Wednesday, March 25, 2009

KenZoku Reloaded

Looks like the exemplars CCP held up showing they have changed alliance names in the past did not hold up under scrutiny. GM Grimmi explains:
We appreciate the feedback from everyone. After reviewing all of these very valid concerns, we were compelled to go back over the information we’d collected in this case and carefully weighed it again against the precedents set in the past. Ultimately, we felt we had no other recourse than to reverse the name change, the key factor being that during this re-investigation we learned that the KenZoku alliance was created several months before the BoB alliance leadership switched hands. That being the case, the name change request was not submitted within a timely manner, as it had been in the legacy cases we were holding up as examples.

We will be contacting the CSM for input regarding our naming policies.
As I said in my point 1 yesterday, if it was not a special circumstance I have no problem with it. Since it appears the other cases were different then KenZoku to BoBR, then I support the camp of not allowing the change. The ex-BoB corps wanted a quick alliance so they joined their backup Alliance KenZoku instead of making a brand new one, so they are stuck with KenZoku.

I still think its a tempest in a teacup. LOL


  1. I still think the entire mechanic that allows a corp to squat on a name just to be a bunch of pricks is beyond retarded. Talk about three-year olds in a sandbox.....

  2. More like a Nyx in a tea cup. I was wholly in agreement with point 1 - agree this is probably the correct decision, and really do hope that the exBoB will stay in the fight and the game.


AddThis button