These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Tackling the problem of null-sec ratting bots.

First post
Author
E-2C Hawkeye
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#201 - 2014-05-17 17:38:56 UTC
Sarcasim wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
21%, while a "large chunk", is nowhere close to the 85%+ of all botting that highsec bears responsibility for.

Sorry to dissuade you from whatever "Grr Goons" you were getting warmed up, but the magnifying glass belongs on highsec, and it should stay there.

Caldari space in particular.

So are you guys really that stupid and or short sighted to believe that these bots are ONLY being ran by people that only live in hi-sec?

Really?? You dont think that these bots could be owned and operated by people who reside in null-sec/low-sec??

You forum trolls NEVER cease to amaze with how dumb you think the rest of the community is or with how stupid you make yourselves sound.

LMAO # WRECKED
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#202 - 2014-05-17 17:44:44 UTC
admiral root wrote:
Sarcasim wrote:
Really?? You dont think that these bots could be owned and operated by people who reside in null-sec/low-sec??


They could be owned and operated by unicorns, too.


Couldn't resist ....

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#203 - 2014-05-17 17:46:44 UTC
Xavier Higdon wrote:
La Nariz wrote:

Its because that's what you are you might try to be in denial now but, denial is the first step so that's an okay thing. You seem to think that advocating for using resources efficiently = supporting nullsec botting and that is not the case. The bit of goonspiracy you spewed basically ruins all credibility you have of being objectively against botting. Using your own logic you are pro-making it easier to bot in highsec. The area that has the most bots and remember this isn't an asteroid belt the resources CCP used to handle bots don't magically respawn at downtime so they have to use them efficiently.

Everyone in this thread agrees that bots are bad.

The answers to literally all of your questions are one of three things, your own goonspiratic bias, limited resources, and/or maximum efficiency.


You're still not saying where you see a goonspiracy in my belief that botting should be targeted everywhere. Why should CCP target most of the bots in high sec, some of the bots in low sec, a few of the bots in null sec and a couple of the bots in wormholes instead of targeting all of the bots in New Eden? That is neither efficient, nor sensible since it would promote botting in the areas of least enforcement. If they're getting caught in high sec, they're not going to stay in high sec. And actually, their resources might be limited but they aren't necessarily finite. CCP doesn't only have 12 GB of bandwidth to dedicate to finding bots, nor do they have only 5 minutes to spend finding them. Every day, the team members can wake up, go to work, and their work day has "respawned" just like an asteroid belt. With your method, their resources would be even more limited, since the moment a botter moves from high sec to null sec you want them to stop chasing them and refocus their attention on another bot in high sec if they've already spent 10% of the day working on a bot in null.

What happens if it would take 20% of their day to prove someone is botting in null? Should they only half punish them? Or should they just forgive them and punish a random high sec player instead? It's worse in high sec after all.

Now please, quote my goonspiracies so I can be discredited. Stop just claiming that I'm a part of some goonspiracy and prove it. Or is my participation in the goonspiracy some kind of highsecspiracy that you're spouting?


I've already said it before, you refer to a "certain alliance," goonspiracy at its finest. 100 units to spend combating botting (70:10:10:10) (high:low:null:wh) number of bots in each sec area (7000:1000:1000:1000). Hmm would it be better to spend the same amount in each area and allow more bots to exist or spend proportional to each area and ensure the most amount of bots get handled. Again you seem to think that efficiently using resources = supporting nullsec botting.

Goonspiratic bias, limited resources, and/or maximum efficiency.

Answer this question for me, does CCP have infinite resources?

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#204 - 2014-05-17 17:51:52 UTC
Sarcasim wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
21%, while a "large chunk", is nowhere close to the 85%+ of all botting that highsec bears responsibility for.

Sorry to dissuade you from whatever "Grr Goons" you were getting warmed up, but the magnifying glass belongs on highsec, and it should stay there.

Caldari space in particular.

So are you guys really that stupid and or short sighted to believe that these bots are ONLY being ran by people that only live in hi-sec?

Really?? You dont think that these bots could be owned and operated by people who reside in null-sec/low-sec??

You forum trolls NEVER cease to amaze with how dumb you think the rest of the community is or with how stupid you make yourselves sound.


Scope posting at it's finest.

Oh, and I don't care where the main of the botter lives. I care where the bot itself does it's thing. And repeat after me, most bots are found in highsec.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#205 - 2014-05-17 17:53:45 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
admiral root wrote:
Sarcasim wrote:
Really?? You dont think that these bots could be owned and operated by people who reside in null-sec/low-sec??


They could be owned and operated by unicorns, too.


Couldn't resist ....


I raise you with this
Sarcasim
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#206 - 2014-05-17 17:53:52 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:
La Nariz wrote:

Its because that's what you are you might try to be in denial now but, denial is the first step so that's an okay thing. You seem to think that advocating for using resources efficiently = supporting nullsec botting and that is not the case. The bit of goonspiracy you spewed basically ruins all credibility you have of being objectively against botting. Using your own logic you are pro-making it easier to bot in highsec. The area that has the most bots and remember this isn't an asteroid belt the resources CCP used to handle bots don't magically respawn at downtime so they have to use them efficiently.

Everyone in this thread agrees that bots are bad.

The answers to literally all of your questions are one of three things, your own goonspiratic bias, limited resources, and/or maximum efficiency.


You're still not saying where you see a goonspiracy in my belief that botting should be targeted everywhere. Why should CCP target most of the bots in high sec, some of the bots in low sec, a few of the bots in null sec and a couple of the bots in wormholes instead of targeting all of the bots in New Eden? That is neither efficient, nor sensible since it would promote botting in the areas of least enforcement. If they're getting caught in high sec, they're not going to stay in high sec. And actually, their resources might be limited but they aren't necessarily finite. CCP doesn't only have 12 GB of bandwidth to dedicate to finding bots, nor do they have only 5 minutes to spend finding them. Every day, the team members can wake up, go to work, and their work day has "respawned" just like an asteroid belt. With your method, their resources would be even more limited, since the moment a botter moves from high sec to null sec you want them to stop chasing them and refocus their attention on another bot in high sec if they've already spent 10% of the day working on a bot in null.

What happens if it would take 20% of their day to prove someone is botting in null? Should they only half punish them? Or should they just forgive them and punish a random high sec player instead? It's worse in high sec after all.

Now please, quote my goonspiracies so I can be discredited. Stop just claiming that I'm a part of some goonspiracy and prove it. Or is my participation in the goonspiracy some kind of highsecspiracy that you're spouting?


I've already said it before, you refer to a "certain alliance," goonspiracy at its finest. 100 units to spend combating botting (70:10:10:10) (high:low:null:wh) number of bots in each sec area (7000:1000:1000:1000). Hmm would it be better to spend the same amount in each area and allow more bots to exist or spend proportional to each area and ensure the most amount of bots get handled. Again you seem to think that efficiently using resources = supporting nullsec botting.

Goonspiratic bias, limited resources, and/or maximum efficiency.

Answer this question for me, does CCP have infinite resources?

What you refuse to see, because it is past your own nose, is he is suggesting that instead of making it based off space to make it based off players and those players already caught botting and where they are from and whom they align with and what alts they have or had and where that botting money gets sent.

Make it player profiled not base it off the demographics.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#207 - 2014-05-17 17:56:22 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
admiral root wrote:
Sarcasim wrote:
Really?? You dont think that these bots could be owned and operated by people who reside in null-sec/low-sec??


They could be owned and operated by unicorns, too.


Couldn't resist ....


I raise you with this

Well played Sir, well played indeed.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

admiral root
Red Galaxy
#208 - 2014-05-17 17:56:24 UTC
Sarcasim wrote:
he is suggesting that instead of making it based off space to make it based off players and those players already caught botting and where they are from and whom they align with and what alts they have or had and where that botting money gets sent.

Make it player profiled not base it off the demographics.


Ok, say CCP do that. How will you be moving the goalposts when it turns out they're still primarily highsec carebears in NPC corps?

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff

Sarcasim
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#209 - 2014-05-17 18:01:57 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Sarcasim wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
21%, while a "large chunk", is nowhere close to the 85%+ of all botting that highsec bears responsibility for.

Sorry to dissuade you from whatever "Grr Goons" you were getting warmed up, but the magnifying glass belongs on highsec, and it should stay there.

Caldari space in particular.

So are you guys really that stupid and or short sighted to believe that these bots are ONLY being ran by people that only live in hi-sec?

Really?? You dont think that these bots could be owned and operated by people who reside in null-sec/low-sec??

You forum trolls NEVER cease to amaze with how dumb you think the rest of the community is or with how stupid you make yourselves sound.


Scope posting at it's finest.

Oh, and I don't care where the main of the botter lives. I care where the bot itself does it's thing. And repeat after me, most bots are found in highsec.


I have been accepted into BNI 7o please feel free to look for me there. I am moving my stuff around to avoid the wardecs. Once home I will accept my invintation.

If you dont care where the main botter lives then why imply its hi-sec people doing the botting?

Because you guys are blinded by your own stupidity and hate you want others to jump on your kill hi-sec bandwagon and cant admit botting is a global problem that could be ran by any player from any where in the game.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#210 - 2014-05-17 18:03:03 UTC
Sarcasim wrote:

What you refuse to see, because it is past your own nose, is he is suggesting that instead of making it based off space to make it based off players and those players already caught botting and where they are from and whom they align with and what alts they have or had and where that botting money gets sent.

Make it player profiled not base it off the demographics.


So basically do guilt by association, what a good idea. That certainly wouldn't promote behaviors we should avoid, like people using garbage accounts to bot and implicate people they don't like.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133

Dave Stark
#211 - 2014-05-17 18:03:14 UTC
Sarcasim wrote:
If you dont care where the main botter lives then why imply its hi-sec people doing the botting?


because if you spend all your time in high sec botting, you live in high sec.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#212 - 2014-05-17 18:07:29 UTC
Sarcasim wrote:

I have been accepted into BNI 7o please feel free to look for me there. I am moving my stuff around to avoid the wardecs. Once home I will accept my invintation.

If you dont care where the main botter lives then why imply its hi-sec people doing the botting?

Because you guys are blinded by your own stupidity and hate you want others to jump on your kill hi-sec bandwagon and cant admit botting is a global problem that could be ran by any player from any where in the game.


The facts show the most boting occurs in highsec so focusing the most anti-boting resources in highsec makes sense to have the best effect combating boting.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#213 - 2014-05-17 18:07:36 UTC
Incidently, if we all watch the team security video we can see that at 34:19 we see where the mining bots live. Shock horror it turns out that the bulk are in high sec and a big old chunck of that is in caldari space.

Fast forward to combat bots shown at 34:47 and we see that the vast bulk of the bots are....in highsec again, with a big chunk in Caldari space.

Finally if we look at isk buyers at 35:01 we see that the vast bulk have been caught and banned in... highsec again, mostly in caldari space...


But wait there's more!

Now we all know that the ship of choice for doing ratting in null is the ever popular Ishtar. So lets see how many bot ratters got caught in the most popular ship by far to rat in.

Yep, 30...

Xavier Higdon
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#214 - 2014-05-17 18:08:55 UTC
La Nariz wrote:

I've already said it before, you refer to a "certain alliance," goonspiracy at its finest. 100 units to spend combating botting (70:10:10:10) (high:low:null:wh) number of bots in each sec area (7000:1000:1000:1000). Hmm would it be better to spend the same amount in each area and allow more bots to exist or spend proportional to each area and ensure the most amount of bots get handled. Again you seem to think that efficiently using resources = supporting nullsec botting.

Goonspiratic bias, limited resources, and/or maximum efficiency.

Answer this question for me, does CCP have infinite resources?


I'm not making up that a "certain alliance" is responsible for 21% of all banned bots. How is it a conspiracy to quote CCP's security presentation? You're seeing things that just don't exist. You think blue doughnut is a code word for "bring down the goons because I hate them for their success, and because I'm ignorant, and because I'm a strong believer in factionalism!" You think quoting CCP regarding the fact that 21% of all bots came from ONE ALLIANCE is super secret level 8 illuminati free mason christophoro columbo secret society 55th degree there are pentagrams in the streets of Washington DC! code for "goons." You're the one with conspiracies, not me.

Second, if CCP has 100 units to spend combating botting, they should spend it like so: 100.... That's it, real simple. They should spend 100% of their anti-botting resources combating botting, no matter where it occurs. In your example CCP could be expected to catch* 4900 bots in high sec, but only 100 bots each in low, null and wormholes. That means 4,800 bots get away with their activity, 900 bots go scot-free in null, 900 more in low and another 900 in wormhole space all because you don't want CCP fighting botting there as much as they fight it in high sec. How is that more efficient than making sure bots everywhere get caught and punished?

No, CCP does not have infinite resources, just like nobody else has infinite resources, but what does that have to do with your desire to police high sec more strictly than policing null sec? You want 90% of all bots outside of high sec to be left alone, and 70% of all bots in high sec to be punished. Why do you want null sec to have a more open and accepting environment for bots? Why do you not want bots everywhere to be punished fully and equally?

*Statistics based on the assumption that CCP employees have 100% efficiency and 100% accuracy in their efforts on detecting, proving and then punishing bots. Since this is unlikely, the concentration of resources being so heavily targeted on high sec would likely lead to fewer than the estimated numbers of bots being caught. Nobody is perfect, after all, and we cannot expect that the bot owners would make it easy for CCP. It can be expected that upon realization that less than 10% of all bots in null sec are being caught, botters would move there and we would see a huge drop in bots being banned, while seeing a huge increase in the actual number of bots being used.
Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#215 - 2014-05-17 18:11:27 UTC
Sarcasim wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
21%, while a "large chunk", is nowhere close to the 85%+ of all botting that highsec bears responsibility for.

Sorry to dissuade you from whatever "Grr Goons" you were getting warmed up, but the magnifying glass belongs on highsec, and it should stay there.

Caldari space in particular.

So are you guys really that stupid and or short sighted to believe that these bots are ONLY being ran by people that only live in hi-sec?

Really?? You dont think that these bots could be owned and operated by people who reside in null-sec/low-sec??

You forum trolls NEVER cease to amaze with how dumb you think the rest of the community is or with how stupid you make yourselves sound.


yeah .. they are so heavily into the 'nerf hi-sec' doctrine espoused by large nul-bloc cartels, that referencing simple evidence like 6 titans being impounded is quickly ignored and marginalised by them as a counter argument.


because 6 titans being impounded by CCP says that some members of those cartels ARE making use of RMT or Botting
the presentation disproves their stance that botting/rmt is a predominantly hi-sec activity
because titans are not a hi-sec asset

the presentation also shows that bot-mining is a much smaller percentage of the rmt/bot problem than they have always maintained, from a quick glance of the accounts banned column ratting has a 4x ratio higher than mining for bot activity

I looked at the heat-map .. only Jove Space is free from botting or rmt activity.

ccp has released some facts and figures
most of which disagree with the statements made over the last 18 months by the mouth-pieces of the nul-block cartels with regards to hi-sec, mining, missions, incursions and rmt/botting
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#216 - 2014-05-17 18:11:49 UTC
Sarcasim wrote:


I have been accepted into BNI 7o please feel free to look for me there. I am moving my stuff around to avoid the wardecs. Once home I will accept my invintation.


Congrats, I suppose?

Quote:


If you dont care where the main botter lives then why imply its hi-sec people doing the botting?

Because you guys are blinded by your own stupidity and hate you want others to jump on your kill hi-sec bandwagon and cant admit botting is a global problem that could be ran by any player from any where in the game.


Because it is highsec people doing most of the botting.

Separate the person behind the screen with the character. The vast majority of bots are highsec characters. This is the fault of the existence of highsec in the first place, from non consensual PvP being too highly discouraged in recent years. I'd wager if they were to admit it, CCP would tell us that botting has taken a sharp rise every time they have buffed Concord or nerfed ganking/can flipping.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Sarcasim
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#217 - 2014-05-17 18:11:59 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Sarcasim wrote:
If you dont care where the main botter lives then why imply its hi-sec people doing the botting?


because if you spend all your time in high sec botting, you live in high sec.

So I have several alts in null...some in low and a couple in hi-sec. Where do I live? What does that make me? A null bear? A care bear?? A pirate maybe?

No.......it makes me an Eve player.

However; you kids please do carry on with your childish finger pointing and blame game and lame attempts at demonizing a area of space because they dont play the game the way YOU think they should.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#218 - 2014-05-17 18:12:27 UTC  |  Edited by: La Nariz
Xavier Higdon wrote:
I'm not making up that a "certain alliance" is responsible for 21% of all banned bots. How is it a conspiracy to quote CCP's security presentation? You're seeing things that just don't exist. You think blue doughnut is a code word for "bring down the goons because I hate them for their success, and because I'm ignorant, and because I'm a strong believer in factionalism!" You think quoting CCP regarding the fact that 21% of all bots came from ONE ALLIANCE is super secret level 8 illuminati free mason christophoro columbo secret society 55th degree there are pentagrams in the streets of Washington DC! code for "goons." You're the one with conspiracies, not me.

Second, if CCP has 100 units to spend combating botting, they should spend it like so: 100.... That's it, real simple. They should spend 100% of their anti-botting resources combating botting, no matter where it occurs. In your example CCP could be expected to catch* 4900 bots in high sec, but only 100 bots each in low, null and wormholes. That means 4,800 bots get away with their activity, 900 bots go scot-free in null, 900 more in low and another 900 in wormhole space all because you don't want CCP fighting botting there as much as they fight it in high sec. How is that more efficient than making sure bots everywhere get caught and punished?

No, CCP does not have infinite resources, just like nobody else has infinite resources, but what does that have to do with your desire to police high sec more strictly than policing null sec? You want 90% of all bots outside of high sec to be left alone, and 70% of all bots in high sec to be punished. Why do you want null sec to have a more open and accepting environment for bots? Why do you not want bots everywhere to be punished fully and equally?

*Statistics based on the assumption that CCP employees have 100% efficiency and 100% accuracy in their efforts on detecting, proving and then punishing bots. Since this is unlikely, the concentration of resources being so heavily targeted on high sec would likely lead to fewer than the estimated numbers of bots being caught. Nobody is perfect, after all, and we cannot expect that the bot owners would make it easy for CCP. It can be expected that upon realization that less than 10% of all bots in null sec are being caught, botters would move there and we would see a huge drop in bots being banned, while seeing a huge increase in the actual number of bots being used.


Answer my question does CCP have infinite resources?

E: The rest of that post is recycled defecated material answer the only question that matters.

E2: Hint its a yes or no question.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133

Sarcasim
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#219 - 2014-05-17 18:14:08 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Sarcasim wrote:


I have been accepted into BNI 7o please feel free to look for me there. I am moving my stuff around to avoid the wardecs. Once home I will accept my invintation.


Congrats, I suppose?




Your the one that seemed to think it was important as to where this toon resided.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#220 - 2014-05-17 18:15:25 UTC
La Nariz wrote:


The facts show the most boting occurs in highsec so focusing the most anti-boting resources in highsec makes sense to have the best effect combating boting.


I'll say it again. Really slowly for you this time.

It....doesn't...matter...where...they...are.

It's the same program. Effective detection algorithms will find the botters wherever they are. Period.

Stop trying to justify leaving your null bots alone. They all need to go.


Mr Epeen Cool