Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Etho Demerzel
Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2008.12.15 22:26:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 15/12/2008 22:27:48 What this last meeting proved is that the CSM requests may be completely ignored by CCP even if they are supported by the vast majority of the community.
The disclosure of the banned accounts and associated alliances was a strong and almost unanimous request from the community, as made obvious by the motion in this same page. Even so CCP refused to comply, justifying with their policy to protect user privacy.
Well, the explanation is as absurd as the fact. It is a very different thing to announce PLAYER names and character names. Announcing <edit>character</edit> names in no way violates user privacy, even because it is done all the time when such chars win prizes, for example. God, even PLAYER names are disclosed all the time, as in the CSM ellection.
So, in conclusion, CCP not only failed to comply with a request of 95% of its player base, it also invented lame excuses to justify it. So I ask, why even bother with the CSM, if when the situation for which the CSM was created comes they can do nothing about it and are just ignored.
The CSM members should just mass resign and deny this facade to CCP. =====
"If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron... |
Treelox
Amarr Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.12.15 22:31:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Etho Demerzel What this last meeting proved is that the CSM requests may be completely ignored by CCP even if they are supported by the vast majority of the community.
So, in conclusion, CCP not only failed to comply with a request of 95% of its player base, it also invented lame excuses to justify it.
The forums only attracts about 10% of the total player base. Less than 5% of the total player base even bothered to vote in the last CSM. Less than 0.05% of the total player base even voted in the thread here about the exploit.
Your numbers are wrong, and your emo nerd rage is strong. I might agree to a degree in the sentiment, that CSM is pre-nerfed in their ability to deal with CCP, I do however strongly disagree with your logic and your solution. -- Chribba's LoveQuest 17:00hrs Dec. 20th (Prizes!!)
|
Haakelen
Gallente Cassandra's Light Caeruleum Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.12.15 22:33:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Etho Demerzel The disclosure of the banned accounts and associated alliances was a strong and almost unanimous request from the community, as made obvious by the motion in this same page.
You are incorrect. The OP of that thread said nothing of the sort. It was a call for transparency on the subject. I supported the proposal on the grounds of transparency on the exploit, not for a pitchfork-waving crusade, and I can assume others did, too.
|
Etho Demerzel
Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2008.12.15 22:45:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 15/12/2008 22:45:08
Originally by: Treelox
The forums only attracts about 10% of the total player base. Less than 5% of the total player base even bothered to vote in the last CSM. Less than 0.05% of the total player base even voted in the thread here about the exploit.
Your numbers are wrong, and your emo nerd rage is strong. I might agree to a degree in the sentiment, that CSM is pre-nerfed in their ability to deal with CCP, I do however strongly disagree with your logic and your solution.
In any democratic process those who abstain are ignored. It is this way in the real world and it is as it should be in Eve or anywhere else. You can't know the opnion of those that didn't give it to you, so you work with the opinions you have. So your argument is completely groundless.
Originally by: Haakelen You are incorrect. The OP of that thread said nothing of the sort. It was a call for transparency on the subject. I supported the proposal on the grounds of transparency on the exploit, not for a pitchfork-waving crusade, and I can assume others did, too.
Just read the posts, shall you? And then read the thread about the exploit. You will see that the most unanimous request even between those that disagreed about everything else was for full disclosure. =====
"If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron... |
Kaijusan
Gallente gallach minig Corp New Eve Mining manufacturing Organisation
|
Posted - 2008.12.15 22:54:00 -
[5]
Agreed
|
Jinx Barker
GFB Scientific
|
Posted - 2008.12.15 23:37:00 -
[6]
They should - but would not - resign if: CCP investigation shows unwillingness to share ALL relevant information with the public. They should - but would not - resign if: CCP would use an NDA to shut up the members of CSM from telling the public the truth.
If CSM has integrity, they would force the CCP's hand into disclosure of the truth. However, as I have seen from last CSM, they are hampered by NDA - which incidentally puts their playing account into jeopardy, should they break it. And CCP is not shy about enforcing the NDA on the CSM - which makes CSM effectively CASTRATED.
There you go.
::::Click The Signature For the Blog::::
|
KAELA MENSHA
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 00:33:00 -
[7]
They would not have to reveal what CCP does not want revealed, but simple statement like: I [we] can not, in good conscience, remain a member[s] of the body that is strictly for show. I [we] can not, in good conscience, be part of the system where CSM members are threatened, or reminded of the NDA, and thus brought into line, when greater good of the public, for whom CSM was created, and whom we supposed to represent, calls for answers that we are not allowed to give.
I guarantee you a 100% uproar on that one. Too bad none of them will ever do it.
|
Allahs Warrior
Gallente Justified Hedonism And Dualism
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 00:44:00 -
[8]
a big NO to this. What if all of EVE said "Give us Darius and Mollie's password!"
it's against the privacy agreement, and would get them sued. I supported the idea, but if they have privacy contracts to follow, then they have privacy contracts to follow.
|
Jinx Barker
Caldari GFB Scientific
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 00:48:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Allahs Warrior a big NO to this. What if all of EVE said "Give us Darius and Mollie's password!"
it's against the privacy agreement, and would get them sued. I supported the idea, but if they have privacy contracts to follow, then they have privacy contracts to follow.
What, let's use the most absurd scenario? He he he.
::::Click The Signature For the Blog::::
|
Etho Demerzel
Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 01:01:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 16/12/2008 01:03:36
Originally by: Allahs Warrior a big NO to this. What if all of EVE said "Give us Darius and Mollie's password!"
it's against the privacy agreement, and would get them sued. I supported the idea, but if they have privacy contracts to follow, then they have privacy contracts to follow.
Like they were sued by, lets see he whose name begins with k... and shall not be pronounced? They didn't have any problems doing it then...
Now seriously, legally the privacy aggrement only covers real world information about the players. It has nothing to do with the characters. =====
"If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron... |
|
Squirrrel
Squirrrel Industries
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 01:07:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Allahs Warrior a big NO to this. What if all of EVE said "Give us Darius and Mollie's password!"
it's against the privacy agreement, and would get them sued. I supported the idea, but if they have privacy contracts to follow, then they have privacy contracts to follow.
CCP own all in-game content. Alliance names, corp names and character names.
Since they own all that, they can easily disclose any or all of them and should.
What they cannot and should not disclose are account login names or passwords or personal details.
|
linkeleo
Fairlight Corp FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 01:12:00 -
[12]
i agree about disclosure of, at the very least the corps involved. this does not in any way breach individual user privacy and imo a virtual entity like a corp does not have privacy rights since it is content material of the game.
if this were a short term thing i would not be bothered by none disclosure... but the lengths of time involved are considerable. and im sure more than a few of these individuals turned this expoit into a real world money tree for themselves.
the only reason i can see for ccp making up excuses as to why they cant disclose this information is to save themselves further embaressment.
perhaps the person who made the original petition should step forward and load some evidence and disclosure of the corps involved onto an external filehost and then post / pm the url to the csm or the author of this thread... that is - if he exists at all.
Link
p.s - you dont have to be a genious to see the amount of ferrogel exceeds the supply of dysprosium. a correctly configured database would spell this out so even a dyslexic alzeimers patient might see it. ----------------------------------------------
|
Lemage
Fine Goods for Fine Gentlemen
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 01:26:00 -
[13]
CSM is supposed to be a way for the players to be heard at CCP. CCP created the CSM, but don't have to listen to them as shown by the last meeting. Why bother having the CSM when CCP simply ignores it? The only options we have as subscribers is to complain and when that doesn't work, our last option is to simply vote with our feet.
I have no idea why we cannot know who exactly were exploiting this last bug??
Was it a major alliance who shifted some war?
While the characters who were exploiting this bug may have been banned, their alts who have no affiliation may still be in game, as well as anyone who benefited from this influx of isk (industrialists supplying them). This exploit has given the organizations who benefited from it, an unfair advantage. While the direct beneficiaries of the exploit have been banned, the indirect beneficiaries haven't been punished.
|
Darwin's Market
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 03:39:00 -
[14]
I like how nobody alts come saying they don't want the names disclosed, while genuine and known alliance are all demanding names for the blood throne.
|
Trist Ian
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 05:32:00 -
[15]
|
Ezoran DuBlaidd
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 05:51:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Etho Demerzel Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 15/12/2008 22:27:48 What this last meeting proved is that the CSM requests may be completely ignored by CCP even if they are supported by the vast majority of the community.
The disclosure of the banned accounts and associated alliances was a strong and almost unanimous request from the community, as made obvious by the motion in this same page. Even so CCP refused to comply, justifying with their policy to protect user privacy.
Well, the explanation is as absurd as the fact. It is a very different thing to announce PLAYER names and character names. Announcing <edit>character</edit> names in no way violates user privacy, even because it is done all the time when such chars win prizes, for example. God, even PLAYER names are disclosed all the time, as in the CSM ellection.
So, in conclusion, CCP not only failed to comply with a request of 95% of its player base, it also invented lame excuses to justify it. So I ask, why even bother with the CSM, if when the situation for which the CSM was created comes they can do nothing about it and are just ignored.
The CSM members should just mass resign and deny this facade to CCP.
maybe the people at CCP believe that the character names really ARE the names of the players... which would be rather confusing if you consider some people have multiple accounts.... |
Tellnan Matkiel
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 11:12:00 -
[17]
No.
|
Doonoo Boonoo
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 11:19:00 -
[18]
OP makes up his own figures and claims them to be fact. It is not CCPs or the CSMs job to pander to conspiracy theorists who will never be happy.
NO
The OP should take the advice in his sig but lacks the courage of his convictions. He looks like another whiner who does nothing else except complain.
|
Ezekyle Rahl
Minmatar Republic University
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 14:42:00 -
[19]
The objective of the CSM, as I understand it, is to coallate information from the playerbase, and then bring that information to CCP as a singular entity. They are an avenue of intelligence into the playerbase from CCP's perspective, and a voice for the playerbase from our-own. They have no authority over the decisions CCP make, and therefore cannot be held responsible for the actions taken by CCP. CCP are well within there bounds to ignore/disagree with the CSM on every issue thats brought forward.
My knowledge of the CSM and other forum shennanigans however is limited, so if im wrong in this, feel free to correct/ignore the above.
In conclussion the CSM advise CCP as to how the playerbase feels/thinks and little more, and so I disagree with the OP.
Also... First post
|
Jah'Ret Khan
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 15:27:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Etho Demerzel
So, in conclusion, CCP not only failed to comply with a request of 95% of its player base, it also invented lame excuses to justify it.
Please direct me to the thread where 218,500 players requested this information.
Not only can you not count, your reasoning abilities are flimsy.
The CSM got answers in a quick and direct manner and asked the questions players wanted asked. This is a lot more efficient than the method we used before the CSM existed. What was it called? Oh yes. The Threadnought.
So, finished trolling yet? ************************** We go ZOOM-ZOOM! You go BOOM-BOOM!
|
|
KTog Juriss
Hadean Drive Yards
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 15:34:00 -
[21]
Edited by: KTog Juriss on 16/12/2008 15:35:29 I'll start with the CSM bit. It seems people still think of this as some oversight committee, put in as a response to earlier problems in the game. Everything I've read from CCP on the implementation of the CSM feels to me at least, that this is intended to be a community relations council. Basically something you go to when you want to feel out how the community feels on subjects, and having it done up in a nice little report. I'm sure they're more than that, but oversight of CCP of any significant impact isn't one of them.
On to the topic, which is the naming of characters, their corp and associated alliances. I'll ask simply enough, how do you prove they had any knowledge at all of what was going on with the moons. The people involved in this didn't just dump this stuff on the market in a way that doubled or tripled availability. So naming anyone that might possibly have been involved, no matter what their level of knowledge of the exploiting was, will instantly be branded as cheats and have people demanding their expulsion from the game as well. This would amount to little more than a witch hunt, with people leaving the game not due to guilt, but due to disgust with what the players had become.
In my opinion, CCP is well within their rights to not release names, as it'd bring negative attention to those that may have done nothing wrong. They should at least release the numbers of people involved, and just how far reaching this exploit was if they can track that, along with the final number of those banned. However, with an exploit that goes this far back, the investigation will take time. This isn't something that goes well with the ban them all now crowd, but they do need to make sure they get the right people. Otherwise, they might as well just become the next Blizzard, and ban recklessly, then have to make corrections and account credits when they realise they screwed up yet again. They obviously took out the accounts that were still doing it, now they have to try and prove the ones that weren't so obvious about it.
Lastly, I feel CCP does need to, in addition to the above, find out what went wrong when this was originally reported and correct it. If it was a misfiling of it, why wasn't that caught and corrected. They could simply say the company they had outsourced their support calls to screwed it up, but I hope we get a bit more than that.
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari Sane Industries Inc. Ursa Stellar Initiative
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 16:34:00 -
[22]
Knowing how was involved is not as important as knowing that proper action will be taken. So if you think your favorite punching-bag alliance are a bunch of exploiting anusholes, you'll still be happy to know they'll lose a titan or two. (If the isk can be traced to them)
The question is then, how far is CCP willing to follow the isk. Not, who was it.
|
Plundaar
Gallente Golden Orb Technology inc
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 16:48:00 -
[23]
We need a poll then, who didn't hear about the affilated partys involved raise your hand.
btw, I'm not raising my hands.
|
Etho Demerzel
Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 16:51:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 16/12/2008 16:55:39
Originally by: Doonoo Boonoo OP makes up his own figures and claims them to be fact. It is not CCPs or the CSMs job to pander to conspiracy theorists who will never be happy.
NO
The OP should take the advice in his sig but lacks the courage of his convictions. He looks like another whiner who does nothing else except complain.
My sig is a compliment to the guy who made the worst PR statment I have ever seen. That in times of George W Bush is a high a standard. It is a gift...
Originally by: Jah'Ret Khan
Please direct me to the thread where 218,500 players requested this information.
Not only can you not count, your reasoning abilities are flimsy.
The CSM got answers in a quick and direct manner and asked the questions players wanted asked. This is a lot more efficient than the method we used before the CSM existed. What was it called? Oh yes. The Threadnought.
So, finished trolling yet?
I see you can't read. So I will repeat myself.
In any democratic process those who abstain are ignored. It is this way in the real world and it is as it should be in Eve or anywhere else. You can't know the opnion of those who didn't give it to you, so you work with the opinions you have. Your argument is completely groundless. =====
"If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron... |
Jah'Ret Khan
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 17:14:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Jah''Ret Khan on 16/12/2008 17:15:06
Originally by: Etho Demerzel
I see you can't read. So I will repeat myself.
I can read, you're just completely wrong is all.
Quote:
In any democratic process those who abstain are ignored. It is this way in the real world and it is as it should be in Eve or anywhere else. You can't know the opnion of those who didn't give it to you, so you work with the opinions you have. Your argument is completely groundless.
Democratic Process!
Shouting like a troglodyte in the street isn't democratic process. Online pixelated spaceship games are not democratic process either.
The "reply" button is not a vote in some world changing policy.
But the voting system for electing the CSM was democratic process with votes allocated ot every subscriber and the outcome being decided by those votes.
I hope you can see the difference.
Now please stop posting, more deserving people need those pixels. And your first post is still full of lies. ************************** We go ZOOM-ZOOM! You go BOOM-BOOM!
|
Kurlieu
Gallente The Ore House
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 17:19:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Kurlieu on 16/12/2008 17:19:39 No, they shouldn't.
|
Etho Demerzel
Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 17:26:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Jah'Ret Khan
I can read, you're just completely wrong is all.
And I see you base your argument in... Oh wait you don't!
Quote:
Democratic Process!
Shouting like a troglodyte in the street isn't democratic process. Online pixelated spaceship games are not democratic process either.
The "reply" button is not a vote in some world changing policy.
But the voting system for electing the CSM was democratic process with votes allocated ot every subscriber and the outcome being decided by those votes.
I hope you can see the difference.
Now please stop posting, more deserving people need those pixels. And your first post is still full of lies.
It doesn't matter if it is online pixelate spaceships or the ellection of your garden club president, both processes are based on democratic principles.
And replying is actually a vote in some world changing policy. It is just not the real world, but some pixelated world that is very important for you, considering your angry, irrational and diconnected posts.
I suggest you look for help. As this anger can make you ill, and I mean in the real world, not in the pixelated world you so much care about. =====
"If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron... |
Jah'Ret Khan
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 17:30:00 -
[28]
No. It's not.
You fail at politics and forms of govenrment.
Where are those thousands of people who agree wiht you now? Damn... guess they're abstaining or something... ************************** We go ZOOM-ZOOM! You go BOOM-BOOM!
|
Ezekyle Rahl
Minmatar Republic University
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 17:34:00 -
[29]
Etho You no longer seem to be debating your original post, and now seem to be attacking other peoples views. Perhaps now would be a good idea to re-think or re-iterate your original point...? |
Amarr Eh
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 17:36:00 -
[30]
Yes they should.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |