These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at

EVE General Discussion

  • Topic is locked indefinitely.

Scarlet Letters and Botters

First post First post First post
Verite Rendition
F.R.E.E. Explorer
#461 - 2012-04-03 23:06:36 UTC
"What would you, the player, stand to benefit from being able to identify which characters had ever been caught botting, whether or not they were still engaging in this activity?"

In short, covering my butt by not doing business with them. Since people who do business with RMTers are at risk of having their assets seized for supporting the RMTers, I'd like to stay as far away from them as possible.

I expect the recidivism rate to be quite high here.
Caldari State
#462 - 2012-04-03 23:10:30 UTC
I vuv you CCP Sreegs !!!! Buying a plex in your honor!

Shook Eelm's hand at Fanfest 2012

Shook CCP Soundwave's hand at Fanfest 2013

Got NPC API removed from Wormhole Space.

sYnc Vir
Ghost Legion.
#463 - 2012-04-03 23:25:34 UTC
Because as a player that has mined im tired of being seen alongside botters.

Because it gives anti botters the chance to gank someone thats botted for sure, rather then someone they are guessing is botting.

Because mining corps dont want botters in their corp risking their stuff.

Because botting punishments should go beyond fair, and be extremely harsh.

Because becoming a "good guy" for a bot is as simply as logging in their mains.

Because training a L3 will do mining alt is too easy, making bots replaceable.

Because almost every Eve player in the game wants it.

Because mission tengu bots are also fairly quick to replace, and will become easier soonTM with tree changes.

Because botting pisses most players off, why can't toss alittle fire back?

Don't ask about Italics, just tilt your head.

Louis deGuerre
The Dark Tribe
#464 - 2012-04-03 23:45:08 UTC
I am also of the zero tolerance family, disgruntled that my hard earned isk is becoming less valuable while people are botting left and right.
However, I want to stay out of this debate except to say that I applaud that CCP is willing to discuss this openly.
ICU Andshutup
Kill Injure Slash and Stomp
#465 - 2012-04-04 00:01:15 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:
Benilopax wrote:
As CCP were saying at fanfest, as people are saying about Mitts.

It's all about consequences.

You do something bad there are consequences, as long as it's made clear to people beforehand I say do it.

This is actually my biggest problem with the thing. We'd be putting ourselves in the position of making a solid statement that would incur player consequences and I prefer to stay out of the sandbox if that makes sense.

TBH botters go in knowing with forethought that they are in contravention of the EULA and make a conscious decision not to care. Assigning a scarlet letter then for ALL those caught is more than justified, as long as the investigation is fair and guilt can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. If, at a later date, the player amends his/her ways and sufficient time has passed, a pardon could be applied for (much like convicted felons can do today).

Cpt Syrinx
Jovian Labs
Jovian Enterprises
#466 - 2012-04-04 00:17:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Cpt Syrinx
Powers Sa wrote:
Cpt Syrinx wrote:
There SHOULD be some indication that action has been taken against a character's account on grounds of game-destructive behavior such as botting, and it SHOULD be visible to all.

Not for reasons of revenge.
Not for reasons of inciting shame.
Not in a feeble attempt to change the perpetrator's behavior for the better.
I do not care about these people.

I care about me. Also, to a lesser extent (this is EVE after all), about the other people that are not risking damage to this game for their own betterment.

I feel that we 'normal' players have a justifiable entitlement to the information required to shield ourselves from these people: I want the ability to avoid business with them, I want the ability to avoid conflict with them. I want the information required to utterly and completely avoid ALL INTERACTION with these people. If I were crazy enough to feel tainted by their very presence in the same system as myself, I would still be entitled to the information required to decide to get the hell out.

I highly disagree. The motivating factor for everyone I've talked to, (real life non-goon friends), is to name and shame people. Basically they want to hold it over people's heads. They want tears. They want to use it as leverage in forums arguments.

You are playing CCP's game. You aren't really entitled to more information than they feel like giving.

CCP knows who is destroying the game, and they in turn are destroying those people without mercy. When I say without mercy, I mean they are hitting everybody. I found out a guy that loaned me isk (I repaid), is actually a dirty RMT/Isk seller. (I've only been playing 5months) Do I get a scarlet letter for transacting him? I hope not.

CCP Sreegs is doing an excellent job to break habits by going after ISK and Assets.

I think my reasoning didnt come across, since it is mostly in line with the last bit you mention here.

I argue that we need the information to protect ourselves, to avoid inadvertent involvement in their activities, either directly or by affiliation. This goes from whole alliances getting reputations of condoning botting, to single players getting negative wallets due to dirty isk involvement.

The word 'entitled', I have chosen on purpose. While its meaning in a forum is diluted by its use to shun badposters (often rightly so tbh), in this case its intended to address the causal relation that our exposure to these people merits information to know them for what they are in our own defence. That people want to know for basic motivations of naming and shaming does not invalidate my argument, I feel. The need to know remains regardless, monkey motivations or not.

Cpt Syrinx wrote:
If we do not know, if we befriend these people and, for instance, loan them isk or assets, we get involved involuntarily!

^^ key point left out of the above quote
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#467 - 2012-04-04 00:24:37 UTC
The real effect is allowing a corp/alliance to see that a person is abotter before they are allowed in. This is critical in 0.0 space as this could cause the loss of captial ships, large corp assets and ability of the player to direct the payments of corp/alliance bills. Example A alliance executor corp's ceo is ban for boting for 30 days. All the sov bills dont get paid. It have the effect of what happen to BoB when goon's took them out.

I personaly dont want a botter near our corp/alliance.
#468 - 2012-04-04 00:28:36 UTC
The protection you seek with the scarlet letter so you dont do bussiness with such people can be avoided by just banning them right away.

You are perma banned if you stole from ccp, but when someone steals from your eve experience you are offered the option to be their vengefull agent. Like you dont have other things to do in the game.

I dont need to know their names, know what alliance they were part off or what country they came from. Just toss em out of the airlock.

CCP is a bussiness and wants to make money, promoting their plexes and battle the rmt. rightfully so.
Now show the same tenacity in your actions against people that willfully stole from your customers.

You go your corridor but.

Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#469 - 2012-04-04 00:35:52 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
CCP Sreegs wrote:
AkJon Ferguson wrote:
The primary advantage of the scarlet letter would undoubtedly be as a deterrent and I support the concept for that reason.

Maybe the scarlet letter could be removed after say 1 year of good behavior?

But I could argue that there are plenty of other deterrents in place. This one has the additional negative of also providing a disincentive for turning into a Good Guy, which is something we've been trying to prevent.

Can't do the time?

Don't do the crime.

Are you talking about applying the "Scarlet letter" to the account or the character used to bot? "Casual" botters rarely bot with their mains - heck, they usually use a seperate account anyway so far as I am aware. Can you produce stats that would indicate that the concern you are raising is numerically significant?

I agree that a scarlet letter applied to a specific character - one which is now locked into that account - is likely to lead to the character being biomassed, but I'm not convinced that this would be "fatal" to the player involved. If someone has no more involvement with EVE than to bot, then good riddance to them. If the player is involved in actual gameplay, then they'll switch to some other method of generating income (hopefully an EULA-compliant one).

The main benefit to we the players of "scarlet letters" is to be able to unambiguously identify botters, and those organisations that tolerate or even cater to them.

Sreegs, when I saw your presentation at fanfest I was imagining what this forum thread would look like and it looks completely opposite of what I expected. From what you said at the presentation and your body language there I think you would agree.

I'm very surprised at how much slack people are giving to dirtbags that cheat. How they are coming up with reasons why it won't work or try to come up with alternatives to sidestep it altogether. I think the real resistance comes from the point that Malcanis makes. That that flagged toons in corps and alliances will be out there for everyone to see. Pointing out who actually allows it to happen, tolerate it and perhaps practice what they preach in the endless discussions about this that have occurred over the years in the forums. Trying to avoid that guilt by association? In Eve epic ganks, sabotage, scamming, cheating people out of supers are all labels of honor and rep for players, corps and alliances that perpetuate them. However associate the dirty words 'botter' or 'RMTer' to them and eHonor is doomed. Maybe there is something to the idea...
Merchants of the Golden Goose
#470 - 2012-04-04 01:01:04 UTC
@Sreegs: Any chance of you publishing white papers on the technology/algorithms you use for detection?

Had a nice sit down with Dr. Christian Thurau from Gameanalytics the other day, he has done a lot of work on human detection - got me a bit "turned on" the subject :-)

Also, if one happened to stop by Iceland at some point, does CCP (you ;-) ) give guided tours with free alcohol?
Kallen Brack
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#471 - 2012-04-04 02:00:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Kallen Brack
CCP Sreegs wrote:




I'd like to reframe the "scarlet letter" idea in this way:

Do you want CCP to be the sole enforcer of botting rules, or do you want the community to be part of that enforcement?

If you want CCP to be the sole enforcer, then the scarlet letter makes no sense.

If you want the community to participate in the enforcement of the botting rules, then the community needs transparency as to who is botting, and the scarlet letter is probably the best tool for providing that transparency.
Eno Lacigol
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#472 - 2012-04-04 02:24:02 UTC
I was banned for botting in the recent wave of bannings, despite never using a bot. It's really messed up that because of a GM who is to incompetent to tell the difference between an afk domi with drones out and a bot, that I'm out 15 days on my two accounts and a mark against me I did not earn.
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#473 - 2012-04-04 02:38:36 UTC
Speaking as a recruiter, it would be a big help to avoid getting these people in my corp.
Im Super Gay
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#474 - 2012-04-04 02:49:55 UTC
Eno Lacigol wrote:
I was banned for botting in the recent wave of bannings, despite never using a bot. It's really messed up that because of a GM who is to incompetent to tell the difference between an afk domi with drones out and a bot, that I'm out 15 days on my two accounts and a mark against me I did not earn.

I smell a liar trying to play the false positive card.
Deep Core Mining Inc.
#475 - 2012-04-04 02:55:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Malkev
I would just prefer they get permabanned after their second violation, then we wouldn't have to worry about this silly Scarlet letter business. First offense: one month ban. Second offense: perma.

There's an old saying in Tennessee...I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee...that says, fool me once, shame on...shame on you. Fool can't get fooled again.
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#476 - 2012-04-04 02:58:11 UTC
Seems to me a Scarlet Letter of Botterhood would open niches for organizations that want to recruit botters.

(a) In the Real World, Alcoholics Anonymous recruits only alcoholics, for the purpose of helping them get and stay sober.

(b) In the Real World, some criminal gangs accept only members who have been convicted of violent crimes.

Do CCP want to do that?

If the SLoB were visible only to Corp recruiters, and a third-party site undertook to collect SLoB reports from Corp recruiters, and publish them, would there be a problem of false SLoB reporting to the third-party site?
Eno Lacigol
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#477 - 2012-04-04 03:05:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Eno Lacigol
Im Super Gay wrote:
Eno Lacigol wrote:
I was banned for botting in the recent wave of bannings, despite never using a bot. It's really messed up that because of a GM who is to incompetent to tell the difference between an afk domi with drones out and a bot, that I'm out 15 days on my two accounts and a mark against me I did not earn.

I smell a liar trying to play the false positive card.
There is nothing I can do or say to prove my innocence to you. If I was in your situation and you were in mine, I'd say the same thing. I know I'm innocent though, and I pisses me off that CCP won't give my case more than 2 generic copy paste reply s more or less telling me to **** off. If repping sentry drones that are set to aggressive while sitting in an area were rats spawn is against the TOS they need to communicate this. Otherwise they need to reimburse me for the time lost from the ban.
State War Academy
Caldari State
#478 - 2012-04-04 03:12:21 UTC
So the purpose of a "Scarlet Letter" is to essentially make the game unplayable for those who earn it. Sure they can play, but we all want to know who they are so we can keep them from really playing Eve.

So why not just ban those people? If we are going to make the game nearly impossible to enjoy those players will just stick around to cause more trouble.

Ban them, or if that is too extreme for this stage, delete their character. They can still play the game but they lose that SP.
Sri Nova
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#479 - 2012-04-04 03:25:53 UTC
Lets make removing bots a player activity of eve.

since you can already detect the bots build in a system that allows the players to enforce the no bottling policy.

implement a system that strips bots of their concord protection .

implement a system that enable players to search a list of known boters through out the eve universe. (ala agents maybe)

this would make bot hunting a viable profession in eve and provide more pew pew.

after a set amount of time the bot is banned per normal.

Vetorept Fera
#480 - 2012-04-04 03:30:05 UTC
I think it would give a lot of insight into null sec alliances.

In pace requiescat