Curse

amaretto creme · May 29, 2010, 12:37 AM // 00:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by freedom_razor

Some of the banned accounts were never injecting, and some others, not yet banned, were injecting, mmkay?

If they were never injecting, they would never have been caught. They might have even had something that they thought was safe but was not, or even, in the case of a friend of mine, their brother used bots and any account coming from that IP just got banned, so, sadly, his did too. It happens, and I'd whoop my brother's butt for that, FYI. Lol

pumpkin pie · May 29, 2010, 12:37 AM // 00:37

off course there is an automated reply email, It is probably pre-written before they release Dhunn. You don't expect them to write individual heart warming reply to every players who submit a query, now, do you? Cos it would take months before they can attend to you.

You can probably use a bot to submit your query

, sorry can't help it.

/runs away

Erys Vasburg · May 29, 2010, 12:47 AM // 00:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by shoyon456

Well then if who got banned doesn't matter, doesn't it make sense that the replies would be very similar if not identical?

They should not be identical, because each case is different. The purpose of emailing support is to receive support. When there is absolutely no support being given, there ceases to be a reason to request it, and likewise a reason to direct one to seek it (see: Question #1). Users are directed to seek assistance, and then promptly denied any.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shoyon456

Because for once Anet is being fair. People are getting the same treatment. Don't you like equality?

Whether or not they are being fair is debatable (for example, it is hardly fair to give these responses to someone asking about their account possibly being compromised, but that is exactly what has happened in at least one case), but I personally feel that in cases of support, people should be treated equally but differently.

vamp08 · May 29, 2010, 12:48 AM // 00:48

*Composes self*

I agree, dont fight bots with bots, ANet.

MArcSinus · May 29, 2010, 12:49 AM // 00:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

off course there is an automated reply email, It is probably pre-written before they release Dhunn. You don't expect them to write individual heart warming reply to every players who submit a query, now, do you? Cos it would take months before they can attend to you.

You can probably use a bot to submit your query

, sorry can't help it.

/runs away

I don't see why it would take months...

Let us assume half of the 3700 accounts have the same IP, which would mean we have 1850 people sending a query. Even this number is to big imo regarding some people having like 12 side-accounts and not everyone replys obviously.
Now let us assume it would cost a support member 10 minutes to look up your account information after your reply and send you the information why you got banned. It would take 18500 minutes, which are 925/3 hours, let's assume a employer works 9 hours a day it would take him or her about 34 days.. but obviously he/her isn't alone. With 10 people it would only cost them 3,4 days..

Of course I made all these numbers up but I hope you get the picture that if we gave them, let's say a week, to respond to everyone they should have plenty of time for a proper response.

cormac ap dunn · May 29, 2010, 12:51 AM // 00:51

At a time when so many people have been banned, can we honestly expect any company to give a non automated response so soon? Its been stated in this thread several times that Anet has their hands full right now, I'm sure in time people will get non canned responses to their questions. Its only been a few days, give these folks a break. Its a job, not a love affair with each person sending in a ticket. If you want kisses and hugs, go to your loved ones. If you want an answer, be patient, in time you will get them.

I Rogue Syndicate I · May 29, 2010, 12:52 AM // 00:52

seems like an insurance company just auto denying coverage many times just to get the majority to stop trying... everyone knows how much love there is for insurance companies... lol

pumpkin pie · May 29, 2010, 12:54 AM // 00:54

They have other things to do as well, like other players with other type of problems.

You all should use the phone line

Erys Vasburg · May 29, 2010, 12:56 AM // 00:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by cormac ap dunn

I'm sure in time people will get non canned responses to their questions.

Unfortunately, they are being told that they will never get any such thing. Please review the final sentence of the fourth email quoted in the original post.

And thus we come to one of the problems that prompted the posing of the first question. Automated replies are to be expected, and there is nothing wrong with them in concept; however, when these automated replies shut users out of any real support after they have been directed by employees to get support, the automation becomes an issue.

MArcSinus · May 29, 2010, 12:57 AM // 00:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

You all should use the phone line

I'm pretty sure that ain't free of charge

Zarion Silverarrow · May 29, 2010, 12:58 AM // 00:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by cormac ap dunn

At a time when so many people have been banned, can we honestly expect any company to give a non automated response so soon? Its been stated in this thread several times that Anet has their hands full right now, I'm sure in time people will get non canned responses to their questions. Its only been a few days, give these folks a break. Its a job, not a love affair with each person sending in a ticket. If you want kisses and hugs, go to your loved ones. If you want an answer, be patient, in time you will get them.

Why not just make an auto response that says they are busy,instead of one that basically says fu*k off in a polite manner?

cormac ap dunn · May 29, 2010, 01:11 AM // 01:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erys Vasburg

Unfortunately, they are being told that they will never get any such thing. Please review the final sentence of the fourth email quoted in the original post.

And thus we come to one of the problems that prompted the posing of the first question. Automated replies are to be expected, and there is nothing wrong with them in concept; however, when these automated replies shut users out of any real support after they have been directed by employees to get support, the automation becomes an issue.

I agree that they are harsh responses, but a recent post seems to state that those who lost their accounts for whatever reason have another avenue

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regina Buenaobra

If you purchase a brand new account, our Support Team will not take action on your account (i.e. ban it) so long as this new account remains free of any incidents requiring action from the Support Team. If you engage in activity that goes against the User Agreement and you are reported for it, this will attract the attention of the Support Team, at which point, they will take action if your account is found to have broken the User Agreement.

So perhaps these accounts are really locked for good. then the automated response terminating all future support makes sense. I believe that the accounts are considered tainted, and therefore will never see reactivation, but to those who feel they can live with the rules, heres a solution.

Sir Cusfreak · May 29, 2010, 01:12 AM // 01:12

I would agree with you if there was any support to be given, or if there was anything different going on between banned accounts. there's not - one answer is entirely encompassing. An alteration (injection) WAS made, and that is enough. "but it was only..." isnt worth pursuing.

I propose another question to the community here:
How much of ANET's current GW1 resources SHOULD be spent on these support emails?
A second scan/evaluation for each account? a personalized "on the night of April 15th at 2:14 am your account exited Bergen Hot Springs for the 400th time since logging on" ? NO. If theyre going to spend money and use resources, it should benefit the players, not the banned souls.
Its a waste of time and money to respond to each cheater, and the fact that they issued the invitation to contact them is a credit to thier professionalism, but, again, a gesture only. The fact that they respond to botters with a bot is a credit to thier greatness - it's a perfect ending; subtle, classy, and entirely appropriate.

Kumu Honua · May 29, 2010, 01:17 AM // 01:17

The only question that would matter to me is:

Did someone who has NOT lost their account to botting sent in a request and been sent these same responses?

THAT would show that they aren't even investigating before responding. All this shows is that they pre-wrote canned responses. They have always used canned responses.

Risus · May 29, 2010, 01:19 AM // 01:19

I understand what you are trying to say, and saying that they have absolutely no margin of error is completely obnoxious on ArenaNet's part, but the fact is that almost all 3700 accounts banned would be appealed despite the fact if they botted or not, simply because everyone thinks "Why not give it a shot?" There is no physical way ArenaNet could sift through all of those emails and figure out which ones even have a shred of legitimacy without being set back at the least a few days, which they are already pressured on time as it is.

I feel sorry for all the people that did get banned, but I suggest that you find another way to contact ArenaNet other than e-mail if you truly were wrongfully banned (phone would be the next best choice, interaction with a real human via voice would be much more legitimate than an email).

Edit: I just had to add this, it's too epic to leave out.

Quote:

I agree, dont fight bots with bots, ANet.

Erys Vasburg · May 29, 2010, 01:21 AM // 01:21

Responses like that, Sir Cusfreak, are why the second question was posed.

How can one be absolutely sure, without a shadow of a doubt, that there is no margin for error in whatever methods ArenaNet has employed here? You speak as if you know for a fact that every player that was banned was violating the terms of the EULA. But even from the contents of the final support email quoted, we know that this is not the case; those sharing a computer with a violator, or (reportedly) on the same Internet connection as a violator, were also banned with no chance of account retrieval, or any chance at receiving anything but the quoted automated responses.

It is quite hard to believe that with 3,700 accounts being processed, none of them could have been banned in error. To reject any suggestions that even one could have been a mistake is quite ridiculous. No method of detection is infallible, and no investigation is flawless.

I Rogue Syndicate I · May 29, 2010, 01:22 AM // 01:22

anyone else think they should have been dealing with botters a little at a time as they were caught as apposed to waiting so long to hit so many all at one time to grand stand it? Seems like it would have been easier to handle the support aspect of it...

cormac ap dunn · May 29, 2010, 01:33 AM // 01:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by I Rogue Syndicate I

anyone else think they should have been dealing with botters a little at a time as they were caught as apposed to waiting so long to hit so many all at one time to grand stand it? Seems like it would have been easier to handle the support aspect of it...

From a support standpoint yes, but i think it was done to send a deliberate VERY public message; Don't break the rules! From that aspect, it was spot on! Would-be cheaters are now certain of what happens,and i think that was the point really!

I Rogue Syndicate I · May 29, 2010, 01:36 AM // 01:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by cormac ap dunn

From a support standpoint yes, but i think it was done to send a deliberate VERY public message; Don't break the rules! From that aspect, it was spot on! Would-be cheaters are now certain of what happens,and i think that was the point really!

If they were handling if from the get go would there have been a need to send such a message...???

Smells funny to me...

I find if funny how everyone is so happy with a company running things like this... there seems to a lot of people so blinded with hate about the botters they are over looking a larger issue here...

Sir Cusfreak · May 29, 2010, 01:38 AM // 01:38

Quote:

Responses like that, Sir Cusfreak, are why the second question was posed.

How can one be absolutely sure, without a shadow of a doubt, that there is no margin for error in whatever methods ArenaNet has employed here? You speak as if you know for a fact that every player that was banned was violating the terms of the EULA. But even from the contents of the final support email quoted, we know that this is not the case; those sharing a computer with a violator, or (reportedly) on the same Internet connection as a violator, were also banned with no chance of account retrieval, or any chance at receiving anything but the quoted automated responses.

It is quite hard to believe that with 3,700 accounts being processed, none of them could have been banned in error. To reject any suggestions that even one could have been a mistake is quite ridiculous. No method of detection is infallible, and no investigation is flawless.

I don't find it hard to believe at all.
It's like this. I have a piece of paper with a picture on it. I made the original, and I know what it's supposed to look like. Now, I sell copies, and then I look at each copy. I CAN, beyond all shadow of a doubt, whether 3700 times or 37000 times or 3 billion times, tell if that copy has been altered. with a neat computer program that superimposes the pictures on top of one another, its even EASIER and reduces the margin of human error I would have if I used my eyesight.

<these people's files WERE altered. Period. ANET knows it, and it's NOT in error.>

Now I can make stacks and sort these copies, THESE were altered in this way, and these were altered in THAT way, etc....but if the copies werent supposed to be altered AT ALL, then WHY BOTHER?

If your file was altered, youre banned. We're calling it botting, and maybe you did and maybe you didnt, ACTUALLY "bot" but either way, you werent supposed to alter that file, and THATS plenty to ban you for.

In the unfortunate case of someone who shared an I.P. Address with a botter, they may be the ONLY case that even possibly should be allowed back in, and that would need to be a VERY strongly documented case...they would need to prove some things, in my opinion. If it happened that way, they should be able to prove it. but I dont want to see ONE botter reinstated because they were able to successfully lie about that situation. And dont start the innocent until proven guilty crap - no way.