EVE General Discussion

The only one with a problem right here is you, surrounded by people kindly trying to explain your things and you headbutting left and right.

I have no issue whatsoever. I don't need to alter the client or anything to smoke someone's butt in the markets.

I don't even have the issue of having started EvE Mon.

I do what now? I did not know I could do this.

And I think I should do it more often, because it sounds fun.

This is EVE-O forums. No.

Did the linked blog reflect the views of EVE-uni?

What do the guys running the corp think?

And how do they justify supporting a guy that was clearly botting for them?

Where are our EVE journalists, asking the tough questions?


There's a conspiracy here, somewhere; I know it.

I hope other people learn from this. The problem is you are only hearing one side of the story. using a calculator doesnt allow you to update 30 script a minuet.

I am sure the guy had good intentions and I am sorry for eve's loss as a community, but the guy got caught. People can and will rationalize cheating. They will say things like others do it so I have to to keep up etc.

My only question would be is why Jita still full with bot spammers? Would this not fall under the same rule?

Yes, indeed. However, what I am getting from this discussion here and elsewhere, is that part of the trouble is that the specific criteria for what constitutes bottling is in at least some cases not entirely clear.

When there is a specific, clear description of what was allegedly done that seems not to be botting and then CCP makes the bald, unexplained, and unsubstantiated assertion that X was botting (pointing at the EULA is not a clear explanation), you create the appearance of arbitrariness. Thus, the 'who watches the watchers' sentiment.

I am sure that more transparency (i.e., a clear explanation of the principles rather than mechanics being exploited by the person who was banned) with respect to the substance of the decision would make not only for less nonsense as found in these threads, fewer allegations of CCP being responsible for the abdication of the Pope, and less uncertainty about just what can and cannot be done 'legally'.

dy

CCP Screegs, thank you for reading this thread and actually answering posts, even though some people don't have any manners!

I read through most of your replies and agree with them. However, this quote shows a sudden, unsettling new direction in CCP policies. As others have pointed out, cache scraping has been a common method for years and is used even today in tools like EVEMon. CCP never had an issue with it.

Also, CCP usually doesn't have an issue with people sitting at their keyboard entering commands - even though some people do this with multiboxing and relay commands to multiple clients. It has always been stated like: "As long as you are at your computer, actually doing things, it's not considered botting/macro usage."

So apparently, John used cache scraping and manual input to stay on top of the market orders. From a previous CCP standpoint I would not expect this to be deemed illegal, but things seem to have changed.

It's your game, your rules, your definition of botting, but I think bending these rules in a hindsight to justify actions against a player is not how things should be.

In case John was really botting (i.e. not copy-pasting the values manually, but using a macro to do it) it was surely the right decision.

If/when it becomes illegal/impossible to use the cache files, what will happen to the massive amounts of isk players have made using this technique?

It was abundantly clear the person in question was botting as he was updating orders at inhumane speeds. But someone brought up cache files and tried to trip up the dev into saying stuff while he was clearly a bit upset. It worked and now here we are arguing about an unrelated topic to the OP.

Nothing. It wasn't against the rules then, so they can't be punished for it.