No, it’s not really surprising. I’m sure you’re enjoying the free bumps on your bad idea.
Man… stop trolling, this aint redit.
we have multiple times stated that the proposed name certificate SHOULD include a very non-anonymous trail, including the same API/Zkillboard history, as well as in-game info with past name.
And you just ignore this and go on about:
“oh no this will never come to pass, it will be abused - people will get away with murder!!!”
your obscuring the objective, and now you troll around saying that our idea of an re-name certificate is “storming the castle” …
No, sir. YOUR idea of a so-called re-name certificate might be what you would describe to “storm the castle” or “shout in the ether” or a “bad idea” … regardless, it has nothing to do with the proposed idea.
In fact, you are way off-topic.
Let him play his game lol.
The guy thinks he’s important and all, yet his behaviour proves he’s not even worth of it.
He has not a single clue about the things he owes to the members of his Coalition and is totally delusional about how he came to this point.
I did not need that, but this is sadly yet another proof about what the CSM really is and composed of.
the point is that your feeding him. and your feeding an offtopic disscussion.
He hasent even grasped the idea, yet he is against it… shine a light on that instead of getting envolved in an offtopic discussion about his person.
(i did and him or mike havent responded yet… lol … thats csm for ya.)
we all know CSM is a paid vacation for top sov owners to go to once a year, they all take turns going etc… if CSM was truley about anything else there would be a raffle based on certain game parameters… it woulnt be a “democratic” / party wip-vote.
(Thats the main reason my top vote was on Torvald for his abyssal lurkers work last year.)
1 Like
I thought you had no idea who I am - now you’re trying to explain how I got elected (and getting it really wrong)?
Ok.
You say this, but I have yet to see an explanation as to how this is going to function. As I noted before, if you see the player in local under a new name, you’re not going to know at first glance this person had a different name before. That is the vast majority of interaction that players have with other players names - it’s all in chat boxes.
I do not see any way around that, and that is the biggest problem with this idea.
But please - if you two want to keep talking to each other, you’ll have managed to convince two people. I don’t think that’s going to be enough, especially considering almost every other comment in this three year old thread is negative.
1 Like
There are tools outgame, you know this yourself.
And i checked your name.
By the way, these informations, i could have gotten them even if you had changed your name. 
This is a point discussed already in this thread :
- The “at first glance” statement works, precisely, “at first”.
Not at “second”, not at “third”, and so on.
Once you know that this guy had that name, you’re now aware about this character new name. - If we suppose that the limit (i’ve learnt in this thread that it existed) of contact (setting standings on characters) is not reached and that you could tag this character as red, the NCC won’t reset this standing, and you would still see this character tagged red. And you would react just as you should should react if you see a bad standing in local : carefully.
The argument “yeah ok, but i might have tagged red someone, but i really want to know what THIS guy did”, is answered by : why did you then tagged him red if you really know THAT guy and know that THAT guy is REALLY dangerous ? - If we suppose that the limit as been reach, you know that, because you couldn’t tag more character, and therefore, you must have gotten the habit to be carefull whenever unknown guy enters local.
That works for a guy you used to know, that has changed his name, until you know he changed his name… - What is really at stake by not recognizing someone in local at first glance ?
A ship, only a ship.
What is left that could be at stake cannot be immediately at stake when that guy enters local, and so, you have time to gather intel about that guy.
I admit that this is the really only argument that is working against a NCC feature.
But.
- Loosing a ship is part of the game, and you should be carefull whenever a guy enters local, tagged or not, known or not, and you should precisely be more carefull about guys you do not recognise in local, by definition…
So the argument falls there : wether you know the name entering local or not, you must be carefull. - You should tag your “ennemies” or the characters you have recognised as “evil”. And if you have reach the limit, you do know it, and you then act as previous point : wheter you know the name entering local or not, you must be carefull + because you couldn’t tagged more guys as you’ve reached the limit.
- If all previous points have failed, you lost a ship.
Waw.
I am personally against it, but this could be an answer :
“New Name aka Old Name” as the new name
For me it would be for instance Enael Sinled (aka Esnaelc Sin'led).
Or an option to turn on : Display Characters' old names as primary name.
The primary issue about those kinds of answers, is :
What about someone that have chosen somebody else old name as new name ?
Those are the points i have wished to discuss with people in this thread, discussion about possible implementation of this feature and their limits, and thinking about how to pass those limits.
Not a straight “No because” answer like an old stuborn arrogant bitter guy that thinks his tag is enough to make a “persuasive” statement…
That does not work with me.
Ok first off, id like to tell you that the chat (local) is not an intel tool.
that is the only reason why ccp dont reinburst ships lost due to temporary local black-outs that happens ever so often.
but lets talk beside that very crucial point.
In Hisec
you have ganks and wardec’s and the ui-flags and the saftey system, for ganks you might be able to spot a “known” scout, and for wardecs you see the ui-flag.
so lets talk about scouts, they can be anyone in a pod, and do not even require omega… that means the “Spotting a known scout” argument is not really a valid argument.
In Lowsec, you might be care-bearing not looking up people on zkillboard or using dscan - you die? welcome to eve.
Your ship was your leacture fee, now that “new neutral” is known, and that “new neutral” cant become “another new netural” in X amount of time (years).
In Null, you see a neut - it dont matter what their name is, that is always a “person of interest”, you look that person up.
long story short, there is no “looking at a glance” to be able to know another player.
CCP have even said that a persons name in local is not suppose to be catogorized as “intel”.
We already have 100% anonymoused and spoofed player alts from injectors and bazaar.
so, there is no problem, if a person wants to be anon and “get away with murder” they already have the tools to do that.
And i think IF a person has one of those “glance name’s” your talking about…
im pretty sure that they worked hard to earn that reputation and are not gonna change name - even if it was a free feature.
There is simply no sane arguments to be had by opposing the idea of this name certificate.
PS.
Ways to implement this??
ccp have the power to “allow” player-id to match two names simulations, if they should be exportable like ship fittings or not, i leave for a CSM discussion.
it can also be a UI feature like an simple icon on overview of the pilots who have done a name change, (that shows for y-amount of time.)
it can also be a client feature that say “show old names and new names” with listing options.
Then there could be a 6 months “active gameplay” cache of those names that would allow the strong, but so very few voices that actully would appose this certificate.
*what is “active gameplay” i also leave for the csm.
The need to have the last internet word, omg 
1 Like
That could turn into impersonation, which is against the EULA. Like someone couldn’t create a character named Ge0 Eclipse 0ksaras and claim to be me… or someone named Br1sc Rub4l and pretend to be Brisc.
I can understand why some people who have had characters for a long time would want to be able to change name. especially since this game takes years of playing to get into you might well have matured or had a change of taste since you named your character. its so easy to skill inject new characters now that i think the old arguments of “Your choices have consequences” really doesn’t hold merit now.
basically. in modern eve, there is no reason to not have the ability to rename your character.
2 Likes
BWAHAHAHHAAAAA!
OMG.
1 Like
Let’s say i change my actual name for Enael.
Another player changes his name for Esnaelc Sin'led
Is that an EULA violation since by changing my name i kind of “revoked” my rights on it, so any body could take it.
Just as if i had biomassed a character name X, and another player creates a new char named X.
Nor sure that it enters the “impersonification” matter.
But that raises another issue.
If the solution to this would be to forbid the access to names that have been revoked by players renaming a character, what would become of owners wanting this name they revoked, on another character. 
lol, it gets messy.
You will be assigned a login name and a character name during the registration and character creation process. You may not allow anyone to use your login name or character name to access the System or play EVE. No player may use the character name of another player to impersonate or falsely represent his or her identity. You may not obtain, attempt to obtain, use or attempt to use the login name or character name of anyone else.
When you delete a character, then wait out the 10 hours and delete him again to send him to biomass, that character name immediately becomes available to anyone who wants it.
1 Like
Oh right, i forgot about the biomass timer.
That actually helps !
A same mecanic, with same timer would be introduced with the NCC that “locks” the old name for 10 hours.
I think “impersonation EULA” only applies to CCP/admin/staff of eve etc ?
On topic:
A rename certificate should “blacklist” your old pilot name for x amount of active gameplay time (months/years).
If there was a UI feature to list past and present name, this old nickname “blacklist” would fall into that. ( you know, some kind of ui feature to appease the minds of the very few (but strong) voices that says “no” to Rename cert.)
try to ridicule all you want.. idk know what to tell you.. it comes streight from CCP.
CCP Glitch and CCP IceCream are the ones who told me that: local is not an intel tool.
*thus; I cannot get reimbursement for my ship loss (that happened due to I did not know there was neuts in local, as it was not a “game bug”)
if you have questions or comments about local not beeing an intel tool, please do take it up with ccp.
Anyways, in essence… that makes the argument for “known names in local” null&void.
*and it kinda makes the statement: “In Eve players are known and players actions have consequences” false.?
Back to reality thou - where local is indeed an intel tool (according to me) .. See my other post where i argue that. Regardless of local being an intel tool or not.. a re-name cert. still doesn’t change anything regarding “intel”.
the only caveat would be if someone is biomassed, which would entail either searching for that person in doomheim or knowing full well someone biomassed that char to take their name.
i dont understand?
if someone is biomassed.. then it wouldnt apply for a disscusion about re-name certificate?
(the whole point about rnc is that it would prevents biomass)
so perhaps name that has gone thru a re-name cant biomass?
or is it the other way around?
names in doomheim cant be picked for a rename?
so that info i found in the above quote seems to be wrong… Just tried to use a name from a biomassed char, and it doesn’t work.
Ah so names in doomheim [666] cant be reused?
Then there is no problems.. i guess?
also.. i pitty the fool who would/wants to use my name after i rename my char xD