Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
^ Back to top
21 Pages123Next pageLast page
 

Terms of Service CSM Feedback Thread

Jump to first DEV post
Author
C C P Alliance
#1 Posted: 2013.09.13 20:30  |  Edited by: CCP Dolan
Greetings,

After reviewing player reaction to our changes to the ToS aimed at making a long standing policy more visible, CCP and the CSM would like further constructive feedback from the playerbase. I encourage you to post both, (1) ideas for rewording the changes to the ToS, and/or (2) thoughtful objections to our traditional reinforcement of ToS in regards to impersonation. It is important to remember that the ToS (along with the EULA) supply what is generally considered to be "the rules" of EVE Online, and as a consequence must be carefully proofed against the exploitation of loopholes and edge cases in their wording.

We will be combing this thread, and asking the CSM to submit their own responses when evaluating whether we should alter the current Terms of Service and, if we decide to change them, how we should do so.

Please be aware that this thread exists solely for constructive feedback. Nonconstructive feedback and trolling will likely result in a ban from the EVE Online Forums, as we are hoping to work together with you all to make sure EVE is the "best" EVE it can be.
CCP Dolan | Community Representative

Twitter: @CCPDolan

Gooby pls
Goonswarm Federation
#2 Posted: 2013.09.13 20:38  |  Edited by: Emcera
CCP Dolan wrote:
I encourage you to post both, (1) ideas for rewording the changes to the ToS


For a start, unwind the changes to the ToS that you applied earlier this week.

edit: Mynnna hit the nail on the head: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3613820#post3613820
#3 Posted: 2013.09.13 20:39  |  Edited by: Boris Borison
Repost from the threadnaught:

Impersonating someone, by using an deliberately similar name, has been (quite rightly) against the rules for as long as I remember.

Misrepresenting yourself, by claiming to be someone's alt or claiming to represent another entity, has until now been a normal part of Eve.

If someone claims to be an alt of Chribba, then I'd check with Chribba or check Chribba's bio. If someone claimed to represent Goons and that they could move my stuff into null, then I'd assume it was a scam anyway, especially if they were a member of the swarm.

Misrepresentation is part of Eve, Carbon as a Charon, Ravens as Navy Ravens, awoxing dishonest scumbags as honest reliable pilots, boys as girls, girls as boys.....

Editing the official wiki to pull off a scam was a clever move and I applaud the players ingenuity, but the wiki does need to be factually correct, so plug that loophole and leave us to lie to each other in game and on these forums.

Editing to add: As for the rewording, I'd agree with mynnna's post just below.
Goonswarm Federation
#4 Posted: 2013.09.13 20:41  |  Edited by: mynnna
My personal feeling on what such a revision should look like is as follows.


  • Expand section 2B of the naming policy to include player names and names of player organizations. Change the relevant sections of the EULA & TOS to mirror this.
  • Nuke section 2C of the naming policy from orbit, & remove the clauses that mirror it from the EULA and the TOS.


These changes would continue to forbid impersonation through similar names (abusing I vs l to fool and confuse and so forth), but allow more meta styles of impersonation as have been brought up as examples countless times in the past few days, such as claiming to be a representative of another player or player group, claiming to be another player, and so on.


In more elaborate terms, Section 2B of the naming policy would add a clause something like this after the second bullet point:

  • Impersonate or parody another character's name or player corporation or alliance for the purpose of misleading other players.


Section 2C would be removed.

Section 8 of the ToS would then read something like "You may not impersonate or present yourself to be a representative of CCP or an EVE Online volunteer. You may not impersonate or present yourself or your corporation or alliance by imitation of their name"; the language may be a bit clunky, but you get the idea.

And finally, the line in section B of the EULA which currently reads "No player may use the character name of another player to impersonate or falsely represent his or her identity." would change to something similar to the TOS, for example "No player may impersonate or parody the name of another character, corporation or alliance for the purpose of misleading other players."
Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Goonswarm Federation
#5 Posted: 2013.09.13 20:41  |  Edited by: Kismeteer
My recommended version:

"You may not impersonate or present yourself to be a representative of CCP or an EVE Online volunteer. You may not falsely present yourself using a misleading character, corporation, or alliance name."


These parts are generally dumb: representative of , group of players or NPC entity.

E: Added suggestion from snig guy: removed "player or"
Double edit: changed meaning entirely to allow for scamming
Gallente Federation
#6 Posted: 2013.09.13 20:46  |  Edited by: Grimpak
CCP Dolan wrote:
Greetings,

After reviewing player reaction to our changes to the ToS aimed at making a long standing policy more visible, CCP and the CSM would like further constructive feedback from the playerbase. I encourage you to post both, (1) ideas for rewording the changes to the ToS, and/or (2) thoughtful objections to our traditional reinforcement of ToS in regards to impersonation. It is important to remember that the ToS (along with the EULA) supply what is generally considered to be "the rules" of EVE Online, and as a consequence must be carefully proofed against the exploitation of loopholes and edge cases in their wording.

We will be combing this thread, and asking the CSM to submit their own responses when evaluating whether we should alter the current Terms of Service and, if we decide to change them, how we should do so.

Please be aware that this thread exists solely for constructive feedback. Nonconstructive feedback and trolling will likely result in a ban from the EVE Online Forums, as we are hoping to work together with you all to make sure EVE is the "best" EVE it can be.

a bit out of the specific of this thread, I would advise to actually give some hard studying of the ToS in it's whole, as it might actually have some ambiguity traps laying about. With this, you might even cut the ToS size by half and making it crystal clear, while retaining the very same rules and meaning.

I can understand, however, some areas need to be a bit more "grey" than others, for there might be some valid exceptions here and there. However, the fallout of this issue might be the perfect excuse to do a house cleaning of the ToS itself.


as for the issue at hand, Kismeteer seems to be the better approach.
[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]

[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote]
ain't that right
Goonswarm Federation
#7 Posted: 2013.09.13 20:47
The use case I would like to see most allowed is for people to scam while impersonating CFC or Goons.

Example:

Unaffiliated to Goons, a scammer can sell an "ice mining permit" using our name and profit.

So they are impersonating a representative of an entity.
Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.
Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
Pandemic Legion
#8 Posted: 2013.09.13 20:48
Kismeteer wrote:
My recommended version:

"You may not impersonate or present yourself to be a representative of CCP or an EVE Online volunteer. You may not falsely present yourself to be another player or character."


These parts are generally dumb: representative of , group of players or NPC entity.


"present yourself to be another player's character" is probably better wording as it accounts for alts.
Goonswarm Federation
#9 Posted: 2013.09.13 20:58  |  Edited by: Scatim Helicon
The only thing that should be forbidden as far as "impersonation" or "misrepresentation" of other players goes is the naming clause - naming an alt Chribbbba or The M1ttani and then using the alt in a scam where you claim to be the original character shouldn't be allowed, but simply saying "hey I'm Scatim Helicon and I'm the alt/business partner of Trusted Third Party Service Provider, please hand over your supercap and/or ISK" is so trivially verifiable that I'm embarrassed that you think you need to outlaw it to protect the foolish and gullible from themselves.
Post on the Eve-o forums with a Goonswarm Federation character that drinking bleach is bad for you, and 20 forum warriors will hospitalise themselves trying to prove you wrong.
#10 Posted: 2013.09.13 21:00  |  Edited by: Yonis Kador
1.) Clearly define "groups."

2.) Also define what constitutes "representation." (i.e, the scope of affiliation - including with npcs)

3.) Misrepresentation and impersonation are cornerstones of dystopian pgc.

I've seen interest in clarification/further discussion on these 3 points in the previous feedback thread. The problem is that the language is too vague. No one knows despite GM/dev assurances that nothing has changed, what's allowed atm? What's a group? When can rp'ing be considered npc affiliation? CCP says one thing, but the words read differently. Whether policy remains unchanged or not, the language of the ToS has changed and the words being used now are much more subjective and open to interpretation. Without guidelines, they are meaningless.

If a re-write is in the works, it must preserve as much cut-throat tomfoolery as possible. The game cannot protect players from EVE's inherent dark nature. If there was anything said repeatedly that was easy to agree with, it's that.

YK
EVE RADIO: Music for the Masses!   chat channel: eve radio
Goonswarm Federation
#11 Posted: 2013.09.13 21:00
Madlof Chev wrote:
Kismeteer wrote:
My recommended version:

"You may not impersonate or present yourself to be a representative of CCP or an EVE Online volunteer. You may not falsely present yourself to be another player or character."


These parts are generally dumb: representative of , group of players or NPC entity.


"present yourself to be another player's character" is probably better wording as it accounts for alts.


On one hand yes, perhaps. On the other hand, it does open up the possibility of a GM having to, through his response to the resulting petition, effectively confirm or deny that one character is the alt of another. It's an issue that I am sympathetic to, and so I'd prefer leaving the language open that way. As when dealing with total strangers, if a character claims to be the alt of someone, confirm with that someone before doing business.
Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Goonswarm Federation
#12 Posted: 2013.09.13 21:00
I think some people take exception to the addition of 'presenting yourself' as the person entirely, but understand that names in Eve are confusing.

So maybe something more like:
"You may not impersonate or present yourself to be a representative of CCP or an EVE Online volunteer. You may not take advantage of another player, corporation, or alliance by using a similar character name, and presenting yourself as the original character."
Caldari State
#13 Posted: 2013.09.13 21:01
Madlof Chev wrote:
Kismeteer wrote:
My recommended version:

"You may not impersonate or present yourself to be a representative of CCP or an EVE Online volunteer. You may not falsely present yourself to be another player or character."


These parts are generally dumb: representative of , group of players or NPC entity.


"present yourself to be another player's character" is probably better wording as it accounts for alts.


This still allows for the great confusion where you cannot actually claim to be your own alt.

I would agree with Mynna, I think that specifically naming your characters or corp to look similar to an existed one should still be banned. However allowing players to pretend to be another player, or a representative for another organisation allows for much of the interesting and in depth meta game experience we have seen and enjoy in EVE.
Gallente Federation
#14 Posted: 2013.09.13 21:02
As we mostly all thought, it should disbarr impersonating a CCP employee, Dev, GM, ISD volunteer or implying direct affiliation with such, also creating deliberately misleading player names and corp names to directly impersonate a player/corp.

Impersonating a Concord collection Agency, Gistii Ambusher or Chribba by claiming to be his alt and such common or garden deceptions should be perfectly legal ToS/EULA wise.
Gallente Federation
#15 Posted: 2013.09.13 21:03  |  Edited by: Tallian Saotome
mynnna wrote:
My personal feeling on what such a revision should look like is as follows.


  • Expand section 2B of the naming policy to include player names and names of player organizations. Change the relevant sections of the EULA & TOS to mirror this.
  • Nuke section 2C of the naming policy from orbit, & remove the clauses that mirror it from the EULA and the TOS.


These changes would continue to forbid impersonation through similar names (abusing I vs l to fool and confuse and so forth), but allow more meta styles of impersonation as have been brought up as examples countless times in the past few days, such as claiming to be a representative of another player or player group, claiming to be another player, and so on.

Pretty much this.

Scamming by selling yourself as something you very much not is just part of EVE, and it has always been the victims responsibility to verify who he is dealing with. How hard is it to contact someone to verify such a claim, after all? Even if it is someone like Chribba, it is safe to assume that anyone one is really acting on his behalf would be able to ensure that he responds to an EVE mail or convo with a simple 'Yup, I authorized this'

Deliberately similar names that look visually identical(or almost so) are an abuse of mechanics(or really, the terrible font in the game) and are not all that easy to check for unless you have a technical background(copy/paste the name into windows notepad, it has a font that clearly differentiates letters by default) but the social engineering aspect is a core fundamental of the game, and without many of the events which have made it famous could not have happened(See: GHSC heist, the event that first brought EVE to my personal attention, or more recently the Revenant AWOX) and as a result losing those will cause EVE to fade into obscurity.

Back when I recruited for a different corp, I had a few newbies decline because we wanted their APIs, and they flat out said they didn't want us to be able to know the truth so that they would have the option of pulling shady activities later on, since that is what EVE is about.

EDIT: Clearly, impersonating a CCP employee or ISD volunteer should be bannable, as we need for their probity to be something that cannot be influenced by the player base.

EDIT2: Also, the language needs to be very clear and concise, so that there can be no confusion as to what is meant. Having a GM tell us that we can be banned for claiming to be our own alt is more than a little ridiculous, and surely cannot have been intended when the new TOS language was put in place.
Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
Ocularis Inferno
#16 Posted: 2013.09.13 21:05
mynnna wrote:
My personal feeling on what such a revision should look like is as follows.


  • Expand section 2B of the naming policy to include player names and names of player organizations. Change the relevant sections of the EULA & TOS to mirror this.
  • Nuke section 2C of the naming policy from orbit, & remove the clauses that mirror it from the EULA and the TOS.


These changes would continue to forbid impersonation through similar names (abusing I vs l to fool and confuse and so forth), but allow more meta styles of impersonation as have been brought up as examples countless times in the past few days, such as claiming to be a representative of another player or player group, claiming to be another player, and so on.


In more elaborate terms, Section 2B of the naming policy would add a clause something like this after the second bullet point:

  • Impersonate or parody another character's name or player corporation or alliance for the purpose of misleading other players.


Section 2C would be removed.

Section 8 of the ToS would then read something like "You may not impersonate or present yourself to be a representative of CCP or an EVE Online volunteer. You may not impersonate or present yourself or your corporation or alliance by imitation of their name"; the language may be a bit clunky, but you get the idea.

And finally, the line in section B of the EULA which currently reads "No player may use the character name of another player to impersonate or falsely represent his or her identity." would change to something similar to the TOS, for example "No player may impersonate or parody the name of another character, corporation or alliance for the purpose of misleading other players."


Not bad, though the language could use some work on clarity. I think it's simpler to say "You may not falsely present yourself as another player or another player's character." A number of long-running scams depend on the ability to (legally) claim to be Bob the Goonswarm Ice Mining Permit Manager.


Point out to me a person who has been harmed by an AFK cloaker and I will point out a person who has no business playing this game.” - CCP Soundwave
WAFFLES.
#17 Posted: 2013.09.13 21:05
Madlof Chev wrote:
Kismeteer wrote:
My recommended version:

"You may not impersonate or present yourself to be a representative of CCP or an EVE Online volunteer. You may not falsely present yourself to be another player or character."


These parts are generally dumb: representative of , group of players or NPC entity.


"present yourself to be another player's character" is probably better wording as it accounts for alts.




"You may not impersonate or present yourself to be a representative of CCP or an EVE Online volunteer. Through use of name you may not falsely present yourself to be another character, corporation or alliance."


This would still leave it open for someone to claim (rightly or wrongly) that they were a persons alt, or that they had been given permission to act on their behalf etc, with the onus being placed on the third party (the victim essentially) to check whether they are being told the truth.
WAFFLES.
#18 Posted: 2013.09.13 21:08
Siobhan MacLeary wrote:
mynnna wrote:
My personal feeling on what such a revision should look like is as follows.


  • Expand section 2B of the naming policy to include player names and names of player organizations. Change the relevant sections of the EULA & TOS to mirror this.
  • Nuke section 2C of the naming policy from orbit, & remove the clauses that mirror it from the EULA and the TOS.


These changes would continue to forbid impersonation through similar names (abusing I vs l to fool and confuse and so forth), but allow more meta styles of impersonation as have been brought up as examples countless times in the past few days, such as claiming to be a representative of another player or player group, claiming to be another player, and so on.


In more elaborate terms, Section 2B of the naming policy would add a clause something like this after the second bullet point:

  • Impersonate or parody another character's name or player corporation or alliance for the purpose of misleading other players.


Section 2C would be removed.

Section 8 of the ToS would then read something like "You may not impersonate or present yourself to be a representative of CCP or an EVE Online volunteer. You may not impersonate or present yourself or your corporation or alliance by imitation of their name"; the language may be a bit clunky, but you get the idea.

And finally, the line in section B of the EULA which currently reads "No player may use the character name of another player to impersonate or falsely represent his or her identity." would change to something similar to the TOS, for example "No player may impersonate or parody the name of another character, corporation or alliance for the purpose of misleading other players."


Not bad, though the language could use some work on clarity. I think it's simpler to say "You may not falsely present yourself as another player or another player's character." A number of long-running scams depend on the ability to (legally) claim to be Bob the Goonswarm Ice Mining Permit Manager.





Personally I think Mynna's wording is better, under yours it could be implied that claiming to be a persons alt is not allowed, whereas with Mynna's it is fairly clear (in my opinion) that it is.
Goonswarm Federation
#19 Posted: 2013.09.13 21:08
I think we're all uniformly against using the eve font and/or bad spelling to impersonate other people or corporations or alliances. (I petitioned a group called 'Goonwaffe.' after someone transferred a TCU to them.)

But the question remains: Can we impersonate another player by saying 'Hey, I'm The Mittani, let me into corp and give me access to the wallet'. Any reasonable person that does this without checking with the main should suffer the consequences.
Noir. Mercenary Group
#20 Posted: 2013.09.13 21:10  |  Edited by: Ali Aras
Posting publicly what I'll be saying in private as well:

My thoughts are more along the lines of no. #2, thoughtful objections to the TOS itself. I like mynnna's wording, and here's where I'm coming from on it:

The TOS on impersonation should (1) prohibit players pretending to be CCP or people connected to CCP, and (2) it should prohibit players from using UI tricks to make their characters too difficult to distinguish from another character.

That's it. Players lying and pretending to be other players or organizations or representatives of those organizations should be completely allowed. After all, if I am pretending to be someone else or someone else's representative, my mark can check in with the original as long as I'm not violating point no. 2 above. If I am, then *that's* the TOS violation that protects the player.

People with good reputations can protect them by petitioning any clones who're scamming and by reminding their customers to triple-check before doing business with them. Access to a character in order to edit a bio or send a mail can verify that you're working with the right person. Someone wants to broker supercaps on their alts? Great, they list their names in their main's bio. Someone wants to rent out all of Vale? Great, they list the approved rental officers in the corp description or a bio or something.

Similarly, if someone apps to my corp with the text 'June Ting's Cyno Alt' and I don't check with June to see whether they're actually who they say they are, I'm liable for anything that happens afterwards. It's no different from accepting an app from someone who says they're a total carebear who wants to come to mining ops without checking their API to see what they *do* at said mining ops. Sure, it's a lazy way to awox, but margin trading is a lazy way to scam and *that* still works. If it's too good to be true, it probably is.
21 Pages123Next pageLast page
Forum Jump