EPTI wonder if TLO lend his T-shirt to Huk, will manufacturer of a T-shirt also be indignant about that?
P.S. Am I right that NASL casters also share accounts ("NASL caster A" / "NASL caster B")? Were they also warned or banned by Blizzard?
Blizzard warns HuK/TLO for account sharing - Page 47
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Unnamed
148 Posts
I wonder if TLO lend his T-shirt to Huk, will manufacturer of a T-shirt also be indignant about that? P.S. Am I right that NASL casters also share accounts ("NASL caster A" / "NASL caster B")? Were they also warned or banned by Blizzard? | ||
|
Seam
United States1093 Posts
On June 25 2011 20:30 Unnamed wrote: TLO and Huk are teammates and friends so I don't see any problem in that, it's all up to them to decide. That is not Blizzard's business at all. I wonder if TLO lend his T-shirt to Huk, will manufacturer of a T-shirt also be indignant about that? P.S. Am I right that NASL casters also share accounts ("NASL caster A" / "NASL caster B")? Were they also warned or banned by Blizzard? Are NASL accounts being laddered on to keep an inactive player in GM? | ||
|
4of8
Germany256 Posts
Casters do this all the time, not only NASL/GSL, they use it to cast games from EU but they only have an NA account for example. Or they cast games from KOR and only have an EU account and stuff. I have friends who ladder with the accounts of inactive teammembers to offrace. And you see a lot of players who are using the accounts of their teammates if they have to play on other servers or have "team accounts" f.e. the account MouzTosh on the NA. Huk has an account on EU/NA/KOR. He can't play any Laddergames on EU because Blizzard messed up with their MMR System, so he had a really good reason to play with TLOs account. They are not warning the people above, they warned HUK/TLO who had a really good reason for the "accountsharing", what the heck? | ||
|
Fireborn
Germany14 Posts
On a different note though, the ToS is probably completely or partly void by german law. I don't know how it is handeled in other countrys, but germany has quite strict laws on these kind of things. For instance, the whole ToS is void if you didn't agree to it before you bought the software. Furthermore, things like the right to change the service in unreasonable ways are explicit forbidden and thus void if put into the ToS (§308 BGB). I'm not a lawyer so I'm not really certain (and it might be completely wrong what i just said), but there was a newspaper wich did a test a year ago or so and checked the ToS of things like MS Office and concluded that nearly everything they tested was at least partly void. So yeah, it's possible that it's actually illegal for blizzard to ban accounts in germany. Not that anyone would have the time and money to conduct a lawsuit against blizzard over a 60$-account, just thought it would be a funny thing to note. | ||
|
Count9
China10928 Posts
| ||
|
Lysenko
Iceland2128 Posts
On June 25 2011 20:21 shinyA wrote: The fact Blizzard CALLED them to warn them is what is pathetic. Doesn't that go against some Blizzard privacy? Like, if some company call my telephone to warn me for using their product in an inappropriate way I'd be quite outraged. I haven't looked at the form for requesting Blizzard's approval for a tournament, but I imagine that it requires providing contact information, and that was most likely how they had Take's phone number. In any case, there's a big difference between an informal phone call saying "please don't do this" and actually hitting the button to shut down someone's account. Without knowing the exact content of their conversation, I suspect this was handled pretty gently. | ||
|
Dimagus
United States1004 Posts
| ||
|
Binabik
Germany686 Posts
On June 25 2011 20:31 Seam wrote: Are NASL accounts being laddered on to keep an inactive player in GM? GM lasts for a few more days and then there's a reset, so it's not that bad....... Perhaps they are planning on buying the GM Leaders a prize and they don't want to give it to a smurf account =D | ||
|
NSGrendel
United Kingdom235 Posts
This event is likely to make people buy the game. The net result is Blizzard's profits go up and Bobby Coke-tic gets another big sack of Bolivian marching powder. Regardless of the intent, the consequences of the call were never going to be positive. Marketing at Blizzard are probably livid right now. | ||
|
jstar
Canada568 Posts
| ||
|
calippo
Sweden2525 Posts
On June 25 2011 21:29 jstar wrote: Devil's advocate: Blizzard has policies to enforce and just because they're TLO and HuK doesn't mean they get exceptions. Agreed. | ||
|
Bagi
Germany6799 Posts
On June 25 2011 21:29 jstar wrote: Devil's advocate: Blizzard has policies to enforce and just because they're TLO and HuK doesn't mean they get exceptions. Well, I kinda think they already got an exception when Blizzard warned them instead of just closing the account. I doubt the regular diamond Joe would get the same treatment. | ||
|
Krimancer
Sweden150 Posts
| ||
|
Krimancer
Sweden150 Posts
| ||
|
Spidinko
Slovakia1174 Posts
It sucks, but Blizzard is big enough to do it. And yeah....they were probably pissed off just because it was streamed to so many people. | ||
|
Laevateinn
Norway115 Posts
Instead of immediately banning them, Blizzard calls them and asks them to stop. What's wrong with that? Sure, HuK is pretty much screwed by the ladder system, and had to borrow an account to play, but the fact remains that account sharing is against the rules and Blizzard would rather not other peolpe get banned for the same thing after seeing HuK and TLO doing it and going "Oh, guess it isn't against the rules anyways." Comparing this to the GSL and MLG is ridiculous since the accounts there are provided by Blizzard. Big tournaments get some leeway, it's not uncommon in any sport. | ||
|
paralleluniverse
4065 Posts
On June 25 2011 11:45 Turenne wrote: ...why would TLO's rating be as high as HuK's? Well looking at the GM league for EU: http://eu.battle.net/sc2/en/ladder/1/grandmaster TLO is rank 1. So this whole story makes no sense to me. If HuK's account was taking too long to find a game, I don't see how using TLO's account will fix that problem. In fact, it should make it take even longer. Also, people are still claiming that HuK used TLO's account for custom games, but any account can play custom games. So why would HuK want to use TLO's account for custom games? To those people saying LAN, how does LAN solve anything. This whole saga doesn't seem to make any sense. Anyway, account sharing is bad, especially for ladder. It delegitimizes the ranks. | ||
|
Chriamon
United States886 Posts
On June 25 2011 22:05 paralleluniverse wrote: Well looking at the GM league for EU: http://eu.battle.net/sc2/en/ladder/1/grandmaster TLO is rank 1. So this whole story makes no sense to me. If HuK's account was taking too long to find a game, I don't see how using TLO's account will fix that problem. In fact, it should make it take even longer. Also, people are still claiming that HuK used TLO's account for custom games, but any account can play custom games. So why would HuK want to use TLO's account for custom games? To those people saying LAN, how does LAN solve anything. This whole saga doesn't seem to make any sense. Anyway, account sharing is bad, especially for ladder. It delegitimizes the ranks. isn't TLO taking a break because of carpal tunnel? I assume that HuK played TLO's account in order to keep him active in GM and blizz didn't like this. This is the only thing that I can think of that makes any sense | ||
|
paralleluniverse
4065 Posts
On June 25 2011 22:07 Chriamon wrote: isn't TLO taking a break because of carpal tunnel? I assume that HuK played TLO's account in order to keep him active in GM and blizz didn't like this. This is the only thing that I can think of that makes any sense I've heard that before, although I'm not sure if it's true or not. But that's so against the rules, that there shouldn't even be a debate if it's true. | ||
|
Irave
United States9965 Posts
| ||
| ||
