude, using third party as well in the process. All seemed legit and you got ISK.
CCP says the guy who paid for your Titan bought ISK from RMT to pay for it. So CCP confiscates your 100b. Now you don't have Titan and you are minus 100b. Is that right? Shouldn't CCP return you the Titan at least?
Or reverse. You ratted your way or traded or whatever to make 100b ISK. With that you bought a Titan, using a third party again. CCP finds that the guy who sold you Titan built it with RMT bought minerals. Then confiscates your Titan, and remove the 100b you paid to the builder as it is in possession of RMTer. Is that right?
TOOBO RAGE.
|

Toobo
Project Fruit House Solyaris Chtonium
266
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:09:01 -
[101] - Quote
Chribba's onto something here. There are many 'services' people pay for with ISK, such as TS hosting and websites, etc. What's up with all those?
TOOBO RAGE.
|

Skia Aumer
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
373
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:11:29 -
[102] - Quote
Toobo wrote:It's about whether such blanket punishment is justifiable. Sorry about bringing it up, but recently we have witnessed this type of punishment IRL and it was generally accepted to be OK. I'm not going into details here, the event was quite widely broadcasted in the media, so most of us probably know what I'm talking about, and if not - feel free to mail me and I'll give the explanation in private. |

Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
8740
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:13:39 -
[103] - Quote
This does not go far enough, and the EULA could be simplified greatly.
In-game items should not be exchangeable for ANY out of game goods or services, period.
Gÿ+
There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.
|

Obil Que
Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance
461
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:15:04 -
[104] - Quote
Chribba wrote:I'm interpreting this as running external sites that deals with ISK/items etc is prohibited.
Is me securing supercap trades against the rules?
Is running a lottery for a titan, using the "Sell Orders" forum against the rules?
Is running an auction for a titan, using the "Sell Orders" forum against the rules?
/c
I think your first interpretation is a bit wide They specifically said 3rd party games of chance not all 3rd party services
|

Lasisha Mishi
Caldari Strike Witches
56
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:15:22 -
[105] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:
Updates & Clarifications:
The 90 day clause:
Our policy on inactive accounts has not changed, we have simply shortened the notice period from six months to three months due to a potentially higher volume of account creation.
so this doesn't mean our accoutns WILL be deleted after 90 days of not logging it. it just means that we'll be warned 90 days IF the supply of accounts becomes to many.
correct?
also with eve-bet being...outlawed........will we have some form of ingame betting (as its fun to bet on teams for the alliance tournament.) |

Lady Ayeipsia
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
1213
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:20:00 -
[106] - Quote
Doc Fury wrote:This does not go far enough, and the EULA could be simplified greatly.
In-game items should not be exchangeable for ANY out of games goods or services, period.
So you couldn't donate isk to the people who coded Evemon, EFT, PYFA, Dotlan etc?
No more PLEX for X charities?
Not all out-of-game goods and services are tied to RMT, not are they all the devil. And I would much rather throw the person coding Evemon an in game donation of day 1 bil isk so they can focus less on making money in eve and more time on enjoying the game given the work they have done.
Now you could argue that it is not an exchange. They give the item freely, I choose to donate. There is no official exchange. However, EULA are full of lawyer speak so perhaps their wording covers this best. |

Obil Que
Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance
462
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:20:01 -
[107] - Quote
Lasisha Mishi wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:
Updates & Clarifications:
The 90 day clause:
Our policy on inactive accounts has not changed, we have simply shortened the notice period from six months to three months due to a potentially higher volume of account creation.
so this doesn't mean our accoutns WILL be deleted after 90 days of not logging it. it just means that we'll be warned 90 days IF the supply of accounts becomes to many. correct? also with eve-bet being...outlawed........will we have some form of ingame betting (as its fun to bet on teams for the alliance tournament.)
Right now: CCP has the right to terminate your account immediately if you don't pay After: CCP will notify you 90 days before terminating you if you don't pay Reality: CCP hasn't ever used this clause
Why people are up in arms about getting 90 days notice to something CCP currently has the right to do immediately is beyond me. |

Lasisha Mishi
Caldari Strike Witches
56
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:21:18 -
[108] - Quote
Obil Que wrote:Lasisha Mishi wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:
Updates & Clarifications:
The 90 day clause:
Our policy on inactive accounts has not changed, we have simply shortened the notice period from six months to three months due to a potentially higher volume of account creation.
so this doesn't mean our accoutns WILL be deleted after 90 days of not logging it. it just means that we'll be warned 90 days IF the supply of accounts becomes to many. correct? also with eve-bet being...outlawed........will we have some form of ingame betting (as its fun to bet on teams for the alliance tournament.) Right now: CCP has the right to terminate your account immediately if you don't pay After: CCP will notify you 90 days before terminating you if you don't pay Reality: CCP hasn't ever used this clause Why people are up in arms about getting 90 days notice to something CCP currently has the right to do immediately is beyond me. ty for clarrification scared me when i saw that. now i feel better =)
|

Cara Forelli
Better Off Red
2091
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:22:25 -
[109] - Quote
This is not a sandbox.
Want to talk? Join my channel in game: House Forelli
Titan's Lament
|

Ginger Naari
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
79
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:27:00 -
[110] - Quote
Andre Vauban wrote:Can you elaborate on "You may establish more than one (1) Account for each copy of the Software licensed. You are however not allowed to play EVE by using more than one account at the same time, unless you pay a subscription fee for the Software"?
How does this relate to alpha and omega's? It is pretty clear that CCP will write some code to prevent another Eve client from being launched whenver an alpha account is running. How does this relate to VMs and containers?
If I run the second Eve account in a container or VM to circumvent the restriction, is that a EULA violation?
If so, what if I run the second Eve account on another PC, is that a EULA violation?
If so, what if I run the second Eve account on another PC with a different public IP than the first account, is that a EULA violation?
If so, what if I run the second Eve account on another PC and place it in front of a pet, is that a EULA violation?
If so, what if I run the second Eve account on another PC and place it in front of a sleeping baby, is that a EULA violation?
If so, what if I run the second Eve account on another PC and place it in front of a spouse who really isn't playing EVE, is that a EULA violation?
I don't mean to be annoying, but people are going to push this ability to multibox alpha's as far as they can just like they did with multi-input.
Your post hurts my eyes.... |

Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2991
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:30:20 -
[111] - Quote
Chribba wrote:I'm interpreting this as running external sites that deals with ISK/items etc is prohibited.
Is me securing supercap trades against the rules?
Is running a lottery for a titan, using the "Sell Orders" forum against the rules?
Is running an auction for a titan, using the "Sell Orders" forum against the rules?
/c ... only games of chance ... everything you listed except the lottery is legit.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|

Minerva Arbosa
Astrocomical Warped Intentions
24
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:33:51 -
[112] - Quote
Chribba wrote:I'm interpreting this as running external sites that deals with ISK/items etc is prohibited.
Is me securing supercap trades against the rules?
Is running a lottery for a titan, using the "Sell Orders" forum against the rules?
Is running an auction for a titan, using the "Sell Orders" forum against the rules?
/c
Securing supercap trades on a 3rd party site will be bannable most likely.
Running a lottery, which is a game of chance, is bannable.
An auction is not a game of chance since you know exactly how much you and everyone else is bidding. However, if it were a silent auction, then that would be a game of chance and possibly get you banned depending on how blurred the lines are for CCP.
|

Minerva Arbosa
Astrocomical Warped Intentions
24
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:35:28 -
[113] - Quote
Toobo wrote:Chribba's onto something here. There are many 'services' people pay for with ISK, such as TS hosting and websites, etc. What's up with all those?
Those are not games of chance. You pay X ISK to receive a service. As long as the person with the service doesn't RMT it, then you are alright. However if he RMT's with the ISK you payed him you are screwed. |

Spc One
The Chodak Void Alliance
303
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:35:39 -
[114] - Quote
Andre Vauban wrote:Can you elaborate on "You may establish more than one (1) Account for each copy of the Software licensed. You are however not allowed to play EVE by using more than one account at the same time, unless you pay a subscription fee for the Software"?
How does this relate to alpha and omega's? It is pretty clear that CCP will write some code to prevent another Eve client from being launched whenver an alpha account is running. How does this relate to VMs and containers?
If I run the second Eve account in a container or VM to circumvent the restriction, is that a EULA violation?
If so, what if I run the second Eve account on another PC, is that a EULA violation?
If so, what if I run the second Eve account on another PC with a different public IP than the first account, is that a EULA violation?
If so, what if I run the second Eve account on another PC and place it in front of a pet, is that a EULA violation?
If so, what if I run the second Eve account on another PC and place it in front of a sleeping baby, is that a EULA violation?
If so, what if I run the second Eve account on another PC and place it in front of a spouse who really isn't playing EVE, is that a EULA violation?
I don't mean to be annoying, but people are going to push this ability to multibox alpha's as far as they can just like they did with multi-input.
These are really good questions. I have the same questions regarding VM and another physical machine (PC).
|

baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18287
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:35:56 -
[115] - Quote
Toobo wrote:Erika Mizune wrote:Obil Que wrote:TL:DR I gave billions of my money to a guy and he got banned *tears* Why CCP, why? Did you read his post? He's talking about the players and how Eve Bet got time to properly honor last minute withdraws until the change goes in full effect but honest players on IWI didn't get the same. CCP also closed and seized Eve Casino - Which haven't even been open yet! - they haven't accepted ANY ISK yet since it was still in testing, but yet all the bankers there have had their isk seized as well? There are things that don't make sense here - I understand it's a risk to hand over your isk to these sites in the first place to feed your addiction, but they did give Eve Bet the benefit of the doubt. Thank you. What I wanted to say in more succinct manner.
From what I can tell, IWI and casino were running a RMT operation while EVEbet were legit. So EVEbet gets time to get its **** in order before shutting down while the other two got nuked.
Coupled with this is the whole steam getting sued for in game gambling so CCP are pulling the plug before something stupid happens and some American lawyer goes after them. |

Drago Shouna
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
649
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:37:20 -
[116] - Quote
Lady Arrien wrote:What on earth are you doing?? I get that there are problems, but this change will kill all of the good things that are funded by those sites, like EVE NT.
Also, how completely self-serving is it that you waited to announce this until the week after they produced an AT show twice as good as the one produced by CCP? Really, did you delay the announcement just to get that last bit of betting funded community effort out before you killed them?
I'm hoping EVE_NT can survive this, I've been to every meeting in Nottingham..It's my away weekend twice a year to just, well, chill and enjoy being with other EVE players.
Solecist Project...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse ..."
" They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want."
Welcome to EVE.
|

Lady Ayeipsia
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
1213
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:42:08 -
[117] - Quote
Obil Que wrote:Lasisha Mishi wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:
Updates & Clarifications:
The 90 day clause:
Our policy on inactive accounts has not changed, we have simply shortened the notice period from six months to three months due to a potentially higher volume of account creation.
so this doesn't mean our accoutns WILL be deleted after 90 days of not logging it. it just means that we'll be warned 90 days IF the supply of accounts becomes to many. correct? also with eve-bet being...outlawed........will we have some form of ingame betting (as its fun to bet on teams for the alliance tournament.) Right now: CCP has the right to terminate your account immediately if you don't pay After: CCP will notify you 90 days before terminating you if you don't pay Reality: CCP hasn't ever used this clause Why people are up in arms about getting 90 days notice to something CCP currently has the right to do immediately is beyond me.
Actually, they did terminate accounts once. It was of trial only accounts and freed up a ton of single character names. |

Nana Skalski
Poseidaon
17843
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:53:13 -
[118] - Quote
When we will get gambling for ISK in game?
Every part of a game helps to tell a story. =ƒôò
Where is Angry CONCORD guy when you need him.
GëíGïüGëí GÖÑ
|

MrJc Brighteast
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:53:49 -
[119] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: From what I can tell, IWI and casino were running a RMT operation while EVEbet were legit. So EVEbet gets time to get its **** in order before shutting down while the other two got nuked.
Coupled with this is the whole steam getting sued for in game gambling so CCP are pulling the plug before something stupid happens and some American lawyer goes after them.
Eve casino wasn't even online yet nor did they accept any isk so idk how they could rmt lol only reason I can think of is Iron bank joining them. Again BEFORE the site was even live |

Hesod Adee
Kiwis In Space No Points Necessary
355
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:54:08 -
[120] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: From what I can tell, IWI and casino were running a RMT operation while EVEbet were legit. So EVEbet gets time to get its **** in order before shutting down while the other two got nuked.
Coupled with this is the whole steam getting sued for in game gambling so CCP are pulling the plug before something stupid happens and some American lawyer goes after them.
Casino wasn't involved in RMT. They were banned for breaking a different rule. From the dev blog:
Quote:The third party service EVE Casino has been shut down in game, and all ISK and assets have been confiscated after multiple and sustained breaches of our Developer License Agreement. Permanent account suspensions have been issued against those involved.
But they were still banned for doing something that was against the rules at the time they did it. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |