EVE Search - deployed to iraq. need thoughts about this problem

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

deployed to iraq. need thoughts about this problem

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 3 post(s)
Murtific Caldari Ore Mongers R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.02 23:53:00 - [1] So here I go again, thread will probably get locked. You get a friend in eve, sister that you work with at subway, or your wife's friend (whom of which has a power of attorney for the first person) whos husband is also getting deployed, to train both of those accounts for the two that are deployed. I wont bring up which document dictates the rights or wrongs committed here. The point being is that persons A and B still pay for their accounts and want their skills trained. We all agree that this is a major part of the game. I would like to publicaly state that ammendments to this document should be made. Conditions such as A) A legal way to "account share" [if we will name it this]; set ur account to some kind of inactive state, but only leaves it so that skills can be trained. B) No in game operation other that skill change can be conducted. C) Continueous logins will raise a flag for possible "account theft". Yea so, I can name about 15 soldiers that I work with here in Balad, Iraq with about 2 accounts each. You do the math on how much money CCP is raking in on 15 inactive people. 30 really. Are they saving bandwith, yep. I have a friend that had a nice little "debate" if you will with my friend. Just for the freaking information to everybody. Nobody demanded/asked/blackmailed me for my login information. And if they did, Why is my account still under my control and skills being trained??? =] "...What you did in regards to demanding the login details of your corp mates in return for ISK, ships, and skills is simply not accepted practice. I hope you can continue playing the game as it is intended to be played and that you will keep building friendships and having fun without sharing accounts. I assure you that the last thing we want to do is to be a thorn in your side. We are only trying to uphold the rules that are set to ensure safety. Best regards Senior GM Guard EVE Customer Support ..." You can only assume that somebody A) Ratted on us because I needed my accounts trained. B) What realy happend was, this individual knew inside information and in the end stole 1.4 bil from corp wallet through corp contract bugs and used to work for CCP, thus wanted to hurt people where it really matters, people like me and 15 other soldiers that I work with. YOu can probably tell I'm a bit angry, and angry at that GM Guard representitive. There are checks and balances.. The GM is simply balancing things, who's checking him and where he gets his information... Enough ranting. Grant some change to EULA for people that are unable to play but pay and expect great service, much like CCP advertises. Create some system. Who aggrees?? Hopefuly a few people will be able to post before this gets locked. Thx for all of your support! Specialist ********* US Army and livid EVE player =]
MC Smith	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:01:00 - [2] Edited by: MC Smith on 03/07/2007 00:01:10 Don't share accounts and don't post GM communications... Edit: also if you want someone to train your character transfer it to an account owned by them
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:01:00 - [3] First off posting communications from the GMs/Devs is a no-no. Edit that out of your post or it will get locked. To the main point account sharing is against the EULA. Certainly we can think of instances where it would be nice to do it and reasonable but CCP cannot get in the habit of researching every case and deciding one instance is ok and another is not. A blanket "no account sharing" is the way to go. If your wife is at home ask her to set skills for you. While I suppose this is technically account sharing it is the same household and your wife. I doubt anyone would ever know much less really care if they did. If she cannot do that then do an account transfer to someone who will maintain it for you and re-imburse them the monthly fee. In this way it is now their account and can legally (as far as CCP is concerned) use the account. When you return have the account transferred back. You have to trust those people but if they have power of attorney with you then I would assume you do trust them. Best of luck.
Alis Aquilae	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:02:00 - [4] Originally by: Imperator Jora'h First off posting communications from the GMs/Devs is a no-no. Edit that out of your post or it will get locked. To the main point account sharing is against the EULA. Certainly we can think of instances where it would be nice to do it and reasonable but CCP cannot get in the habit of researching every case and deciding one instance is ok and another is not. A blanket "no account sharing" is the way to go. If your wife is at home ask her to set skills for you. While I suppose this is technically account sharing it is the same household and your wife. I doubt anyone would ever know much less really care if they did. If she cannot do that then do an account transfer to someone who will maintain it for you and re-imburse them the monthly fee. In this way it is now their account and can legally (as far as CCP is concerned) use the account. When you return have the account transferred back. You have to trust those people but if they have power of attorney with you then I would assume you do trust them. Best of luck. The wife thing should work fine, I believe there is an exception for direct family?
X99 Z990	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:03:00 - [5] Rules are rules.
SgtDeaux	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:03:00 - [6] First of all Hooah. 2nd be smart in the sandbox 3rd contact CCP directally.. this is a special problem and therefore deserves special attention. I think they would rather keep you as a consumer than loose your money. Lets also not forget too mention the money of thousands of other soldiers who play this game around the world who would be ANNOYED too see a company screw a soldier.
Murtific Caldari Ore Mongers R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:04:00 - [7] Why should I pay 40 dollars extra to ensure my account(s) get trained.
MC Smith	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:05:00 - [8] Originally by: Alis Aquilae The wife thing should work fine, I believe there is an exception for direct family? Only for parent-child afaik.
MC Smith	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:11:00 - [9] Originally by: Murtific Why should I pay 40 dollars extra to ensure my account(s) get trained. Why should you be given special treatment and be exempted from the rules?
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:12:00 - [10] Originally by: Murtific Why should I pay 40 dollars extra to ensure my account(s) get trained. I assume you mean the cost of tranferring and transferring back. Sucks I know but that's the deal. Maybe if you contacted CCP directly and explained why they might benice and wave the fee. No idea if they would but doesn't hurt to ask. Would be a nice thing for them to do for soldiers who get sent abroad (any country's soldiers).
Murtific Caldari Ore Mongers R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:16:00 - [11] Originally by: MC Smith Originally by: Murtific Why should I pay 40 dollars extra to ensure my account(s) get trained. Why should you be given special treatment and be exempted from the rules? I never stated that I should be given special treatment. I stated that a system should be intriducted for the populous. Perceptions are your reality.
chrisreeves Gallente Asgard Protectorate	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:17:00 - [12] Edited by: chrisreeves on 03/07/2007 00:16:41 ibtl & you shouldn't post CCP communication, you'll get bad things done to you. Oh and, even though everyone says that its very clear, the EULA is flawed at best in it's attempt to dissuade members from sharing accounts, training skills for someone else, etc. Not that I share accounts, I don't. It's just that I can read for myself and see there are issues with it. Yeah I said it, flawed and don't give me that social engineered answer "the EULA says no" because the EULA also says that " #21 You may not share your account password with anyone. Infraction of this rule is done at your own risk. Further information on account transfers can be found in the EULA." Kinda vague there. So what's the EULA say? "2 B. You are responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of your Password and for any damage, harm, lost or deleted characters, etc. resulting from your disclosure, or allowing the disclosure, of any Password, or from use by any person of your Password." Now it also says in there that "YOU MUST NOT ALLOW" but, you can't have multiple negating rules that people are supposed to agree to. Anyways a simple solution but one that costs you more is to have the person start a new account and transfer your characters to them. They can train the characters and when you get back, transfer them back or to a new account. Sucks but, like many things in Eve, CCP just hasn't taken this to a place that addresses the different situations that their "loyal" subscribers get placed in in their lives. ----------------- Originally by: kieron The Ibis was never intended to be a solo OMGWTF mission-farming PWNmobile. "It was empty!!"
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:19:00 - [13] Edited by: Crumplecorn on 03/07/2007 00:19:37 Originally by: Murtific Why should I pay 40 dollars extra to ensure my account(s) get trained. You pay 40 dollars to get away with it if someone untrustworthy is in the loop. Everyone does account sharing for the purpose of skill training sometime. Most people only let trustworthy people know about it. If it is let slip, CCP have to come down hard because all kinds of Badness could potentially ensue from abuses of account sharing. Oh, and IBTL . - You keep using that word . . . I do not think it means what you think it means
Ore Liberator Minmatar	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:23:00 - [14] Eve is a game where you can't trust anyone. The no account sharing clause sucks, but thems the rules. IMO it should not be enforced with the understanding of "if someone steals your account, you're screwed" much like how it is dealt with in WoW (hey, you got hacked, grats now you're banned!) I lost near a year of training in eve (this is an alt) on my day 1 character as a result of deployments, and yes, I do think it sucks.
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:24:00 - [15] Originally by: chrisreeves Oh and, even though everyone says that its very clear, the EULA is flawed at best in it's attempt to dissuade members from sharing accounts, training skills for someone else, etc. Not that I share accounts, I don't. It's just that I can read for myself and see there are issues with it. EULA is fine. Originally by: chrisreeves #21 You may not share your account password with anyone. Infraction of this rule is done at your own risk. Further information on account transfers can be found in the EULA." Kinda vague there. The EULA says you can't account share. Rather than saying CCP will burn you at the stake, they simply say 'at your own risk'. Which, to just about anyone, means "don't get caught". Originally by: chrisreeves "2 B. You are responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of your Password and for any damage, harm, lost or deleted characters, etc. resulting from your disclosure, or allowing the disclosure, of any Password, or from use by any person of your Password." Now it also says in there that "YOU MUST NOT ALLOW" but, you can't have multiple negating rules that people are supposed to agree to. It is not a 'negating rule'. This also covers accidental disclosure of password. This is just an expansion on the 'at your own risk' part of the previous bit. Seems quite clear to me. - You keep using that word . . . I do not think it means what you think it means
Jennai The Silent Rage R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:26:00 - [16] Originally by: Crumplecorn If it is let slip, CCP have to come down hard because all kinds of Badness could potentially ensue from abuses of account sharing. you mean like the account sharing 23/7 mining isk farmers that never have anything done to them? providing special considerations for soldiers on deployment is good PR. rules-lawyering soldiers into shelling out $40 in transfer fees while doing nothing about the thousands of isk farmers isn't going to look good if it hits the media.
Spenz Gallente Dark Knights of Deneb Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:48:00 - [17] Is this the final nail in the coffin containing consumer trust for CCP? If it gets out I would say so. If I had an Alt I would probably post with it...
chrisreeves Gallente Asgard Protectorate	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:49:00 - [18] The way the rules are written are so that CCP has a means to say "see, it says here" when in fact, it is said numerous times throughout the EULA but in fact does not agree with itself. The "contradictory" rules are contained in other passages, not necessarily in the ones I quoted. If you look at the TOS and EULA, they are not clear when it comes to being explicit in the sharing rules. Yes the EULA says that "you cannot" share which means, it's against the rules, penalties ensue. Yes the EULA says it's "your responsibility" <-- this should be removed because it suggests that you can share but wont be supported by CCP if something goes wrong when in fact, they don't want you sharing at all, no questions asked so this part is unnecessary. There is one famous precedent involved in the last statement from what I seem to remember, even a comment in a blog or dev statement in reference to a certain group of people when this was brought up in the past. I'll see if I can find it. ----------------- Originally by: kieron The Ibis was never intended to be a solo OMGWTF mission-farming PWNmobile. "It was empty!!"
James Duar Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:56:00 - [19] The sharing account details rules have always been lame and comedically enforced (cyno-alts, nope, no one anywhere has been sharing those out! Devs taking advantage of them? Nope never happened either!) Maybe what CCP should actually do is get on and implement a proper system to allow people to queue skills up for exactly this reason.
Mari Onette Amarr Gottland Production Transport Mines	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:56:00 - [20] #1: Thank you for your service. You do a job nobody should need to do and I have much respect for that. #2: I feel like there's something you're leaving out. you start out talking about how you needed to keep account's training for your soldier buddies, and suddenly the post skids into the theft of 1.4 billion isk, and GM interaction. I think you should take a moment to write out the whole story so we can better understand what happened. #3:If you have characters that are going inactive, It's best practice to remove all corp rights they may have to things this will prevent corp theft. ------ I am in blood! Stepp'd in so far that, should I wade no more, it would be as tedious as going over. -MacBeth
Le Skunk Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:57:00 - [21] Originally by: Spenz Is this the final nail in the coffin containing consumer trust for CCP? If it gets out I would say so. Im not quite sure about this. Its a kick in the shins for the OP - but how could CCP get a media drubbing for following the rules they laid out. They didnt really get a drubbing for breaking the rules they laid out some time ago even. SKUNK Originally by: Fink Angel They acted like Mr. Creasote at the all you can eat buffet, and CCP provided the Wafer Theeen Mint.
MC Smith	Posted - 2007.07.03 00:57:00 - [22] Originally by: chrisreeves The way the rules are written are so that CCP has a means to say "see, it says here" when in fact, it is said numerous times throughout the EULA but in fact does not agree with itself. Its pretty explicit actually. The "your responsibility" and "at your own risk" part simply states that CCP is not liable for any actions taken by others as a result of you giving away your password.
Nadarius Chrome Celestial Horizon Corp. Valainaloce	Posted - 2007.07.03 01:10:00 - [23] Allowing skill queueing from the account management page would be a good solution. Don't allow changing of a skill in progress, but allow people to add one queued skill if there isn't one already, or change it if there is. This should obviously only work on open/active accounts, else you'd be able to skill on closed accounts.
Chronos Sage	Posted - 2007.07.03 01:30:00 - [24] who the hell is going to train your character for you when you have transfered it to thier account - no one - because only one character can be trained on any given account, so thats just silly - what is really needed it to be able to access the character training section via the web or somthing instead if actually having to have a eve client installed. then you could just drop into a local i-cafe and pull it up and change the skill training as required. having a short training queue would be better but weve had the answer to that over and over... so... my two cents anyway Sage
Ridley Tree The Black Rabbits	Posted - 2007.07.03 01:33:00 - [25] People tend to be in the sandbox for a lot longer than it takes to train two skills mate. There needs to be a long-term solution to allow someone else to manage your account, not character. Maybe it would require an approval process via CCP. Maybe it would be an exemption only allowed for military deployments and require a copy of your orders or some such. But this issue stinks and as it looks right now, CCP is profiteering people for $60 extra bucks if they want to keep their characters skilling when they can't access the game. Thats $20 you give your friend in cash so he can create a new account. Thats $20 to transfer the character over and thats $20 to transfer it back when you're done doing what your doing. Or maybe they could actually implement the changing of skills via cell-phone or the internet and not just through the game client. This still could still cut a lot of people out but most people, even soldiers in Iraq, tend to get internet access. ---- The Ridley Tree Productions Vault of Videos
Draygo Korvan Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.07.03 01:38:00 - [26] Ill give you a simple answer: If the person setting your training skills (like your wife) logs in to your computer, sets the skills, then logs off there is no way for CCP to know that it wasnt you unless you tell them. There is no way CCP can enforce no-account sharing in a household because it is completely undetectable. The larger question you are posing can only be answered by CCP. Good luck.
Ridley Tree The Black Rabbits	Posted - 2007.07.03 01:43:00 - [27] Edited by: Ridley Tree on 03/07/2007 01:42:16 Originally by: Draygo Korvan Ill give you a simple answer: If the person setting your training skills (like your wife) logs in to your computer, sets the skills, then logs off there is no way for CCP to know that it wasnt you unless you tell them. There is no way CCP can enforce no-account sharing in a household because it is completely undetectable. The larger question you are posing can only be answered by CCP. Good luck. And how can they tell if its not you if its a different computer? If I log into EVE from my place in California on Monday. My brother's place in Arizona on Tuesday. My friend's place in Texas on Wednesday and my cousin's place in Germany on Friday am I going to have my account canceled for account sharing? ---- The Ridley Tree Productions Vault of Videos
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2007.07.03 01:48:00 - [28] Originally by: Jennai Originally by: Crumplecorn If it is let slip, CCP have to come down hard because all kinds of Badness could potentially ensue from abuses of account sharing. you mean like the account sharing 23/7 mining isk farmers that never have anything done to them? No, I mean like someone getting their account stolen and trying to blame CCP. - You keep using that word . . . I do not think it means what you think it means
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2007.07.03 01:54:00 - [29] Originally by: Ridley Tree stuff You seem to have missed the part where you have to change skills yourself manually. CCP have refused to even add skill changes to the 'My Character' page because they want to force people to log in if they want their character to continue training. Not being able to continue training if you can't log in for an extended period isn't a problem, it's the game's design in action. This whole thing reminds me of noobs who stay up late at night to change over to their next 6H long skill, just on a longer time scale. - You keep using that word . . . I do not think it means what you think it means
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2007.07.03 01:59:00 - [30] Originally by: Dez Affinity I'm guessing this thread will get locked as well, which is sad because this game caters for lots of people and letting people voice their opinions about rules should be allowed, otherwise it's some kind of dictatorship. Oh well. The EULA is hardly going to be determined through democracy now is it? - You keep using that word . . . I do not think it means what you think it means

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.

IBTL