These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Scarlet Letters and Botters

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
TheButcherPete
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#201 - 2012-03-27 11:32:35 UTC
Name and shame, but then Shadow of xDeath might implode if you do. Still not a bad thing, bots hurt everyone.

[b]THE KING OF EVE RADIO

If EVE is real, does that mean all of us are RMTrs?[/b]
Vaarkk
State War Academy
Caldari State
#202 - 2012-03-27 11:34:49 UTC
I absolutely support scarlet lettering the **** out of bots. We shouldn't make any concessions for their owners if they are breaking the rules.
Othran
Route One
#203 - 2012-03-27 11:35:07 UTC
Camios wrote:
RDevz wrote:
Given the within-account recidivism rate is 8.5%, is this even necessary, except to placate the torches-and-pitchforks-wielding Daily Mail reading crowd?

(Before anyone accuses me of protesting too much, I've never botted)



Yes, 8.5 % is really high, I don't want to have anything to do with such people.


I don't know enough about the MMO market to judge the recidivism rate accurately, however 8.5% does seem high.

Gut feeling for me is if its over 5% then the first strike penalty isn't harsh enough.
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#204 - 2012-03-27 11:48:11 UTC
I really like the idea with the scarlet letter. If something makes me grin maliciously over ten minutes it has to be good.
And I really see no problem with it. The players have been warned, they knew the risk- if they chose to bot nonetheless, they deserve every scarlet letter in the alphabet.

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.
Miliam Brinalle
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#205 - 2012-03-27 11:49:23 UTC
I find this whole scarlet letter thing completely ********. The only way to deal with a botter is permanently banning them and all their other accounts, otherwise botting is still worth the risk.

I suppose the reason it is not done is because botting is so widespread that it would cause a serious problem to the game if all these people were banned, but keeping this bullshit of virtually no consequences for botting is only going to make the problem worse in the long run.

Botting ruins the game for legit players. Give it the importance it deserves.
Klandi
Consortium of stella Technologies
#206 - 2012-03-27 11:50:01 UTC
See Sreegs - I want to DO something about it ..personally

I want the bounty hunter profession to be employed properly. Their task is to collect bounties and to kill bots.

I envisage the bounty hunter would either observe or receive reports of observations of botting like behaviour, register the target with your dept. The offender would be contacted (in all languages) that he has been flagged a botter and after 3 days - bounty hunter is free to engage (with no repercussions). Should a mistake be made (as is possible) the target can recieve his goods back.

I also believe if they are in this profession, they should be able to operate in all-secs with CONCORD/DED approval.

I am aware of my own ignorance and have checked my emotional quotient - thanks for asking
Dracoth Simertet
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
#207 - 2012-03-27 11:50:36 UTC
Name and shame, anything that puts a bump in the road for botters is a good thing.

o7
Drac
Gempei
Marvinovi pratele
#208 - 2012-03-27 11:53:02 UTC
after banning account:
1. 30 day "shame" tag visible for all player
2. after 30 day warning for CEO when player step into corporation
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#209 - 2012-03-27 11:56:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Kidd
Scarlet letters

What is CCP's intent? To deter botters and retain customers? Or to deter botters and run people out of the game?

We can say without a doubt that there are two classes of botters: the professionals and the casual. One cannot be rehabilitated. The other might. The professional won't care. They'll just create new accounts. The latter might care. Such a tactic would only be ineffectual on the former and most likely alienate from the game, the latter.

Scarlet letters do one thing well, create a discriminatory class of people in whatever context such tactics are used. Lets face it, people love to discriminate against someone else. Who doesn't enjoy the feeling of superiority and the ability to mock, badger, harass & defame someone else with complete impunity? As a point of history, it has worked well to enable such behavior. I need not cite references to anyone that has been alive at any time since the 1930's although as exampled a star of David, not a scarlet letter was used.

So, Sreegs, what is CCP's intent?

Marking botters as botters will have zero effect on the professionals who are running +20 accounts, recycling and discarding tunes as a routine course of business. Which ones affect CCP's bottom line the most?

Don't ban me, bro!
hermot
The No One Cares Corp
#210 - 2012-03-27 12:01:01 UTC
Mr Kidd wrote:
Scarlet letters

What is CCP's intent? To deter botters and retain customers? Or to deter botters and run people out of the game?

We can say without a doubt that there are two classes of botters: the professionals and the casual. One cannot be rehabilitated. The other might. The professional won't care. They'll just create new accounts. The latter might care. Such a tactic would only be ineffectual on the former and most likely alienate from the game, the latter.

Scarlet letters do one thing well, create a discriminatory class of people in whatever context such tactics are used. Lets face it, people love to discriminate against someone else. Who doesn't enjoy the feeling of superiority and the ability to mock, badger, harass & defame someone else with complete impunity? As a point of history, it has worked well to enable such behavior. I need not cite references to anyone that has been alive at any time since the 1930's although as exampled a star of David, not a scarlet letter was used.

So, Sreegs, what is CCP's intent?

Marking botters as botters will have zero effect on the professionals who are running +20 accounts, recycling and discarding tunes as a routine course of business. Which ones affect CCP's bottom line the most?



Casual botters and professional botters alike shouldn't be welcome in the game. So running any type of botters out of the game is for the best i think.
gfldex
#211 - 2012-03-27 12:13:50 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:
This is actually my biggest problem with the thing. We'd be putting ourselves in the position of making a solid statement that would incur player consequences and I prefer to stay out of the sandbox if that makes sense.


Oi! Mate, if you want to stay out of the sandbox you have to give me the tools to hunt botters. Or should you not? Well, you should not because I'm just mean but I hear there are players in EVE that are nice fellows. Power to the people!

Funny, actually. You have just disproven yourself. We can't kick that specific sandcastle and that's why you have to. It's a scary prospective isn't it? As a goon you always wanted to do that but now that you have The Power Of The Gods you shy away. :)

If you take all the sand out of the box, only the cat poo will remain.
gfldex
#212 - 2012-03-27 12:24:58 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:
There is no resale value as these characters can't be sold legally.


And selling accounts illegally is not creating resale value? Could I have your rose coloured glasses for a moment? I feel a little sad right now.

If you take all the sand out of the box, only the cat poo will remain.
Nirnias Stirrum
UberWTFBBQ and Battle Technologies
#213 - 2012-03-27 12:29:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Nirnias Stirrum
First time caught:
Assets and ISK seized
Second time caught:
Name and Shame (Whether publicy that its flagged in their character profile, or privately that it only shows up to CEO of alliances and corps).
Third time caught:
Biomass the character

The only downside i can see to naming and shaming is knowing Eve as well as i know Eve, people are gunna go no holes barred on people flagged as botters, whether it be a simple comment as "filthy botter" or just being down right mean to the person" . I have no problems with trolling as its all for sh.ts and giggles but going out of your way to make someone feel bad is far beyond the line.

Even done so CEO can only see it, lists will be made and shared and eventually we will have a big huge list of names publicly available and lots of killing will happen (personally i love this idea, love me some hulk kills).

I cannot think of a situation where naming and shaming would be a great idea and should be implemented publicly. If it was kept the way it is but its actually freaking implemented and they get banned, im all for it... I used to hunt bots cause they annoyed me ESPECIALLY the obvious ones. But months after reporting and petioning most of them were still active (i gave up and deleted them all from contacts), but i do still have my list saved somewhere.

Hell why not after the second time caught that players character is automatically attacked by concord or the navy, they die horribly and everyone will just assume someone did something silly.
e.g
caught bot mining, if they get in a mining ship, CONKORDUKENED
caught as a courier bot, if they get in a courier ship, CONKORDUKENED
caught mission botting, if they hop in a combat ship, CONKORDUKENED

/me waits for the day watching 30+ ice miners in a belt, SUDDENLY CONCORD, BOOM BOOM BOOM for no reason what so ever.

If this happens then i suppose the wrecks would have the pilots name in them.. I dunno any way around that. If conkordukened, no wreck spawn?

doing the mission bot one will severely hamper someone being able to play the game (well from my perspective as all i do is pew pew), but no sympathy for people caught so....

Dunno about people here but if i was a botter and i knew i was gunna loose Hulk/Freighter/Tengu any time i logged in, i wouldnt log in, BUT id still have a chance to mend my filthy sinful ways by not doing it.

After 6months to a year of "good behavior" concord kisses and makes up with you. This process would take alot of work on the game.. I dont even know if its feasible to do, im just bored on my lunch break and went on a rant... I was originally only going to post first 7 lines.
Carneros
The Night Watchmen
Goonswarm Federation
#214 - 2012-03-27 12:40:04 UTC
I would advocate on the side of "No Scarlet Letter".

A previous poster is correct. There are serious/professional botters and there are casual experimenters. We wish to remove entirely the first group and reform the second group.

A Scarlet Letter will have zero effect on the first group. It will have a negative effect on our objectives for the second group. Instead of encouraging reformation, it will encourage departure.

Let's try to find another path forward. Thanks.
gfldex
#215 - 2012-03-27 12:48:02 UTC
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.


So if they are all so awesome why are you still working for CCP? If we would all just do what our neighbours do we would still be walking the planes with a club in our hands. I like bow and arrow and I would not mind to improve further. Very weak argument on your side there.

If you take all the sand out of the box, only the cat poo will remain.
Elmoman7
Perkone
Caldari State
#216 - 2012-03-27 12:49:24 UTC
Why not have it as a list based on Alliance (Historically) banned for botting?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#217 - 2012-03-27 12:53:35 UTC
Not sure if this has been said or not but how about having it so that upon their second offence they get the name and shame treatment. It could be seen as the next step given that they did not learn their lesson the first time.
Henry Haphorn
Killer Yankee
#218 - 2012-03-27 12:56:38 UTC
Here is something that could potentially benefit both CCP Games and those playing the market aspect of Eve Online.

In addition to one of the previous posters here suggesting that the first offense shouldn't include a public flag but for those who are directors or CEOs, why not allow a filter of sorts in the advanced market settings in which a legitimate seller or buyer would be able to tell the market to accept only buy/sell orders from players who are not flagged by this scarlet letter?

If I was going to purchase minerals from the market for my manufacturing jobs that I have pending in a station, I want to make sure that I am not contributing ISK to some botter who is looking to ruin the in-game economy, which they all do anyways. Also, I don't want to sell minerals to botters who spend their ill-gained ISK to create their shiny ships while the money they made ends up in my wallet which could potentially have me investigated by CCP as a potential RMTer. I don't want anything to do with RMT or botters except to try to destroy their operations.

This is a very big benefit for both legitimate miners who sell minerals for ISK and for legitimate buyers who don't want to give ISK to bots.

Of course, your question is still about what benefits there would be for a "public" list of names. In that case, it could potentially help career gankers focus their resources in attacking the right targets as that is something people like me always strive to aim for. I don't want legitimate miners being ganked simply because of the illegal actions committed by another miner next to them in the belt. But of course, like others have said, public naming and shaming should be limited to a second offence. At first offence, only the CEOs and Directors of corps should have access to that information.

Adapt or Die
Claire Voyant
#219 - 2012-03-27 13:06:35 UTC
I haven't read the whole thread, so sorry if this has been suggested before.
I think corporations' concerns about asset seizures due to actions of their members is legit.
If you don't want to name and shame publicly, then obviously a new API flag would be one way for corps to have this information on anyone who applies or is a current member.
If you don't want to blackball them for life, then maybe a probationary flag set on the account for 12 months after a first offense. It would be reset after that and invisible to the API.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#220 - 2012-03-27 13:07:57 UTC
knobber Jobbler wrote:
We all know who's doing the botting


If you know who's doing the botting, why do you need to be told?

What happens when it turns out that your alliance had more bots generating more ISK that the guys who you thought were the most evil, prolific bothers in the game? That would be a little humiliating, don't you think?

Wouldn't it be better if your alliance's little problem would just quietly go away?

Day 0 Advice for New Players