| 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) |
Marduk Nibiru
Risk Breakers
C0NVICTED
163
   |
Posted - 2012.04.06 20:52:00 -
[541] - Quote
Terminal Insanity wrote:Name and Shame. Do it!
Bot/Macros are fairly predictable, and once you observe them in action it becomes reasonably easy to gank them. If you identify botters, it would make vigilante justice easier, and players would know who to keep an eye on. I bet many of them are repeat offenders.
It would also act as a deterrent. Getting your account permanently marked as a 'cheater/botter' would allow us to avoid trading with those who have obtained their isk illegitimately.
Unfortunately, I don't see how. The market doesn't exactly allow you to buy from those you want to buy from. Even if you could identify which sell order was from a reputable seller, and which are not, you can't decide to buy from the reputable ones. If you try it just gives the money you would have paid them to whomever has the lowest sell order; giving them extra ISK in other words. Botters of course would find it a lot easier to undercut the market than legitimate traders and thus you just end up buying from them whether you want to or not.
CCP would have to allow us to purchase from exactly who we want, and of course this would instantly be abused to our detriment by the same botters and RMT **** wads we're trying to get rid of.
Quote:It would also be useful for recruitment screening, helping to keep our corps bot-free.
This though. Recruitment would of course require full API, which most are these days, and anyone found receiving or giving funds to one of these marked characters could be excluded from participation by the player community. Of course, first step there is to convince the main chunk of players that they should do this and it would seem that since a great many of the large alliances enable, support, and fund botting...that might be a hard sale.
|
Coolsmoke
State War Academy
Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.07 18:20:00 -
[542] - Quote
I know this thread has probably gone on long enough, but for anyone sitting on the fence regarding botters, here are some quick figures for a typical mission botter scenario:
Player X runs (a fairly typical) 5 mission botters in CNR's, each running 20 hrs/day and earning around 40mill isk/hr.
5 x 20 x 40 = 4 billion isk/day or 120 Billion a month.
A fair, if not major, proportion of botters RMT some of this isk. With the rest, they buy plex for their accounts and after that, pretty much whatever they damn well please. There's no disputing the fact that botter iskies are a major contributing factor to inflation.
With the current run on bot-spotting and banning, botters are trying a mix of methods to prevent detection - the most obvious being a reduction in the time spent constantly running missions.
But even at 10 hours a day, each bot player is pulling in 60b/month.
There are a LOT of botters in Eve. Pretty much any L4 mission hub in Caldari space has them.
It takes 20 days from account creation to run a T2 & faction fitted CNR in Level 4 missions. "Mission bot software" is highly sophisticated and customisable, and constantly being adapted in order to better reflect the actions of a genuine hands-on player.
Find them, report them and ban them all  |
Nohb Oddy
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 08:10:00 -
[543] - Quote
Regardless of your choice on the matter CCP Sreegs, I want to thank you for opening this forum of discussion and taking an active part in it to really get a feel for what the players think.
Nohb Oddy likes you. |
Halvon Strauss
State War Academy
Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 11:40:00 -
[544] - Quote
Jada Maroo wrote:Does anyone seriously think shaming is any sort of deterrant in Eve If I'm making phat isk doing something you don't like, you think wagging your finger is gonna stop me? 
You raise an excellent point. Moreover, if the "majority" or even some of the botters happen to be involved with RMT rings, you think them having their accounts flagged actually will have any negative impact? It could in fact have an opposite effect and in some cases be a form of advertising for them. The best place to pick up "escorts" in vegas is on the courthouse steps as they're walking out from their courtcases or paying their fines. You might not make your move right then, but if you're interested you can rendezvous and hammer out the details elsewhere.
The RMT organizers are very clever at finding new ways to get as much currency per hour as they can, especially as many of their "employees" seem to be located in ecomically depressed countries. If their known toons/accounts get blacklisted for botting they'll find other ways to work their trade. Bans are considerably more effective and inconvenient to the RMT rings.
To the average botter not working for the RMT market? Not sure they'll care either. I doubt the average attention deficient gamer is going to take the time to look at a laundry list of demerited botters before logging in or even at all. Most "RL" friends in EVE know if one of their comrades are botting and many corp-mates can figure it out. It's been my experience that no one likes botting for the myriad reasons of fairness unless your friend happens to be a botter and shares their wealth with you; then some folk are willing to offer discretion at the expense of personal gain.
In a sandbox where relabeling a ship as the tiered upgrade of itself and trading it away for a scamming profit is common place, or falsely creating buy and sell orders around a mis-named skill, simply adding a flag to someone's toon probably won't mean a whole heck of a lot. Unless it's in bright neon colors and makes a keynote everytime the player types out a chat message and you are audibly warned when these players come in and out of local space, but even then I remain skeptical. After enough scarlet letters were observed you might check your UI to find a way to disable it's functionality.
The Scarlet Letter we're discussing just seems an additional way to humiliate the botter, but doesn't seem to serve any real effect aside from recruitment. Even then someone once told me that if you're not cheating you're not trying hard enough. Given the harsh "world" of EVE, working outside the bounds of convention may be applauded by some and frowned on by those unwilling to risk questionable wealth procurement at the expense of game time served. I personally think it's crap and messes with the already volatile New Eden economy. Adding a badge of honor for breaking the rules may not be as undesirable as one might think. |
CirJohn
The Flying Tigers
Intrepid Crossing
1
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 12:06:00 -
[545] - Quote
I believe you've said that you're using a 3-strikes plan for botters. Why not make the scarlet letter part of the second strike? Here's my reasoning:
A 1-strike individual has a good chance of becoming a "good guy." He has seen that botting really is punished, so there is an incentive to stop. If he does stop then everyone wins.
A 2-strike individual has been warned (and punished), but he still continues to cheat. This shows both a habitual pattern of wrong behavior and a disregard for the rules. This type of person will often continue to break the rules without regard for those around him.
By placing an "habitual botter" tag on repeat offenders (2 strikes), you allow corporations to protect themselves from these selfish players. |
Ntrails
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
70
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 12:40:00 -
[546] - Quote
CirJohn wrote:By placing an "habitual botter" tag on repeat offenders (2 strikes), you allow corporations to protect themselves from these selfish players.
What sort of corporation would skim 15% in taxes from an enthusiastic ratter without asking too many questions about where they came from in the first place!?!?!
(Hint: As long as the taxes are not reclaimed corps won't give a **** if someone is named and shamed) |
Waylan Yutani
The Ghost Division
22
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 13:08:00 -
[547] - Quote
I'm all for a public scarlet letter, not only should it apply to the character that bots but also to the corp and alliance that houses said botting characters. Also make them criminally flagged to all other players for 6 months I have zero tolerance for players using bots.
Question is, whether you wants to rehabilitate bad players or wage an all out war on bots.
edit; from "wartargets" to "criminally flagged" |
Malcorath Sacerdos
Deep Space Equinox
20
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 16:30:00 -
[548] - Quote
Name and shame!
But not only the toon but the entire acc and all accs owned by the same person . and when you introduse the meta acc system that has been discussed last year id say add it to that so that all toons on all acs under the same person is flagged as botter.
however it shuld not be a permanent marker unless you get hit with one say three times.
why
well if you let us know who does it we will make shure they learn how we feal about it after their ban period is over.
Edit i agree with the previous poster .. flag em all while they harbor a botter and im personally gonna front the isk for a good merc corp to decc them . |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
986
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 16:50:00 -
[549] - Quote
Ntrails wrote:CirJohn wrote:By placing an "habitual botter" tag on repeat offenders (2 strikes), you allow corporations to protect themselves from these selfish players. What sort of corporation would skim 15% in taxes from an enthusiastic ratter without asking too many questions about where they came from in the first place!?!?! (Hint: As long as the taxes are not reclaimed corps won't give a **** if someone is named and shamed)
You're calling a botter an "enthusiastic ratter", so let's keep it this way even if I don't like your definition of boter.
If you accept bots in your corp knowing this, then your corp wallet should go negative too if the guy is caught again, and don't start your rabble about "I didn't knew it" if the guy is flagged.
Because with 10min e-mail address and very often a lot more tools you can find in some corporations/alliances forums, you can perfectly create a bot alt and not be detected by regular tools watching IP or MAC address, because I know how easy it is to change those ones.
Hacking and cheating is a way of living or a state of mind, you just can't change those guys to good guys if they do it more than once, so whenever you hit those just hit hard, ban and biomass char's take all isk destroy all items and disband their corp/alliance take all corp/alliance assets.
No, if you do something then you do it right and don't close one door to those jerks and let another one open, you close it definitively and decisively, CCP would look like idiots if they do it differently and I trust forum alts to bring that up when it happens. |
Marduk Nibiru
Risk Breakers
C0NVICTED
168
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 19:00:00 -
[550] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote: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.
I also like the idea of it being available in the API for then someone could demand access to it as part of various other operations such as forming "business" relations. With the way they API works now, requiring player consent for all permissions, it seems like this would create the best of possible worlds. |
|
|
FeralShadow
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
79
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 19:35:00 -
[551] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:
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.
APB Reloaded is publicly naming and shaming. It's a FTP game, and has been riddled with hackers. They've gotten better at taking them out, and the long lists of names on their forums is good to see, giving people confidence that steps are being taken. Hacking in that game is quite obvious, unlike in Eve, and in addition to that it's a FTP game that anybody can start playing so hackers just make a new account and start all over again.
Well, anyways, i just wanted to give you a game that uses name and shame, Sreegs.
Successful "carebear" attitudes:-áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=37279 |
Halvon Strauss
State War Academy
Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 20:17:00 -
[552] - Quote
FeralShadow wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:
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.
APB Reloaded is publicly naming and shaming. It's a FTP game, and has been riddled with hackers. They've gotten better at taking them out, and the long lists of names on their forums is good to see, giving people confidence that steps are being taken. Hacking in that game is quite obvious, unlike in Eve, and in addition to that it's a FTP game that anybody can start playing so hackers just make a new account and start all over again. Well, anyways, i just wanted to give you a game that uses name and shame, Sreegs.
Other devs in most other mmos keep their disciplinary measures on the downlow as to not draw attention to potential exploits. The common philosophy is to avoid talking about "Fight Club" to not draw any curiosity towards it's pursuits. The laundry list seems nothing more than a metric to show that the "powers that be" are actually taking action. It makes the community feel more "protected" I imagine, similar to seeing a beat-cop. |
KwaLevu
PH0ENIX COMPANY
The 99 Percent
1
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 03:52:00 -
[553] - 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?"
Alot of corps , atleast i hope alot donot condone RMT or anything to do with it. By naming and shaming them we can kick people who do it from our TS and also from our community. Alot of people trade chars legally and the only way we know who they are is thier voice on coms and if you name and shame these ppl using i sold my char as an excuse for being banned will no longer be used .
|
Kietay Ayari
Caldari State
326
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 04:05:00 -
[554] - Quote
I support this idea. I do not think that monetary losses will ever be a good enough deterrent against botters until you can make them consistently lose more money than they make. Which may eventually be possible but I doooont think its even close right now :> We already know from the history of the world and every government ever that the less involved the state is in a solution the more efficient the solution will be. Letting the players refuse to associate with botters, hunt them down, and make their time worse for free will be the best deterrent to botting.
I understand it would also almost completely stop their ability to reform without making a new account but if you deter enough people you stop needing to reform them. In the end it comes down to what CCP wants. If you do not mind losing some players now, who might have actually made good EVE players when warned once, to almost entirely stop botting, then you should do this idea. If you think that you can achieve this eventually through other means and want to keep the few players who do reform then do not implement this.
You know our stance though! ;D
Ferox #1 |
Thurken
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 05:18:00 -
[555] - Quote
Botters are in a NPC corp. This people don't care about social flags..
Botters are on multiple accounts. Accounts caught over that, should have their characters removed them from their Player corp if there is one
Flags are not really good, because there are minors, who do make mistakes and will maybe never return.
Also the metagaming. It could be possible that players bot to receive that flag with the intention to damage reputations of Corps and Alliances
I fear you open a can of worms with early flagging.
But as a final Punishment an Event Idea:
Take possesion of all bot accounts. Move their characters with their actual used ship into a unreachable Wormhole system
put them all in a corporation.
Once a month A special deadspace gate to that system opens in the trade hubs, which limits to t1 cruiser and lower ships to enter.
Who finds and shots the most botters gets a nice price.
Players have fun killing each other and the "botted" botters. And CCP has a nice stress testing environment on the live server :)
Botageddon :)
|
Xi-Admiral-P6045
State War Academy
Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 06:29:00 -
[556] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote: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!
:)
Ship them off to Polaris, and tell them that they can leave if they find the stargate.
|
Wiccan999
Starwinders
The Unwilling.
2
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 07:44:00 -
[557] - Quote
I'm not sure if its posted yet or not.
You could always place a concord bounty on botters and make it a proffession in eve.
Botkillers will emerge, and maybe even corps dedicated to this proffession alone...
just a thought.
|
Ken Kyoukan
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 12:30:00 -
[558] - Quote
For those of you who only read the latest page, I noticed no-one had commented on my suggestion below:
Ken Kyoukan wrote:My PoV... Flagging should last for 1 day per qty of isk confirmed as botted. I see the first flag as being kept reasonably quiet alongside Impounded ISK/Assets to allow further investigation and to allow for any accidental false positives (I would like to assume there were none, but always better to be safe than sorry.), prior to those ISK/Assets being removed from the game. The second flag being the Scarlet Letter version.. A CEO or Director would automatically have their Corp Member Listing flagged for all of their fellow Corp and Alliance members upon getting the second flag. Flag:1a. Personal Character Info (Via NeoCom) shows as Flagged with a warning about future actions.   1b. Applications to Corps flagged for CEO/Directors/Recruiters as potential problem.  1c. Corp Member Listing flagged for that Corps CEO/Directors as potential problem. 1d. Impounded (and then removed) ISK/Assets.  2a. Personal Character Info (Via NeoCom) shows as Flagged with a final warning about being banned.  2b. Applications to Corps flagged.  2c. Corp Member Listing flagged for that Corps(/Alliances at CEO discression) members.  2d. Removed ISK/Assets.  During the second flag timer the following could also apply:2e. Marked as Wanted (Reason being: Botting, Exploiting, etc.) - Scarlet Letter. 2f. No Concord Protection, upto -10 Sec Status.  2g. Flagged as a Militia target for every Militia. 3. Perma-Banned!
|
Shade Alidiana
Concern Clear Sky
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 18:56:00 -
[559] - Quote
The game seems to go further and further from the one that impressed me being so close to reality.. Both the recent boomerang and this anti-bot campaign make it look more like a game. Let players punish players for this! Don't become the gods of such a beautiful world.
And boomerang... It seemed to have so nice economical consequences.. I was almost going to try gank someone |
Alundil
The Unnamed.
148
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 21:20:00 -
[560] - Quote
This was my "name and shame" idea posted several months back and hit on both the name and shame aspects of anti-botting/RMT and potentially added some interesting exploration content and made visible warnings of the perps ingame.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=107650#post107650
Quote:Just a thought in regards to the Botting/Macroing/RMT-ing people caught in Sreegs' devious net of devious catching.
I thought it would be a great idea if there might be a special place in New Eden for those toons/accounts caught exploiting or botting/macroing/RMT-ing by the Devs.
There's an oft quoted and cliched saying along the lines of "There's a special place in Hell for..."
1. It of course relies on CCP's willingness to seriously address the problem (insert EVE meme at your leisure).
I am not necessarily saying that they do not - there just doesn't appear to be much in the way of meaningful "Perp-Walk"
2. Once the offending toon/character/account is detected the following actions happen:
a. Their accounts are immediately frozen and disabled
b. Their EVE-worldy possessions (from all toons on the account) are ejected in a special super large "Jet Can" in a random system in space (w- or k-). These containers would be scannable/probable using Deep Space probes and would offer a real neat surprise to the player(s) that located them.
c. The ship hulls in their possession (from all toons on the account) are transported to a remote beacon in the system they were located in.
d. This beacon would be called something along the lines of "Sreegs' revenge" or some other Lore - Appropriate name
e. These transported hulls would be derelict wrecks and un-salvageable. They would retain the names of the Toon caught and expelled for violating the TOS in the manner described above (botting, etc)
This would, effectively, be an EVE ship graveyard populated by some of the most despicable characters in New Eden. |
|
|
Empathic Psychopath
Cult of the Crayon
3
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 11:21:00 -
[561] - Quote
I can't admit to looking at every single response to this but I've skimmed over a lot of posts and one thing that sticks out like a sore thumb is the level of "WE MUST PUNISH" and general righteous indignation. I notice quite a few people saying they'll happily pay for a merc corp to go chase botters...why not do it yourself if you feel so strongly, or are you too busy care bearing?
People need to get off the "punish them forever" bandwagon that is so popular in the US these days (and look how many people they've imprisoned in their own country purely as punishment rather than rehabilitation) and start looking at this rationally. If someone tried botting, got hit with a temporary ban and decided it's not worth the risk (i.e. no more botting ever) then why the need to name and shame? Given that said ex-botter is probably playing legitimately since they obviously haven't left the game (paying for a sub or playing to pay) then continuing the punishment after the initial ban will just p1ssthemoff and CCP loses a customer, so from a commercial perspective it's kind of dumb. If people continue to bot then hey, simple solution - perma ban all their accounts (i.e. what already happens now).
Hard core botters are mostly RMT based corps with very few actual people who have been around a long time and will be there as long as the game mechanics and code base allow this. It takes nothing to set up a network of bots and there are so many ways of disguising where your PC(s) are located it's not funny. Given that the incentive still exists for massive scale botting (i.e. RMT dollars) then in my view there are only 2 semi-realistic options to fix this.
One is to change the EVE client to remove the possibility of code injection and/or mess with OCR bots by keeping things on the screen dynamic enough for that type of bot not to work. Chance of this happening? Not high given the complexity involved - if it was easy do you think CCP wouldn't have already done this by now? We aren't talking about simple tweaks here. And of course any changes to the client need to be made carefully so as not to completely wreck gameplay.
So, what's the other way? To paraphrase the current debate about "solving" drug problems, start treating this as a health issue rather than a criminal one and you will probably get better results. I'm not saying that botting isn't criminal within the context of EVE, certainly it results impacts both players and CCP alike. But like the drug trade, if you take away the incentive (i.e. the stupid amounts of money to be made for doing virtually nothing) then you'll see the botters eventually disappear once the effort vs reward balance swings in favour of effort. To do this, CCP would need to start selling ISK directly to players. I'm not talking about buying plex then trading for iskies in-game. I'm talking about paying real money to get iskies. The trick is to sell it at a rate that is low enough to make botting not worthwhile for the RMT crowd, but not so cheap that your create massive inflation due to currency oversupply. Essentially you just replace one RMT organisation with another (CCP!) but when you think about it, conceptually this isn't really that much different from selling graphics cards for plex.
Other than that, I guess all that can be done is continue to catch the RMT bots and perma-ban when found.
My 0.05 ISK worth :) |
Grace Chang
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 12:05:00 -
[562] - Quote
I think you need to look at the whole issue from a different angle.
Obviously you look at it from CCPs view, which probably comes down to "how do we keep a player and generate revenue from him while at the same time we won't upset other players". Your 3-Strike rules seems to me like an attempt to walk that fine line.
Personally, i am not convinced of your metrics that that approach works, for all i know it could be PR (how about some more details?). Also the whole premise of "making a bad player a good player" is flawed in my opinion. A person who bots or cheats doesn't belong into this game, because he doesn't have the necessary mindset to enjoy it in the "right way" to begin with. A cheater or botter has already proven that he is not willing to compete within the ruleset. For "good players" (as you define them), the joy of playing such a competetive game is however fundamentally built on a fair playing ground, if that is gone, the joy is gone (and that should be your greatest fear in my opinion, not the lost revenue from some miscreants). Therefore i would think that a botter/cheater will never be able to enjoy the game it is supposed to be enjoyed - it is not a problem of action, it is a problem of mindset. This mindset is also the reason that a person that cheats in FPS games will never seriously attempt at getting better at the game, he will focus his efforts at not being detected the next time.
Which brings us to the proposed changes. As a person who enjoys this game for its competetiveness i don't see a reason why i should tolerate you ruining my fun just to get some extra bucks from people who don't really deserve a second chance. It should be your responsibility that the rules you set up for this game get enforced, if you don't do that (what you actually do with your 3-Strike rule) they are not really rules to be taken seriously to begin with.
What the proposed changes will do is to allow players to enforce YOUR rules socially, that you are unwilling to enforce because of financial reasons and that you are unable to enforce of technical reasons (that part you are really not to blame for, cheats cannot really be completely avoided on general purpose computing plattforms, but still you are quite far away from what can be done technically)
So, yes i think scarlet letters are great. It will allow me to shut out players from my gameplay, players which you should have shut out from the game in my opinion. Therefore it is only the second best option, but you owe players that abide to the rules that much at least. At the end of the day i don't want to be CCPs unvoluntary propationer. It is not about you, CCP, it is about the players that stick to the rules. |
Udonor
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
13
|
Posted - 2012.04.13 05:35:00 -
[563] - Quote
Well scarlet letters might be visible but lack details. Think about generalizing (not just RMT) the flag to simply say
"this person has previously engaged in bannable actions which could potential ensnare other players in penalties -- number of days since last offense occured xxx "
(CCP can also be harsher and use "days since last ban ended xxx"
PLUS
to separate the one time curious or possibly semi-innocently ensnared from habitual offenders consider adding
"number of prior bans zzz"
or to confer information on seriousness of offense(s) as well as repeats
"total number of weeks previously banned for all offenses is zzz"
Frankly if they are habitable offenders, the public deserves to know as most will work the gray areas hard
(i.e. harsh scams, tantrum ganking, etc). Some will try to get others to carry out risky parts of potentially bannable
activities while waiting to fall off CCP radar.
Finally I would think scarlet letters should attach to ACCOUNTS not just toons. Some bannable actions don't take that much toon training. |
Udonor
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
13
|
Posted - 2012.04.13 05:48:00 -
[564] - Quote
Plus I think posting toon names of offenders does NOT impede progress to reformed citizen.
RL such stigma does however often lead to special groups.
Such toons might well need to locate other offenders to form new corps.
Carebears might even offer to set up HALFWAY HOUSE type corps where a few parole officers monitor their behavior over 6 months to a year. As graduation gift they get special public award.
Heck CCP might even have its staff players CEO a few of these HALFWAY HOUSE corps to make sure they don't get griefed too badly nor go rogue and to add soem weight to the reformed sticker.
Opportunity not problem. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P
C C P Alliance
1027
|
Posted - 2012.04.13 10:49:00 -
[565] - 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 |
|
Andrev Nox
SOMER Blink
Cognitive Development
64
|
Posted - 2012.04.13 10:52:00 -
[566] - Quote
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.
Somer Blink - The original microlottery site. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P
C C P Alliance
1027
|
Posted - 2012.04.13 11:00:00 -
[567] - 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 |
|
ElQuirko
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
552
|
Posted - 2012.04.13 11:03:00 -
[568] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote: You could but I'm going to read every post in the thread equally anyway.
OMFG I QUOTED A DEV
If we distribute pictures of people, does that mean God can file copyright claims under SOPA? |
wiskyjack
Caldari Deep Space Ventures
Intrepid Crossing
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.13 11:14:00 -
[569] - Quote
How about this.
Dont ban them, put a marker on them that would allow them to be ganked and you would not be insta poped by concord. Of course we would not be able to see this marker, turning the kill into a roulette game.
It would make things interesting |
Asuri Kinnes
Adhocracy Incorporated
Adhocracy
334
|
Posted - 2012.04.13 11:45:00 -
[570] - Quote
wiskyjack wrote:How about this.
Dont ban them, put a marker on them that would allow them to be ganked and you would not be insta poped by concord. Of course we would not be able to see this marker, turning the kill into a roulette game.
It would make things interesting
I think a marker (unknown to the botter) for the first day would be "fun"... Then allow CCP's normal disciplinary routine to take over. I also only think that this would really only work in hi-sec. Lvl 4 & mining bots would then be a lot less popular...
As a side note, allowing players to pop them is far more enjoyable than /graphpron....
vOv
I personally hate bots, but if CCP can turn someone around and get $/month from them, more power to you.
Wormholes: The *NEW* end game of Eve - Online:
No Local. No Lag. No Blues (No Intell Channesl). No Blobs.
NEW FEATURE: NO INCARNA! |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 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 |