Curse

bigwig · Sep 03, 2006, 09:03 AM // 09:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by ubermancer

You, the PR voice of your company, knows nothing about a HUNDRED MILLION DOLLAR CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT against your parent company? Excuse my disbelief, but that kinda seems like the sort of thing you should be aware of. Allow me to enlighten you:

http://www.player2player.net/index.p...article&sid=91

http://loudopinions.com/forums/index...=0&#entry34006

Heres a choice snippet:

She's a community rep for arenanet, not a lawyer for ncsoft. wtf would she know about a nuisance lawsuit from some greedy nerd?

Demesis · Sep 03, 2006, 10:00 AM // 10:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigwig

She's a community rep for arenanet, not a lawyer for ncsoft. wtf would she know about a nuisance lawsuit from some greedy nerd?

He's not a greedy nerd. He had a valid reason to issue the lawsuit. Here's the important parts, if you missed them:

Quote:

His credit card continued to be charged for additional months even though he could not play. Refunds for the additional charges were not refunded as well. The suit claims that NCSOFT’s action surrounding it’s credit card charging process constitutes fraud.

Quote:

Lin’s account of banning players detailed, “Anytime a player started making too much noise about botting or anything like that we banned them. I thought it was unfair but that’s what we were told to do. No player was allowed to talk about bots in the forums, or name a person that was botting. When a player always petitioned us, we would call them a “pet” and sometimes we banned them because they would rally other players to petition us about bots. We really couldn’t have that.”

Quote:

Over eighteen (18) pages containing (211) signatures from players whose accounts have been terminated, received credit card charges, no refunds, and no explanations was entered in support of the Plaintiff’s motion seeking Class Action status.

Quote:

153 Articles of Evidence were entered with the lawsuit showing in detail that NCSOFT was fully aware that these bots were prevalent within the Lineage 2 game. Records of the Lineage2 forum site were provided showing how the company censors and deletes any topics/threads/posts related to the discussion of bots within the game’s environment. Some articles even detail how an internal NCSOFT employee used a bot, to level their own character.

bigwig · Sep 03, 2006, 11:13 AM // 11:13

Ok this is really off topic so this is all i'll say about it, but lets not believe everything some guy on the internet says shall we? Suing for 100 million dollars, and the guy is personally out maybe what, 50 or 60 bucks?

ubermancer · Sep 03, 2006, 11:35 AM // 11:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigwig

She's a community rep for arenanet, not a lawyer for ncsoft. wtf would she know about a nuisance lawsuit from some greedy nerd?

Okay, again. She is a PR rep. Her parent company is facing a 100 million dollar class action lawsuit (thats ~2 million GW accounts, btw)... and your asking why she would be aware of this?

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigwig

Ok this is really off topic so this is all i'll say about it, but lets not believe everything some guy on the internet says shall we? Suing for 100 million dollars, and the guy is personally out maybe what, 50 or 60 bucks?

I dont think that a lawsuit against ANet's parent company regarding their poor handling of botting and banning in another game is offtopic when we are talking about ANets poor handling of botting and banning.

Also, do you even know how a class action lawsuit works? Substantial legal fees aside, that money is going to be split more then 200 ways. Also, in such lawsuits you always ask for more then what you think you will be awarded (the judge could choose to award them 3 million, for example).

But the real point of the whole process is to force NCSoft to change their policies, because (if I remember, its late early now) if it is found that the claims made in the class action lawsuit are true, and NC Soft does not correct them, it can then be treated like a criminal matter. (and to be honest, closing someones account then continuing to charge their credit card either is illegal, or should be - same as those mail-in rebate offers that companies make sure *NEVER* get to you)

bigwig · Sep 03, 2006, 12:04 PM // 12:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by ubermancer

Okay, again. She is a PR rep. Her parent company is facing a 100 million dollar class action lawsuit (thats ~2 million GW accounts, btw)... and your asking why she would be aware of this?

I know what a class action lawsuit is, do you know what a community rep is? Because its not a PR person. She doesn't work for ncsoft. Let ncsofts PR people take care of this. A PR person for kfc doesn't handle PR for pizza hut, but they're owned by the same company. All of which is irrelevent since gailes job is community rep. Yeah sure, similar, but not the same. I doubt she speaks to ncsoft much, and i doubt they choose to send her memo's about every frivolous lawsuit.

Quote:

I dont think that a lawsuit against ANet's parent company regarding their poor handling of botting and banning in another game is offtopic when we are talking about ANets poor handling of botting and banning.

Also, do you even know how a class action lawsuit works? Substantial legal fees aside, that money is going to be split more then 200 ways. Also, in such lawsuits you always ask for more then what you think you will be awarded (the judge could choose to award them 3 million, for example).

But the real point of the whole process is to force NCSoft to change their policies, because (if I remember, its late early now) if it is found that the claims made in the class action lawsuit are true, and NC Soft does not correct them, it can then be treated like a criminal matter. (and to be honest, closing someones account then continuing to charge their credit card either is illegal, or should be - same as those mail-in rebate offers that companies make sure *NEVER* get to you)

The lawsuit in question is filled with absurdity, conspiracy theories and will most likely be dismissed. It is not a class action lawsuit, yet. The amount of money this guy lost could be sought after in *small claims court*.

And by off topic i meant, gaile greys knowledge of this lawsuit.

unholy guardian · Sep 03, 2006, 08:37 PM // 20:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by ubermancer

You, the PR voice of your company, knows nothing about a HUNDRED MILLION DOLLAR CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT against your parent company? Excuse my disbelief, but that kinda seems like the sort of thing you should be aware of. Allow me to enlighten you:

http://www.player2player.net/index.p...article&sid=91

http://loudopinions.com/forums/index...=0&#entry34006

Heres a choice snippet:

revenege of the nerds lol jk seriously jk'ing

It's pretty bad when you relize you ban people who are complaining about bots but don't ban the bots.

unholy guardian · Sep 03, 2006, 08:38 PM // 20:38

double post sorry, didn't know it went through the first time >_>

Andisa Kalorn · Sep 03, 2006, 10:24 PM // 22:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

The parallel is: paralyzing a police force by telling them that if any arrested individuals are found innocent at trial, then all criminals must be left unarrested in the event that one is accused inaccurately. That way leads to madness.

I hardly see how this analogy can be applied to botting in an online game. Criminals in the real world are capable of stealing my money, causing me physical harm, or even killing me. Bots in an online game? They can do none of this. In fact, they hardly affect me at all. I mostly use collector/crafter items, salvaging materials and crafting armor doesn't require interaction with the game's "economy" at all. The only way bots would affect me was if I was trying to get some unneccessary luxury item. Really, HOW can this compare to criminals in real life?

The reason why we accept that innocents may be caught up in the justice system is that crime is capable of so much harm to our society. Bots are just not on the same level. Not even close. And let's not forget that in our criminal justice system, you are allowed to SEE the parameters that could lead to arrest, and you are presented with the evidence that the authorities have found.

So why should Anet's system be so harsh given that the issue is of LESS consequence than crime, and that the "checks and balances" are nowhere near as comprehensive as in the criminal justice system?

Sorry but this analogy is a bad argument. I still see no reason why Anet should use parameters that WILL result in false bannings. Bots don't hurt me. False bannings do.

Loviatar · Sep 04, 2006, 12:50 AM // 00:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andisa Kalorn

Sorry but this analogy is a bad argument. I still see no reason why Anet should use parameters that WILL result in false bannings. Bots don't hurt me. False bannings do.

just because you are one of a minority who isnt affected by the economy crashing does not mean that most players are unaffected by botting screwing the economy.

there are no workable parameters that will be guaranteed to only catch bots without the few bot look alikes getting caught as well

also for some reason most players want the bots gone as well

Andisa Kalorn · Sep 04, 2006, 12:54 AM // 00:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loviatar

just because you are one of a minority who isnt affected by the economy crashing does not mean that most players are unaffected by botting screwing the economy.

I am affected by bots, as I do occasionally like to buy those luxury items. My point those is that they don't really HURT me. Not like, say, getting mugged. I can still play the game. I don't like bots around, but comparing them to criminals is just a little too much.

Loviatar · Sep 04, 2006, 01:11 AM // 01:11

[QUOTE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andisa Kalorn

I am affected by bots, as I do occasionally like to buy those luxury items. My point those is that they don't really HURT me. Not like, say, getting mugged. I can still play the game. I don't like bots around, but comparing them to criminals is just a little too much.[/QUOTE]

that is where the misunderstanding occurred.

she was not comparing bots to criminals

she was comparing the standard needed to guarantee that no person who acted in all respects like a bot would ever be tagged no matter what

Gaile was stating that the equivalent guarantee of no arrest of an innocent person ever under any circumstances would prevent virtually all arrests of guilty people as well.

sgtclarity · Sep 04, 2006, 01:15 AM // 01:15

I won't comment on your case personally due to me being conservative. I can't and won't say who's wrong or right.
What I will say is that if indeed your case is sincere, I fully agree. ANet has a disgusting track record of this kind of crap. I mean, YES it's nice that they are actively getting rid of botters, but at WHAT cost!?

IMO, I'm content to dealing with chinese farmers than to having players who dedicate much time to this game owned in the face and sent on their way.

In short, revise your RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOing policy ANet, and DO something beneficial.

Andisa Kalorn · Sep 04, 2006, 02:01 AM // 02:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loviatar

she was not comparing bots to criminals

she was comparing the standard needed to guarantee that no person who acted in all respects like a bot would ever be tagged no matter what

Gaile was stating that the equivalent guarantee of no arrest of an innocent person ever under any circumstances would prevent virtually all arrests of guilty people as well.

What I understood from her argument is that she was saying it would be madness to tell the police not to arrest anyone because they may be arresting an innocent person. And indeed it would. But it's a far stretch to say this parallels the situation of bot bannings, due to the difference in level of seriousness and the amount of institutional checks to protect the innocent.

Would it really be madness to say that Anet shouldn't ban bots if they can't PROVE it really was a bot? Maybe. I don't know. All I know is that when they announce mass bot bannings nothing really seems to happen to the economy except a short term increase on superior monk rune prices.

If she was just trying to say that they can't ban bots without banning innocent people, I don't see why that would require an analogy with police. Its purpose seems to be to say that those who are against banning innocents are crazy for wanting anet to be more careful (as we wouldn't want the police to be more careful).

But Anet bans on parameters. Isn't that like the police arresting you just on the basis of your credit card activity and your movements? ("Well you looked like you were exhibiting criminal behaviour patterns") They have no proof, they won't even confront you with the evidence, and they apparently make it difficult for an innocent person to appeal the false banning (given wilderness's story).

Sure, the police will arrest people even though they know the person may be innocent. But this DOESN'T explain why Anet can't overhaul their banning policy, given so many stories of innocent bannings. Even if I accept the need to ban bots, that doesn't mean they can't improve their system so that less innocents get banned, and those who are falsely banned aren't treated so badly (because, yes, it will happen if you want to ban bots without solid proof).

luinks · Sep 04, 2006, 02:21 AM // 02:21

they are doing their work aren't they? they have dozens of parameters to check before hitting the ban button.
this was a minute ago

you can see the patterns clearly after a time

Gaile Gray · Sep 04, 2006, 02:36 AM // 02:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by ubermancer

You, the PR voice of your company, knows nothing about a HUNDRED MILLION DOLLAR CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT against your parent company?

I know that anyone can sue anyone. I also know that simply filing suit doesn't mean they'll win. This one I wasn't aware of, but there are thousands of frivolous lawsuits set forth daily. We'll see how far this progresses. So far, it appears not at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigwig

She's a community rep for arenanet, not a lawyer for ncsoft. wtf would she know about a nuisance lawsuit from some greedy nerd?

Oh, thanks! I couldn't say it quite that way, but...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loviatar

just because you are one of a minority who isnt affected by the economy crashing does not mean that most players are unaffected by botting screwing the economy. there are no workable parameters that will be guaranteed to only catch bots without the few bot look alikes getting caught as well. also for some reason most players want the bots gone as well

Very true. The point I need to make is that I see the ban lists, and we do ban hundreds a week. We are careful, we use care in instances where there may have been an error. But suggesting that we stop bans because someone--out of hundreds--might be put to the inconvenience of seeking a review is wrong. Bots do affect players, and we do intend to keep taking action against them. We use more than 20 parameters, and are as careful as we can be. But we're not going to back off such action because someone worries about that rare account that we need to reset. With regret, that's the collateral damage to making the game better, and as long as we're responsive to and willing to correct the rare mishap, I don't see our processes changing. We will continue to refine the processes, by all means, but the overall intention remains. If you can see bots now, imagine what you would see if we were not active!

Eviance · Sep 04, 2006, 03:13 AM // 03:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

As time moves on, and we ban people, we will always have a number who protest their innocence and claim that no, they were not a bot, they didn't know what a bot was, couldn't recall every putting the letters b, o and t together in a single word, and so forth.

And I joke, but it's true. We get protests, and we have to hold the line at some point. We have to say "Yes, you're claiming that you're not a bot, but dear heavens, the evidence is overwhelming. No human would play as you have." And we will look again at the 20+ parameters, and we will say "Well, sure, he/she is protesting, but there's just no way that that isn't a botting account."

I'm glad to hear this! This is what I know I personally needed to know as a player and consumer. And I agree that yeah botters will try to get their account unlocked, but I'm willing to bet that "most" of them are single bot runners and not mutiple bot ebay gold farmers.
One of the reasons I had reason to believe wilderness's innocence over others that have been posted was because he didn't cry to heaven about it. He just told people that they might get banned for possibly "looking" like a bot. Even if his post elluded to him wanting a bit of sympathy it was more for what was lost and not him crying about how it was unfair and unjust to the extreme or that he needed a petition or anything. He didn't sound like the typical "OMGZ I LOST MY ACCOUNT LOVE ME AND GET PITCHFORKS AND TORCHES AND BURN ANET!" Maybe I am gullable but *shrugs* I believe in innocence till proven guilt even though I have seen it do more harm than good in instances. The fact that he had faith that you guys would eventually see that he was innocent also helped....

Basically I am glad he can now play on with the rest and I am glad for what Anet does - And lastly I am VERY pleased to see that GMs will go out of their way to be of service if you poke at them long enough >_> (as frustrating as it is).

Congrats wilderness!

(I am not even touching that lawsuit thing -_- Unless the gaming company causes my eyes to set fire and hell to freeze over, I think sueing is just silly!)

milias · Sep 04, 2006, 04:30 AM // 04:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

I know that anyone can sue anyone. I also know that simply filing suit doesn't mean they'll win. This one I wasn't aware of, but there are thousands of frivolous lawsuits set forth daily. We'll see how far this progresses. So far, it appears not at all.Oh, thanks! I couldn't say it quite that way, but...

Please do not comment on this Gaile! For your own sake! Before commenting on this publically at all, check with ANet or NCSoft first! They may have some kind of policy against employees discussing ongoing legal matters!

Just for reference, I believe this is the article.

milan · Sep 04, 2006, 05:28 PM // 17:28

It appears that innocent (in the terms of botting) gamers being banned is being played down considerably, if it were simply one or two accounts that were banned in error then yes it was an isolated incident, however though the number is far below the 4000 quoted previously there was a considerable amount of accounts that were banned for no apparent reason.

As for comparing the unwarranted banning of player accounts to police being unable to arrest anyone for fear of being found not guilty at trial I find this to be slightly out of skew, it would be more like bypassing the trial, sentencing to jail time and then later letting them out because there wasn't any evidence against them anyway.

One of my accounts was banned during the festival event, my third account. It farmed a little in tombs (maybe twice a week in barrage groups) never used a third party program, never bought anything outside the game, never sold anything outside of the game and was used rarely. It was aslo created with a valid cd key from a sealed box bought from Game. Used approximately 4 to 5 hours a week. The account was unbanned and to be honest it didn't cause me any real problems, my worry about the whole situation was how on earth was it flagged as a botter?

Stockholm · Sep 04, 2006, 05:51 PM // 17:51

Well apperently NC-Soft is having problems in more than the USA.
http://www.whatpc.co.uk/vnunet/news/...lated_articles

Citing an ongoing legal investigation, Crouch was unable to comment on the case in Japan.

Demesis · Sep 04, 2006, 10:38 PM // 22:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stockholm

Well apperently NC-Soft is having problems in more than the USA.
http://www.whatpc.co.uk/vnunet/news/...lated_articles

Citing an ongoing legal investigation, Crouch was unable to comment on the case in Japan.

Goddamit, after reading that I've noticed it's always the Chinese making bots. Sorry if I sound racist, but from my observation, it's always the Chinese making bots, always the Chinese making third party programs, always the Chinese finding some way to manipulate an online game to an unfair advantage. It makes me ashamed to be born as a Chinese myself.