Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 30 post(s) |
Wille Sanara
Felador night Corp
5
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 21:27:00 -
[451] - Quote
Ban them all, we want our sandbox without botters and RMT! Thats pretty much what I wanted to say... |
Katja Faith
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
16
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 21:27:00 -
[452] - Quote
I personally see zero point in doing so, much in the same way that banning the disgraced lawyer was: he has multiple toons across multiple accounts, so he just continues his game. Same with botters. Irrevocably deleting the entire account (not just barring the single toon) has more of an effect, albeit a minor one. But will that stop someone in the Drone Regions?
Hardly. |
Bibosikus
Inside out. The G0dfathers
96
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 21:32:00 -
[453] - Quote
Botting is against the EULA.
Ban the accounts. FFS, they've had enough warnings by now both in-game and out.
Then name them so we can at least take them off the "possible war targets" contact lists..
EDIT: Or - Putting then in a corp of their own is a nice idea - as long as they can't use cloaks... The box said "Requires Windows-á2000 or better", so I installed Linux. |
Dangus Kahn
EdgeGamers Dark Taboo
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 21:53:00 -
[454] - Quote
Why not just give kill rights with the scarlet letter? So anybody can pop bots without repercussion. It may lighten the work load for CCP because the player in question would have to end his subscription and nobody would buy his toon. |
Bluestream3
the Goose Flock
9
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 21:56:00 -
[455] - Quote
To me, that would look very unprofessional. If you find out someone is botting, ban him, and be done with it. The only reason there is for you (CCP) to let them keep playing is because they pay you money, if there are other reasons, please enlighten me. Assume there are two sides here, players just want them gone, but I bet in some ways CCP doesn't. Otherwise they wouldn't get second chances and they wouldn't still be here, would they? I think it's really bad to try to please both sides, or whatever you'd try to accomplish by this.
Why make a problem of what to do with the bots when the real problem is detecting them? |
Grikath
T.E.L.O.G.S.
28
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 22:07:00 -
[456] - Quote
I don't think the scarlet letter is needed..
As far as I can see RMT-ers and botters end up with permabans or utterly unplayable accounts. This essentially removes those accounts from the game altogether, so added measures are really superfluous.
|
Moolti
Skadi's Call
4
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 22:08:00 -
[457] - Quote
I'm torn on this.
I really do like the idea of scarlet letters. Putting the offenders up on a stackode, and throwing tomatoes. I'd like to know someone is a known offender to not invite them to a corp.
However, I'm fearful that people may assume the lack of a scarlet letter is some sort of positive or clearance that they are above board. Also if it is true the recidivism rate is as low as portrayed, it should only be for a 2nd or 3rd offense. *edited to add: and if someone offends 3 times they should be perma banned instead of a scarlet letter |
Conventia Underking
Underking Family
144
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 22:14:00 -
[458] - Quote
I haven't read the entire thread, so I'm not sure if this idea has been brought up or not. So, here goes:
What if botters got a flag that was only visible through their API? That way, it's not public, but if for any reason they try to join a corp or get audited by someone where there is an existing expectation of providing API access, then this would act as a deterrent without preventing someone from turning into a good guy. It may also make sense to have it be available for corp directors so they could see if their members were botters.
It would be important to include a timestamp of the last instance of botting, which would allow people to benefit from "remaining clean".
This way, the only disincentive to "turning good" is that you can't join a corp or get public funding without people knowing you botted, but at the same time, they could continue playing alone or with people who ultimately, don't care about botting. For God; Salvation is Imperative, but not at the cost of our Humanity!
The Vitoc Problem - Conventia Underking |
ParagonFree
RGSU Goonswarm Federation
5
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 22:18:00 -
[459] - Quote
yes |
Bawsk
Celestial Mayhem PROJECT MAYH3M
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 22:27:00 -
[460] - Quote
I would allow char's with scarlet letters into my corp......... So I could awox them at the first possible chance
I am for the naming and shaming on the first offense with some additional turns. Make the scarlet letter (visable on character portrait) last for only 6 months Unless (and this makes the assumption that most botters plex up their accounts) They update their account to a minimum 3 month paid subscription by creditcard, then the scarlet letter goes away.
-The ones that can be turned into goodguys will start paying for their subscription like the average player. The hardcore botters will not, and continue to plex up.
-CCP gets more money to fight botters (hopefully you can direct this cash towards your department )
-Creditcard info becomes attached to the account, possibly allowing you to see if they have any other accounts, and possibly track them better should they "relapse"
2nd offense: scarlet letter for a year, attachment to their api details, and no way to remove it.
on another note
The interdiction nullifier on the botting Tengu seems to be the bane of the bott hunter lately. Anyone have a way of catching these bastards?
and p.s. Make a twiter account CCP Sreegs, so we can follow you :) |
|
InstinctE17
Avant-Garde Monastery G00DFELLAS
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 22:36:00 -
[461] - Quote
Killer Gandry wrote:There are playergroups in the EVE Universe who wish in no way to be identified alongside botters. They want no dealings with them since a botter doesn't play the game. a program runs ertain keystrokes.
Also people who want to buy a character from the character bazaar would like to know if the character they buy in any way got flagged or even temporary banned because of botting. It's like buying a house or car. You want to know a bit of history which could possebly affect your purchase.
I for one would be shocked if I were to purchase a character on the forums and then be forced in any way to explain to other people everytime that I wasn't the owner of said character which was caught with his hands in the cookiejar at some point.
If a character should go up for sale the potential buyer should be informed about a history which could affect him in the future if he were to aquire said character.
As for ingame policing. I personally think it's CCP's job to keep an eye on previously temp banned botters as to see if they return to their unlawfull ways of botting. This isn't something the playerbase should get into unless you would like to start off a witchhunt. We all know how well the public responds to convicted criminals. We also know how a large part of the EVE playerbase would respond by not letting a flagged botter get into the game as intended again.
Edit: Being an oldbee I am very rusted in my ways. Since not long ago character transfers of flagged people isn't possible anymore so that reason has no validation anymore. However the rest in my post stays as it is.
This is one of the reasons i have said many times that when we buy a char, we should have the option to change the name and wipe the corp history. since a new buyer has no ties to the name or history of said char thier is no reason to pay for his mis steps over and over. of course the potential for abuse is great here. however i stand by my point in this matter.
|
Andrea Roche
State War Academy Caldari State
66
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 22:44:00 -
[462] - Quote
InstinctE17 wrote:
This is one of the reasons i have said many times that when we buy a char, we should have the option to change the name and wipe the corp history. since a new buyer has no ties to the name or history of said char thier is no reason to pay for his mis steps over and over. of course the potential for abuse is great here. however i stand by my point in this matter.
i disagree cos if i was an offender i can do a ficticious buy of character just to clean it. The potential for abuse its even higher. This is without even concidering thievery and the many other reasons why would sanatise it. |
wettowelreactor
WettCorp
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 22:47:00 -
[463] - Quote
Instead of making things public have the NPC's deal with it. Charge known botters more for insurance, clones, station servies, ect... A cheaters tax if you will. This acts as a deterrent without the consequences of a public tagging. After a period of good behavior these fees coud be removed. |
Verite Rendition
F.R.E.E. Explorer EVE Animal Control
109
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 23:06:00 -
[464] - Quote
"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?"
In short, covering my butt by not doing business with them. Since people who do business with RMTers are at risk of having their assets seized for supporting the RMTers, I'd like to stay as far away from them as possible.
I expect the recidivism rate to be quite high here. |
G0hme
Lead Farmers Kill It With Fire
10
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 23:10:00 -
[465] - Quote
I vuv you CCP Sreegs !!!! Buying a plex in your honor! |
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade Lost Obsession
176
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 23:25:00 -
[466] - Quote
Because as a player that has mined im tired of being seen alongside botters.
Because it gives anti botters the chance to gank someone thats botted for sure, rather then someone they are guessing is botting.
Because mining corps dont want botters in their corp risking their stuff.
Because botting punishments should go beyond fair, and be extremely harsh.
Because becoming a "good guy" for a bot is as simply as logging in their mains.
Because training a L3 will do mining alt is too easy, making bots replaceable.
Because almost every Eve player in the game wants it.
Because mission tengu bots are also fairly quick to replace, and will become easier soonTM with tree changes.
Because botting pisses most players off, why can't toss alittle fire back? |
Louis deGuerre
The Dark Tribe Against ALL Authorities
254
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 23:45:00 -
[467] - Quote
I am also of the zero tolerance family, disgruntled that my hard earned isk is becoming less valuable while people are botting left and right. However, I want to stay out of this debate except to say that I applaud that CCP is willing to discuss this openly. FIRE FRIENDSHIP TORPEDOES ! Louis's epic skill guide v1.1 |
ICU Andshutup
Perkone Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 00:01:00 -
[468] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote: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.
TBH botters go in knowing with forethought that they are in contravention of the EULA and make a conscious decision not to care. Assigning a scarlet letter then for ALL those caught is more than justified, as long as the investigation is fair and guilt can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. If, at a later date, the player amends his/her ways and sufficient time has passed, a pardon could be applied for (much like convicted felons can do today).
|
Cpt Syrinx
Jovian Labs Jovian Enterprises
34
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 00:17:00 -
[469] - Quote
Powers Sa wrote:Cpt Syrinx wrote:There SHOULD be some indication that action has been taken against a character's account on grounds of game-destructive behavior such as botting, and it SHOULD be visible to all.
Why? Not for reasons of revenge. Not for reasons of inciting shame. Not in a feeble attempt to change the perpetrator's behavior for the better. I do not care about these people.
I care about me. Also, to a lesser extent (this is EVE after all), about the other people that are not risking damage to this game for their own betterment.
I feel that we 'normal' players have a justifiable entitlement to the information required to shield ourselves from these people: I want the ability to avoid business with them, I want the ability to avoid conflict with them. I want the information required to utterly and completely avoid ALL INTERACTION with these people. If I were crazy enough to feel tainted by their very presence in the same system as myself, I would still be entitled to the information required to decide to get the hell out.
I highly disagree. The motivating factor for everyone I've talked to, (real life non-goon friends), is to name and shame people. Basically they want to hold it over people's heads. They want tears. They want to use it as leverage in forums arguments. You are playing CCP's game. You aren't really entitled to more information than they feel like giving. CCP knows who is destroying the game, and they in turn are destroying those people without mercy. When I say without mercy, I mean they are hitting everybody. I found out a guy that loaned me isk (I repaid), is actually a dirty RMT/Isk seller. (I've only been playing 5months) Do I get a scarlet letter for transacting him? I hope not. CCP Sreegs is doing an excellent job to break habits by going after ISK and Assets.
I think my reasoning didnt come across, since it is mostly in line with the last bit you mention here.
I argue that we need the information to protect ourselves, to avoid inadvertent involvement in their activities, either directly or by affiliation. This goes from whole alliances getting reputations of condoning botting, to single players getting negative wallets due to dirty isk involvement.
The word 'entitled', I have chosen on purpose. While its meaning in a forum is diluted by its use to shun badposters (often rightly so tbh), in this case its intended to address the causal relation that our exposure to these people merits information to know them for what they are in our own defence. That people want to know for basic motivations of naming and shaming does not invalidate my argument, I feel. The need to know remains regardless, monkey motivations or not.
Cpt Syrinx wrote:If we do not know, if we befriend these people and, for instance, loan them isk or assets, we get involved involuntarily!
^^ key point left out of the above quote |
McDarila
Lost Society Get Off My Lawn
7
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 00:24:00 -
[470] - Quote
The real effect is allowing a corp/alliance to see that a person is abotter before they are allowed in. This is critical in 0.0 space as this could cause the loss of captial ships, large corp assets and ability of the player to direct the payments of corp/alliance bills. Example A alliance executor corp's ceo is ban for boting for 30 days. All the sov bills dont get paid. It have the effect of what happen to BoB when goon's took them out.
I personaly dont want a botter near our corp/alliance. |
|
Hroya
23
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 00:28:00 -
[471] - Quote
The protection you seek with the scarlet letter so you dont do bussiness with such people can be avoided by just banning them right away.
You are perma banned if you stole from ccp, but when someone steals from your eve experience you are offered the option to be their vengefull agent. Like you dont have other things to do in the game.
I dont need to know their names, know what alliance they were part off or what country they came from. Just toss em out of the airlock.
CCP is a bussiness and wants to make money, promoting their plexes and battle the rmt. rightfully so. Now show the same tenacity in your actions against people that willfully stole from your customers.
You go your corridor but. |
engjin
The Konvergent League Sanctuary Pact
17
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 00:35:00 -
[472] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: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. Can't do the time? Don't do the crime.Are you talking about applying the "Scarlet letter" to the account or the character used to bot? "Casual" botters rarely bot with their mains - heck, they usually use a seperate account anyway so far as I am aware. Can you produce stats that would indicate that the concern you are raising is numerically significant? I agree that a scarlet letter applied to a specific character - one which is now locked into that account - is likely to lead to the character being biomassed, but I'm not convinced that this would be "fatal" to the player involved. If someone has no more involvement with EVE than to bot, then good riddance to them. If the player is involved in actual gameplay, then they'll switch to some other method of generating income (hopefully an EULA-compliant one). The main benefit to we the players of "scarlet letters" is to be able to unambiguously identify botters, and those organisations that tolerate or even cater to them.
Sreegs, when I saw your presentation at fanfest I was imagining what this forum thread would look like and it looks completely opposite of what I expected. From what you said at the presentation and your body language there I think you would agree.
I'm very surprised at how much slack people are giving to dirtbags that cheat. How they are coming up with reasons why it won't work or try to come up with alternatives to sidestep it altogether. I think the real resistance comes from the point that Malcanis makes. That that flagged toons in corps and alliances will be out there for everyone to see. Pointing out who actually allows it to happen, tolerate it and perhaps practice what they preach in the endless discussions about this that have occurred over the years in the forums. Trying to avoid that guilt by association? In Eve epic ganks, sabotage, scamming, cheating people out of supers are all labels of honor and rep for players, corps and alliances that perpetuate them. However associate the dirty words 'botter' or 'RMTer' to them and eHonor is doomed. Maybe there is something to the idea...
|
Thabiso
Merchants of the Golden Goose
4
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 01:01:00 -
[473] - Quote
@Sreegs: Any chance of you publishing white papers on the technology/algorithms you use for detection?
Had a nice sit down with Dr. Christian Thurau from Gameanalytics the other day, he has done a lot of work on human detection - got me a bit "turned on" the subject :-)
Also, if one happened to stop by Iceland at some point, does CCP (you ;-) ) give guided tours with free alcohol? |
Kallen Brack
Smokedancers
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 02:00:00 -
[474] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:
DISCUSS!
:)
Sreegs,
I'd like to reframe the "scarlet letter" idea in this way:
Do you want CCP to be the sole enforcer of botting rules, or do you want the community to be part of that enforcement?
If you want CCP to be the sole enforcer, then the scarlet letter makes no sense.
If you want the community to participate in the enforcement of the botting rules, then the community needs transparency as to who is botting, and the scarlet letter is probably the best tool for providing that transparency.
--Kallen |
Eno Lacigol
Roomwraiths
2
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 02:24:00 -
[475] - Quote
I was banned for botting in the recent wave of bannings, despite never using a bot. It's really messed up that because of a GM who is to incompetent to tell the difference between an afk domi with drones out and a bot, that I'm out 15 days on my two accounts and a mark against me I did not earn. |
Aluchem
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 02:38:00 -
[476] - Quote
Speaking as a recruiter, it would be a big help to avoid getting these people in my corp. |
Im Super Gay
Hedion University Amarr Empire
38
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 02:49:00 -
[477] - Quote
Eno Lacigol wrote:I was banned for botting in the recent wave of bannings, despite never using a bot. It's really messed up that because of a GM who is to incompetent to tell the difference between an afk domi with drones out and a bot, that I'm out 15 days on my two accounts and a mark against me I did not earn. I smell a liar trying to play the false positive card. |
Malkev
GRUMPS RESEARCH TEAM
41
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 02:55:00 -
[478] - Quote
I would just prefer they get permabanned after their second violation, then we wouldn't have to worry about this silly Scarlet letter business.
There's an old saying in Tennessee...I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee...that says, fool me once, shame on...shame on you. Fool me......you can't get fooled again. |
Kropotkin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 02:58:00 -
[479] - Quote
Seems to me a Scarlet Letter of Botterhood would open niches for organizations that want to recruit botters.
(a) In the Real World, Alcoholics Anonymous recruits only alcoholics, for the purpose of helping them get and stay sober.
(b) In the Real World, some criminal gangs accept only members who have been convicted of violent crimes.
Do CCP want to do that?
If the SLoB were visible only to Corp recruiters, and a third-party site undertook to collect SLoB reports from Corp recruiters, and publish them, would there be a problem of false SLoB reporting to the third-party site?
|
Eno Lacigol
Roomwraiths
2
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 03:05:00 -
[480] - Quote
Im Super Gay wrote:Eno Lacigol wrote:I was banned for botting in the recent wave of bannings, despite never using a bot. It's really messed up that because of a GM who is to incompetent to tell the difference between an afk domi with drones out and a bot, that I'm out 15 days on my two accounts and a mark against me I did not earn. I smell a liar trying to play the false positive card. There is nothing I can do or say to prove my innocence to you. If I was in your situation and you were in mine, I'd say the same thing. I know I'm innocent though, and I pisses me off that CCP won't give my case more than 2 generic copy paste reply s more or less telling me to **** off. If repping sentry drones that are set to aggressive while sitting in an area were rats spawn ins against the TOS they need to communicate this. Otherwise they need to reimburse me for the time lost from the ban. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |