Account sharing?

SeptimusDova · April 2016

well well well. Isnt this something. Life lesson folks. Some people are more equal than others.And ZOS shame on you. You showed leniency when it benefits You.Well inquisitions such as this are a good thing as it will bring to light what has been hidden in the dark.

@ all of the informative posts. Thank you this goes a long way into revealing the nature of the beast. And @Sypher .. Did I read that correctly. You knowingly used or encouraged the use a Bugged effect from shards on Kena? That is cheating and you know it.

@Zos to discourage the use of exploits such as this remove shards from templars until this gets fixed. I know you can do this for several reasons. Lock the skill out pending review.

1.It is a templar skill and you like to remove those
2. It is a templar and Mr.Wrobel likes to "balance those"
3. Radiant is too OP
4. BOL is too OP
5. No one likes a Templar except when it benefits them right Sypher.

ZOS a review of your past bans might be in effect. I would encourage it and reaching out to those in the past who have been perma banned would be good PR.

to those who got the Ban Hammer and were then graced with Valhalla's Reprieve think of today as a new day to start fresh. To those who will continue to cheat and exploit stay tuned.

Wollust · April 2016

SeptimusDova wrote: »

.

@Zos to discourage the use of exploits such as this remove shards from templars until this gets fixed. I know you can do this for several reasons. Lock the skill out pending review.

1.It is a templar skill and you like to remove those
2. It is a templar and Mr.Wrobel likes to "balance those"
3. Radiant is too OP
4. BOL is too OP
5. No one likes a Templar except when it benefits them right Sypher.

lol

GrumpStump · April 2016

Why would anyone share their account? My son came over and wanted to show me something in game, he logged into his game, not mine. I don't want ANYONE touching my game. I don't get it.

GrumpStump

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO · April 2016

You know how i keep from being banned in the game? I dont violate the rules.

Elsonso · April 2016

Sypher wrote: »

I admitted my fault.

Went through the same appeal processes that everyone goes through.

Got a second chance.

Streamer Privledge? Not really. Another player who isn't a streamer got unbanned within the same time frame and was under the same circumstances.

I apologize and will abide by the TOS.

@Sypher ... I don't watch your stream, but I stopped by to watch the replay. I just wanted to give you kudos for the way you handled it. Good luck with your 24 hour stream.

Junipus · April 2016

SeptimusDova wrote: »

@Zos to discourage the use of exploits such as this remove shards from templars until this gets fixed. I know you can do this for several reasons. Lock the skill out pending review.

You'll be interested to know, and catch up with the rest of us, that the issue was fixed with TG patch.

Unfortunately the patch brought up dozens of further "exploits".

I phrase it as such because they're technically bugs that more and more people are using now that awareness is growing (bombard, shuffle etc). However, that's all for another thread.

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO · April 2016

I wasnt going to bring it up but since he posted it this isnt his first time violating the TOS and being banned. He admitted it on the stream. So hows this a second chance?

God_flakes · April 2016

GrumpStump wrote: »

Why would anyone share their account? My son came over and wanted to show me something in game, he logged into his game, not mine. I don't want ANYONE touching my game. I don't get it.

GrumpStump

Because clearly someone isn't a synth and needs sleep from time to time but t-shirts must still be sold. The brand must play eso 24/7.

Lava_Croft · April 2016

Money, money, money.
It's so funny.

Psychotius · April 2016

I understand that this is against Terms of Service to protect against Gold Sellers and Hackers, but isn't it also to protect against players soliciting help to level or complete content that they cannot do so on their own? If that's not against the rules, then surely botting to advance your own characters and for personal gain only is not against the rules...

Really, enforcing the rules has to be all or nothing. I've been playing since beta and have contributed a lot with many friends who are streamers, past and present; but I expect that if I break the rules I will be punished accordingly. After all, I agreed to the terms of service...

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO · April 2016

Psychotius wrote: »

I understand that this is against Terms of Service to protect against Gold Sellers and Hackers, but isn't it also to protect against players soliciting help to level or complete content that they cannot do so on their own? If that's not against the rules, then surely botting to advance your own characters and for personal gain only is not against the rules...

Really, enforcing the rules has to be all or nothing. I've been playing since beta and have contributed a lot with many friends who are streamers, past and present; but I expect that if I break the rules I will be punished accordingly. After all, I agreed to the terms of service...

Im a nobody I probably would still be waiting for them to read the email.

Tyrion87 · April 2016

Can someone indicate (quote) the exact 'rule' stating that account sharing (in the meaning described below) is forbidden? If this is what I'm thinking about (the rule I found in TOS), the situation, where somebody agrees that his account may be used by another person (i.e. the family member) just to enable this other person to play, is not against that rule.

Alcast · April 2016

God_flakes wrote: »

So "special people" get "special treatment". Nice to know.

+
Better be popular or gtfo Kappa

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO · April 2016

Tyrion87 wrote: »

Can someone indicate (quote) the exact 'rule' stating that account sharing (in the meaning described below) is forbidden? If this is what I'm thinking about (the rule I found in TOS), the situation, where somebody agrees that his account may be used by another person (i.e. the family member) just to enable this other person to play, it is not against that rule.

To be honest he really didnt violate the spirit of the rule. Which I think is to keep "leveling" services from being able to login your account and level your pvp rank or whatever while you are at work. I dont think they ever meant for the rule to apply to say if your brother gets on your acct to play a little from the house you both live in.

FooWasHere · April 2016

lordrichter wrote: »

Sypher wrote: »

I admitted my fault.

Went through the same appeal processes that everyone goes through.

Got a second chance.

Streamer Privledge? Not really. Another player who isn't a streamer got unbanned within the same time frame and was under the same circumstances.

I apologize and will abide by the TOS.

@Sypher ... I don't watch your stream, but I stopped by to watch the replay. I just wanted to give you kudos for the way you handled it. Good luck with your 24 hour stream.

Hmm, you're right--this is the correct response. Well said!

Psychotius · April 2016

Tyrion87 wrote: »

Can someone indicate (quote) the exact 'rule' stating that account sharing (in the meaning described below) is forbidden? If this is what I'm thinking about (the rule I found in TOS), the situation, where somebody agrees that his account may be used by another person (i.e. the family member) just to enable this other person to play, is not against that rule.

From section 1 of TOS:

Accounts are non-transferable under all circumstances. You have sole liability for all activities on Your Account and/or under Your user names. You may be held liable for losses incurred by ZeniMax or other third parties due to someone else using Your Account, user name or password. Your Account or certain features of Your Account may be restricted, suspended, and/or terminated if someone else uses Your Account, user name or password to engage in activity that violates these Terms of Service or is otherwise improper or illegal. You agree to notify ZeniMax immediately of any unauthorized use of Your Account, user name, or password, or any other breach of security.

myrrrorb14_ESO · April 2016

So much hate on the thread.

I would think that having a flexible system to review and appeal decisions would be a good thing.

It sounds like ZOS main concern over this type of infraction is gold farming and account hacking. After reviewing the appeal they made a decision on this particular case. And it sounds like they made a good call to me.

Apparently when you are quasi famous, everyone will hate and assume it's special treatment due to celebrity status. They just can't accept the fact that maybe famous people deserve the chance of an appeal like everyone else.

Lettigall · April 2016

Tyrion87 wrote: »

Can someone indicate (quote) the exact 'rule' stating that account sharing (in the meaning described below) is forbidden? If this is what I'm thinking about (the rule I found in TOS), the situation, where somebody agrees that his account may be used by another person (i.e. the family member) just to enable this other person to play, is not against that rule.

Code of Conduct

4.3 You shall not share Your account with anyone. Joint or shared ownership or use of an account by more than one individual natural person is prohibited. Access to the ZeniMax sites and Services are intended for the entertainment, enjoyment and recreation of individual natural persons. These sites and services are not for use as corporate, business, commercial, or income seeking activities. Corporations, associations, partnerships, joint ventures, limited liability companies, artificial persona, and other businesses or entities that are not a single, individual natural person are not eligible to establish accounts to access the ZeniMax sites, play games or participate in offered services, nor is anyone who is acting for or on behalf of or in the course of the business of, any such artificial person or entities.

Tyrion87 · April 2016

Psychotius wrote: »

Tyrion87 wrote: »

Can someone indicate (quote) the exact 'rule' stating that account sharing (in the meaning described below) is forbidden? If this is what I'm thinking about (the rule I found in TOS), the situation, where somebody agrees that his account may be used by another person (i.e. the family member) just to enable this other person to play, is not against that rule.

From section 1 of TOS:

Accounts are non-transferable under all circumstances. You have sole liability for all activities on Your Account and/or under Your user names. You may be held liable for losses incurred by ZeniMax or other third parties due to someone else using Your Account, user name or password. Your Account or certain features of Your Account may be restricted, suspended, and/or terminated if someone else uses Your Account, user name or password to engage in activity that violates these Terms of Service or is otherwise improper or illegal. You agree to notify ZeniMax immediately of any unauthorized use of Your Account, user name, or password, or any other breach of security.

This is exactly what I was thinking about. So, I really don't think that rule penalizes a behaviour described by me in the post above.

Psychotius · April 2016

Tyrion87 wrote: »

Psychotius wrote: »

Tyrion87 wrote: »

Can someone indicate (quote) the exact 'rule' stating that account sharing (in the meaning described below) is forbidden? If this is what I'm thinking about (the rule I found in TOS), the situation, where somebody agrees that his account may be used by another person (i.e. the family member) just to enable this other person to play, is not against that rule.

From section 1 of TOS:

Accounts are non-transferable under all circumstances. You have sole liability for all activities on Your Account and/or under Your user names. You may be held liable for losses incurred by ZeniMax or other third parties due to someone else using Your Account, user name or password. Your Account or certain features of Your Account may be restricted, suspended, and/or terminated if someone else uses Your Account, user name or password to engage in activity that violates these Terms of Service or is otherwise improper or illegal. You agree to notify ZeniMax immediately of any unauthorized use of Your Account, user name, or password, or any other breach of security.

This is exactly what I was thinking about. So, I really don't think that rule penalizes a behaviour described by me in the post above.

That's what I find confusing though, the body of the rule doesn't imply that he did anything technically wrong, but the first sentence clearly says under all circumstances. That statement alone is all encompassing towards any aspect of account sharing.

Edit: Also, I believe the offense wasn't for letting his brothers play his console accounts. My understanding is that he actually streamed himself playing on someone's account, not his own.

Cuyler · April 2016

Is this some play to make these forums more interesting to read again? You know your forums are boring when the top thread is about discussing disciplinary actions.

idk · April 2016

Why is anyone sharing a F2P game?

Edit: rhetorical, obviously since it just doesn't make sense.

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO · April 2016

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

Why is anyone sharing a F2P game?

Edit: rhetorical, obviously since it just doesn't make sense.

This is not a f2p game. Also he said he shared accounts because when he wants to stream say xbox one he doesnt have to level a character up on that server. Or that his brother wanted to play.

SeptimusDova · April 2016

@dap_robertb16_ESO

The shard remark
It was sarcastic satire.

Sorry if you did not get it...

but cheats and exploits are going into one of my soon to be released mega videos. Some people will be surprised at their starring roles.

Dont cheat, dont exploit...

umagon · April 2016

Lettigall wrote: »

Code of Conduct 4.3 You shall not share Your account with anyone. Joint or shared ownership or use of an account by more than one individual natural person is prohibited. Access to the ZeniMax sites and Services are intended for the entertainment, enjoyment and recreation of individual natural persons. These sites and services are not for use as corporate, business, commercial, or income seeking activities. Corporations, associations, partnerships, joint ventures, limited liability companies, artificial persona, and other businesses or entities that are not a single, individual natural person are not eligible to establish accounts to access the ZeniMax sites, play games or participate in offered services, nor is anyone who is acting for or on behalf of or in the course of the business of, any such artificial person or entities.

I wonder when the streamers "donations" are going to stop if they are going to bide by the rules.

Tyrion87 · April 2016

Lettigall wrote: »

Tyrion87 wrote: »

Can someone indicate (quote) the exact 'rule' stating that account sharing (in the meaning described below) is forbidden? If this is what I'm thinking about (the rule I found in TOS), the situation, where somebody agrees that his account may be used by another person (i.e. the family member) just to enable this other person to play, is not against that rule.

Code of Conduct

4.3 You shall not share Your account with anyone. Joint or shared ownership or use of an account by more than one individual natural person is prohibited. Access to the ZeniMax sites and Services are intended for the entertainment, enjoyment and recreation of individual natural persons. These sites and services are not for use as corporate, business, commercial, or income seeking activities. Corporations, associations, partnerships, joint ventures, limited liability companies, artificial persona, and other businesses or entities that are not a single, individual natural person are not eligible to establish accounts to access the ZeniMax sites, play games or participate in offered services, nor is anyone who is acting for or on behalf of or in the course of the business of, any such artificial person or entities.

This is funny because such rules should comply with the essence of property rights regarding the game purchased since I cannot use the game if I don't have an account. The game itself may be the subject to property rights of multiple persons, while the account assigned may be used only by one. So there may be the case where one person owns the game but cannot play it.

FortheloveofKrist · April 2016

Time to put this one to bed.

NobleNerd · April 2016

Ichnaea wrote: »

Honestly, this whole thing reeks of incompetence.

So, Zenimax had 3 choices:
1 - They catch him and decide to take action. They overturn their action. People are pissed because of favoritism.
2 - They catch him and decide to take action. They do not overturn their action. Not only have they banned their #1 source of free advertising in a dying game, they have also pissed off numerous people who like him.
3 - They catch him and decide to do nothing. Honestly this would have been the smartest choice.

If even one person has been banned for a similar situation, and not had it overturned, it feels like favoritism. Because he's a streamer holds no value, because one could argue that "Well hey, I spent close to $3000 in the Crown Store! Apparently my money doesn't mean I've done a lot for your company?" Make sense? If I were someone that has been banned for a similar issue, I would be pissed!

I actually like Sypher. Unfortunately, I still think he should have stayed banned. Nothing personal.

Honestly as much contact as they have had with the streamer in mention they should have kept it private and contacted him directly, let him defend himself and resolved it before they even banned. This has just become a cluster of he said she said, the world is unfair BS!

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO · April 2016

NobleNerd wrote: »

Ichnaea wrote: »

Honestly, this whole thing reeks of incompetence.

So, Zenimax had 3 choices:
1 - They catch him and decide to take action. They overturn their action. People are pissed because of favoritism.
2 - They catch him and decide to take action. They do not overturn their action. Not only have they banned their #1 source of free advertising in a dying game, they have also pissed off numerous people who like him.
3 - They catch him and decide to do nothing. Honestly this would have been the smartest choice.

If even one person has been banned for a similar situation, and not had it overturned, it feels like favoritism. Because he's a streamer holds no value, because one could argue that "Well hey, I spent close to $3000 in the Crown Store! Apparently my money doesn't mean I've done a lot for your company?" Make sense? If I were someone that has been banned for a similar issue, I would be pissed!

I actually like Sypher. Unfortunately, I still think he should have stayed banned. Nothing personal.

Honestly as much contact as they have had with the streamer in mention they should have kept it private and contacted him directly, let him defend himself and resolved it before they even banned. This has just become a cluster of he said she said, the world is unfair BS!

This ban worked out well for the streamer. He made quite a bit of money before being unbanned.

Joy_Division · April 2016

Sypher is not the first or only person in the ESO community who appealed a ban and got it overturned.

This is not a big deal. Laws and rules and punishment are meant to be ambiguous and have flexibility because each case has its own set of unique circumstances involved and thus judged individually. This is basic jurisprudence recognized across time and cultures.