Question about IGN

GeneralZezo2

[size=+1]I asked support team to change my IGN to Another one is used by low rank which is last seen a year ago ..
And they replay :- The user who is currently using this In-Game name is active

How ? ...but its show on website :- last seen a year ago ..

So how long does it take to become inactive? [/size]

idarkmyth

It is the GM's prerogative if they want to help you or not.

[GM]Kanadian

idarkmyth wrote: »

It is the GM's prerogative if they want to help you or not.

Thats not the case. A GM is always required to help in accordance with rules and such.

That being said, to touch on the original topic, there are rules in place about what counts as active or not, but they are not currently shared. If support says an IGN can't be taken, its because that person hasn't fallen outside the range of 'active' yet.

CFKhalifa

[GM]Kanadian wrote: »

Thats not the case. A GM is always required to help in accordance with rules and such.

That being said, to touch on the original topic, there are rules in place about what counts as active or not, but they are not currently shared. If support says an IGN can't be taken, its because that person hasn't fallen outside the range of 'active' yet.

What's the logic behind not sharing such trivial knowledge? I mean what's so secretive and confidential about telling your users the rules for determining activity, status of server fixes, reported player is banned or not, and the plethora of other things. If you shared the set rules for determining the activity, then you won't be seeing this much threads about this topic and so on. People won't be spamming support and forum if these things are shared.

Maybe call a meeting with your superiors and other staff, and decide to share these unnecessarily blocked info pronto.

Grumpy-

CFKhalifa wrote: »

What's the logic behind not sharing such trivial knowledge? I mean what's so secretive and confidential about telling your users the rules for determining activity, status of server fixes, reported player is banned or not, and the plethora of other things. If you shared the set rules for determining the activity, then you won't be seeing this much threads about this topic and so on. People won't be spamming support and forum if these things are shared.

Maybe call a meeting with your superiors and other staff, and decide to share these unnecessarily blocked info pronto.

There is a logic, the question is if you don't agree with it, will it be ok?

The name change policy depends on number of information, several of them are account specific therefore the information about other accounts cannot be shared. If an IGN is available then you can take it, if it is not then you cannot. Not sure why would you think that a GM would decide randomly that they don't want to give away this or that IGN.

GeneralZezo2

[GM]Kanadian wrote: »

Thats not the case. A GM is always required to help in accordance with rules and such.

That being said, to touch on the original topic, there are rules in place about what counts as active or not, but they are not currently shared. If support says an IGN can't be taken, its because that person hasn't fallen outside the range of 'active' yet.

ok , i will wait or i will search for Another one and thanks for your replay

CFKhalifa wrote: »

What's the logic behind not sharing such trivial knowledge? I mean what's so secretive and confidential about telling your users the rules for determining activity, status of server fixes, reported player is banned or not, and the plethora of other things. If you shared the set rules for determining the activity, then you won't be seeing this much threads about this topic and so on. People won't be spamming support and forum if these things are shared.

Maybe call a meeting with your superiors and other staff, and decide to share these unnecessarily blocked info pronto.

I hope that they will share with us and with the community more information.

CFKhalifa

[GM]Grumpy wrote: »

There is a logic, the question is if you don't agree with it, will it be ok?

The name change policy depends on number of information, several of them are account specific therefore the information about other accounts cannot be shared. If an IGN is available then you can take it, if it is not then you cannot. Not sure why would you think that a GM would decide randomly that they don't want to give away this or that IGN.

It will be 100% ok. Because then we'll atleast know what we're not agreeing to.

Y0ungAngie

[GM]Grumpy wrote: »

There is a logic, the question is if you don't agree with it, will it be ok?

The name change policy depends on number of information, several of them are account specific therefore the information about other accounts cannot be shared. If an IGN is available then you can take it, if it is not then you cannot. Not sure why would you think that a GM would decide randomly that they don't want to give away this or that IGN.

I get it why sometimes someone can't request an IGN due to the account being "active" even though it didn't login in over a year, but there's something I don't get.

A while ago, I tried requesting an IGN from an account that didn't login in almost 4 years, and support said account was active. Yet, a few days before that, a friend of mine tried with an IGN from an account that didn't login in only a few months and support helped him.

Is it possible that the "inactive rule" doesn't apply if you are requesting the IGN from an account that is perm banned?

iAnarchy

Y0ungAngie wrote: »

I get it why sometimes someone can't request an IGN due to the account being "active" even though it didn't login in over a year, but there's something I don't get.

A while ago, I tried requesting an IGN from an account that didn't login in almost 4 years, and support said account was active. Yet, a few days before that, a friend of mine tried with an IGN from an account that didn't login in only a few months and support helped him.

Is it possible that the "inactive rule" doesn't apply if you are requesting the IGN from an account that is perm banned?

That would make sense as there is absolutely no chance that the user would EVER become active again. Also I think it is easier to take the IGN's of lower ranked accounts that have never spent ZP before (just a hunch). I think we need to do another IGN roll-back where inactive accounts lose their IGN's.

GeneralZezo2

This time i asked them for a low rank account ign which is last seen 2 years ago and got the same replay !

AuraSphere

I wonder is it works the same for clan name changes, since there are loads of clans with 1 member only (whose IGNs arent' even showed in the list on web profiles) that need to be released already. =/

~