A warning. - Guild Wars Guru archive powered by Guild Wars Legacy

ubermancer

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jul 2005

******************* Refuge From Exile [RFE]

02 Sep 2006 at 06:40 - 201

Quote:

Originally Posted by sindex

In all actuality I disagree with the statement A-net is doing their job, because it seems clearly that they are not. First of all this is a crime; not a small one, but a pretty large crime in FRAUD. As a customer I can see the point of license agreement, to keep the program(s) (or product(s)) from being manipulated by the public or even stolen. The fact is how well does that agreement hold up, and if it does not bend towards manipulation of the customer (to otherwise benefit the company instead). A-net knows that what they are running an MMO and for that reason alone they should know, of what the customer goes through while establishing that online connection (i.e. Hackers, Software Viruses, Identity Theft, and etc). What they did to this particular customer sounds like an assumption by one individual, (a human being (flawed if you will)) seeing a particular pattern; then establishing it as breach in contract. Furthermore they did not only band this customer, but they stated that the customer is a liar and a thief. After which the customer goes to the public, and then actions are changed stating: even though your account was permanently band we are giving you a second chance, but if we see this breach in contract again you will be permanently band (no apology or reasons of). Now if this customer had certain specialists go through the computer and state that there was no evidence of these so called “third party programs” running in the background; and furthermore if there is evidence that “Guild Wars” was a key entity to bring in this third-party program into this customers computer (that there was a hack from their servers brought back to the customer) A-nets fully liable.

This brings me to what the customer now feels, two big emotions paranoia and anger. Some people will go the rout of forgiving A-net for its supposed mistake in their minds. However other people (and including myself) sees one thing, “being taken advantage of as a paying customer” (with a company dealing in Fraudulent Affairs); which will inevitably lead to one major setback to the company: “LAWSUIT(S).” This will also lead to people being wary of the game where people will lose their faith in the company. Finally bringing them to canceling out all together; of course when you have no customers, you have no product, and you have no company.

This opinion of mine does not reflect this customer thought(s) or feeling(s), but are my opinions alone.

Lawsuits, like the one pending against NC Soft for actively supporting botting (to the point of reprimanding employees who banned bots)?

Akhilleus

Forge Runner

Join Date: Sep 2005

If it aint expensive, it aint worth buyin'.

Leading/Co-leading Bretheren Of Chaos [Dark]

W/Mo

02 Sep 2006 at 07:15 - 202

when i was banned (wrongfully) it took spending 4 hours on the phone to customer support and eventually getting online with one of the people at the corporate office at NC-Soft to get my account back...
basically the response from the human-automated-response-systems (these morons couldnt zip their pants without help) was that once an account is banned nothing can be done since anet mods do such a fantastic job with researchign crap...
so, after 4 and a half hours i learn they banned me based off of a doctored screenshot sent in by someone who had actually scammed me. after 5 minutes of looking into the situation they realized that the so called "irrefutible evidence" they had was a load of malarky, and unbanned me.
wtf anet?...seriously, wtf?

wilderness

tinyurl.com/6hqar7a

Join Date: Mar 2006

We Couldn't Figure Out A Name [LMAO]

W/N

02 Sep 2006 at 09:38 - 203

Another day. Another empty inbox.

Apparently "We will unlock your account in 24 hours" means:

1. We'll make you a promise which we have no intention of honoring
2. We'll ignore you for a while.
3. We'll pass the matter between GMs who will spam repeated automated responses at you.
3. We'll 'unlock' a completely unrelated account that was never even banned.
4. We'll ignore you some more.

I really don't understand how they can make such a mess of this...

Gaile Gray

ArenaNet

Join Date: Feb 2005

02 Sep 2006 at 18:43 - 204

Quote:

Originally Posted by ubermancer

Lawsuits, like the one pending against NC Soft for actively supporting botting (to the point of reprimanding employees who banned bots)?

I know absolutely nothing about such a lawsuit, and I know that I receive emails daily with lists of banned bots for Guild Wars. Could you please provide specific information about this alleged lawsuit? Excuse my skepticism, but I've seen too many such statements that are nothing more than fabrication.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eviance

Just like I am sure that Anet makes mistakes ...4000! to be exact...

Not even close to 4,000 were in error! Please, before posting spectacular facts, be sure they are, you know, factual.

Quote:

If they are going to ban everyone who looks like a bot then we are all eventually doomed at some point and time.

No, that is not true. There are nearly two dozen parameters to "earn" a ban. It's unfortunate that a few--and I use that term advisedly, a very few--will be banned incorrectly. The vast, vast majority will be banned as they should be, for botting or using bot programs.

Players beg us to "Do something about bots!" When we do, they then start hedging their bets saying things like "But never, ever take such action that may require a reversal." Can't have it both ways, sorry! We will address the concerns of individual players such as the OP, but on the other hand, if you want us to make a significant impact on the pernicious problem of botting, you must support us using a system that may, again on the rare occasions, require us to take that extra step and reverse an erroneous account closure. And please, no thinking individuals should say, "Even one banned in error is too many," which is something I have read in the past. Realisitically, we must take action, and that means that a few will be banned who should not be. It's a choice that we have to make, for otherwise, our hands are tied, and we cannot take the action that we all know needs to be taken to remove the bots. The parallel is: paralyzing a police force by telling them that if any arrested individuals are found innocent at trial, then all criminals must be left unarrested in the event that one is accused inaccurately. That way leads to madness.

There are checks. There are balances. I will see where we are with the OPs situation, and I would ask the broader community's support of our doing our level best to keep the game great for all of us, and confidence that we will remain responsive in those rare instances when an error is made.

johnmedgla

Academy Page

Join Date: Dec 2005

Dark

N/Me

02 Sep 2006 at 20:09 - 205

Thankyou for your reply Gaile, it's nice to know you're at least aware of this. The final clause in your last sentece is, I believe, really the crux of this matter: "we will remain responsive in those rare instances when an error is made." To more than a few people, the response from various avenues of support in instances of mistaken bans has been anything but supportive or responsive - distinctly unhelpful and overbearing is a more accurate description - and I imagine that's why this issue is receiving more attention, and provoking stronger responses from the community than the actual number of mistaken bans actually warrants.

I appreciate that systems such as this cannot ever be made perfect, and in a very true sense no one at all, least of all yourself, is to blame for unfortunate situations such as this, but as the medium for communication between the developers/support people and the communuty at large, perhaps you could endeavour to impress upon your colleagues that basic public relations skills would be handy for anyone dealing with the public, especially those responsible for issues likely to elicit a strong response.

Well done for actually doing something about the botters - but perhaps try to be as conscientious in restoring incorrectly banned accounts. My own experience of this very issue, couple with any number of discussions on this exact issue here and on other forums suggest that the people dealing with this issue could perhaps word their warnings/summary ban notices/general communications with a tad more tact in a manner less likely to raise hackles and generally bewilder.

Thankyou for your patience.

Retribution X

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Nov 2005

Check behind you again.

N/

02 Sep 2006 at 21:09 - 206

To the crux of the issue, Shit happens.

And that's about it.

Eviance

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Nov 2005

Eh I forget... o_O

Biscuit of Dewm [MEEP]

R/

02 Sep 2006 at 22:14 - 207

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

Not even close to 4,000 were in error! Please, before posting spectacular facts, be sure they are, you know, factual.

.

Well sorry to have to requote your quote that was quoted way back when. So I read what you wrote wrong then? (or is that the other way around?)

Quote:

Just to reassure you: The account terminations took place, in a batch of about 4000, at approximately 12:30 PDT today. They are not ongoing. Nobody is going to lose an account by some ban bot (now that would be an irony! ) running amuck in the account server.

(I did give the link if you click on mistakes and if you go through all those quotes its in there burried somewhere - I would give the dirrect link but I hate being a member of multiple boards.) If I read it wrong then ok, but I'm just quoting what was quoted from you in the dev tracker.

Please note Gaile that I was not saying that all 4000 were a mistake although I think thats exactly how I made it sound (will edit). All I know is that you quoted that 4000 accounts were banned that day around 12:30. It only speaks of the 115 that were reinstated but it went on to talk about how so many more were still being reinstated and that it would be some time but within a couple of days it would all be sorted out. So that leads me to believe there were still a fair amount. (Mutual misunderstanding on both our faults for my typo =P)

The fact is that within a very short time a whole crapload of people were banned and at LEAST 115 were accidental/innocent. That's still not the best proof that its all sorted and figured out. I'm not saying that bannings shouldn't happen but saying someone looks like a bot without any real proof just seems... I don't know I would hate to get convicted of a crime I didn't do without any proof. That's just the way it stands in my eyes.
I'm not saying a temp ban on someones account that you think might be guilty is out of question, but that if it comes into question of innocent vs guilty at least go the extra mile to make sure you were correct in your ban in the first place.

Loviatar

Underworld Spelunker

Join Date: Feb 2005

02 Sep 2006 at 22:55 - 208

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eviance

I'm not saying a temp ban on someones account that you think might be guilty is out of question, but that if it comes into question of innocent vs guilty at least go the extra mile to make sure you were correct in your ban in the first place.

did you miss the critical tiny part of that thread where Gaile said the logs would be studied to find out what went wrong and make changes in what flags a bot alert so as many fewer false alerts are made as possible?

they are trying to fix things as best they can without a perfect way to be 100% all the time.

there will be further mistakes and hopefully each mistake will lead to a better anti bot system in the future.

we can only hope cant we?

Eviance

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Nov 2005

Eh I forget... o_O

Biscuit of Dewm [MEEP]

R/

02 Sep 2006 at 23:02 - 209

aww hun I wasn't bitching at that point I was re-clearifying - it's been a long day did I fail? -_-

(I'm gonna go crawl in a hole somewhere and avoid posting till my brain is straight)

Loviatar

Underworld Spelunker

Join Date: Feb 2005

02 Sep 2006 at 23:06 - 210

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eviance

aww hun I wasn't bitching at that point I was re-clearifying - it's been a long day did I fail? -_-

(I'm gonna go crawl in a hole somewhere and avoid posting till my brain is straight)

hangs head

it was only a small part of it and easy to miss so i thought if you missed it you could know that they are making adjustments.

information not criticism was intended

Eviance

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Nov 2005

Eh I forget... o_O

Biscuit of Dewm [MEEP]

R/

02 Sep 2006 at 23:26 - 211

LOL come on I am sure there is a hole for both of us somewhere. *hugs* no harm hun - its just been a REALLY long day for me (that and I still can't play GW cause of err7s) so I'm a bit testy -_- I just wanted to make sure that you too realized I hadn't missed it. (I think I am going to sleep before I kill my husband >_>) Laters!

wilderness

tinyurl.com/6hqar7a

Join Date: Mar 2006

We Couldn't Figure Out A Name [LMAO]

W/N

02 Sep 2006 at 23:30 - 212

Well, ty all for your responses/support.

And ty Gaile for your response/reasurrence. Not sure if you had anything to do with my account finally being unlocked this afternoon, if so, thank you greatly.

I just wish they had a better system in place for dealing with these situations. The way this was handled was hardly professional. While I do appreciate there must be a large amount of these cases at any one time, it was still a frustrating experience.

Also, I was never told exactly what it was that got me banned. Let's just hope I manage to avoid doing whatever it was from now on :/

sindex

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Aug 2006

California

Swords of Night & Day [SWRD]

02 Sep 2006 at 23:58 - 213

So I see the politics here; running with the whole idea of majority over minority. The little guy can be, stepped on without repercussions what so ever (stating “we don’t cater to individuals even if they are paying customers”). So if lets say, so many people get banned by A-net (a thousand or so) in six months, and about 2/3 are innocent (because they fit your so called “pattern”); that’s not going to lead to any repercussions what so ever? Unfortunately that blindness is going to land that company in the cross-hairs of so many Lawsuits (your head will spin).

cosyfiep

are we there yet?

Join Date: Dec 2005

in a land far far away

guild? I am supposed to have a guild?

Rt/

02 Sep 2006 at 23:59 - 214

.......and lets hope that the next person who gets the ax doesnt have to wait as long as you did, wilderness, to get it straightened out.
happy playing!

Immaculata Regina

Ascalonian Squire

Join Date: Jun 2006

Netherlands

DVDF

W/

03 Sep 2006 at 00:03 - 215

Congratulations on finally getting your account back.
I've been following this thread with some concern and I'm glad there seems to be a happy end after all. Now let's hope history won't repeat itself.

VitisVinifera

Banned

Join Date: Nov 2005

Northern California

HoTR

N/Me

03 Sep 2006 at 01:24 - 216

Quote:

Originally Posted by wilderness

And ty Gaile for your response/reasurrence. Not sure if you had anything to do with my account finally being unlocked this afternoon, if so, thank you greatly. :/

I personally am VERY happy to hear this. I've followed this thread and just thought, if it could be you then it could be me. It just really sucks what you had to put up with to get it back. For all that they do owe you a personal (and public) apology. I have a feeling it was Gaile's intervention, because the rank and file of anerf support has been largely incompetent in a wide variety of matters.

Gaile Gray

ArenaNet

Join Date: Feb 2005

03 Sep 2006 at 01:43 - 217

Let me just speak to the whole "wrongfully banned" issue. Yes, I pointed to this thread (from Germany, as I recall) and today, but our Support Team is the one that made the reinstatement and they should get full credit for that.

However...

As time moves on, and we ban people, we will always have a number who protest their innocence and claim that no, they were not a bot, they didn't know what a bot was, couldn't recall every putting the letters b, o and t together in a single word, and so forth.

And I joke, but it's true. We get protests, and we have to hold the line at some point. We have to say "Yes, you're claiming that you're not a bot, but dear heavens, the evidence is overwhelming. No human would play as you have." And we will look again at the 20+ parameters, and we will say "Well, sure, he/she is protesting, but there's just no way that that isn't a botting account."

In that instance, we'll hold tight. We'll say, and this is 100% true, that protests of innocence do not equal innocence. I read somewhere "Well, if they write to protest they obviously are not a bot!" Oh please, read that! "I protested that speeding ticket, obviously I was not going too fast!" We have people protest every day, and our good Support folk have to, as I said, hold the line so that the entire system does not crumble. They carefully review and yes, they occasionally reverse a decision, but never unthinkingly and never with trivial evidence.

So wilderness is back in his account, but I'm not going to--none of us are going to--bow and scrape and apologize to the community as a whole for taking action that is, ultimately, good for the game. Am I sorry that wilderness was blocked? Of course! Do I apologize for the process, or suggest that we amend it to the point where the parameters are so hard to hit that a thousand bots a day get by with their nefarious deeds? No. I don't think you want that, and I don't think wilderness wants that. Bot bannings are important and should be supported, as players should be supported and reinstated in the rare instances when they are inadventently caught in a bot sweep.

wilderness: Play on, and get better soon.

sindex

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Aug 2006

California

Swords of Night & Day [SWRD]

03 Sep 2006 at 02:08 - 218

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loviatar

your assumptions that most banned accounts are innocent rather than a few that get mixed in with a bunch of bots to start with.

secondly yout almost worshipful impression of lawsuits.

since NCsoft (Anets owner) has been doing online games for years with a standard policy where are all the lawsuits you speak of that should have popped up over the years?

You should have left out that "t" in "you" (just pulling your chain). Secondly you have to bring up the “Lawsuit” word if you are going to get anything done. I see way to many people sit back and let corporation walk all over them, because of them being passive aggressive. No one wants to take legal action, because (to them) it takes up way to much time and effort. Especially this generation basically stating, “you can hit me like piñata even though I pay you”. Third of all A-net has yet to ring in the big bucks in the past years, until now. It’s usually when the size of the company gets bigger; certain things follow (i.e. Greed, Fraud, Detachment from their consumers, and etc.). Look at EA games when they started out, they probably cared for public opinion, now look at them (they could care less for the people and care more for annual profits).

Listen I agree on the issue that it’s a small number of people being hit by this. However when the numbers start to increase, will they have the same customer satisfaction they had; as going into Guild Wars from the very beginning? We will have to see; but I just hope that certain people are not targeted, only by this so called “pattern” and relies there are innocent bystanders out there. Basically it boils down to that: "do they do learn from their mistakes?" Finally I do realize there are some rather evil people out there, which will take advantage of a good thing. I blame those people for causing the security issues to be enforced in the first place.

ubermancer

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jul 2005

******************* Refuge From Exile [RFE]

03 Sep 2006 at 08:01 - 219

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

I know absolutely nothing about such a lawsuit, and I know that I receive emails daily with lists of banned bots for Guild Wars. Could you please provide specific information about this alleged lawsuit? Excuse my skepticism, but I've seen too many such statements that are nothing more than fabrication.

You, the PR voice of your company, knows nothing about a HUNDRED MILLION DOLLAR CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT against your parent company? Excuse my disbelief, but that kinda seems like the sort of thing you should be aware of. Allow me to enlighten you:

http://www.player2player.net/index.p...article&sid=91

http://loudopinions.com/forums/index...=0&#entry34006

Heres a choice snippet:

Quote:

Lin states that when he started to work for the company last year, he banned every bot that was petitioned (when a players sees a bot, they have the ability to petition a GameMaster online to remove the bot) but was quickly told by the Head GameMaster (HGM) to cease with his activities. In the ensuing 9 months of his employment he was only able to terminate nine (9) accounts for botting (the process of running a bot in-game). He states that he received in excess of 2000 petitions related to botting from characters but was instructed to only investigate the petitions and not to terminate any accounts.

In Lin’s affidavit, he states “NC made it clear to me that they didn’t want to ban the bots because it would mean lost revenue for them. I think that the bots make up anywhere from 30 to 40% of the community. So banning the bots would result in a 40% decrease in revenue. Everybody knew this, and accepted it.”

tASE

Academy Page

Join Date: Aug 2006

IAmCanadian

Heaven's Covenant

W/Mo

03 Sep 2006 at 08:42 - 220

When i read the article about that lawsuit, i realised how much the people at the computer that hit "BAN" button on your account don't realise how much time and effort and TIME you have passed in the game, even if those are virtual objects, virtual money, virtual level, it's NOT virtual time, nor virtual MONEY that you spend on buying the game and playing it.

They should think twice when hitting that BAN or DELETE key, put themselfs in the place of the user thats going to login one morning and see that his account has been banned, all his time and efforts wasted, double, triple check the reasons, ESPCIALLY if it's eye-witness or third-party report of a breach, because those people can't be 100% sure, they can think hes using a bot because hes moving in particular manner (Select+Space on a NPC activates a trace route code commonly seen in bots, but is 100% legit, but still can be taken as being a bot code route) or have a personal grudge against that player (yeayea hey, everyone has them, you don't like how they talk, how they act, any reason can make you dislike them).

Sure there are those dirty people that download a 3rd application that are against the rules, but they should investigate more, instead of "/info" "/ban userid ####" or however they do it (example taken out of WoW GM command lines) to ban someone...damn it's late im going to bed

bigwig

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Oct 2005

Nova Scotia

#Dismantle

03 Sep 2006 at 09:03 - 221

Quote:

Originally Posted by ubermancer

You, the PR voice of your company, knows nothing about a HUNDRED MILLION DOLLAR CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT against your parent company? Excuse my disbelief, but that kinda seems like the sort of thing you should be aware of. Allow me to enlighten you:

http://www.player2player.net/index.p...article&sid=91

http://loudopinions.com/forums/index...=0&#entry34006

Heres a choice snippet:

She's a community rep for arenanet, not a lawyer for ncsoft. wtf would she know about a nuisance lawsuit from some greedy nerd?

Demesis

Banned

Join Date: May 2006

03 Sep 2006 at 10:00 - 222

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigwig

She's a community rep for arenanet, not a lawyer for ncsoft. wtf would she know about a nuisance lawsuit from some greedy nerd?

He's not a greedy nerd. He had a valid reason to issue the lawsuit. Here's the important parts, if you missed them:

Quote:

His credit card continued to be charged for additional months even though he could not play. Refunds for the additional charges were not refunded as well. The suit claims that NCSOFT’s action surrounding it’s credit card charging process constitutes fraud.

Quote:

Lin’s account of banning players detailed, “Anytime a player started making too much noise about botting or anything like that we banned them. I thought it was unfair but that’s what we were told to do. No player was allowed to talk about bots in the forums, or name a person that was botting. When a player always petitioned us, we would call them a “pet” and sometimes we banned them because they would rally other players to petition us about bots. We really couldn’t have that.”

Quote:

Over eighteen (18) pages containing (211) signatures from players whose accounts have been terminated, received credit card charges, no refunds, and no explanations was entered in support of the Plaintiff’s motion seeking Class Action status.

Quote:

153 Articles of Evidence were entered with the lawsuit showing in detail that NCSOFT was fully aware that these bots were prevalent within the Lineage 2 game. Records of the Lineage2 forum site were provided showing how the company censors and deletes any topics/threads/posts related to the discussion of bots within the game’s environment. Some articles even detail how an internal NCSOFT employee used a bot, to level their own character.

bigwig

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Oct 2005

Nova Scotia

#Dismantle

03 Sep 2006 at 11:13 - 223

Ok this is really off topic so this is all i'll say about it, but lets not believe everything some guy on the internet says shall we? Suing for 100 million dollars, and the guy is personally out maybe what, 50 or 60 bucks?

ubermancer

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jul 2005

******************* Refuge From Exile [RFE]

03 Sep 2006 at 11:35 - 224

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigwig

She's a community rep for arenanet, not a lawyer for ncsoft. wtf would she know about a nuisance lawsuit from some greedy nerd?

Okay, again. She is a PR rep. Her parent company is facing a 100 million dollar class action lawsuit (thats ~2 million GW accounts, btw)... and your asking why she would be aware of this?

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigwig

Ok this is really off topic so this is all i'll say about it, but lets not believe everything some guy on the internet says shall we? Suing for 100 million dollars, and the guy is personally out maybe what, 50 or 60 bucks?

I dont think that a lawsuit against ANet's parent company regarding their poor handling of botting and banning in another game is offtopic when we are talking about ANets poor handling of botting and banning.

Also, do you even know how a class action lawsuit works? Substantial legal fees aside, that money is going to be split more then 200 ways. Also, in such lawsuits you always ask for more then what you think you will be awarded (the judge could choose to award them 3 million, for example).

But the real point of the whole process is to force NCSoft to change their policies, because (if I remember, its late early now) if it is found that the claims made in the class action lawsuit are true, and NC Soft does not correct them, it can then be treated like a criminal matter. (and to be honest, closing someones account then continuing to charge their credit card either is illegal, or should be - same as those mail-in rebate offers that companies make sure *NEVER* get to you)

bigwig

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Oct 2005

Nova Scotia

#Dismantle

03 Sep 2006 at 12:04 - 225

Quote:

Originally Posted by ubermancer

Okay, again. She is a PR rep. Her parent company is facing a 100 million dollar class action lawsuit (thats ~2 million GW accounts, btw)... and your asking why she would be aware of this?

I know what a class action lawsuit is, do you know what a community rep is? Because its not a PR person. She doesn't work for ncsoft. Let ncsofts PR people take care of this. A PR person for kfc doesn't handle PR for pizza hut, but they're owned by the same company. All of which is irrelevent since gailes job is community rep. Yeah sure, similar, but not the same. I doubt she speaks to ncsoft much, and i doubt they choose to send her memo's about every frivolous lawsuit.

Quote:

I dont think that a lawsuit against ANet's parent company regarding their poor handling of botting and banning in another game is offtopic when we are talking about ANets poor handling of botting and banning.

Also, do you even know how a class action lawsuit works? Substantial legal fees aside, that money is going to be split more then 200 ways. Also, in such lawsuits you always ask for more then what you think you will be awarded (the judge could choose to award them 3 million, for example).

But the real point of the whole process is to force NCSoft to change their policies, because (if I remember, its late early now) if it is found that the claims made in the class action lawsuit are true, and NC Soft does not correct them, it can then be treated like a criminal matter. (and to be honest, closing someones account then continuing to charge their credit card either is illegal, or should be - same as those mail-in rebate offers that companies make sure *NEVER* get to you)

The lawsuit in question is filled with absurdity, conspiracy theories and will most likely be dismissed. It is not a class action lawsuit, yet. The amount of money this guy lost could be sought after in *small claims court*.

And by off topic i meant, gaile greys knowledge of this lawsuit.

unholy guardian

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Mar 2006

Lost Haven

A/Mo

03 Sep 2006 at 20:37 - 226

Quote:

Originally Posted by ubermancer

You, the PR voice of your company, knows nothing about a HUNDRED MILLION DOLLAR CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT against your parent company? Excuse my disbelief, but that kinda seems like the sort of thing you should be aware of. Allow me to enlighten you:

http://www.player2player.net/index.p...article&sid=91

http://loudopinions.com/forums/index...=0&#entry34006

Heres a choice snippet:

revenege of the nerds lol jk seriously jk'ing

It's pretty bad when you relize you ban people who are complaining about bots but don't ban the bots.

unholy guardian

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Mar 2006

Lost Haven

A/Mo

03 Sep 2006 at 20:38 - 227

double post sorry, didn't know it went through the first time >_>

Andisa Kalorn

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jul 2006

[PMS]

03 Sep 2006 at 22:24 - 228

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

The parallel is: paralyzing a police force by telling them that if any arrested individuals are found innocent at trial, then all criminals must be left unarrested in the event that one is accused inaccurately. That way leads to madness.

I hardly see how this analogy can be applied to botting in an online game. Criminals in the real world are capable of stealing my money, causing me physical harm, or even killing me. Bots in an online game? They can do none of this. In fact, they hardly affect me at all. I mostly use collector/crafter items, salvaging materials and crafting armor doesn't require interaction with the game's "economy" at all. The only way bots would affect me was if I was trying to get some unneccessary luxury item. Really, HOW can this compare to criminals in real life?

The reason why we accept that innocents may be caught up in the justice system is that crime is capable of so much harm to our society. Bots are just not on the same level. Not even close. And let's not forget that in our criminal justice system, you are allowed to SEE the parameters that could lead to arrest, and you are presented with the evidence that the authorities have found.

So why should Anet's system be so harsh given that the issue is of LESS consequence than crime, and that the "checks and balances" are nowhere near as comprehensive as in the criminal justice system?

Sorry but this analogy is a bad argument. I still see no reason why Anet should use parameters that WILL result in false bannings. Bots don't hurt me. False bannings do.

Loviatar

Underworld Spelunker

Join Date: Feb 2005

04 Sep 2006 at 00:50 - 229

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andisa Kalorn

Sorry but this analogy is a bad argument. I still see no reason why Anet should use parameters that WILL result in false bannings. Bots don't hurt me. False bannings do.

just because you are one of a minority who isnt affected by the economy crashing does not mean that most players are unaffected by botting screwing the economy.

there are no workable parameters that will be guaranteed to only catch bots without the few bot look alikes getting caught as well

also for some reason most players want the bots gone as well

Andisa Kalorn

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jul 2006

[PMS]

04 Sep 2006 at 00:54 - 230

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loviatar

just because you are one of a minority who isnt affected by the economy crashing does not mean that most players are unaffected by botting screwing the economy.

I am affected by bots, as I do occasionally like to buy those luxury items. My point those is that they don't really HURT me. Not like, say, getting mugged. I can still play the game. I don't like bots around, but comparing them to criminals is just a little too much.

Loviatar

Underworld Spelunker

Join Date: Feb 2005

04 Sep 2006 at 01:11 - 231

[QUOTE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andisa Kalorn

I am affected by bots, as I do occasionally like to buy those luxury items. My point those is that they don't really HURT me. Not like, say, getting mugged. I can still play the game. I don't like bots around, but comparing them to criminals is just a little too much.[/QUOTE]

that is where the misunderstanding occurred.

she was not comparing bots to criminals

she was comparing the standard needed to guarantee that no person who acted in all respects like a bot would ever be tagged no matter what

Gaile was stating that the equivalent guarantee of no arrest of an innocent person ever under any circumstances would prevent virtually all arrests of guilty people as well.

sgtclarity

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jul 2005

I Can Break These C[uffs]

W/

04 Sep 2006 at 01:15 - 232

I won't comment on your case personally due to me being conservative. I can't and won't say who's wrong or right.
What I will say is that if indeed your case is sincere, I fully agree. ANet has a disgusting track record of this kind of crap. I mean, YES it's nice that they are actively getting rid of botters, but at WHAT cost!?

IMO, I'm content to dealing with chinese farmers than to having players who dedicate much time to this game owned in the face and sent on their way.

In short, revise your RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOing policy ANet, and DO something beneficial.

Andisa Kalorn

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jul 2006

[PMS]

04 Sep 2006 at 02:01 - 233

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loviatar

she was not comparing bots to criminals

she was comparing the standard needed to guarantee that no person who acted in all respects like a bot would ever be tagged no matter what

Gaile was stating that the equivalent guarantee of no arrest of an innocent person ever under any circumstances would prevent virtually all arrests of guilty people as well.

What I understood from her argument is that she was saying it would be madness to tell the police not to arrest anyone because they may be arresting an innocent person. And indeed it would. But it's a far stretch to say this parallels the situation of bot bannings, due to the difference in level of seriousness and the amount of institutional checks to protect the innocent.

Would it really be madness to say that Anet shouldn't ban bots if they can't PROVE it really was a bot? Maybe. I don't know. All I know is that when they announce mass bot bannings nothing really seems to happen to the economy except a short term increase on superior monk rune prices.

If she was just trying to say that they can't ban bots without banning innocent people, I don't see why that would require an analogy with police. Its purpose seems to be to say that those who are against banning innocents are crazy for wanting anet to be more careful (as we wouldn't want the police to be more careful).

But Anet bans on parameters. Isn't that like the police arresting you just on the basis of your credit card activity and your movements? ("Well you looked like you were exhibiting criminal behaviour patterns") They have no proof, they won't even confront you with the evidence, and they apparently make it difficult for an innocent person to appeal the false banning (given wilderness's story).

Sure, the police will arrest people even though they know the person may be innocent. But this DOESN'T explain why Anet can't overhaul their banning policy, given so many stories of innocent bannings. Even if I accept the need to ban bots, that doesn't mean they can't improve their system so that less innocents get banned, and those who are falsely banned aren't treated so badly (because, yes, it will happen if you want to ban bots without solid proof).

luinks

Frost Gate Guardian

Join Date: May 2006

Purple Ravens

Mo/E

04 Sep 2006 at 02:21 - 234

they are doing their work aren't they? they have dozens of parameters to check before hitting the ban button.
this was a minute ago

you can see the patterns clearly after a time

Gaile Gray

ArenaNet

Join Date: Feb 2005

04 Sep 2006 at 02:36 - 235

Quote:

Originally Posted by ubermancer

You, the PR voice of your company, knows nothing about a HUNDRED MILLION DOLLAR CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT against your parent company?

I know that anyone can sue anyone. I also know that simply filing suit doesn't mean they'll win. This one I wasn't aware of, but there are thousands of frivolous lawsuits set forth daily. We'll see how far this progresses. So far, it appears not at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigwig

She's a community rep for arenanet, not a lawyer for ncsoft. wtf would she know about a nuisance lawsuit from some greedy nerd?

Oh, thanks! I couldn't say it quite that way, but...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loviatar

just because you are one of a minority who isnt affected by the economy crashing does not mean that most players are unaffected by botting screwing the economy. there are no workable parameters that will be guaranteed to only catch bots without the few bot look alikes getting caught as well. also for some reason most players want the bots gone as well

Very true. The point I need to make is that I see the ban lists, and we do ban hundreds a week. We are careful, we use care in instances where there may have been an error. But suggesting that we stop bans because someone--out of hundreds--might be put to the inconvenience of seeking a review is wrong. Bots do affect players, and we do intend to keep taking action against them. We use more than 20 parameters, and are as careful as we can be. But we're not going to back off such action because someone worries about that rare account that we need to reset. With regret, that's the collateral damage to making the game better, and as long as we're responsive to and willing to correct the rare mishap, I don't see our processes changing. We will continue to refine the processes, by all means, but the overall intention remains. If you can see bots now, imagine what you would see if we were not active!

Eviance

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Nov 2005

Eh I forget... o_O

Biscuit of Dewm [MEEP]

R/

04 Sep 2006 at 03:13 - 236

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

As time moves on, and we ban people, we will always have a number who protest their innocence and claim that no, they were not a bot, they didn't know what a bot was, couldn't recall every putting the letters b, o and t together in a single word, and so forth.

And I joke, but it's true. We get protests, and we have to hold the line at some point. We have to say "Yes, you're claiming that you're not a bot, but dear heavens, the evidence is overwhelming. No human would play as you have." And we will look again at the 20+ parameters, and we will say "Well, sure, he/she is protesting, but there's just no way that that isn't a botting account."

I'm glad to hear this! This is what I know I personally needed to know as a player and consumer. And I agree that yeah botters will try to get their account unlocked, but I'm willing to bet that "most" of them are single bot runners and not mutiple bot ebay gold farmers.
One of the reasons I had reason to believe wilderness's innocence over others that have been posted was because he didn't cry to heaven about it. He just told people that they might get banned for possibly "looking" like a bot. Even if his post elluded to him wanting a bit of sympathy it was more for what was lost and not him crying about how it was unfair and unjust to the extreme or that he needed a petition or anything. He didn't sound like the typical "OMGZ I LOST MY ACCOUNT LOVE ME AND GET PITCHFORKS AND TORCHES AND BURN ANET!" Maybe I am gullable but *shrugs* I believe in innocence till proven guilt even though I have seen it do more harm than good in instances. The fact that he had faith that you guys would eventually see that he was innocent also helped....

Basically I am glad he can now play on with the rest and I am glad for what Anet does - And lastly I am VERY pleased to see that GMs will go out of their way to be of service if you poke at them long enough >_> (as frustrating as it is).

Congrats wilderness!

(I am not even touching that lawsuit thing -_- Unless the gaming company causes my eyes to set fire and hell to freeze over, I think sueing is just silly!)

milias

Grotto Attendant

Join Date: Nov 2005

Defected back to America

Me/E

04 Sep 2006 at 04:30 - 237

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

I know that anyone can sue anyone. I also know that simply filing suit doesn't mean they'll win. This one I wasn't aware of, but there are thousands of frivolous lawsuits set forth daily. We'll see how far this progresses. So far, it appears not at all.Oh, thanks! I couldn't say it quite that way, but...

Please do not comment on this Gaile! For your own sake! Before commenting on this publically at all, check with ANet or NCSoft first! They may have some kind of policy against employees discussing ongoing legal matters!

Just for reference, I believe this is the article.

milan

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Nov 2005

BONE

N/

04 Sep 2006 at 17:28 - 238

It appears that innocent (in the terms of botting) gamers being banned is being played down considerably, if it were simply one or two accounts that were banned in error then yes it was an isolated incident, however though the number is far below the 4000 quoted previously there was a considerable amount of accounts that were banned for no apparent reason.

As for comparing the unwarranted banning of player accounts to police being unable to arrest anyone for fear of being found not guilty at trial I find this to be slightly out of skew, it would be more like bypassing the trial, sentencing to jail time and then later letting them out because there wasn't any evidence against them anyway.

One of my accounts was banned during the festival event, my third account. It farmed a little in tombs (maybe twice a week in barrage groups) never used a third party program, never bought anything outside the game, never sold anything outside of the game and was used rarely. It was aslo created with a valid cd key from a sealed box bought from Game. Used approximately 4 to 5 hours a week. The account was unbanned and to be honest it didn't cause me any real problems, my worry about the whole situation was how on earth was it flagged as a botter?

Stockholm

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Feb 2006

Censored

R/

04 Sep 2006 at 17:51 - 239

Well apperently NC-Soft is having problems in more than the USA.
http://www.whatpc.co.uk/vnunet/news/...lated_articles

Citing an ongoing legal investigation, Crouch was unable to comment on the case in Japan.

Demesis

Banned

Join Date: May 2006

04 Sep 2006 at 22:38 - 240

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stockholm

Well apperently NC-Soft is having problems in more than the USA.
http://www.whatpc.co.uk/vnunet/news/...lated_articles

Citing an ongoing legal investigation, Crouch was unable to comment on the case in Japan.

Goddamit, after reading that I've noticed it's always the Chinese making bots. Sorry if I sound racist, but from my observation, it's always the Chinese making bots, always the Chinese making third party programs, always the Chinese finding some way to manipulate an online game to an unfair advantage. It makes me ashamed to be born as a Chinese myself.