Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Louella Dougans]

Would the eve API ever be usable IC, or is it always only OOC ?

I'm looking at a thread where someone said they received a mail from someone, and the other party denies sending it.

The eve API would, as far as I know, clear that up, and show that x message was infact sent/received, but is that IC information ? or would that be OOC, or metagame, or what ?

[kalaratiri]

CSPA? Admittedly you can turn the charge to 0, but the fact that it's there in the first place suggests that Concord are monitoring your mail ^_^

[ArtOfLight]

I'd say it's IC information, personally. Realistically speaking, they'd have an electronic log of the mail being sent and would easily be able to prove it was sent by that party, even if that party denies it.

I've always referred to the API in character as the Authenticated Personnel Identification.

[Saede Riordan]

Yeah, it seems plenty in character to me.

[Silas Vitalia]

IC I always treat digital correspondence between capsuleers as only being as reliable as much as you trust the person making the statement.

Someone can show me a 'mail' all day long claiming x, y, and z, but if I don't trust the person I'll just call it a forgery, etc.  This applies to IC chatlogs as well.

[ArtOfLight]

IC I always treat digital correspondence between capsuleers as only being as reliable as much as you trust the person making the statement.

Someone can show me a 'mail' all day long claiming x, y, and z, but if I don't trust the person I'll just call it a forgery, etc.  This applies to IC chatlogs as well.

Bingo.

[Louella Dougans]

IC I always treat digital correspondence between capsuleers as only being as reliable as much as you trust the person making the statement.

Someone can show me a 'mail' all day long claiming x, y, and z, but if I don't trust the person I'll just call it a forgery, etc.  This applies to IC chatlogs as well.

I see, however, the API is objective. Is that objectivity metagamey though ?

like API verified killmails, they say X killed Y, objectively. Can that still be denied IC ?

[Saede Riordan]

How do you prove it though? Provide open API access?

[Gottii]

IC I always treat digital correspondence between capsuleers as only being as reliable as much as you trust the person making the statement.

Someone can show me a 'mail' all day long claiming x, y, and z, but if I don't trust the person I'll just call it a forgery, etc.  This applies to IC chatlogs as well.

I see, however, the API is objective. Is that objectivity metagamey though ?

like API verified killmails, they say X killed Y, objectively. Can that still be denied IC ?

Sure it can still be denied IC.  Just it wont be believed. 

Its an important part of the game.  In EM we called the API the "background check".  EVE-mail traffic would be the actual comms logs.  Not sure why it wouldnt be used in RP?

[Morwen Lagann]

API and the information it can pull are totally IC, in my opinion. Especially mails (unless they're obviously OOC either by marking or by content) assets and kill reports. Chat logs can be forged, yes, but it's not easy to do properly, especially in bulk, and logs aren't hard to verify either.

As we can't generate (read: forge) kill reports ingame (yet), I'd argue that simply producing one of those ingame is the simplest way to call BS on someone claiming a kill/loss never happened.

In general, though, it goes back to a lesson all of us should know already: don't say or do things around people you wouldn't trust with that information. You don't have any control of it once you hit the Enter key to send the message, so once you do, be prepared to suck it up and deal with the consequences.

[Silas Vitalia]

Might be splitting hairs but I distinguish between 'verifiable' IC things like ship kills and 'easily forged' things like evemails and comms logs.

You can post an evemail to the IGS with Rodj Blake expressing his desire to overthrow the Empress and no one will believe you, even it it actually happened.

However, I can IC ridicule a pilot for losing an expensive faction ship to a frigate and capsuleers will independently verify the information. 

 

[Saede Riordan]

Might be splitting hairs but I distinguish between 'verifiable' IC things like ship kills and 'easily forged' things like evemails and comms logs.

You can post an evemail to the IGS with Rodj Blake expressing his desire to overthrow the Empress and no one will believe you, even it it actually happened.

However, I can IC ridicule a pilot for losing an expensive faction ship to a frigate and capsuleers will independently verify the information.

unless you do something like publically verify that the conversation happened by providing a link to a 'public' API

[Morwen Lagann]

You can pull evemails via the API with the right flags set. That makes them pretty damn verifiable.

[Silas Vitalia]

Yes, but,

Regardless of weather its true or not, correspondence will still be down to 'he said she said' in the court of public opinion, which is the only court that matters.... whereas the perception IC is that kills are less so.

This is super interesting though.  As I'm sure many of you do, I've reams and reams of rather incriminating conversations with all sorts of people being one sort of loyalty/persuasion in public and very different when talking to Silas privately....

[Louella Dougans]

conversations are "he said she said" if it's a chat log.

evemail exchanges are a bit different.