These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Update from Team Security (graphs within!)

First post
Author
Epic Rupture
Riot Industries
#41 - 2014-07-29 03:00:18 UTC
So, where does IsBoxer fall in this? And please don't give the "We don't recommend you use it" response. People are using it and we need this to be clarified. I know people who use it and they think it should be banned. That's reason enough for me.
Rhivre
TarNec
Invisible Exchequer
#42 - 2014-07-29 03:57:00 UTC
Epic Rupture wrote:
So, where does IsBoxer fall in this? And please don't give the "We don't recommend you use it" response. People are using it and we need this to be clarified. I know people who use it and they think it should be banned. That's reason enough for me.


http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=1291641&page=10#274

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2743356#post2743356

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2750884#post2750884








Antihrist Pripravnik
Scorpion Road Industry
#43 - 2014-07-29 04:01:57 UTC
Thank you for these pretty numbers and graphs Smile

Keep fighting the good fight Big smile

And could someone, please sticky this (at least for a while)?
Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#44 - 2014-07-29 04:07:15 UTC
I want to believe that you're fighting the war against bots but it's hard to when completely obvious bots continue operating months after multiple detailed reports of the precise behaviour which proves that they cannot possibly be controlled by a human. It often feels like you just don't care about the bots and value botter subscription fees over making sure the only bots in the game are red crosses.

I don't know what kind of response I'm looking for, maybe an acknowledgement that you need to improve your logs? If we can tell beyond a shadow of a doubt that a ship (or, as often the case, a pod) is being flown by a bot and you claim that you can't, something is wrong and I really hope that it's not apathy.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#45 - 2014-07-29 04:17:01 UTC
Yeah, sounds more and more like "the war on drugs".
So you keep hammering the buyer.
How about posting explicit data on how many sellers you nailed, and the value of that chunk of ISK?
How about their ingame affiliations?

Until we get full transparency on who you nailed, this kind of stuff is just more propaganda.
Delta Tremor
Second Hand Souls
#46 - 2014-07-29 04:45:34 UTC
ISK buyers - if they missed the point on strike two, they will still have the drive for strike three, thus wasting CCP's and player's time.

Strike One - Seize ISK 10 day ban, 10% skills reduction

Strike Two - Seize all assets, cancel and seize all sell orders and contracts, PERMANENT BANHAMMER!

Don't tolerate those who think breaking the rules is worth trying to get away with it.

Set up stings on sites that sell ISK or Items - look for things which connect gamers with the selling sites

Sell sites ISK and Items at low prices that disappear after so many hours/ change of hands - ruin their reps with faulty products.

Look at fan sites that have adverts for selling sites

Closely look at all sites that sell ISK or advertise for other sites that sell ISK Put a cheating collaboration clause in the contract which your lawyers can word to overcome the First Amendment screamers When you cut off a site which carries a link to a site which enablers others to cheat, you are not limiting that site's First Amendment rights. Don't let a reseller of PLEX advertise for ISK sellers or have links to sites that have adverts for sellers.

30k bans in 2013 - Great! Now that you've skimmed the surface, DIG DEEP!!
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#47 - 2014-07-29 04:58:35 UTC
If someone is renting null systems and ends up getting banned for RMT/Botting, does the ISK they paid to the landlord get removed?

If not, perhaps it should be?

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~

Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#48 - 2014-07-29 05:02:33 UTC
Delta Tremor wrote:
ISK buyers - if they missed the point on strike two, they will still have the drive for strike three, thus wasting CCP's and player's time.


The problem with going all crazy on the ISK buyers is that in a vast majority of MMOs out there ISK buyers are never banned, or even reprimanded. Removing the ISK is fine, but quick to ban might not be the best idea.

Even the smartest dog needs to be told a few times to learn new tricks.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~

Delta Tremor
Second Hand Souls
#49 - 2014-07-29 06:02:53 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
Delta Tremor wrote:
ISK buyers - if they missed the point on strike two, they will still have the drive for strike three, thus wasting CCP's and player's time.


The problem with going all crazy on the ISK buyers is that in a vast majority of MMOs out there ISK buyers are never banned, or even reprimanded. Removing the ISK is fine, but quick to ban might not be the best idea.

Even the smartest dog needs to be told a few times to learn new tricks.



Use cap letters to drive home the policy in trial and new accounts and a good explanation on strike one with a very firm description of what strike two brings.

Go ahead and change it back to three strikes when there is incontrovertible evidence proving the smartest dogs are now playing Eve.
2pt
Writing Memoirs
#50 - 2014-07-29 06:52:15 UTC
OK - scamming is legal...

But SPAMMING IS NOT! So, am I the only one who petitions the exactly 30 second interval scammer for spamming?
Anthar Thebess
#51 - 2014-07-29 06:53:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Anthar Thebess
Why you don't implement silver bullet for RMT alliances.
If at given time from one alliance to many people is banned for RMT - they get warning .
If nothing changes - alliance is disbanded.

You should check forum more often - people are adversing their RMT services here.
Just found & report around 7 topic on this forum offering RMT
http://community.eveonline.com/support/policies/third-party-policies/

Quote:
Real money trading
Trading in-game items for real-life currency or services is NOT allowed under any circumstances.
Galadriel Vasquez
Project Omega Industries
Reeloaded.
#52 - 2014-07-29 07:25:37 UTC
One fact over all of them jumped off the screen.....


Moldova has interwebz

I have tin foil hat trained to 5.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#53 - 2014-07-29 07:42:06 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
Delta Tremor wrote:
ISK buyers - if they missed the point on strike two, they will still have the drive for strike three, thus wasting CCP's and player's time.


The problem with going all crazy on the ISK buyers is that in a vast majority of MMOs out there ISK buyers are never banned, or even reprimanded. Removing the ISK is fine, but quick to ban might not be the best idea.

Even the smartest dog needs to be told a few times to learn new tricks.


They are people and know they are cheating. The clubbing they get is perfectly fineTwisted
Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises
Otherworld Empire
#54 - 2014-07-29 08:03:30 UTC
Wonder how much of those spambots are really RMT related. And for spambots please just mute them on strike 1 so they can keep spamming being unaware of it and keep paying their subs.

/c

★★★ Secure 3rd party service ★★★

Visit my in-game channel 'Holy Veldspar'

Twitter @ChribbaVeldspar

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#55 - 2014-07-29 08:06:28 UTC
Chribba wrote:
Wonder how much of those spambots are really RMT related. And for spambots please just mute them on strike 1 so they can keep spamming being unaware of it and keep paying their subs.

/c


You sly dog you.
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#56 - 2014-07-29 08:22:34 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Sentamon wrote:
Delta Tremor wrote:
ISK buyers - if they missed the point on strike two, they will still have the drive for strike three, thus wasting CCP's and player's time.


The problem with going all crazy on the ISK buyers is that in a vast majority of MMOs out there ISK buyers are never banned, or even reprimanded. Removing the ISK is fine, but quick to ban might not be the best idea.

Even the smartest dog needs to be told a few times to learn new tricks.


They are people and know they are cheating. The clubbing they get is perfectly fineTwisted


Unless you're a large alliance engaged in an exploit of epic dimensions, then it's all haha's, a wink, and a pat on the back.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=124145

hypocrites, gotta love em Lol

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~

Arkady Romanov
Whole Squid
#57 - 2014-07-29 08:43:57 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Yeah, sounds more and more like "the war on drugs".
So you keep hammering the buyer.
How about posting explicit data on how many sellers you nailed, and the value of that chunk of ISK?
How about their ingame affiliations?

Until we get full transparency on who you nailed, this kind of stuff is just more propaganda.


I'd like the numbers and alliances they belong to too. Mostly because I suspect that if there were a significant number in the larger alliances, we would probably be better at keeping house than CCP.

Whole Squid: Get Inked.

Setsune Rin
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#58 - 2014-07-29 10:09:39 UTC
Chribba wrote:
Wonder how much of those spambots are really RMT related. And for spambots please just mute them on strike 1 so they can keep spamming being unaware of it and keep paying their subs.

/c


when is the next jita local analysis?

i remember the day jita was silent.....or at least not a constant stream of isk doubling, i think if you post another they might sweep the system clean again.
Rhivre
TarNec
Invisible Exchequer
#59 - 2014-07-29 10:22:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Rhivre
Arkady Romanov wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Yeah, sounds more and more like "the war on drugs".
So you keep hammering the buyer.
How about posting explicit data on how many sellers you nailed, and the value of that chunk of ISK?
How about their ingame affiliations?

Until we get full transparency on who you nailed, this kind of stuff is just more propaganda.


I'd like the numbers and alliances they belong to too. Mostly because I suspect that if there were a significant number in the larger alliances, we would probably be better at keeping house than CCP.


I suspect a significant proportion would be in NPC corps, how would we go about keeping house then?

Alliances without the information on names would be no better at keeping house than now.


Do we trust Eve players to adjust that figure so it is a % of the population, or just go on a witchhunt based on raw numbers?

"Oh, this alliance has 10 RMTers, they are fine, this other alliance has 100, burn them with fire" or

"Oh, this alliance has 10/12 members RMTing, this other alliance has 100/3000, perhaps we should burn the 10 members"


Finally, @Dinsdale, whilst CCP Pelligro did say the ban duration related to buyers, are you actually suggesting that sellers go free whilst buyers get banned?, because that would be a Guiness Book worthy feat of stretching, even for a nimble trained acrobat such as yourself.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#60 - 2014-07-29 13:06:22 UTC
Rhivre wrote:
Arkady Romanov wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Yeah, sounds more and more like "the war on drugs".
So you keep hammering the buyer.
How about posting explicit data on how many sellers you nailed, and the value of that chunk of ISK?
How about their ingame affiliations?

Until we get full transparency on who you nailed, this kind of stuff is just more propaganda.


I'd like the numbers and alliances they belong to too. Mostly because I suspect that if there were a significant number in the larger alliances, we would probably be better at keeping house than CCP.


I suspect a significant proportion would be in NPC corps, how would we go about keeping house then?

Alliances without the information on names would be no better at keeping house than now.


Do we trust Eve players to adjust that figure so it is a % of the population, or just go on a witchhunt based on raw numbers?

"Oh, this alliance has 10 RMTers, they are fine, this other alliance has 100, burn them with fire" or

"Oh, this alliance has 10/12 members RMTing, this other alliance has 100/3000, perhaps we should burn the 10 members"


Finally, @Dinsdale, whilst CCP Pelligro did say the ban duration related to buyers, are you actually suggesting that sellers go free whilst buyers get banned?, because that would be a Guiness Book worthy feat of stretching, even for a nimble trained acrobat such as yourself.


All I can say is that whenever CCP champions how wonderful they are in their "kill the RMT'ers" PR campaigns, the majority of their verbage is about buyers. Every transaction has a buyer and a seller. And if RMT economics is anything like any other illicit economy, there are a heluva lot more buyers in the market than sellers. Nailing sellers would shrink RMT activity faster than nailing buyers.

And outing BOTH sides would do wonders for credibility.