These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
#161 - 2014-05-17 14:27:36 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:


I would imagine CCP are already keeping a very close watch on that particular alliance, well I bloody hope they are.

However here is one of my biggest problems with CCP and why they will always struggle with catching botters / RMT etc.. it is too damn easy to create untraceable accounts.

You can create an account using false details + plex and very easily hide your IP.

Once they have successfully laundered (easily done) their isk they can keep creating untraceable accounts and purchasing characters.

Those who bot / rmt do not use credit card information, paypal, direct debit etc.. they use plex. They hide their IP address via various methods. They use disposable email accounts.

I have wanted CCP to introduce secure login tokens for years now, okay they are not infallible but they will certainly make a lot harder for people circumvent getting banned.


I'm glad you're finally off the crap about targeting all of high sec just to catch botters that are probably a part of one alliance. However, you cannot buy EvE Online with PLEX, you need to purchase it with some kind of cash or credit. Since the only option to hide your information in that situation is to buy a hard copy, and I don't think most botters are all that smart(after all, they're gathering in a single alliance and keep getting banned from that single alliance at rates greater than other alliances), it's likely they have purchased a digital copy of the game through CCP directly or Steam. Using the payment information gained through these two sources it's likely that CCP can just wait for it to pop up again when the botter rejoins the alliance responsible for 21% of all botters and then ban them again at the first instance of possible botting. Now this won't stop hacked accounts or stolen credit card information, but if a single alliance is responsible for having that many hacked accounts and members that use stolen credit card information then the entire alliance should just be banned, since obviously it is something that they are doing that attracts people that willfully violate the EULA, TOS and regional law.
Prince Kobol
#162 - 2014-05-17 14:36:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Prince Kobol
Xavier Higdon wrote:


I'm glad you're finally off the crap about targeting all of high sec just to catch botters that are probably a part of one alliance. However, you cannot buy EvE Online with PLEX, you need to purchase it with some kind of cash or credit. Since the only option to hide your information in that situation is to buy a hard copy, and I don't think most botters are all that smart(after all, they're gathering in a single alliance and keep getting banned from that single alliance at rates greater than other alliances), it's likely they have purchased a digital copy of the game through CCP directly or Steam. Using the payment information gained through these two sources it's likely that CCP can just wait for it to pop up again when the botter rejoins the alliance responsible for 21% of all botters and then ban them again at the first instance of possible botting. Now this won't stop hacked accounts or stolen credit card information, but if a single alliance is responsible for having that many hacked accounts and members that use stolen credit card information then the entire alliance should just be banned, since obviously it is something that they are doing that attracts people that willfully violate the EULA, TOS and regional law.


Sorry to say you are wrong, you can use plex to convert a trial account to a full account.

http://community.eveonline.com/support/knowledge-base/article.aspx?articleId=495

Hence the problem of untraceable accounts.

Also, I have not stopped anything about HS. Fact is most botting occurs in HS. It is easier and more profitable to bot in HS. That is where most of the resource should go.

Like I said, simply make it so you have to be in a player corp to do missions and you will find that particular problem solved very quickly.
Xavier Higdon
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#163 - 2014-05-17 14:56:44 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:


I'm glad you're finally off the crap about targeting all of high sec just to catch botters that are probably a part of one alliance. However, you cannot buy EvE Online with PLEX, you need to purchase it with some kind of cash or credit. Since the only option to hide your information in that situation is to buy a hard copy, and I don't think most botters are all that smart(after all, they're gathering in a single alliance and keep getting banned from that single alliance at rates greater than other alliances), it's likely they have purchased a digital copy of the game through CCP directly or Steam. Using the payment information gained through these two sources it's likely that CCP can just wait for it to pop up again when the botter rejoins the alliance responsible for 21% of all botters and then ban them again at the first instance of possible botting. Now this won't stop hacked accounts or stolen credit card information, but if a single alliance is responsible for having that many hacked accounts and members that use stolen credit card information then the entire alliance should just be banned, since obviously it is something that they are doing that attracts people that willfully violate the EULA, TOS and regional law.


Sorry to say you are wrong, you can use plex to convert a trial account to a full account.

http://community.eveonline.com/support/knowledge-base/article.aspx?articleId=495

Hence the problem of untraceable accounts.


You're right, it's been a long time since I had a trial account and I forgot the activation fee is waived for those paying with PLEX. But still, that PLEX comes from some place, not from the Aether. It was bought by somebody, even if it was only in game, and it's unlikely that there is some huge conspiracy where there are long chains of untraceable accounts all passing ISK and PLEX between them in order to hide that one 30 day old toon's RMT transaction. Furthermore, I don't think RMT is as big of a problem with bots as bots are with people looking for personal gain. RMT sites are most often utilized by new accounts, less than 99 days old, and most of them probably don't even realize that RMT sites don't offer some great deal on ISK or that they can buy PLEX and sell it for in game ISK. A lot of sites charge nearly the same, and in some cases more, than if a player were to just buy PLEX from CCP or Steam(depending on where they got their account). I think most botters are probably in it for personal wealth, not as part of some sort of Freemason EvE Online New World Order Illuminati Cabal bent on world domination through PLEX.
Xavier Higdon
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#164 - 2014-05-17 15:01:27 UTC
And a large chunk of botting occurs in one alliance. Also, since CCP's pie chart didn't include coalitions, it's possible that almost all botting occurs as part of a single coalition. Since so much botting occurs as part of one alliance, and potentially most occurs as part of that alliance's coalition, it makes sense that CCP should focus the majority of their attention not on high sec, where the vast majority of players are innocent, but on this single group where so many are guilty. Obviously botting and that alliance go hand in hand, and something is very wrong with that alliance which obviously condones violating the EULA and TOS and it makes more sense to target them than it does to target such a vast area of space where so few are guilty.

As for being a part of player run corporations to run missions... well that's the damn problem. A player run alliance is infested with bots, not NPC corps.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#165 - 2014-05-17 15:23:46 UTC
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.

"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
#166 - 2014-05-17 15:36:25 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:
One simple question: Prince Kobol, La Nariz, why the hell are you guys defending botting in null sec?



Well you could begin to show where I have come out and supported botting let alone botting in null sec.

Oh that's right you cant because I haven't Big smile

I am probably the hardest on CCP and botters when it comes to botting and RMT.

I have said numerous times in various other posts over the years that CCP are part of the reason why we have issues with botting and RMT because it is too damn easy to create untraceable accounts.

Also I would have a 1 strike rule... get caught once and your banned.. no exceptions but that is me.

What I hate is people like Dinsdale who have such a blind hatred of any null sec alliance that they keep this ridiculous narrative that we are all evil and we all bot and we all RMT and that we somehow control CCP, which actually detracts from the discussion about how is best to eliminate botters/RMT'ers.

The facts are pretty damn simple.

CCP have limited resources.
Most Botting occurs in HS.

With those two facts it doesn't take a genius to concentrate your efforts in eliminating as many of those bots that operate in HS as that will have the greater effect.

Its a numbers game. Why ban a handful of people when you can ban hundreds or even thousands?

The great thing with low and null sec is that we the players can actually do something about botters as they do not have concord to protect them and bubbles are a wonderful thing, again another reason why they chose HS.

Also logistically, HS is a much easy place to operate out of then null sec.

On top of that you will actually find most null sec alliances, including Goons will not have botters in their corps.

I actually know a lot about the most of the botting problems work because I have obtained copies of them and looked at the code that drives them. I often visit their forums often to see how people are using them and what kind of technical issues they are having.

That helps me understand where they are being used and how to combat them in game if I see somebody I think is botting.

The fact is botting problems DO NOT differentiate what space they are being used in. The more advances programs use local if you so chose to, so if a red enters system your ship will automatically warp to a safe spot and will stay there until local is clear.

The thing is you have to ask yourself, where will I make the most isk if I am botting. HS will always win.

Why kill a few rats in null sec when you can run mission indefinitely, earning both isk and lp and do not have to worry about who is in local or bubbles?

You know you are going to get caught at some point so you want to maximise how much isk you can earn in that time with as little effort as possible and since CCP have made so damn easy to simply create account after account after account, then HS is the place to be.

Create untraceable account.
Purchase Mission running toon
Run HS Missions for x hours per day in NPC corp and Concord Protection
Earn Isk + LP
Launder Isk LP
x amount of time later account is banned

Create new untraceable account
Purchase Mission running toon
Run HS Missions for x hours per day in NPC corp and Concord Protection
Earn Isk + LP
Launder Isk + LP
x amount of time later account is banned

Rinse and repeat.

You know a very simply way to stop most HS botters, simply make it a requirement that you must be in a player run corp to run Level 4 missions.

Watch those numbers tumble Big smile


Funny I said something analogous yet they howled about everything I said.

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
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#167 - 2014-05-17 15:39:05 UTC  |  Edited by: La Nariz
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Goons win the war on highsec, watch subscription numbers fall.....
All your proposed anti bot measures like banning level 4's will do is cement your place as untouchable. People need to be able to make a good income to even consider starting to challenge a dug in group. Null is better income, the fact 72% of NPC ships killed are in Null, meaning at least 72% of bounties come from null, meaning at least 50% of the isk faucets come from Null says so.
Quit the war on highsec, it utterly destroys your credibility when every post you make is about nerfing highsec because you want it to be nerfed.


I picture you as one of the crazy people in San Fransico standing on a crappy plastic crate with a megaphone and poorly drawn cardboard sign screaming "THE HIGHSEC PUBBIE RAPTURE IS COMING REPENT NOW NULLSEC CARTELS!"

While dinsdale is on to something the highsec pubbie rapture is still a myth. No matter how many times you say it, it will remain a myth. Just like no matter how many times you insist that botting is primarily a nullsec RMT cartel problem it will still be wrong.

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
#168 - 2014-05-17 15:41:56 UTC
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.


What do you mean "grr goons?" I'm merely quoting CCP's own numbers where it shows that 21% of all botters come from one alliance. They didn't name that alliance, so I have no clue which alliance it might be. Someone with more experience in botting and botting friendly alliances would have to make an informed decision as to which alliance has harbored 3,000 plus bots in the past 16 months, and that person most definitely is not me. The only alliance I've been a part of is a tiny one with less than 50 active members. However, targeting high sec makes no sense. It just doesn't make sense to try to sift through hundreds of thousands of players in order to catch a few thousand. It makes far more sense to target the tens of thousands of players as part of those bot friendly alliances in order to catch the bots that are infesting said alliances. Where the botting takes place is immaterial. It's far more important to target those groups that are promoting and condoning botting such they represent the vast majority of bots. By targeting the alliance(s) or coalition(s) that has created a bot friendly environment CCP can nip this problem in bud and stop the proliferation of bots everywhere instead of targeting a huge portion of the playerbase and being unable to stop botting anywhere. As for your assumption that 85% or more of all botting takes place in high sec, I couldn't find any information to back it up. Will you please link or quote where CCP provided this information? Thanks man.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#169 - 2014-05-17 15:42:32 UTC
La Nariz wrote:


Funny I said something analogous yet they howled about everything I said.


Duh. Dat because you is Goon.

"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
#170 - 2014-05-17 15:45:14 UTC
Kitty Bear wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
I agree with Mike Azariah. Mining needs to be less mind numbingly predictable.

Add Loot Spew to mining 2014.

You have to admit, it would kill botting.


fine by me
so long as your prepared to add the same mechanism to all other forms of activity with a similar interaction
(which means activities that involve lock target, press F1)

you still think it's a good suggestion ?


Sure I think it'd be cool if we shot a supercapital up enough some of its modules started breaking off and flying into space. Doesn't really make much sense for the smaller stuff but, it does provide us a reason to have more pretty visuals and a nerf to super caps.

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.
#171 - 2014-05-17 15:46:49 UTC
Xavier Higdon wrote:

What do you mean "grr goons?" I'm merely quoting CCP's own numbers where it shows that 21% of all botters come from one alliance. They didn't name that alliance


Good Lord, you actually are that dense.

The "Grr Goons" comes from your desperate attempts to deflect attention away from highsec and onto nullsec. Since we know for a indisputable fact that nullsec comprises a tiny minority of botting, you are only doing so with an agenda. Typically that agenda is "Grr Goons".

Oh, and as for that alliance, would you like me to tell you which one it is?

Caldari State.

"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
#172 - 2014-05-17 15:50:16 UTC
Xavier Higdon 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.


What do you mean "grr goons?" I'm merely quoting CCP's own numbers where it shows that 21% of all botters come from one alliance. They didn't name that alliance, so I have no clue which alliance it might be. Someone with more experience in botting and botting friendly alliances would have to make an informed decision as to which alliance has harbored 3,000 plus bots in the past 16 months, and that person most definitely is not me. The only alliance I've been a part of is a tiny one with less than 50 active members. However, targeting high sec makes no sense. It just doesn't make sense to try to sift through hundreds of thousands of players in order to catch a few thousand. It makes far more sense to target the tens of thousands of players as part of those bot friendly alliances in order to catch the bots that are infesting said alliances. Where the botting takes place is immaterial. It's far more important to target those groups that are promoting and condoning botting such they represent the vast majority of bots. By targeting the alliance(s) or coalition(s) that has created a bot friendly environment CCP can nip this problem in bud and stop the proliferation of bots everywhere instead of targeting a huge portion of the playerbase and being unable to stop botting anywhere. As for your assumption that 85% or more of all botting takes place in high sec, I couldn't find any information to back it up. Will you please link or quote where CCP provided this information? Thanks man.


Why doesn't targeting the area with the most botting make sense? 85% of botting in highsec.

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
#173 - 2014-05-17 15:57:32 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:

What do you mean "grr goons?" I'm merely quoting CCP's own numbers where it shows that 21% of all botters come from one alliance. They didn't name that alliance


Good Lord, you actually are that dense.

The "Grr Goons" comes from your desperate attempts to deflect attention away from highsec and onto nullsec. Since we know for a indisputable fact that nullsec comprises a tiny minority of botting, you are only doing so with an agenda. Typically that agenda is "Grr Goons".

Oh, and as for that alliance, would you like me to tell you which one it is?

Caldari State.


Caldari State, really? Where did you get this information? I didn't find CCP releasing the name of the alliance, seeing as they didn't want to name and shame anybody. And I don't know what you mean by deflecting attention away from high sec onto null sec, I've never said that null sec should be targeted more than high sec. I distinctly remember not saying that a "magnifying glass" should be placed on any one part of space. You must have me confused with somebody that has been arguing one part of space deserves to be less scrutinized in favor of scrutiny for another part of space. There might be one or two people in this thread that have been arguing that, though I don't think they've been arguing high sec should be left alone... I have maintained, throughout this entire thread, that it is far more important to target botting in EvE as a whole and far less important to target botting in only one portion of EvE. Any attempts to deflect attention from one sec status space to another has not been from me. After all, CCP has limited resources, and by focusing on only one portion of EvE they are far more likely to miss botting than if they were to focus on EvE as a whole and, since I don't want botting to occur in any sec status, I'm a firm believer in an approach that favors targeting botting and disfavors targeting high sec botting or null sec botting. And again, I'm still not seeing a "grr goons." What does targeting botting in all parts of space have to do with goons? Are you saying that it's anti-goon to want to do away with botting in null sec? Why is it anti-goon to target bots in null sec? Are you saying goons have a vested interest in botting happening in null sec? That's a pretty serious claim you've made there and I hope you have evidence to back it up. Rumour mongering is against the rules and I don't think you should be slinging such accusations around lightly.
Xavier Higdon
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#174 - 2014-05-17 15:59:08 UTC
La Nariz wrote:

Why doesn't targeting the area with the most botting make sense? 85% of botting in highsec.


I still can't find where that number comes from, please provide a link so we can clear this up.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#175 - 2014-05-17 16:05:49 UTC
Xavier Higdon wrote:
La Nariz wrote:

Why doesn't targeting the area with the most botting make sense? 85% of botting in highsec.


I still can't find where that number comes from, please provide a link so we can clear this up.


Pretty sure its the aggregation of all highsec bots. You need to use paragraphs too I am not reading those big blocks of goonspiracy they aren't nearly as entertaining as dinsdale.

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
#176 - 2014-05-17 16:09:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Xavier Higdon
La Nariz wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:
La Nariz wrote:

Why doesn't targeting the area with the most botting make sense? 85% of botting in highsec.


I still can't find where that number comes from, please provide a link so we can clear this up.


Pretty sure its the aggregation of all highsec bots. You need to use paragraphs too I am not reading those big blocks of goonspiracy they aren't nearly as entertaining as dinsdale.


You'll be sorely disappointed to know that I don't have any goonspiracies. Kaarous, however, seems to think targeting bots in null sec means your targeting goons, so you might want to ask him about his goonspiracies.

And as for aggregation of all high sec bots, I'm still not finding that information. Are you just making a guess, or do you actually have some information regarding bots?
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#177 - 2014-05-17 16:11:40 UTC
Xavier Higdon wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:
La Nariz wrote:

Why doesn't targeting the area with the most botting make sense? 85% of botting in highsec.


I still can't find where that number comes from, please provide a link so we can clear this up.


Pretty sure its the aggregation of all highsec bots. You need to use paragraphs too I am not reading those big blocks of goonspiracy they aren't nearly as entertaining as dinsdale.


You'll be sorely disappointed to know that I don't have any goonspiracies. Kaarous, however, seems to think targeting bots in null sec means your targeting goons, so you might want to ask him about his goonspiracies.

And as for aggregation of all high sec bots, I'm still not finding that information. Are you just making a guess, or do you actually have some information regarding bots?


You're the one mentioning "a certain alliance" and "blue doughnut." So no, you are the goonspiracy theorist. Yep the aggregation of all the botting numbers by region which you show highsec from nullsec. Caldari highsec is especially heinous.

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
#178 - 2014-05-17 16:17:07 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:
La Nariz wrote:

Why doesn't targeting the area with the most botting make sense? 85% of botting in highsec.


I still can't find where that number comes from, please provide a link so we can clear this up.


Pretty sure its the aggregation of all highsec bots. You need to use paragraphs too I am not reading those big blocks of goonspiracy they aren't nearly as entertaining as dinsdale.


You'll be sorely disappointed to know that I don't have any goonspiracies. Kaarous, however, seems to think targeting bots in null sec means your targeting goons, so you might want to ask him about his goonspiracies.

And as for aggregation of all high sec bots, I'm still not finding that information. Are you just making a guess, or do you actually have some information regarding bots?


You're the one mentioning "a certain alliance" and "blue doughnut." So no, you are the goonspiracy theorist. Yep the aggregation of all the botting numbers by region which you show highsec from nullsec. Caldari highsec is especially heinous.


I never mentioned blue doughnut except in response to your assertion that blue doughnut was a code word for anti-goon. If you'll just look back, you'll see it was Doc Fury making a joke about the blue doughnut that seems to be one of the reasons you went on your "leave null sec alone cuz it's worse in high sec" crusade.

And why wouldn't I mention that a certain alliance accounts for 21% of all bots? That's not some made up number like your 85%, that comes straight from CCP's presentation. Go ahead, I'll give you a moment to check these things.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#179 - 2014-05-17 16:20:31 UTC
Xavier Higdon wrote:


I never mentioned blue doughnut except in response to your assertion that blue doughnut was a code word for anti-goon. If you'll just look back, you'll see it was Doc Fury making a joke about the blue doughnut that seems to be one of the reasons you went on your "leave null sec alone cuz it's worse in high sec" crusade.

And why wouldn't I mention that a certain alliance accounts for 21% of all bots? That's not some made up number like your 85%, that comes straight from CCP's presentation. Go ahead, I'll give you a moment to check these things.


You jumped on the goonspiracy bandwagon and got angry over being labeled a crazy. Compare that "certain alliance" to the NPC alliances and let us all know how that works.

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
#180 - 2014-05-17 16:24:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Xavier Higdon
La Nariz wrote:
Xavier Higdon wrote:


I never mentioned blue doughnut except in response to your assertion that blue doughnut was a code word for anti-goon. If you'll just look back, you'll see it was Doc Fury making a joke about the blue doughnut that seems to be one of the reasons you went on your "leave null sec alone cuz it's worse in high sec" crusade.

And why wouldn't I mention that a certain alliance accounts for 21% of all bots? That's not some made up number like your 85%, that comes straight from CCP's presentation. Go ahead, I'll give you a moment to check these things.


You jumped on the goonspiracy bandwagon and got angry over being labeled a crazy. Compare that "certain alliance" to the NPC alliances and let us all know how that works.


I can't compare that certain alliance to anything, since CCP didn't release the name of the alliance. I'm not sure why you feel it's the goons that are responsible for 21% of all bots, but I haven't made that assertion and I'll advise you of the same thing that I advised Kaarous: accusing an alliance of being infested with bots(over 3,000 in the past 16 months) is a very serious thing and you should have proof before you go doing so. Also, you shouldn't be making these accusations in GD, but instead you should be getting in touch with CCP directly and providing them with the proof that you have so that they may deal with it. It's against the forum rules to rumour monger.

Edit: And it's strange that you're accusing your own alliance of such heinous actions. Shouldn't you be leaving in protest?