|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 100 post(s) |
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises
Ev0ke
67
   |
Posted - 2012.04.03 20:23:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:1) Right now we haven't had to go any farther than the consumer ie the guy who made the purchase. If things change we will as well.
So, basically, you have been given carte-blanche to shut down the game by banning every single account producing anything for market if you deem necessary. It's not like we can choose who to sell to on the eve market.
No offense, but I think I'll just switch my production chars from 12 month subscriptions to a monthly / as needed basis. Having 250 SP in industry is starting to feel like a security feature.
|
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises
Ev0ke
67
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 20:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Mioelnir wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:1) Right now we haven't had to go any farther than the consumer ie the guy who made the purchase. If things change we will as well. So, basically, you have been given carte-blanche to shut down the game by banning every single account producing anything for market if you deem necessary. It's not like we can choose who to sell to on the eve market. No offense, but I think I'll just switch my production chars from 12 month subscriptions to a monthly / as needed basis. Having 250 SP in industry is starting to feel like a security feature. I'm pretty sure you're going a bit overboard here.
Good.  |
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises
Ev0ke
67
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 21:04:00 -
[3] - Quote
Padme Amidala Naberrie wrote:I would say it's more likely they are deliberately mis-representing the facts for reasons of their own. Not saying what those reasons might be but if I were you I would investigate these people for possible RMT infractions. Plus the ones who have responses like "Now I am not defending RMT but if you take action against it it fooks up the game for everyone".  But you've already thought of that haven't you?
And with just one additional level of tinfoil hattery, your 4 month old alt posting is in reality just trying to deflect away from yourself unto other people. 
|
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises
Ev0ke
67
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 21:31:00 -
[4] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:I'll look into this. I hadn't thought of it actually and I think it's a good idea. Unfortunately we don't own The Internet so we can't stop people from sending mails. We're working on the problem but there's no really easy solution given the technology involved.
One doesn't need to own the internet for that. For example the CCP bulk mta often used for surveys and stuff is run under the cocos islands domain ccp.cc which - while it does indeed belong to CCP - is never ever used anywhere else that customers see, so it probably looks fishy to most users.
Then again, if you read your mails with full headers, you are probably already sufficiently paranoid. |
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises
Ev0ke
67
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 22:34:00 -
[5] - Quote
Buzzy Warstl wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Buzzy Warstl wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:What percentage of people do you suppose would actually use that? It's certainly feasible but adoption rates are abysmal out in the world. Debian signs their security announcements. They are completely accessible to people not using PGP/GPG and are authenticated for people who are using them. Yeah I know some people sign their emails, what I'm saying is given the work that would go into implementing such a system how many people would actually gain benefit from it. PGP signing adoption rates are terrible or were at least the last time I checked. True, I'd be surprised if the Debian security mailing list had more than a few thousand subscribers, and that may include everyone who uses GPG who isn't on FreeBSD.
Also true (and a +like for FreeBSD).
Sadly, business-wise it probably isn't enough benefit to warrant any attention. Even though the marketing department would probably not have to script openssl into muttrc.
|
|
|
| |
|