Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 30 post(s) |
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
448

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 02:14:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hello wonderful Internet Spaceship Pilots!!!!!
Though not all of you have seen my presentation last Friday at this point I have some time to kill so I'd like to get this conversation started that I not only promised, but that I'm really looking forward to.
In some of my past dev blogs and conversations with players it's been mentioned by a number of you that you'd like botters identified publicly. As you will eventually see from my presentation once it's posted, I'm not entirely convinced that this has any real tangible benefit to you as a player in any respect other than as a tool to implement the metagame.
I'm also not convinced that it's a worthless pursuit so what I'd like to see from you, the players, is a discussion regarding how you feel about this and I'm hoping to see some really cool ideas.
If I'm forced to frame it as a question I'd like answered I think I'd frame it as "What would you, the player, stand to benefit from being able to identify which characters had ever been caught botting, whether or not they were still engaging in this activity?"
Please try to stay on topic. If this thread gets garbaged (Sarah Palin License to invent words) then we'll clean it but I'd rather we just stick to the topic and provide some really good input personally.
DISCUSS!
:) |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
448

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 02:20:00 -
[2] - Quote
AkJon Ferguson wrote:The primary advantage of the scarlet letter would undoubtedly be as a deterrent and I support the concept for that reason.
Maybe the scarlet letter could be removed after say 1 year of good behavior?
But I could argue that there are plenty of other deterrents in place. This one has the additional negative of also providing a disincentive for turning into a Good Guy, which is something we've been trying to prevent. |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
448

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 02:22:00 -
[3] - Quote
Pampers Toralen wrote:This the distraction from the mittens thread? Any word from ccp about the issue
There's plenty of other threads to post in about this. Leave mine alone. |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
448

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 02:23:00 -
[4] - Quote
jonnykefka wrote:It adds another "risk" weight to botting. Many corps won't touch botters, especially as bot-acquired assets are seized. If the practice of "scarlet letters" is itself advertised, it basically means anyone who chooses to bot does so knowing that they will lose all of the assets they gain and probably have to biomass their char if they ever get caught. It's all risk vs. reward calculations, so up the risk and the overall behavior of botting will likely become less common.
But does simply adding risk without the capacity to become a good citizen by curbing action make sense is I guess what I'm curious about?
I know EVE and I know actions should have results but I'm a bit concerned about the terms. |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
450

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 02:26:00 -
[5] - Quote
Alpheias wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Pampers Toralen wrote:This the distraction from the mittens thread? Any word from ccp about the issue There's plenty of other threads to post in about this. Leave mine alone. Fine, here is something for you. What about the authentication dongles you gave out at fanfest 2011, or if it was 2010?
A tentative date and explanation were given on Friday. We're looking at a release sometime in July and you can get the explanation for the delay from the stream as there's a lot of words involved. It'll be posted this week I imagine.  |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
450

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 02:35:00 -
[6] - Quote
AkJon Ferguson wrote:Well, are the other deterrents working?
From the fanfest presentation, I see a lot of downward spikes on patch days, followed by a speedy return to 'business as usual' levels.
I think 'behave for a year and the letter goes away' is a decent enough incentive to straighten up and fly right.
I think you might want to look at where the dips are happening again and watch the overall downward trend. What I seem to recall seeing is a nice slowly declining curve that I expect to start dipping lower. |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
450

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 02:37:00 -
[7] - Quote
Benilopax wrote:As CCP were saying at fanfest, as people are saying about Mitts.
It's all about consequences.
You do something bad there are consequences, as long as it's made clear to people beforehand I say do it.
This is actually my biggest problem with the thing. We'd be putting ourselves in the position of making a solid statement that would incur player consequences and I prefer to stay out of the sandbox if that makes sense. |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
451

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 02:39:00 -
[8] - Quote
Ohh Yeah wrote:Scarlet Letters should be implemented, but not visible to all players.
These should only be visible to corp CEOs when a pilot has put in an application to the corporation. Something along the lines of a notice that the applicant has had strikes against their account for botting.
This allows conscientious CEOs to turn away players with whom they seek to prevent their corporation members from exchanging ISK with. I say this because botters tend to be notorious for a certain type of transaction which is not allowed. I don't think any CEO would want potentially dirty ISK being passed directly from a "marked" botter to their corp members through trades, contracts, or what have you. There's also the possibility that one player's knowledge of botting could easily be shared to others (I think, Darius, you are familiar with a certain Space Captain Schettino who crashed his corporation into the rocks by spreading knowledge of botting).
Lying about your intentions ("Oh I'm not joining this WH corp to clean out the hangars") is one thing, but being able to lie about actions taken against your account is another.
TL;DR - Strikes not visible to everyone, only CEO/Directors of corps when a player with strikes against their account applies to that corporation. This allows them to make smart decisions and not accept players they would not otherwise.
Being familiar with how things work you know I'd just make a corp and publish the info using some really cool API app. :(
I agree with the spirit but the devil is in the implementation. |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
451

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 02:40:00 -
[9] - Quote
Pampers Toralen wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Pampers Toralen wrote:This the distraction from the mittens thread? Any word from ccp about the issue There's plenty of other threads to post in about this. Leave mine alone PLEASE. Wow Someone's crankey just posted here yes there is many threads but lack the blue mark from a ccp employee has posted Fixed your post also thing called manners?
Please refer to the forum rules regarding on topic posts in reference to manners. <3 |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
451

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 02:41:00 -
[10] - Quote
Chokichi Ozuwara wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:But I could argue that there are plenty of other deterrents in place. This one has the additional negative of also providing a disincentive for turning into a Good Guy, which is something we've been trying to prevent. This is a pipe dream, and you guys keep protecting and trying to reform criminals are doing it at the expense of existing players and future participants in Eve as well. You know what Facebook does when they take action? No appeal. Google? No appeal. The evidence needs to be solid, but if someone is botting, they need to be thrown out of the game because they are potentially ruining the experience for thousands of other players (butterfly effect and all that jazz).
Neither of those companies makes a videogame so what is being botted? I'm missing you here and I really don't want to be. |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
451

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 02:42:00 -
[11] - Quote
Terminal Insanity wrote:AkJon Ferguson wrote:I think 'behave for a year and the letter goes away' is a decent enough incentive to straighten up and fly right. This would be a solution to the 'preventing them from becoming a good guy' problem. They indeed need to be publicly shamed for participating in the destruction of our market though. oh and if we see some guy ratting in our 0.0 belts who logs out every time we enter system... we'd be able to report them easier if they were marked this way. CCP's own deterrent isnt really enough. Does CCP monitor botters that have been caught on a regular basis? I really doubt it. But us players could.
This is gone over in the presentation but reported bots do matter. We've also decided to start removing all profits gained when we ban them so there's the market adjustment. |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
451

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 02:44:00 -
[12] - Quote
Andski wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Being familiar with how things work you know I'd just make a corp and publish the info using some really cool API app. :(
I agree with the spirit but the devil is in the implementation. I don't get it - who would shotgun apply to every corp in sight if their account was flagged for botting?
So the flag would only be available upon application and not just generally to all CEOs? I may have missed that and this intrigues me. |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
451

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 02:45:00 -
[13] - Quote
Sisohiv wrote:The only benefit that could come from this would be the resale value.
Three stars is bann so when selling a Char you look for no star chars.
There is no resale value as these characters can't be sold legally. |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
451

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 02:46:00 -
[14] - Quote
Ohh Yeah wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: Being familiar with how things work you know I'd just make a corp and publish the info using some really cool API app. :(
I agree with the spirit but the devil is in the implementation.
I don't mean that CEOs should be able to pop open someone's info and see their strikes. I mean that when a player puts in their application to a corporation, the server checks for strikes, and if strikes exist, they are mentioned as a warning in the application management interface for the corp CEO/Directors. The only time that a marked player would be standing on the gallows in the rain like Hester Prynne is when they put in their application to a specific corporation. I'm not familiar with the current API, but I don't believe any fancy API apps currently allow you to see strikes against an account, so I assume that information is not publicly available. If you you get what I'm saying. Edit: CCP Sreegs wrote: So the flag would only be available upon application and not just generally to all CEOs? I may have missed that and this intrigues me.
Yeah, that's exactly the idea.
Yeah this now makes a buttload (sorry for the foul language) more sense. BUT LET'S NOT STOP HERE FOLKS |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
451

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 02:51:00 -
[15] - Quote
Revii Lagoon wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Andski wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Being familiar with how things work you know I'd just make a corp and publish the info using some really cool API app. :(
I agree with the spirit but the devil is in the implementation. I don't get it - who would shotgun apply to every corp in sight if their account was flagged for botting? So the flag would only be available upon application and not just generally to all CEOs? I may have missed that and this intrigues me. If CEO's are doing recruitment then they probably need to delegate roles a bit better. Anyone with roles to accept applications should be able to see it. But that isn't enough, most of the time people who apply have already been accepted because they went through the recrutiment process and were already accepted. The actual application is just there because it is necessary, but holds no substance in terms of the recruitment process. This info being avaliable through the API would be ideal because any sane corp who does recruitment uses the API to check things.
Every alliance isn't a mega-alliance and the structures can be different. I think you'll find that most corps are actually fairly small. |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
451

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 02:53:00 -
[16] - Quote
Ohh Yeah wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: BUT LET'S NOT STOP HERE FOLKS Where else would you envision seeing Scarlet Letters? I'm full of creativity and exceptionally thin semen this evening The only thing I can think of (as seems to be the general consensus) is allowing CEOs to realize that a botter has applied to their corp.
You may have spilt everything so to speak with your great feedback, but there's been other ideas I've heard and all I'm saying is that I don't want people to shy away because of it.
I can absolutely guarantee this as a thread where player opinion will find its way into a policy discussion internally so I want anything we can get. |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
454

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 02:55:00 -
[17] - Quote
Istvaan Shogaatsu wrote:Sreegs, I'd like to put my support behind the scarlet letter idea.
Why? Because it feels like Eve. No other reason.
In Eve's fictional background, AI research is strictly frowned upon due to its tendency to spontaneously assert sentience, mutilate its creators, and fly off to nowhere. It stands to reason that CONCORD would look very un-kindly upon attempting to automate not a simple drone, but a fully functional and tactically terrifying capsuleer warship. As such, CONCORD flags these individuals who irresponsibly surrender their ship controls to crude AI, and flags them for capsuleer termination in the name of maximum efficiency.
I'm just quoting this because I don't read the fiction but the idea of player consequences and being true to eve needs to be a factor and I'm just going to namesearch what I quoted later. |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
454

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 02:57:00 -
[18] - Quote
Andski wrote:Jada Maroo wrote:As a CEO, I'd much rather have a Corp Thief tag if we're gonna have any at all. Absolutely not. Don't assign hangar roles blindly and you won't have corp thieves to deal with.
Yeah don't worry I don't see that happening any time soon. ( not my department) |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
454

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 03:01:00 -
[19] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:name and shame wont help the problem
bots will move away from corporations and stay in npc corps
players behind the bots will get better at hiding their true identity, bot isk, sell for money, buy plex with money, sell plex for isk, really difficult for CCP to find their true identity if stuff like TOR and Virtual Machines is used to hide the true ID and details of the computer
an anonymous list (3 market bots in jita, 40 ratting bots in XXX, 50 mining bots in YYY were banned today, they lost a total of ZZZ isk and assets worth XXX isk since they were aquired via botting) of those in their first and second strike and a a public list of those characters permabanned might be a good idea to state clearly that CCP is actively fighting bots
While I love the mythology that people have that they can remain anonymous on the internet it's a falsehood over time. The idea that, especially given EVE and all of the numbers involved, we can actually focus on this and any other *example here norms* apply is pretty silly.
The margins on one hand are completely different and we allow PLEX. We've shown at least three times in the early days that we can focus and completely shut down a bot developer because the margins frankly aren't there.
If you think this is some world where someone doing a bad activity we care about can just magically vanish those dog days are pretty much over. |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
454

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 03:03:00 -
[20] - Quote
Revii Lagoon wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: Every alliance isn't a mega-alliance and the structures can be different. I think you'll find that most corps are actually fairly small.
Just because corps are structured differently doesn't mean that some would see a large benefit from having API information knowing if someone was a botter. In terms of corp recruitment process, unless a corp has a specific open door policy, such as EVE UNI or Red vs Blue, then most likely there will be some sort of interview before hand. Restricting how info about someone who is flagged as a botter will only make it harder for the people who recruit. If after a long interview process they were to only find out on their actual application that they were a know botter, that would mean a lot of wasted effort on recruiters part because some may have a strict no-botting policy.
I was referring more to your statement about whom was doing the recruiting. The rest makes perfect sense. |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
468

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 03:32:00 -
[21] - Quote
Nemo deBlanc wrote:Sisohiv wrote:Revii Lagoon wrote:Sisohiv wrote: You will understand if people miss things on the tickertape forum. If they are making Bot chars account locked, the motive for flagging them with stars is kind of not there.
Bot bann gets you -10.00 makes more sense. I wouldn't even bann them. Just run Sec -10.00 and all 4 empires -10.00 on third offence.
Terrible idea, most bots operate in 0.0 anyways so it would do nothing. Null bots are rare. I've done Null Mining Ops and 10/10 and there is no need to bot them. We could wipe a Plex belt in an hr or do a 10/10 in as much time. Everything is done in fleet out there. it's very efficient. Funny, care to explain my recent trip through deep Russian space then? ~10 systems in a row, each with Raven and Exequeror. The second you enter system, Raven heads to POS, Exequeror cloaks. Only characters in system, each made on the exact same day, all members of two different corps. But oh, I suppose that's perfectly normal, and those were all legit players, right?  All of this stuff is ******* pointless if CCP is going to keep failing so hard they can't even break injection bots. ******* Runescape has got everyone forced to work in Color and OpenGL now, yet CCP flails along paddling the fail boat trying to do resource intensive manual investigations and bans. If they'd actually just break bots and obfuscate their code better, they could stop paying us lip service and show real results.
Hi I'm the guy who keeps showing you charts. I'll ask someone else to show more and we'll see if that cracks through. |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
468

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 03:34:00 -
[22] - Quote
Ai Shun wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:What would you, the player, stand to benefit from being able to identify which characters had ever been caught botting, whether or not they were still engaging in this activity? It would allow me to block those players, ignore contracts from them and generally ensure I don't need to interact with people that try to ruin EVE for the rest of us that play the game legitimately. This is not the same as scamming, can-flipping or similar but a deliberate breach of the EULA. I'd rather not play with those kinds of ass-hats and if I can prevent myself from actively interacting with them or supporting them through such interaction that would be great. It does not matter to me if this is the first time they have been caught or not; the anti-botting stance is fundamentally entrenched in almost every single MMO out there. They cannot claim ignorance and I don't care if they repent or not - they actively chose to break that contract with CCP and the other players of EVE Online.
No other MMO is naming and shamimg. I just want to point that out and if I'm wrong I'm happy to stand corrected. |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
468

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 03:38:00 -
[23] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Gilbaron wrote:name and shame wont help the problem
bots will move away from corporations and stay in npc corps
players behind the bots will get better at hiding their true identity, bot isk, sell for money, buy plex with money, sell plex for isk, really difficult for CCP to find their true identity if stuff like TOR and Virtual Machines is used to hide the true ID and details of the computer
an anonymous list (3 market bots in jita, 40 ratting bots in XXX, 50 mining bots in YYY were banned today, they lost a total of ZZZ isk and assets worth XXX isk since they were aquired via botting) of those in their first and second strike and a a public list of those characters permabanned might be a good idea to state clearly that CCP is actively fighting bots While I love the mythology that people have that they can remain anonymous on the internet it's a falsehood over time. The idea that, especially given EVE and all of the numbers involved, we can actually focus on this and any other *example here norms* apply is pretty silly. The margins on one hand are completely different and we allow PLEX. We've shown at least three times in the early days that we can focus and completely shut down a bot developer because the margins frankly aren't there. If you think this is some world where someone doing a bad activity we care about can just magically vanish those dog days are pretty much over. so you say that you can still identify me if im using TOR via 3g on my laptop for my bot and my normal Cable internet on my desktop for normal gaming, running two accounts who never ever have touched each other ingame and dont have anything in common on the account management site ? thats pretty interesting and i would like to hear more concerning PLEX i think i have to agree with you, they are likely the single most powerfull weapon against professional RMTers but will do nothing about the guys who are simply to lazy to go and farm their ships via hard work like everybody else
I can tell you based on professional experience that the sense of anonymity you seem to be professing is really overblown and is the kind of thing that puts deliciously round "O" faces on people in handcuffs being escorted from their houses. I'm sure you're interested in more, but that's what the news is for.
PLEX just owns and it's a great tool against this problem :) |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
468

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 03:41:00 -
[24] - Quote
Nemo deBlanc wrote:Gilbaron wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Gilbaron wrote:name and shame wont help the problem
bots will move away from corporations and stay in npc corps
players behind the bots will get better at hiding their true identity, bot isk, sell for money, buy plex with money, sell plex for isk, really difficult for CCP to find their true identity if stuff like TOR and Virtual Machines is used to hide the true ID and details of the computer
an anonymous list (3 market bots in jita, 40 ratting bots in XXX, 50 mining bots in YYY were banned today, they lost a total of ZZZ isk and assets worth XXX isk since they were aquired via botting) of those in their first and second strike and a a public list of those characters permabanned might be a good idea to state clearly that CCP is actively fighting bots While I love the mythology that people have that they can remain anonymous on the internet it's a falsehood over time. The idea that, especially given EVE and all of the numbers involved, we can actually focus on this and any other *example here norms* apply is pretty silly. The margins on one hand are completely different and we allow PLEX. We've shown at least three times in the early days that we can focus and completely shut down a bot developer because the margins frankly aren't there. If you think this is some world where someone doing a bad activity we care about can just magically vanish those dog days are pretty much over. so you say that you can still identify me if im using TOR via 3g on my laptop for my bot and my normal Cable internet on my desktop for normal gaming, running two accounts who never ever have touched each other ingame and dont have anything in common on the account management site ? thats pretty interesting and i would like to hear more concerning PLEX i think i have to agree with you, they are likely the single most powerfull weapon against professional RMTers but will do nothing about the guys who are simply to lazy to go and farm their ships via hard work like everybody else CCP uses hardware fingerprints as well as IP's. But it's still quite the fallacy on their part to try and pretend like people don't fake that as well. They've said bans are also on actual people, not just an account. But even if so, nothing stops Russians who bot EVE for a living from just using their grandmother for billing.
Firstly the statements about what we do or don't use to identify things aren't quite what people think. Secondly it'd be pretty cool if we could stop labeling ethnic groups.
The hyberbole regarding how to be anonymous on the internet has replaced the Internet Lawyer in the near future where the Internet Lawyer has ceased to exist. (this future will never happen) |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
468

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 03:43:00 -
[25] - Quote
Nemo deBlanc wrote:Razin wrote:Besides the fact that such a thing would be somewhat immersion breaking, I really couldn't care less about knowing if someone had been caught botting. All I want is Delayed Local so that the players have a chance to self-police in 0.0 at the very least. Why isn't this getting done?? This. But make it no local. There's absolutely no easier fix for CCP to address botting than simply not sending clients info on players in a system until the player is detected by scanning/entering grid. Unless I'm missing something, it's the blatantly obvious fix here, and it disappointing me that CCP won't actually make it happen. Sure, nullbears will cry. Who cares?
I'm pretty sure "protecting botters" isn't even on the list of reasons for local to exist. This is really a question better answered by someone in game design but I'll see if I can find an answer. |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
468

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 03:45:00 -
[26] - Quote
Alpheias wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Alpheias wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Pampers Toralen wrote:This the distraction from the mittens thread? Any word from ccp about the issue There's plenty of other threads to post in about this. Leave mine alone. Fine, here is something for you. What about the authentication dongles you gave out at fanfest 2011, or if it was 2010? A tentative date and explanation were given on Friday. We're looking at a release sometime in July and you can get the explanation for the delay from the stream as there's a lot of words involved. It'll be posted this week I imagine.  Ah. I missed that. But you got any information on authenticators being available to those that didn't go to fanfest or is that something that will be revealed in the devblog?
Assume the same timeframe with more information to follow. I'm not in the distribution department. |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
468

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 03:46:00 -
[27] - Quote
Largo Usagi wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Ai Shun wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:What would you, the player, stand to benefit from being able to identify which characters had ever been caught botting, whether or not they were still engaging in this activity? It would allow me to block those players, ignore contracts from them and generally ensure I don't need to interact with people that try to ruin EVE for the rest of us that play the game legitimately. This is not the same as scamming, can-flipping or similar but a deliberate breach of the EULA. I'd rather not play with those kinds of ass-hats and if I can prevent myself from actively interacting with them or supporting them through such interaction that would be great. It does not matter to me if this is the first time they have been caught or not; the anti-botting stance is fundamentally entrenched in almost every single MMO out there. They cannot claim ignorance and I don't care if they repent or not - they actively chose to break that contract with CCP and the other players of EVE Online. No other MMO is naming and shamimg. I just want to point that out and if I'm wrong I'm happy to stand corrected. If no other MMO is naming and shaming, Trend Set to me just naming and shaming them seems like a minimal change on your behalf and its more ammunition against the problem.
I do not in any way disagree with trend setting. Based on the statement that was made I just wanted to be clear. |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
470

|
Posted - 2012.03.27 03:48:00 -
[28] - Quote
I'm going to bed now guys I'll be back in a few hours. NN! |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1027

|
Posted - 2012.04.13 10:49:00 -
[29] - Quote
Ok guys I haven't forgotten about this thread. I'm going to start going through all 120000 pages over the next couple of days. <3 "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|

CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1027

|
Posted - 2012.04.13 11:00:00 -
[30] - Quote
Andrev Nox wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Ok guys I haven't forgotten about this thread. I'm going to start going through all 120000 pages over the next couple of days. <3 Please, may I draw special attention to those posts made by the player-run businesses/investments - as they're among the most directly endangered by unknowingly interacting with botters.
You could but I'm going to read every post in the thread equally anyway. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
|