|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |

La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.02.24 04:00:00 -
[1] - Quote
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:Akirei Scytale wrote:I disagree with scamming newbros, as well as disagree with blanket bans for behavior like this.
I'm pretty torn TBH, but this CCP decision is indeed on a slippery slope. It would be nice to design a "corp finder" with similar functionality to the agent finder so the channel itself could be free game again, but thats not a tiny task.
My point is, there are much better ways to ensure new players have positive first experiences with EVE than this. There are many paths to removing these restrictions. #1 Is this http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Possibly_Practical_POS_Performance_Proposal_%28CSM%29 fully modular permissions and divisions will mean the spy and thief threat can be better managed so noobs will be in demand again instead of shunned as potential spiez. There are other good ideas as well. So its not slippery slope. Its a temporary band aid.
How about instead of implementing that proposal they just let the game continue to be a sandbox. They don't even need to do anything to do that. |

La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.02.24 04:34:00 -
[2] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:What part of tough ****, CCP ruled it in favourable interests of the entire playerbase don't you reprobates that "do" understand but simply argue tooth and nail to the extent you think your some kind of special snowflake deserving unmitigated rights over others because your interests naturally have to come first? 
I have no clue what you said there bud, try again? |

La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2012.02.24 04:42:00 -
[3] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:Hurrrrrr :downsmad:
Yes because wanting to preserve the sandbox, which applies to everyone means I want "better rights." (I think you mean favortism here but I'm not sure) Everyone should have equal scamming opportunities, happy now pubbie? |

La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2012.02.24 04:49:00 -
[4] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:
So despite my attempts to clarify things you will continue to go with your assumptions anyhow. Arrogance and idiocy, QED.
You haven't really done anything but shitpost, please though do explain yourself.
E: Guy above me, newbs do not make good marks they have nothing of value so they are not scammed. Idiots with too much isk and too little brains those are the marks. |

La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2012.02.24 05:03:00 -
[5] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:And yet funnily enough its my belief that the very reason CCP introduced the ruling was very much to preserve this sandbox, and not just for "scammers".
Why don't you explain this to me, how does preventing people with too much isk and too little brains from being scammed increase the sandbox potential?
I can answer it for you already, it doesn't restricting actions reduces sandbox potential. The only good exception to that is botting.
Grumpy Owly wrote: Since I believe CCP have made this decision in order to benefit the growth of the community and to afford the purposeful use of the recruitment channel for its intended purpose. I see this as largely more beneficial to "whole" of EvE rather than just pandering to the interests of scammers who obviosuly don't give two hoots about the progression of EvE overall. They are more concerned about ensuring ISK is flowing into their own wallets.
+1 to CCP.
Growth would have to be an increase as in more new players. Yet as many of us have already stated new players have nothing so they aren't marks. One of the attractions to EVE is that it is a cold, dark, and harsh place. Hell most of the word of mouth advertising from EVE comes from scams. I see no growth from allowing rich morons to keep their isk by protecting them from scams. |

La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2012.02.24 05:29:00 -
[6] - Quote
I can't see the second one for some reason but the first one doesn't include post-crucible. That information is way to dated to be applied to the current situation.
E: After getting that to load it shows a slight increase which further proves that you are completely wrong.
Also the one you really want, is the number of subscribed accounts, not logins. |

La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2012.02.24 05:33:00 -
[7] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:Ladie Harlot wrote:Grumpy Owly wrote:And yet login statstics do demonstrate that the game has stagnated. That has more to do with space pants and other poor decision making on CCP's part than anything we are doing. If CCP could point to an actual statistic that showed them that scamming was actually hurting the game they would change the EULA and put a stop to it. Everything else is just hot air. Ok fair enough so nothing to do with Goons, ok, so where is this amazing pull the Goons are demonstrating for the appeal to the game on the server graph, please point it out?
Tell you what, point to the part on the graph that's the people leaving the game over scamming. Don't present data then ask questions that have no relevance to the data. |

La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2012.02.24 05:37:00 -
[8] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:Ladie Harlot wrote:Grumpy Owly wrote:And yet login statstics do demonstrate that the game has stagnated. That has more to do with space pants and other poor decision making on CCP's part than anything we are doing. If CCP could point to an actual statistic that showed them that scamming was actually hurting the game they would change the EULA and put a stop to it. Everything else is just hot air. Ok fair enough so nothing to do with Goons, ok, so where is this amazing pull the Goons are demonstrating for the appeal to the game on the server graph, please point it out?
Also your character was created way before the worst of it back in summer 2011. So you really don't have a clue how bad it actually was and couldn't possibly have a true perception of stagnation in this game. |

La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2012.02.24 05:38:00 -
[9] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:La Nariz wrote:I can't see the second one for some reason but the first one doesn't include post-crucible. That information is way to dated to be applied to the current situation. E: After getting that to load it shows a slight increase which further proves that you are completely wrong. Also the one you really want, is the number of subscribed accounts, not logins. Sorry i dont see it, all I see from the long term graph (which is up to date) is a downard trend to a virtual flat line, there is no serious growth trend to account for and please attribute it to Goons playstyle.
Where is this graph now, link it for me? It certainly is not one of the two you linked, the first one is not even current and the server login graphs show a very slight increase. |

La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2012.02.24 05:42:00 -
[10] - Quote
I have some proof that scamming is a draw to the game, take a look at this article from the New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/15/business/15views.html
Right there word of mouth advertising for the game and a draw to it.
A good quote from that article: "But the word from Reykjavik isnGÇÖt likely to comfort EbankGÇÖs depositors. EveGÇÖs creators at CCP GÇö which employs its own economist and philosopher GÇö take a laissez-faire approach, leaving most such matters to the gameGÇÖs users to sort out."
Grumpy Owly wrote:Sorry if someone is making the claim that the Goons playstyle is an improvement to server numbers they have to prove it.
Funny by that logic you should have to prove all of your points which you haven't and can't. I don't have access to CCP's internal server statistics or I would bother with showing you the raw data. I sure as hell am not going to use out dated or off subject data to flail around trying to prove my point while frothing at the mouth in an angry seizure. |
|

La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2012.02.24 05:57:00 -
[11] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote: I placed them as a contra argument to the claims being projected, mainly as we have seen significant evidence in the forums of the differences in opinion represented to the Goons, not as a factual representation.
But I don't want to explore the Goon hate phenomina beyond what is needed to make a point, as I don't have or want to see any motivations for seeing Goons not being a relevant part of EvE. But I'm not going to simply swallow the BS either.
You do realize that the forum population is not a representative sample of the actual eve population right?
Your argument is basically one big bandwagon fallacy. Everyone on the forums whines about goons scamming them therefore scams should be removed.
You aren't making a point and I'm not feeding you any BS. The only thing you've done this entire thread is link an out of date graph and link a graph that's data had nothing to do with the point you were trying to make.
So please make a point.
|

La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5
|
Posted - 2012.02.24 06:04:00 -
[12] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:Everyone off the forums, they hold no relevance or value, Goons have said so, pointless being here, nothing to see.  I have made points, don't expect you to like them and certainly would expect you to oppose them as a Goon. Not surprised you would simply try to deny the points. TL;DR: IYO, bored now. I'll wait for CCP's comment.
These points, where are they? |

La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5
|
Posted - 2012.02.24 06:10:00 -
[13] - Quote
Valentyn3 wrote:While I think these stories are hilarious, I do think that the channels should be used for what they are designed for. Using the recruit channel to scam people with no intention accepting them is really no different than WTB/WTS spamming the channel.
That is a different type of advertisement and those two are not at all alike but I can agree with not letting the channel turn into Jita local. |

La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5
|
Posted - 2012.02.24 06:31:00 -
[14] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:La Nariz wrote:Valentyn3 wrote:While I think these stories are hilarious, I do think that the channels should be used for what they are designed for. Using the recruit channel to scam people with no intention accepting them is really no different than WTB/WTS spamming the channel. That is a different type of advertisement and those two are not at all alike but I can agree with not letting the channel turn into Jita local. I see so when La Nairz says it it's a point. And you say your not in denial about my points: Grumpy Owly wrote:Since I believe CCP have made this decision in order to benefit the growth of the community and to afford the purposeful use of the recruitment channel for its intended purpose. Hypocrit.
I have no idea what you are trying to say. Are you calling yourself a hippocrite? All you said in your quote is that in your opinion CCP is right. You didn't make any points. |

La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
9
|
Posted - 2012.02.24 14:04:00 -
[15] - Quote
GM Spiral wrote:I was directed to this thread shortly after I updated the current MotD of the Recruitment Channel a few minutes ago.
To be succinct: 1. Scamming is not forbidden in EVE unless they are facilitated through bugs, exploits and the like. Likewise, if they are conducted in such a manner as to violate the ToS or EULA they will be stopped. 2. The onus of responsibility was always on the shoulders of both parties involved in recruitment. It was stated so in the MotD even, although it did not receive much attention. If the recruit or recruiter got scammed or betrayed in any way, it would be their responsibility for having entered into the deal. 3. For the simple purpose of keeping the channel somewhat usable, posting scams into it was considered off topic and therefore forbidden. Updating the MotD to emphasize this then spun into the current situation, which should now be (hopefully) clarified.
GM Spiral wrote:Desert Ice78 wrote:Nope, still doesn't make sence.
You cannot post anything but legitimate post in channel, i.e. no scams, but at the same time you can be scammed.
It's got to be one or the other. Want a GM responce to this. You are always responsible for the outcome of any deal you enter into yourself in EVE Online, Customer Support can not protect you from your own choices. Posting scams in the Recruitment Channel is forbidden in the same way that posting off topic there is forbidden. It is a measure of moderation of the channel, being a member of the channel does not carry with it any implied protection from such scams any more than being a member of the Help channel does.
Can you please answer the petition I have regarding this? |
|
|
|