These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Xavier Higdon
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#101 - 2014-05-17 00:32:52 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:
One simple question: Prince Kobol, La Nariz, why the hell are you guys defending botting in null sec?


I would say that they're not, they're merely pointing out that nullsec botting is far, far less of a systemic problem than highsec botting.

Highsec botting is there, it's real, and it's been developer acknowledged to be the primary problem, with more bots than every other area of space combined.


So their argument is that because it happens in high sec more, it should be ignored if it happens some place else? I didn't see a single post of theirs that said anything along the lines of, "if someone bots in null sec they should be punished." I did, however, see a lot of deflection, "the presentation said most of it happens in high sec and I swear I've never seen a bot in null!" or "remember the facts show high sec bots the most." Both of those statements are just attempting to argue that botting either doesn't happen in null or, if it does happen, CCP's actions against null sec botters should be secondary to punishing botters in high sec.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#102 - 2014-05-17 00:40:11 UTC
Xavier Higdon wrote:
One simple question: Prince Kobol, La Nariz, why the hell are you guys defending botting in null sec?


We're not, we're counter the factionalism and ignorance in this thread was basically an excuse to whine about nullsec instead of being solely against botting. Many people are angry that the CFC is successful and want to shout about wild RMT conspiracies in order to discredit us for whatever perceived slight they attribute to us.

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
Xavier Higdon
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#103 - 2014-05-17 00:42:25 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:
One simple question: Prince Kobol, La Nariz, why the hell are you guys defending botting in null sec?


We're not, we're counter the factionalism and ignorance in this thread was basically an excuse to whine about nullsec instead of being solely against botting. Many people are angry that the CFC is successful and want to shout about wild RMT conspiracies in order to discredit us for whatever perceived slight they attribute to us.


Where did the OP say anything about the CFC?
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#104 - 2014-05-17 00:51:00 UTC
Xavier Higdon wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:
One simple question: Prince Kobol, La Nariz, why the hell are you guys defending botting in null sec?


We're not, we're counter the factionalism and ignorance in this thread was basically an excuse to whine about nullsec instead of being solely against botting. Many people are angry that the CFC is successful and want to shout about wild RMT conspiracies in order to discredit us for whatever perceived slight they attribute to us.


Where did the OP say anything about the CFC?


Literally the second post starts it. The OP implies that the highsec botting is controlled but, nullsec botting is not.

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
Xavier Higdon
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#105 - 2014-05-17 00:58:37 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:
One simple question: Prince Kobol, La Nariz, why the hell are you guys defending botting in null sec?


We're not, we're counter the factionalism and ignorance in this thread was basically an excuse to whine about nullsec instead of being solely against botting. Many people are angry that the CFC is successful and want to shout about wild RMT conspiracies in order to discredit us for whatever perceived slight they attribute to us.


Where did the OP say anything about the CFC?


Literally the second post starts it. The OP implies that the highsec botting is controlled but, nullsec botting is not.


The OP didn't mention anything about highsec botting being controlled, rather only stating(though he didn't clarify that it was merely his opinion) that mining bots were on their way to being controlled or eliminated. He even goes so far as to mention both null sec and high sec in his statement. As for Doc Fury's post, if you can somehow connect the blue doughnut to RMT conspiracies... well I don't know what to suggest about that, because that is one hell of a stretch. I still haven't seen you guys come out against botting in null sec though.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#106 - 2014-05-17 01:12:14 UTC
Xavier Higdon wrote:
Both of those statements are just attempting to argue that botting either doesn't happen in null or, if it does happen, CCP's actions against null sec botters should be secondary to punishing botters in high sec.


Not in the slightest.

Both of those statements are a rejection of the OP's premise.

Botting, anywhere, is bad.

But most botting happens in highsec. More botting than anywhere else in the game combined, in fact. So let's get a handle on that first, hmm?

"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.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#107 - 2014-05-17 01:15:44 UTC
Xavier Higdon wrote:

The OP didn't mention anything about highsec botting being controlled, rather only stating(though he didn't clarify that it was merely his opinion) that mining bots were on their way to being controlled or eliminated. He even goes so far as to mention both null sec and high sec in his statement. As for Doc Fury's post, if you can somehow connect the blue doughnut to RMT conspiracies... well I don't know what to suggest about that, because that is one hell of a stretch. I still haven't seen you guys come out against botting in null sec though.


The OP wrote:

We have seen a lot of work done to ensure that perceived 'mining bots' have been reduced or removed entirely by a sustained campaign of AFK cloaking camps in null and suicide gankers in highsec. These benevolent efforts have gone a long way towards ensuring the players who actually play the game are not ripped off by those who use more nefarious means (botting / automation)

However we still lack adequate means / efforts to reduce the impact upon the economy made by ratting bots. How can it be fair to the people who actually play the game to have their profits reduced by those who afk farm rat belts and anoms afk for 23 hours every day...


Ratting only takes place in nullsec while suicide ganking only takes place in highsec. It states mining bots are "reduced or removed entirely." It completely ignores mission running bots which would be highsec bots and singles out ratting bots which would be nullsec bots. It also ignores what I would argue is the most significant bot, the market bot, another mostly highsec bot. This single-minded focus on a nullsec bot over all of the other kind out there leaves the implication that nullsec botting is out of control while highsec botting is controlled.

The above combined with the dinsdale post and the blue doughnut literally being in the second post already promotes the ignorance, hatred of success, and factionalism many of us are posting against.

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
Xavier Higdon
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#108 - 2014-05-17 01:26:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Xavier Higdon
La Nariz wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:

The OP didn't mention anything about highsec botting being controlled, rather only stating(though he didn't clarify that it was merely his opinion) that mining bots were on their way to being controlled or eliminated. He even goes so far as to mention both null sec and high sec in his statement. As for Doc Fury's post, if you can somehow connect the blue doughnut to RMT conspiracies... well I don't know what to suggest about that, because that is one hell of a stretch. I still haven't seen you guys come out against botting in null sec though.


The OP wrote:

We have seen a lot of work done to ensure that perceived 'mining bots' have been reduced or removed entirely by a sustained campaign of AFK cloaking camps in null and suicide gankers in highsec. These benevolent efforts have gone a long way towards ensuring the players who actually play the game are not ripped off by those who use more nefarious means (botting / automation)

However we still lack adequate means / efforts to reduce the impact upon the economy made by ratting bots. How can it be fair to the people who actually play the game to have their profits reduced by those who afk farm rat belts and anoms afk for 23 hours every day...


Ratting only takes place in nullsec while suicide ganking only takes place in highsec. It states mining bots are "reduced or removed entirely." It completely ignores mission running bots which would be highsec bots and singles out ratting bots which would be nullsec bots. It also ignores what I would argue is the most significant bot, the market bot, another mostly highsec bot. This single-minded focus on a nullsec bot over all of the other kind out there leaves the implication that nullsec botting is out of control while highsec botting is controlled.

The above combined with the dinsdale post and the blue doughnut literally being in the second post already promotes the ignorance, hatred of success, and factionalism many of us are posting against.


So you're argument is that it's worse in high sec, so botting is all good in null sec? I guess I'm just not understanding your argument. You keep talking about the "ignorance, hatred of success, and factionalism(which is something that is really confusing to me. what contentious minority are you talking about?)" and yet the only example you've give is Doc's comment about the blue doughnut and Dinsdale. Doc's comment about the blue doughnut is something I still cannot connect to any of those three things you're so adamantly opposed to, and Dinsdale is a great example of his own ignorance and hatred, but not such a great example of anybody else. The part of the paragraph you emphasized is clearly pertaining to the part of the paragraph you didn't emphasize, where the OP clearly states he's talking about his perception that mining bots have been reduced in number and efficacy due to AFK cloaking in null and suicide ganking in high sec. Furthermore, you're still arguing that because botting takes place more often in high sec, null sec should be left alone. I didn't see any place in his post where it said that botting in high sec should be ignored while botting in null sec should be focused upon, while your posts are full of deflections about how it's "worse in high sec." And you still haven't come out against botting in null sec.
Xavier Higdon
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#109 - 2014-05-17 01:28:50 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:
Both of those statements are just attempting to argue that botting either doesn't happen in null or, if it does happen, CCP's actions against null sec botters should be secondary to punishing botters in high sec.


Not in the slightest.

Both of those statements are a rejection of the OP's premise.

Botting, anywhere, is bad.

But most botting happens in highsec. More botting than anywhere else in the game combined, in fact. So let's get a handle on that first, hmm?


Why would you ignore botting in null sec just because it happens more often in high sec? Why not get a handle on botting no matter where it occurs. And the statements you didn't quote are a great example of deflection. Arguing that "it happens more in high sec" is a deflection, a means of arguing that because it's worse "there" it should be focused upon to the exclusion of other areas.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#110 - 2014-05-17 01:32:49 UTC  |  Edited by: La Nariz
^^: You wouldn't but, you also wouldn't single out a nullsec activity to rally around and claim is a problem while implying the highsec activities are under control instead of doing a general call out against botting.

Xavier Higdon wrote:


So you're argument is that it's worse in high sec, so botting is all good in null sec? I guess I'm just not understanding your argument. You keep talking about the "ignorance, hatred of success, and factionalism(which is something that is really confusing to me. what contentious minority are you talking about?)" and yet the only example you've give is Doc's comment about the blue doughnut and Dinsdale. Doc's comment about the blue doughnut is something I still cannot connect to any of those three things you're so adamantly opposed to, and Dinsdale is a great example of his own ignorance and hatred, but not such a great example of anybody else. The part of the paragraph you emphasized is clearly pertaining to the part of the paragraph you didn't emphasize, where the OP clearly states he's talking about his perception that mining bots have been reduced in number and efficacy due to AFK cloaking in null and suiding ganking in high sec. Furthermore, you're still arguing that because botting takes place more often in high sec, null sec should be left alone. I didn't see any place in his post where it said that botting in high sec should be ignored while botting in null sec should be focused upon, while your posts are full of deflections about how it's "worse in high sec." And you still haven't come out against botting in null sec.


No my argument is its ignoring the idea that botting is bad in all sec areas and unreasonably claiming that botting in nullsec is uncontrolled while botting in highsec is controlled. Mining in null is insignificant compared to mining in highsec.

If you read the thread several posters have whined about the blue doughnut, nullsec cartels, and nullsec alliance RMT. You are correct the comments are not explicit, its dogwhistle language because rumor mongering is against forum rules and that's what all of this whining about nullsec RMT doughnut cartels is.

You're getting scarily close to deliberately obtuse.

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.
#111 - 2014-05-17 01:47:22 UTC
Xavier Higdon wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:
Both of those statements are just attempting to argue that botting either doesn't happen in null or, if it does happen, CCP's actions against null sec botters should be secondary to punishing botters in high sec.


Not in the slightest.

Both of those statements are a rejection of the OP's premise.

Botting, anywhere, is bad.

But most botting happens in highsec. More botting than anywhere else in the game combined, in fact. So let's get a handle on that first, hmm?


Why would you ignore botting in null sec just because it happens more often in high sec? Why not get a handle on botting no matter where it occurs. And the statements you didn't quote are a great example of deflection. Arguing that "it happens more in high sec" is a deflection, a means of arguing that because it's worse "there" it should be focused upon to the exclusion of other areas.


So I ask you again.

Why not focus the attention where there are indisputably the most bots? Just because it makes some people uncomfortable that it's highsec? Too damn bad, highsec needs to stop botting so damn much then. No one is talking "to the exclusion" of anywhere else. Just each in proportion to their contribution to the crime.

The OP is a pure example of deflection, by the way. Doesn't like the fact that highsec gets all the attention for botting, tries to deflect it elsewhere.

"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.
Xavier Higdon
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#112 - 2014-05-17 01:54:58 UTC
Where are these comments that are "dogwhistle" language? I see Dinsdale's typical conspiracy crafting, and Jaun Pecht-Feng who I've seen before, but never paid any attention to. Other than that, I don't see anything that talks about "nullsec RMT doughnut cartels" except your posts. I don't care where botting occurs, it should be punished immediately with a full IP ban as well as a block placed on the credit card or whatever kind of monetary account used to purchase the game. I don't see it as some kind of anti-CFC conspiracy to target botters in null sec, just like I don't see it as some kind of pro-CFC conspiracy to target them in high sec. Just because mining happens in high sec, doesn't mean botting doesn't happen in null. Perhaps you should stop seeing everything as "us vs. them" and instead see the fact that botting is a huge problem in this game, and should be stomped out where ever it occurs. Your argument that because this one guy made a suggestion on how to counter bots in null sec it means that there is some kind of systemic issue where people think botting no longer occurs in high sec is childish and rather paranoid. A suggestion on how to combat botting in null sec can be made without also making a suggestion to deal with botting in high sec, and there is no super secret level 8 decoder ring lone ranger language that somehow translates the OP's suggestion on how to deal with botting in a very specific part of EvE that translates it into an attack on the CFC.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#113 - 2014-05-17 01:55:27 UTC
Yeah this thread would have gone much better if the OP called out all of botting and refuted the people trying to claim :goonspiracy:.

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
Pix Severus
Empty You
#114 - 2014-05-17 01:56:57 UTC
Forum bots are completely uncontrolled by CCP, in fact I'm sure that they don't even consider them an issue.

In the meantime, Doc Fury is allowed to run rampant.

*shakes fist*

MTU Hunter: Latest Entry - June 12 2017 - Vocal Local 5

MTU Hunting 101: Comprehensive Guide
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#115 - 2014-05-17 01:57:06 UTC
Xavier Higdon wrote:
Where are these comments that are "dogwhistle" language? I see Dinsdale's typical conspiracy crafting, and Jaun Pecht-Feng who I've seen before, but never paid any attention to. Other than that, I don't see anything that talks about "nullsec RMT doughnut cartels" except your posts. I don't care where botting occurs, it should be punished immediately with a full IP ban as well as a block placed on the credit card or whatever kind of monetary account used to purchase the game. I don't see it as some kind of anti-CFC conspiracy to target botters in null sec, just like I don't see it as some kind of pro-CFC conspiracy to target them in high sec. Just because mining happens in high sec, doesn't mean botting doesn't happen in null. Perhaps you should stop seeing everything as "us vs. them" and instead see the fact that botting is a huge problem in this game, and should be stomped out where ever it occurs. Your argument that because this one guy made a suggestion on how to counter bots in null sec it means that there is some kind of systemic issue where people think botting no longer occurs in high sec is childish and rather paranoid. A suggestion on how to combat botting in null sec can be made without also making a suggestion to deal with botting in high sec, and there is no super secret level 8 decoder ring lone ranger language that somehow translates the OP's suggestion on how to deal with botting in a very specific part of EvE that translates it into an attack on the CFC.


Considering your own logic then:

Why are you defending highsec botting?

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
Xavier Higdon
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#116 - 2014-05-17 02:00:06 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:
Both of those statements are just attempting to argue that botting either doesn't happen in null or, if it does happen, CCP's actions against null sec botters should be secondary to punishing botters in high sec.


Not in the slightest.

Both of those statements are a rejection of the OP's premise.

Botting, anywhere, is bad.

But most botting happens in highsec. More botting than anywhere else in the game combined, in fact. So let's get a handle on that first, hmm?


Why would you ignore botting in null sec just because it happens more often in high sec? Why not get a handle on botting no matter where it occurs. And the statements you didn't quote are a great example of deflection. Arguing that "it happens more in high sec" is a deflection, a means of arguing that because it's worse "there" it should be focused upon to the exclusion of other areas.


So I ask you again.

Why not focus the attention where there are indisputably the most bots? Just because it makes some people uncomfortable that it's highsec? Too damn bad, highsec needs to stop botting so damn much then. No one is talking "to the exclusion" of anywhere else. Just each in proportion to their contribution to the crime.

The OP is a pure example of deflection, by the way. Doesn't like the fact that highsec gets all the attention for botting, tries to deflect it elsewhere.


You just talked about to the exclusion of anywhere else, by stating that anti-botting attention should be focused on high sec instead of being focused on botting. As for the OP's post, it's a suggestion on how to handle botting in a specific case, not an outline on how to handle botting in general. I'm all for getting rid of bots in high sec, and I'm also all for getting rid of bots in low sec and null sec. Now show me on the doll where high sec touched you and we can talk about the real reason you don't want anti-botting attention being given to null sec.
Xavier Higdon
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#117 - 2014-05-17 02:03:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Xavier Higdon
La Nariz wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:
Where are these comments that are "dogwhistle" language? I see Dinsdale's typical conspiracy crafting, and Jaun Pecht-Feng who I've seen before, but never paid any attention to. Other than that, I don't see anything that talks about "nullsec RMT doughnut cartels" except your posts. I don't care where botting occurs, it should be punished immediately with a full IP ban as well as a block placed on the credit card or whatever kind of monetary account used to purchase the game. I don't see it as some kind of anti-CFC conspiracy to target botters in null sec, just like I don't see it as some kind of pro-CFC conspiracy to target them in high sec. Just because mining happens in high sec, doesn't mean botting doesn't happen in null. Perhaps you should stop seeing everything as "us vs. them" and instead see the fact that botting is a huge problem in this game, and should be stomped out where ever it occurs. Your argument that because this one guy made a suggestion on how to counter bots in null sec it means that there is some kind of systemic issue where people think botting no longer occurs in high sec is childish and rather paranoid. A suggestion on how to combat botting in null sec can be made without also making a suggestion to deal with botting in high sec, and there is no super secret level 8 decoder ring lone ranger language that somehow translates the OP's suggestion on how to deal with botting in a very specific part of EvE that translates it into an attack on the CFC.


Considering your own logic then:

Why are you defending highsec botting?


Here, let me quote it for you:

Xavier Higdon wrote:
I don't care where botting occurs, it should be punished immediately with a full IP ban as well as a block placed on the credit card or whatever kind of monetary account used to purchase the game.


Any other questions? Oddly, you still haven't come out against botting in null sec.

Edit: And to be clear, nobody needs to refute Dinsdale or the other guy that posted, they do a dang good job of refuting themselves.
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#118 - 2014-05-17 02:10:00 UTC
Xavier Higdon wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:
Both of those statements are just attempting to argue that botting either doesn't happen in null or, if it does happen, CCP's actions against null sec botters should be secondary to punishing botters in high sec.


Not in the slightest.

Both of those statements are a rejection of the OP's premise.

Botting, anywhere, is bad.

But most botting happens in highsec. More botting than anywhere else in the game combined, in fact. So let's get a handle on that first, hmm?


Why would you ignore botting in null sec just because it happens more often in high sec? Why not get a handle on botting no matter where it occurs. And the statements you didn't quote are a great example of deflection. Arguing that "it happens more in high sec" is a deflection, a means of arguing that because it's worse "there" it should be focused upon to the exclusion of other areas.


You should probably refer to the OP, and their genius suggestion for the reason the thread is what it is.

Quote:


So i have a proposal for tackling the issue. Alongside the proposed reduction in rat drops of refinable loots we also lower the bounties of rats found in belts and anomalies as well as removing any chance or seriously reducing the chance of faction spawns in said belts and anomalys. 'But this isnt fair'!, i hear you cry.

In order to compensate the players who live in null and rightfully deserve an increased profit for thier time in game; we move the faction spawns into scannable plex's and increase the bounties on the ordinary rats in said plex's We also increase the drop rate of valuable modules from scannable plex's



Not only do I live in null, I happen to be the only resident in my system. Whilst the plexes are worth 3b a month to me, there are only 10 - 15 ded plexes and a similar amount of unrateds spawned per month. The average CFC character fill is at least 50 characters per system, so this geniuses idea is to move any sort of isk/hr to things that on average a character has an expectation of getting 1 or 2 per month. (individuals renting their own personal systems notwithstanding), whilst not considering at all that sisters missions are worth -more- than anomaly running, and not all players even have the wherewithal to do all signatures (FSP is a pain in the ass without carrier/dread).
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#119 - 2014-05-17 02:15:00 UTC  |  Edited by: La Nariz
^^: Often a pain that only thing of value is an OSE.

Xavier Higdon wrote:


Any other questions? Oddly, you still haven't come out against botting in null sec.

Edit: And to be clear, nobody needs to refute Dinsdale or the other guy that posted, they do a dang good job of refuting themselves.


Yet your insinuation that my refutation of the pro-highsec conspiracy theorists somehow makes me pro-nullsec botting. You are also posting against my anti-highsec botting so that must mean by your own logic you are pro-highsec botting.

So why wouldn't your advances be defined as you being pro-highsec botting?

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
Xavier Higdon
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#120 - 2014-05-17 02:24:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Xavier Higdon
La Nariz wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:


Any other questions? Oddly, you still haven't come out against botting in null sec.

Edit: And to be clear, nobody needs to refute Dinsdale or the other guy that posted, they do a dang good job of refuting themselves.


Yet your insinuation that my refutation of the pro-highsec conspiracy theorists somehow makes me pro-nullsec botting. You are also posting against my anti-highsec botting so that must mean by your own logic you are pro-highsec botting.

So why wouldn't your advances be defined as you being pro-highsec botting?


Where have I said that botting shouldn't be combated where ever it occurs? Can you quote me so that I can see it more clearly, because I've looked and I can't find any place where I said that botting in high sec should be ignored. And you're not refuting Dinsdale and the other guy when they hadn't even chimed in with their pointlessness until after you had made your first post stating that "it's worse in high sec." And I still don't understand why Dinsdale or Juan matter when it comes to combating botting in null sec. What bearing do they have on botting being just as much of a problem when it occurs in null sec as when it occurs in high sec?