EVE General Discussion

..some reason it posted this twice.

I was inferring that from Rosewater mentioning something about "one client per monitor" titan and super pilots with a single monitor would be upset that they wouldn't be allowed to alt-tab.

Sorry, not one client per monitor. One ship per window. One client per monitor would be silly.

You're actually asking me how it's a lie that anyone, ever, got banned for alt tabbing?

And you're doing this on the basis of an unconfirmed statement by someone on a third party forum, saying "friend of a friend".

Are you nuts?

Irony: You're going so far out of your way to defend CCP that you passed Bugs Bunny on his way to Albuquerque, and to give them the benefit of the doubt, while at the same time attacking anyone who is part of a close-knit community that you aren't part of who regularly share information about setups and news.....

That SS yes there is a way to bypass it. Now ISBoxer comes default with Input broadcasting disabled but you can go in and enabled it again. Simple as that. But CCP has stated that they will allow it for window arrangement and login. SO with this I have assumed its a thirdparty software they will look past as long as you are not using Input broadcasting out side what they said. SO with that I may use my VideoFx again.

Since you're so set in your ways to see ISBoxer as nothing but a bot, and your complete refusal to even consider that it isn't, coupled with your fundamental lack of knowledge on the subject, leads me to believe you are nothing more than a troll, and as such I will attempt to ignore you until you bring something tangible to the table. Have a good day, and I wish you the best of luck with EVE.

The irony of you asking me to provide proof of something I never claimed, while at the same time not providing proof to back up your own claims, is extremely amusing. I never made the claim that alt-tab got someone banned, however, I do have this guy http://www.dual-boxing.com/threads/51980-The-Banned-thread?p=396907&viewfull=1#post396907 who got banned for running this setup without broadcasting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFdYO9h0H3Y&feature=youtu.be

Your turn.

Lax tries his best to make sure that ISBoxer follows each game's specific EULA, but I didn't expect you to know that given your prejudices and inherent biases. I love the fact that you outright ignored my proof that so thoroughly demolished your argument, and that you snipped it out.

As for your "source that anyone here should believe", I must wonder whether or not you understand what happens when you take a group of human beings, give them a means to communicate amongst themselves, and add time. People form friendships, grow to know each other, and tend to not be tinfoil-hat suspicious of each other when something happens (especially when it's something as serious as being banned).

And finally, as much as I hate to attack a player, I really must ask: Do you believe that Fox News and ABC are unbiased? Of course there's going to be bias on any forum, including EVE's, especially with CCP's draconian policy on stiffling the spread of information obtained in petitions and conversations, in-game and out. Additionally, since we're on the subject, what is your definition of "bias"?

Your astounding lack of knowledge on the subject of ISBoxer and bots aside (which I and others find quite funny given rumors of CODE's origins as an anti-bot effort, not to mention the fact that there are (or were) a lot of ISBoxers who multiboxed Catalysts in CODE), I will admit that no, it does not mean that any such thread is to be taken with faith. However, if we apply Occam's Razor to some of these threads and bans, we quickly find that some of the claims that they were "botting" fall apart under scrutiny. Especially when you consider that at least one of the people who received a ban was instrumental in devising the means to continue to multibox a fleet without using ISBoxer's broadcast feature, round robin or otherwise, at all. Now, I ask you, if we developed a way to continue to multibox within the new confines of the rules, do you honestly think that someone would "revert" to broadcasting if he knew it was a surefire way to get banned? I realize this may be too much to swallow, but let me draw a parallel to Hyperdunking. Players figured out a way to shorten the time period between suicide ganking and re-shipping, and people (freighter pilots and highsec players alike) complained about it. Before this, you had one ship that you'd go out and suicide, then you'd hope you brought enough players to take out a freighter, and sit in station for your criminal period (or head to null, either way).
Now, going by a strict interpretation of the EULA, Hyperdunking is illegal, but no doubt you'll bend over backwards to defend it, being in CODE and all.

That was called a generalization, my dear friend. Just as you generalized all ISBoxers to be botters constantly breaking the EULA and no doubt "selling their ISK for RMT" without so much as a puff of proof, so too did I generalize every CODE member to being a F1 monkey who wants to defend whatever new exploit he may have found for ganking. For the future, I'd advise against making sweeping generalizations and stick to using facts and data..... if you had any, that is.