open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked WE ARE FED UP!!!! TIME TO MAKE SOME NOISE ABOUT RMT AND BOTTING!!!!
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 81 82 83 84 85 [86] 87 88 89 : last (89)

Author Topic

Disturbed Pilot
Posted - 2011.07.15 22:15:00 - [2551]
 

Originally by: Jonathan Ferguson
Originally by: Disturbed Pilot
If CCP promised to give 10% of MT profit (for X amount of time) to combat bots, I would forgive them for all there short comings in the last several months.

Their lead developer for Internet Spaceships is a goon. Goons bot and RMT on a massive scale. Why would you expect them to do anything about bots or care if you forgive them or not (or believe their promises if they made them, for that matter)?

You must be new here.


I'd just like to say, i left my opinion short and to the point to see if a troll would grab hold of it. Do you really got nothing better to do?

Jonathan Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.16 18:06:00 - [2552]
 

Originally by: Disturbed Pilot
Originally by: Jonathan Ferguson
Originally by: Disturbed Pilot
If CCP promised to give 10% of MT profit (for X amount of time) to combat bots, I would forgive them for all there short comings in the last several months.

Their lead developer for Internet Spaceships is a goon. Goons bot and RMT on a massive scale. Why would you expect them to do anything about bots or care if you forgive them or not (or believe their promises if they made them, for that matter)?

You must be new here.


I'd just like to say, i left my opinion short and to the point to see if a troll would grab hold of it. Do you really got nothing better to do?


You made an ignorant/inflammatory post to provoke a reaction, then? (Isn't that trolling?)

You really got nothing better to do?

Novon Toll
Posted - 2011.07.16 21:31:00 - [2553]
 

Good topic. Death to bots!

Crucis Cassiopeiae
Amarr
PORSCHE AG
Posted - 2011.07.18 22:10:00 - [2554]
 

ehhm... and whats about that blog??? Rolling Eyes

Cletus Majora
Posted - 2011.07.18 22:17:00 - [2555]
 

Originally by: Crucis Cassiopeiae
ehhm... and whats about that blog??? Rolling Eyes


lol, just lol.

To expect 'that blog', one would have to expect that anything CCP says, or has said, about their pursuit of botting was true, or is true. I know that most of the denizens of this threadnaught believe them, but, really, where is the actual evidence?

Everywhere I go I see either the same old bots or new bots in the same numbers.

Originally by: The A Team's Mr. T
I pity the fool (who thinks CCP really wants to do anything about botting)

OHU812
Posted - 2011.07.18 22:26:00 - [2556]
 

Yup... might as well quit wasting your time.

AkJon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.19 20:26:00 - [2557]
 

Over on failheap a potty-mouthed fanboi is claiming that with respect to bots, CCP have "picked up the ball here and run with it. The problem isn't completely solved and it never can be but they are doing something about it."

Is there any truth to this or is it still just like 1 guy at CCP giving multiple chances to botters enforcing a policy with multiple loopholes, allowing botting to continue more or less as before?

I'd think that if CCP were really doing something significant, they'd be crowing about it.

Meryl SinGarda
Caldari
Belligerent Underpayed Tactical Team
Posted - 2011.07.19 20:32:00 - [2558]
 

There needs to be a topic called, "WE ARE FED UP!!!! TIME TO MAKE SOME NOISE ABOUT DERPERS AND WHINERS!!!!"

Vincent Athena
Posted - 2011.07.19 21:02:00 - [2559]
 

Originally by: AkJon Ferguson
Over on failheap a potty-mouthed fanboi is claiming that with respect to bots, CCP have "picked up the ball here and run with it. The problem isn't completely solved and it never can be but they are doing something about it."

Is there any truth to this or is it still just like 1 guy at CCP giving multiple chances to botters enforcing a policy with multiple loopholes, allowing botting to continue more or less as before?

I'd think that if CCP were really doing something significant, they'd be crowing about it.


CCP has told the CSM this (from the May meeting minutes with the Eve Secutity Task Force):

"CSM was shown a graph of the number of characters actively performing a “certain action” more than 20 hours a day. There were huge chasms in the graph around Chinese New Year, Hulkageddon, and a final cliff like drop after the first ESTF bannings."

"Only 8% of players who receive their first strike go on to get a second strike. CSM noted that this compares to a 1-year recidivism rate in the US of 16%, which indicates that EVE players are distressingly law-abiding.
As of the week before the summit, nearly 100 players had received a third-strike, but an additional number of players who had been caught botting were separately banned for RMT.
CSM raised the concern that the numbers being shown were being affected by character laundering (selling of characters that have received strikes and replacing them with clean characters). However, CCP tracks this activity and the numbers are not significant."

For that last: The strikes are against the PLAYER, not the account or character. There are reports in the other bot thread of botters with 5 accounts, 4 of which bot, getting all 5 banned.

So CCP is doing something. But is it enough?

AkJon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.19 21:17:00 - [2560]
 

Originally by: Vincent Athena
Originally by: AkJon Ferguson
Over on failheap a potty-mouthed fanboi is claiming that with respect to bots, CCP have "picked up the ball here and run with it. The problem isn't completely solved and it never can be but they are doing something about it."

Is there any truth to this or is it still just like 1 guy at CCP giving multiple chances to botters enforcing a policy with multiple loopholes, allowing botting to continue more or less as before?

I'd think that if CCP were really doing something significant, they'd be crowing about it.


CCP has told the CSM this (from the May meeting minutes with the Eve Secutity Task Force):

"CSM was shown a graph of the number of characters actively performing a “certain action” more than 20 hours a day. There were huge chasms in the graph around Chinese New Year, Hulkageddon, and a final cliff like drop after the first ESTF bannings."

"Only 8% of players who receive their first strike go on to get a second strike. CSM noted that this compares to a 1-year recidivism rate in the US of 16%, which indicates that EVE players are distressingly law-abiding.
As of the week before the summit, nearly 100 players had received a third-strike, but an additional number of players who had been caught botting were separately banned for RMT.
CSM raised the concern that the numbers being shown were being affected by character laundering (selling of characters that have received strikes and replacing them with clean characters). However, CCP tracks this activity and the numbers are not significant."

For that last: The strikes are against the PLAYER, not the account or character. There are reports in the other bot thread of botters with 5 accounts, 4 of which bot, getting all 5 banned.

So CCP is doing something. But is it enough?



That actually sounds promising. Thanks for the info. (Not sure how wise it is to tell the botters that the cut-off is 20 hours per day, but that might be (justifiable for a change) deliberate misinformation.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2011.07.19 21:26:00 - [2561]
 

Originally by: AkJon Ferguson
Originally by: Vincent Athena
Originally by: AkJon Ferguson
Over on failheap a potty-mouthed fanboi is claiming that with respect to bots, CCP have "picked up the ball here and run with it. The problem isn't completely solved and it never can be but they are doing something about it."

Is there any truth to this or is it still just like 1 guy at CCP giving multiple chances to botters enforcing a policy with multiple loopholes, allowing botting to continue more or less as before?

I'd think that if CCP were really doing something significant, they'd be crowing about it.


CCP has told the CSM this (from the May meeting minutes with the Eve Secutity Task Force):

"CSM was shown a graph of the number of characters actively performing a “certain action” more than 20 hours a day. There were huge chasms in the graph around Chinese New Year, Hulkageddon, and a final cliff like drop after the first ESTF bannings."

"Only 8% of players who receive their first strike go on to get a second strike. CSM noted that this compares to a 1-year recidivism rate in the US of 16%, which indicates that EVE players are distressingly law-abiding.
As of the week before the summit, nearly 100 players had received a third-strike, but an additional number of players who had been caught botting were separately banned for RMT.
CSM raised the concern that the numbers being shown were being affected by character laundering (selling of characters that have received strikes and replacing them with clean characters). However, CCP tracks this activity and the numbers are not significant."

For that last: The strikes are against the PLAYER, not the account or character. There are reports in the other bot thread of botters with 5 accounts, 4 of which bot, getting all 5 banned.

So CCP is doing something. But is it enough?



That actually sounds promising. Thanks for the info. (Not sure how wise it is to tell the botters that the cut-off is 20 hours per day, but that might be (justifiable for a change) deliberate misinformation.


Which just leaves the minor side issue of the "potty mouthed fanboi" being right and you being wrong.

AkJon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.19 21:43:00 - [2562]
 

Edited by: AkJon Ferguson on 19/07/2011 21:46:11
On this issue (whether or not CCP's actions are having any significant effect at reducing/deterring botting,) it sounds like you were right and I was wrong. (and I'd rather be wrong than right here, tbh.)

AkJon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.20 18:00:00 - [2563]
 

Originally by: Vincent Athena
So CCP is doing something. But is it enough?

Not if it means that all a botter has to do is bot 18 hours a day on 4 PLEXed accounts instead of 23.5 hours a day on 3 PLEXed accounts.

'Recidivism rates' are meaningless if 'law enforcement' is incompetent or if the criminals have learned how to avoid detection.

Fewer than 100 players banned for botting. It sounds like CCP has made a 'promising' start, by targeting the most flagrant abusers. CCP is very good at promising. Delivering, not so much.

What ever became of that list of RMTers on EVENews24? Were they all banned? Were they at least all investigated?

edith prickley
Posted - 2011.07.20 18:45:00 - [2564]
 

Edited by: edith prickley on 20/07/2011 18:50:14
The CSM numbers are interesting. 100 banned (3rd strike) and 8% 2nd strike recidivism. If we knew the 3rd strike rate, we'd know how active CCP has been, but we can still make some guesses.

For instance, if we assume the 8% repeat offenders are determined botters, and 100% of them go on to a 3rd strike, then we find that CCP have detected a total of 1250 botters. Doesn't seem like very much.

On the other hand, if we use the known 2nd strike rate (8%) for the 3rd strike as well, we get 15625 bots detected. Ouch, that would mean almost 10% of Eve users were identified as bots (assuming ~160k people are playing, which is about what you get from 360k accounts and 2.25 accounts per person).

Probably the real answer is between these two widely separated extremes, since I guess the perma-ban 3rd strike penalty is enough to deter some proportion of even the most serious botters.

Hopefully Sreegs returns to the forums with his blog at some point so that we can stop speculating.

Crucis Cassiopeiae
Amarr
PORSCHE AG
Posted - 2011.07.20 19:36:00 - [2565]
 

Edited by: Crucis Cassiopeiae on 20/07/2011 19:36:36


ppl, you know that sticky topic "Current Botting and Exploit/Client Modification Policies - 12/5/2011"
well... its not any more...

and you know when something is not important any more... when they remove it... Confused

Cletus Majora
Posted - 2011.07.20 19:43:00 - [2566]
 

It's so very interesting to see all these people putting absolute faith in what amounts to an absolutely unfaithful company.

Ooooh, they showed the CSM a graph??? Well, shut my mouth! I guess that proves everything.

When combined with the removed sticky on botting policy, I wonder when all these faithful will finally open their eyes and see the absolute LACK of evidence staring right at them.

edith prickley
Posted - 2011.07.20 19:53:00 - [2567]
 

Edited by: edith prickley on 20/07/2011 19:54:19
Yup, given that Sreegs has been quiet for a couple of months now and they've silently removed his policy sticky (a very strange move), I'm beginning to have more faith in the botters' point of view: CCP is really just paying lip service to this problem.

Well, we've heard it from Hilmar himself. Don't listen to what they say, watch what they do.

So CCP, what are you doing?

Jonathan Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.24 21:06:00 - [2568]
 

Trusting CCP kinda reminds me of Sam Kinison's take on love/marriage.

CCP Sreegs

Posted - 2011.07.24 22:14:00 - [2569]
 

Originally by: edith prickley
Edited by: edith prickley on 20/07/2011 19:54:19
Yup, given that Sreegs has been quiet for a couple of months now and they've silently removed his policy sticky (a very strange move), I'm beginning to have more faith in the botters' point of view: CCP is really just paying lip service to this problem.

Well, we've heard it from Hilmar himself. Don't listen to what they say, watch what they do.

So CCP, what are you doing?


Banning botters

Tautut
Amarr
Posted - 2011.07.24 22:19:00 - [2570]
 

Originally by: CCP Sreegs
Originally by: edith prickley
Edited by: edith prickley on 20/07/2011 19:54:19
Yup, given that Sreegs has been quiet for a couple of months now and they've silently removed his policy sticky (a very strange move), I'm beginning to have more faith in the botters' point of view: CCP is really just paying lip service to this problem.

Well, we've heard it from Hilmar himself. Don't listen to what they say, watch what they do.

So CCP, what are you doing?


Banning botters


Right on.

Although I've just put a couple of war decs on a few ... Not trying to make your life difficult but be sensitive to my combat needs. Razz

Moon Shadowfall
Posted - 2011.07.24 22:22:00 - [2571]
 

Originally by: CCP Sreegs
Originally by: edith prickley
Edited by: edith prickley on 20/07/2011 19:54:19
Yup, given that Sreegs has been quiet for a couple of months now and they've silently removed his policy sticky (a very strange move), I'm beginning to have more faith in the botters' point of view: CCP is really just paying lip service to this problem.

Well, we've heard it from Hilmar himself. Don't listen to what they say, watch what they do.

So CCP, what are you doing?


Banning botters


86 pages summed up with two words. LOL

Jonathan Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.24 22:24:00 - [2572]
 

Originally by: CCP Sreegs
Banning non-goon botters while I spew buzzwords and happytalk in an effort to gain more influence at CCP like the rest of the circle-jerks who work here.


FYP (My condolences.)

CCP Sreegs

Posted - 2011.07.24 22:31:00 - [2573]
 

Originally by: Jonathan Ferguson
Originally by: CCP Sreegs
Banning non-goon botters while I spew buzzwords and happytalk in an effort to gain more influence at CCP like the rest of the circle-jerks who work here.


FYP (My condolences.)


I'd appreciate it if you'd

A) Not misquote me
B) Stop stalking me, it's creepy

I'm perfectly capable of speaking for myself.

Thanks!

Jonathan Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.24 22:36:00 - [2574]
 

Darius, I feel bad for you. I'm gonna give you a heads up on the buzzword you should be using more. It's one of Touborg's favorite words, versimilitude. It means, truthlikeness. CCP uses it a lot.

If you drop a few V-bombs at the next big meeting, I'm sure you'll be a non-intern in no time.

Jonathan Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.24 22:40:00 - [2575]
 

Oops, sorry for the X-post, Darius.

I'd appreciate it if you'd:

1. Not lie (FYP means I've changed the content, so I'm not 'misquoting' you.)

2. Not accuse me of **** I don't do. (okay, technically that's lying, but I had to think of 2 things)

(Stalk you? A week ago I didn't even know you were a goon. Get over yourself, son.)

You do your job and you'll have no complaints from me.

Amsterdam Conversations
Posted - 2011.07.24 23:12:00 - [2576]
 

Originally by: Jonathan Ferguson
Oops, sorry for the X-post, Darius.

I'd appreciate it if you'd:

1. Not lie (FYP means I've changed the content, so I'm not 'misquoting' you.)

2. Not accuse me of **** I don't do. (okay, technically that's lying, but I had to think of 2 things)

(Stalk you? A week ago I didn't even know you were a goon. Get over yourself, son.)

You do your job and you'll have no complaints from me.


Look at how proud he is of himself for knowing who the player behind CCP Sreegs is.

He must be a scientist to have found out.

Jon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.25 19:32:00 - [2577]
 

No more QEN's. Botters will now be allowed to bot with impunity since there will be no more hard evidence to prove that the entire EVE economy is a botfest. C/D?

dexington
Caldari
Baconoration
Posted - 2011.07.25 19:54:00 - [2578]
 

Originally by: Jonathan Ferguson
You do your job and you'll have no complaints from me.


I find that very hard to believe.

Speaker4 theDead
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.25 19:58:00 - [2579]
 

Originally by: Jon Ferguson
No more QEN's. Botters will now be allowed to bot with impunity since there will be no more hard evidence to prove that the entire EVE economy is a botfest. C/D?


LOL, How would CCP survive without the Botfest?


Jon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.25 20:07:00 - [2580]
 

Originally by: dexington
Originally by: Jonathan Ferguson
You do your job and you'll have no complaints from me.


I find that very hard to believe.


What's hard to believe? I give CCP credit when they get it right. I give CCP employees credit when they get it right. Doesn't Turbefield work for CCP?

And I misspelled verisimilitude, sorry, my bad.


Pages: first : previous : ... 81 82 83 84 85 [86] 87 88 89 : last (89)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only