open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Open letter to CCP - c.a. CCP Sreegs about ban policies
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8

Author Topic

Ghoest
Posted - 2011.05.16 16:53:00 - [181]
 

Originally by: Mr Kidd
Edited by: Mr Kidd on 16/05/2011 11:44:04
Originally by: Wyke Mossari

2) Commercial entities can withdraw commercial services to anybody for any reason and are under no obligation to provide any explanation. However CCP do provide one in Botting-Bans EULA violation.




Yes they do. But it does not explicitly ban macros does it?

Quote:
3. You may not use macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play. You may not rewrite or modify the user interface or otherwise manipulate data in any way to acquire items, currency, objects, character attributes or beneficial actions not actually acquired or achieved in the Game.


I've bolded the one sentence that addresses macros. Taken in it's totality it would seem macros are banned from use for ACCELERATED acquisition of wealth, etc when compared to ordinary game play. Did I miss something? Is there another EULA floating around that says "Macros are explicitly banned"?

Even CCP's EULA is as clear as mud and there are people here who don't believe that CCP shouldn't provide some means for a player to appeal their cases?

The petition system is good and fine except that, and I'm assuming here, that the banned player is given no criteria with which to prove innocence in the case of a false positive.




Im sure they can find a wiktionary entry to justify it.

Super Failure
Posted - 2011.05.17 00:13:00 - [182]
 

If you start white listing, what happens if someone names their bot program EVEMon? Confused


Malak Alraheem
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.05.17 03:42:00 - [183]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Yeah, but at least now you KNOW what exactly is you're being charged with, and can start preparing a defense for the trial date.
Contrast that to being already sentenced when the lawmen come to pick you up and being stuck in prison without the possibility of an appeal.



I believe the charge is macro use in this instance. Build your defense, they'll get to you eventually.

Why all four accounts were charged in this case could make for an interesting discussion, but not really. Much like how the driver a car can get busted for the drugs in the car even though the person who actually had the drugs in the first place was not driving, he just stuffed them under the seat when the cops turned on the rollers.

CCP has SCMODS

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2011.05.17 03:55:00 - [184]
 

The charge applies to all accounts because it's the same person driving them. So a batter real world analogy would be confiscating all your cars because you broke the law while driving one of them (since in this world, there is no licence card which identifies you uniquely and indicates that you have permission to drive).

Ranger 1
Amarr
Ranger Corp
Posted - 2011.05.17 05:38:00 - [185]
 

Edited by: Ranger 1 on 17/05/2011 05:38:27
Originally by: Mara Rinn
The charge applies to all accounts because it's the same person driving them. So a batter real world analogy would be confiscating all your cars because you broke the law while driving one of them (since in this world, there is no licence card which identifies you uniquely and indicates that you have permission to drive).



I'm tuning in late to revisit this train wreck of a thread, but the clearer analogy (perhaps it's what you are trying to say) is they revoke the drivers license of the person with 4 cars... they don't confiscate car or cars themselves (usually).

So yes, in this case it is the person suffering the ban, not the character that got caught.

Ranger 1
Amarr
Ranger Corp
Posted - 2011.05.17 05:42:00 - [186]
 

Originally by: JackStraw56
Edited by: JackStraw56 on 15/05/2011 11:49:01
Originally by: CCP Sreegs
That's a lot of words to say you don't know what's going on.
You really should have stuck to your rule of not discussing this on the forum. That's no way to talk to customers. (We are customers, remember?)

Your work banning bots is great. But this attitude toward customers....is not.


Actually, humorous and concise is a good thing. So is developing a sense of humor and dropping the snobby "I'm the customer, you'll speak only when spoken to" attitude.

Or, to quote a classic line, "lighten up Francis".

Ranger 1
Amarr
Ranger Corp
Posted - 2011.05.17 05:56:00 - [187]
 

Originally by: Peregrine
I don't give a crap one way or the other if the OP botted or didn't.

But I agree on 2 points.

1) and I will leave the legal beagle crap to mittens, but in every western country in the world you have the right to know what you did wrong. If I am using a bot and I know about it CCP would not be providing me any information by telling me that I was banned for using xyz bot etc. The name of the bot (if possible) should show up in the original pop up imo. So if in the OP's claim that Reverance could have been the bot he should know that. It is not good enough to get a fine and be only told that you broke the law.

2) there should be some sort of fast track appeal process that would allow minimal disruption to the PAYING customer in the unlikely event that an error occurred etc.


1) He wasn't fined, and he is not accused of breaking the law. He was informed that CCP had reason to believe he was using a bot, which violated their end user license agreement, and was therefore banned for a period of time. Frankly, their opinion is more than sufficient to warrant such an action or a permanent ban if they so desire. He is accused of breaking an agreement for terms of service, not a law.

2: He was also told, point blank, how to get into direct contact on the matter and would be handled in due course. They could just as easily said "beat it". Being a "paying customer" doesn't mean jack if you have the company providing the service believes you have violated your agreement.

Step awaaaaay from the soapbox please.

Lugaedh
Posted - 2011.05.17 06:10:00 - [188]
 

Edited by: Lugaedh on 17/05/2011 06:11:15
For me, postinh #94 has made my day!

Originally by: Vincent Athena
BTW Sarah, is this you?


Originally by: botthurt

Hi All

FYI got banned after a number of years myself, worst thing is over the last 2-3 months ive hardly used ghost miner other than for autopilot aspect,

Was miening about 6-10 hours a day (sometimes only 4-5) in a newbie system....

Basically i hold 4 accounts (only run GM on 1 of them) all 4 have been banned, im apealing the ban (as i said havent realy used GM at all for the last couple of months) but they seem to have a very low priorty on dealing with banned petitions, was submitted a week ago (submitted two) and have had 0 responce form them, also when accounts were banned agian no email just your aco**** is banned for two weeks on start up, as these aco****s are all paid for by credit car dit will be interesting to see if they will also refund the two week banned peiord as time not used.




Same number of accounts, same timing on the appeals, same comments on the delay of response, same payment method.....

If so the software you need to delete is GM.





past this the discussion is now mere academic.

Good Work, Sreegs!

MaiLina KaTar
Posted - 2011.05.17 07:01:00 - [189]
 

Edited by: MaiLina KaTar on 17/05/2011 07:02:00
Originally by: Akita T
Yeah, but at least now you KNOW what exactly is you're being charged with, and can start preparing a defense for the trial date.
Contrast that to being already sentenced when the lawmen come to pick you up and being stuck in prison without the possibility of an appeal.


That's not how it works around here. More like the crusades. Witches get burned alive. Some of em might have done nothing wrong at all but nobody cares... until its their children getting grilled.

All fine and dandy with the CCP "crack down on the botters" ****... but only as long as your terms are clear. CCP's terms are not clear. Hones players will get banned for doing absolutely nothing. And the crowd will applaud.

Lugaedh
Posted - 2011.05.17 07:52:00 - [190]
 

Edited by: Lugaedh on 17/05/2011 07:52:58
Originally by: MaiLina KaTar
Edited by: MaiLina KaTar on 17/05/2011 07:02:00
Originally by: Akita T
Yeah, but at least now you KNOW what exactly is you're being charged with, and can start preparing a defense for the trial date.
Contrast that to being already sentenced when the lawmen come to pick you up and being stuck in prison without the possibility of an appeal.


That's not how it works around here. More like the crusades. Witches get burned alive. Some of em might have done nothing wrong at all but nobody cares... until its their children getting grilled.

All fine and dandy with the CCP "crack down on the botters" ****... but only as long as your terms are clear. CCP's terms are not clear. Hones players will get banned for doing absolutely nothing. And the crowd will applaud.



Crusades were religious motivated wars for land and booty from ~ 1100 to 1300.

Witches were burned during the early modern period ~1563 till the end of 18th century.
some still happen in africa today.

Nevertheless, it is a virtual game, and anyone contesting our fun to game by using automated scripting should get their asses kicked!

MaiLina KaTar
Posted - 2011.05.17 08:12:00 - [191]
 

Originally by: Lugaedh
Edited by: Lugaedh on 17/05/2011 07:52:58
Originally by: MaiLina KaTar
Edited by: MaiLina KaTar on 17/05/2011 07:02:00
Originally by: Akita T
Yeah, but at least now you KNOW what exactly is you're being charged with, and can start preparing a defense for the trial date.
Contrast that to being already sentenced when the lawmen come to pick you up and being stuck in prison without the possibility of an appeal.


That's not how it works around here. More like the crusades. Witches get burned alive. Some of em might have done nothing wrong at all but nobody cares... until its their children getting grilled.

All fine and dandy with the CCP "crack down on the botters" ****... but only as long as your terms are clear. CCP's terms are not clear. Hones players will get banned for doing absolutely nothing. And the crowd will applaud.



Crusades were religious motivated wars for land and booty from ~ 1100 to 1300.

Witches were burned during the early modern period ~1563 till the end of 18th century.
some still happen in africa today.

Nevertheless, it is a virtual game, and anyone contesting our fun to game by using automated scripting should get their asses kicked!

Well your smartass-skills are certainly up in the 5s. Kudos. Doesn't change the point, though: Honest players will get banned for no reason and people will applaud... until they get to stand on the wrong side of the gun.
CCP are not being clear on what's considered cheating and what isn't. And their EULA certainly doesn't do much to improve the situation.
For example I haven't yet found any clear and authorative source arund here that informs on whether using AutoHotkey to automate certain clicks with the intent of preventing RSI constitutes a bannable offence or not. I've seen disabled people get banned cause they used tools that would allow them to play. Again, CCP are not being clear.

So if they're gonna play the hardbody thuggish "I'ma kill all botters... f* em and their petitions!" type of company they need to be equally consequent on putting out guidelines that are not a bunch of wishwash, ambiguous horse****. They need to put that info in one place where everyone can inform themselves about what they can and cannot do.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.05.17 08:29:00 - [192]
 

Originally by: Malak Alraheem
Originally by: Akita T
Yeah, but at least now you KNOW what exactly is you're being charged with, and can start preparing a defense for the trial date.
Contrast that to being already sentenced when the lawmen come to pick you up and being stuck in prison without the possibility of an appeal.

I believe the charge is macro use in this instance. Build your defense, they'll get to you eventually.

Right, because when you get charged for something, nobody provides you with absolutely any information and evidence whatsoever regarding when and where the alleged crime took place ?

"Banned for macro use" MIGHT be more than sufficient for a GUILTY party, because they KNOW what they did. Of course, they might still pretend to be innocent, but they know full well how to attempt to claim they didn't use the macros that they used.

However, "banned for macro use" is basically almost no help at all to somebody who is actually INNOCENT, because he usually has absolutely no idea what the bloody blazes he did to warrant any of this... and his only possible attempt at a defense would be to GUESS AND KEEP GUESSING which one of his normal behaviours or legitimate software MIGHT have caused a false positive with CCP.

Do you see the imbalance here ?
Those that actually did something wrong have it MUCH easier than those that did nothing wrong but were nevertheless accidentally caught by the system.
You really think that's a good idea ?
Do you think it's really fair to those very, very few genuinely innocent people that MIGHT get in this position ?
Or do you even think that NOT telling people the details of their ban will really help in the long run with anything ?

Merouk Baas
Gallente
Posted - 2011.05.17 10:08:00 - [193]
 

I agree with you AkitaT (posted a few pages back but got mobbed by the fans).

The thing is, their attitude probably stems from the fact that all of the botters LIE so they're sick of dealing with the lies. They want the process to be "you bot -> banned" but instead it always is "you bot -> banned -> petition -> escalate -> investigation -> still banned" and that's more work than they originally planned for.

Too bad.

Sreegs' crusade is popular with the fans, but it also shows that they are unfair to the innocents (who are apparently having a hard time proving their innocence), and perceived unfairness is very bad when trying to manage a crowd / playerbase / group of employees / any group of people. So it's going to bite them in the ass relatively soon. Sreegs should google up "Ghostcrawler" and his current popularity ratings.

Lugaedh
Posted - 2011.05.17 11:05:00 - [194]
 

Originally by: Merouk Baas

Sreegs' crusade is popular with the fans, but it also shows that they are unfair to the innocents (who are apparently having a hard time proving their innocence), and perceived unfairness is very bad when trying to manage a crowd / playerbase / group of employees / any group of people. So it's going to bite them in the ass relatively soon. Sreegs should google up "Ghostcrawler" and his current popularity ratings.


i think you are very much missing the point.
Sreegs and his team ban i they are pretty sure.
anyone can then petition.

and the support in the player base is very, very broad!

Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
Posted - 2011.05.17 12:18:00 - [195]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Malak Alraheem
Originally by: Akita T
Yeah, but at least now you KNOW what exactly is you're being charged with, and can start preparing a defense for the trial date.
Contrast that to being already sentenced when the lawmen come to pick you up and being stuck in prison without the possibility of an appeal.

I believe the charge is macro use in this instance. Build your defense, they'll get to you eventually.

Right, because when you get charged for something, nobody provides you with absolutely any information and evidence whatsoever regarding when and where the alleged crime took place ?

"Banned for macro use" MIGHT be more than sufficient for a GUILTY party, because they KNOW what they did. Of course, they might still pretend to be innocent, but they know full well how to attempt to claim they didn't use the macros that they used.

However, "banned for macro use" is basically almost no help at all to somebody who is actually INNOCENT, because he usually has absolutely no idea what the bloody blazes he did to warrant any of this... and his only possible attempt at a defense would be to GUESS AND KEEP GUESSING which one of his normal behaviours or legitimate software MIGHT have caused a false positive with CCP.

Do you see the imbalance here ?
Those that actually did something wrong have it MUCH easier than those that did nothing wrong but were nevertheless accidentally caught by the system.
You really think that's a good idea ?
Do you think it's really fair to those very, very few genuinely innocent people that MIGHT get in this position ?
Or do you even think that NOT telling people the details of their ban will really help in the long run with anything ?



The problem is that giving out those details isn't going to be helpful for the defending side either in making his case. The reason for that is the obvious fact, that nothing on the client side can be trusted. If CCP detected you botting on a constant basis for some period of time and have their server logs as proof, they aren't going to accept your claims about how you did no such thing during that period of time and can provide your logs and friends testimony as evidence.

Yes there is a definite imbalance there, but that is how it is, how it's always been and how it will always be for the simple reason that you, your friends, your client and your logs simply can't be trusted. CCP certainly could handle things in a way that significant portions of legitimate players get falsely banned, but despite all this imbalance and potential for injustice there hasn't been many cases during the past 8 years of any large miscarriage of justice and all legit 3rd party software hasn't had issues with this.

I would agree to your objections if there was serious proof that legitimate activities and programs are causing people to get banned, but no such proof exists at this moment. The current objections come mainly from botters and devils advocates trying to come up with theoretical situations of what might happen, without any knowledge of the processes CCP uses to catch bots or any other evidence to give any credibility to their claims. I guess ruminating the issue helps to pass the time on the forums, but I don't see any legitimate reasons for concern at this point in time.

Tobiaz
Spacerats
Posted - 2011.05.17 12:39:00 - [196]
 

The OP seems sincere to me though perhaps a bit naive. CCP really isn't going to to give out info on their bot-detection. They already have troubles fighting botters as it is now.

I DO think however the mentioned lack of response of CCP to petitions considering bans is a big mistake. Failure to communicate is one of the surest ways to alienate your gaming community, especially when it concerns something as serious as a ban. Infallibility is an illusion.

Zagdul
Gallente
Clan Shadow Wolf
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2011.05.17 13:09:00 - [197]
 

Edited by: Zagdul on 17/05/2011 13:10:36



I have a sneaking suspicion I know who the OP is. He's also afraid to elevate his petition due to the fact that if he does and something he's unaware of running on his computer is the culprit, they'll perma ban his account.

There were some people who have been temp (14 day) banned for the software drivers associated with their keyboards returning a false positive.

One story I've heard was a cyno account where the only purpose of said account was to light cynos, train one character up to sell and it basically sat around doing nothing else, was banned.


Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2011.05.17 13:21:00 - [198]
 

Originally by: Merouk Baas
I agree with you AkitaT (posted a few pages back but got mobbed by the fans).

The thing is, their attitude probably stems from the fact that all of the botters LIE so they're sick of dealing with the lies. They want the process to be "you bot -> banned" but instead it always is "you bot -> banned -> petition -> escalate -> investigation -> still banned" and that's more work than they originally planned for.

Too bad.

Sreegs' crusade is popular with the fans, but it also shows that they are unfair to the innocents (who are apparently having a hard time proving their innocence), and perceived unfairness is very bad when trying to manage a crowd / playerbase / group of employees / any group of people. So it's going to bite them in the ass relatively soon. Sreegs should google up "Ghostcrawler" and his current popularity ratings.


Your post would seem to be predicated on the fact that the OP is innocent. But such evidence as we have would seem to show that isn't the case. The Ghost Miner forum post is pretty damning, and until the Op provides some counter evidence of equivalent weight, then there's no particular reason to assume that anything has gone awry with CCPs policies.

In fact it seems if anything that they're working exactly as they should be: The OP was using a bot on one account, and consequently all his accounts got temp banned, and now he's butt-hurt about it.

Wyke Mossari
Gallente
Posted - 2011.05.17 14:11:00 - [199]
 

Edited by: Wyke Mossari on 17/05/2011 14:24:08

I cannot believe that so many posters are falling for the claims of innocent. Blaming bans on legitimate software is clearly just an attempt to stir up FUD - Fear Uncertainty and Doubt.

Originally by: Merouk Baas
They want the process to be "you bot -> banned" but instead it always is "you bot -> banned -> petition -> escalate -> investigation -> still banned" and that's more work than they originally planned for.




Therefore the punishment should escalate for filing a false protest. Problem solved.


Landlady
Posted - 2011.05.17 14:49:00 - [200]
 

Since it seems to be the common theme here, I'll talk out of my ass for a bit.
---

There won't be false positives. Examining the way that bans are going down you can see a definite progression along a timeline as users of 1 particular program are hit all at once, and then a short time later users of another.

Despite the eventual plans the current detection software is NOT looking at heuristics; it is a particularly targeted piece of code, and they are having to implement detection for each bot in a manual way.

This is good, despite the fact that it seems inefficient. Heuristic detection examines behavior, but that leads to collateral damage(false bans).

People right now are trying to beg off their bans as being a result of false positives, but for the system implemented SO FAR this won't happen, but they assume it will(since most cheat detection is done in a manner that causes this).

A few months down the line when they get through their list of bots to target and they start implementing heuristic detection you will see them being more responsive to these claims.

Bomberlocks
Minmatar
CTRL-Q
Posted - 2011.05.19 02:49:00 - [201]
 

Originally by: Le Skunk
In this thread:

One indignant bot user
One rude dev
30 rude dev fanbois
One awesome poster

SKUNK

This. Still waiting for CCP to provide a decent disclosure on the forum disaster (hint, it probably will never come). CCP has proved itself to be utterly incompetent so often in the past that relying on CCP not making mistakes while running after bots, which they ignored for years until player rage once again proved that that is the only way to get CCP to respond to anything is like relying on Catholic priests to leave the choir boys alone.

In other words: Sreegs where is the disclosure dev blog on the forum screw up? Two weeks was a long, long time ago. You asked for two weeks and since nothing has come of it, you've only proved just how incompetent you and CCP as a company are.

Personal attack removed. Zymurgist

SmokeTheFly
Caldari
Elite Force
Posted - 2011.05.19 04:40:00 - [202]
 

great thread,would read again.

Skex Relbore
Gallente
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2011.05.19 06:29:00 - [203]
 

My problem with the absolute faith in the infallibility of CCP's bot detection program from the fanbois is that this detection method comes from the same bunch who thought that 50 fittings was more than enough for anyone.

That's just way to damned much faith in the face of past performance.

CCP does not have a pristine track record when it comes to QA for the game so why would anyone assume that this would be different for their "bot detection" tool?

Mistakes are made by programers all the time, yes even by the good ones. It's the whole reason the concept of QA exists in the first place. For example one of my programers made a small mistake in a simple script to scrub out duplicate monitoring events in our database last week resulting in a complete corruption of the data. The error didn't show in the limited QA testing but became obvious when run on a larger data set.

The reality is that small programing errors make it through QA testing on a regular basis, It's just reality that one can not create a testing environment that can fully replicate the complexity and diversity of systems that exist in the wild. It's why patches exist in computer software it's why we're about to get Incursion 1.5.

This makes me extremely leery of just taking CCP's word that this program is perfect "trust us" on face value. It just flies in the face of known reality when it comes to software design.

The lack of transparency on their audit and review process regarding this new anti-boting initiative is very discouraging of any confidence in the system.

Such transparency would not require specific information on what the detection program is looking for or how it's looking. What it would require is a formalized and detailed process for appealing a ban, particularly at the initial release when one would expect the greatest number of false positives.

Lets be honest here. Most actual boters aren't going to appeal their bans they're going to take their licks and wait for their developers to figure out how to beat the new detection program. So I think it would be a fairly safe assumption that a significant portion of if not the majority of appeals will be from false positives and prompt attention to those cases will result in fewer false positives and a more reliable detection program in the long run.

This guilty until proven innocent attitude represented by the majority of respondents in this thread is quite foolish considering the context we're operating in. CCP does not have a history of infallibility; quite the contrary actually, so granting them the benefit of the doubt in this case is quite stupid.

So while I fully agree with CCP Sreeg's refusal to discuss details of this specific ban as well as specific details of the detection program itself in this forum I do think that further elaboration of what processes are in place to reality check their results is in order.

Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.05.19 07:17:00 - [204]
 

Hah, you're naive if you think botters don't petition...

Also every case is reviewed by a GM before ban, so it's not going to ban innocent people due to programmer errors.

Zelda Wei
Caldari
New Horizon Trade Exchange
Posted - 2011.05.19 08:01:00 - [205]
 



So much butt hurt from bot sympathisers you just know this programme is working muchly.

Maxpie
Metaphysical Utopian Society Explorations
Posted - 2011.05.19 14:35:00 - [206]
 

I must agree with the OP on one point. Petitions should get a response. Even if the response is 'go #$%$#% in a hat' there should be a response.

I recently re-subbed. Got an email from CCP saying I could re-open my account for a few hours so I could buy a plex. I took them up on it. Patched my client, logged in, bought a plex. Went to fly to pick it up and encountered a very frustrating error occurring at every session change. Sent a petition - no response. Nothing. Nada. I want to get back into the game. I want to play. I want to give CCP my money again. Yet several days have gone by with no response. That's not cool.

TheGunzo
Posted - 2011.05.19 15:17:00 - [207]
 

Good day all.

I am one of those false positives. I had all of my accounts banned for 3 days (when that policy existed) earlier in the year.

GM Horse banned my entire team and I was out of the game for 3 days. I petitioned and the good people at CCP did their research, did a great job getting back to me and apologizing for incorrectly banning my accounts. Reset me and made things right.

So whether I was an early false-positive to the current approach, I don't know. I do know, I appreciate CCP for doing what was right by me.

I do hope they continue to ban bots. It will help all of us earn more isks in the long run.

Gunzo

Everinsearch
Posted - 2011.05.19 15:20:00 - [208]
 

Edited by: Everinsearch on 19/05/2011 15:22:07
Originally by: CCP Sreegs
Edited by: CCP Sreegs on 13/05/2011 17:52:12
Originally by: Sarah Tarith
Edited by: Sarah Tarith on 13/05/2011 17:49:09
Originally by: CCP Sreegs
The forum is not the petition system. The forum never will be the petition system. You can petition both by sending an email to support@eveonline.com and by using the support link on the navigation of this website. We'll review your case and be happy to spend time discussing it with you via the proper channels. Those channels are the petition system. We do not and never will discuss bans or petitions anywhere other than in private. We will not provide you with details about the detections, we will merely verify that they worked. When we determine that they have (and you'd be the first case where they haven't) we will repeat to you that you are banned for x amount of time. Unless you're botting or running a botting application you haven't been detected. By botting application I mean an application used for botting, nothing else.

Have a nice day and we look forward to your email petition.


I am very excited you were so kind to reply to me, the SURE pariah and cheater in the universe Crying or Very sadCrying or Very sadCrying or Very sad

More than 1 week ago, I sent both an anonymous petition (I can't log in to send it from the banned accounts, very, very inconvenient imho), then a mail to support@ccpgames.com.

Seeing no reply, I paid a new account (this one) and sent a petition in game under "BANS / EULA". I can post screenshot if you want proof.

None of this has been replied at all so far.


Also, how could I prove that I did not macro? Please tell me I'll do all you ask me, if you want I open my computer so you can check, I can phone, whatever.

Edit: could you pretty please confirm that Reverence (a python engine + scripts) is an allowed software? It's the only thing that rings me a bell.


I would recommend you re-read my previous post. There won't be any more on this topic.

:edit: I can understand your frustration if the situation is exactly what you say it is, but regardless of what the situation may be I'm not having this discussion on the forums with you or anyone else, nor will I ever. It has to go through the petition system and if that's not working then your beef is with customer service and the petition system. Nothing you do on the forums is going to solve either of those problems.



"You can petition both by sending an email to support@eveonline.com and by using the support link on the navigation of this website. We'll review your case and be happy to spend time discussing it with you via the proper channels."

Doctor Nakajima
Posted - 2011.05.19 15:30:00 - [209]
 

Originally by: Sarah Tarith
please I beg you CCP on my knees [/quote



Sweet.

Doddy
Excidium.
Executive Outcomes
Posted - 2011.05.19 15:47:00 - [210]
 

Originally by: Peregrine

1) and I will leave the legal beagle crap to mittens, but in every western country in the world you have the right to know what you did wrong. If I am using a bot and I know about it CCP would not be providing me any information by telling me that I was banned for using xyz bot etc. The name of the bot (if possible) should show up in the original pop up imo. So if in the OP's claim that Reverance could have been the bot he should know that. It is not good enough to get a fine and be only told that you broke the law.



Seriously dude, if you can't see how this would be used by bot programmers to render their software undetectable (and continuously updatable) there is really no hope for you. They can simply trial and error their way through security. Bot users can even trial and error to see which to use.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8

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