Remove Angry Goblin Window

[Naethyn]

The fact is you need a stunningly large amount of evidence to result in admin intervention. 30 seconds isn't going to prevent the guys who are paying rent with it. What I want to prevent is the well intentioned player from making poor decisions, because he found out how everyone else is doing it. At 10 seconds you foster an environment that lends to this type of cheating. At 30 seconds it is reasonable that most people wouldn't make that choice.

[kjs86z2]

its tuesday 8 am

goblin going into window soon

does your employer know what you're up to?

[Goregasmic]

Seems to me they went to great length not to ban the POH mini guy so I don't see them enforcing jack shit.

Until they do I guess.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Goregasmic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Seems to me they went to great length not to ban the POH mini guy so I don't see them enforcing jack shit.

Until they do I guess.

Like many of the rules here, the 2-boxing rule's enforcement is all about being caught in the act.

The hate farmer has done all his cheating (for years) when no one, or only a single player (eg. me) could see him do it. Until someone records his cheating, the staff's policy appears to be:
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But if a player violates the player agreement by turning in when they didn't win a roll, they do so in front of a whole mess of witnesses (one of whom might even be recording), so that player is far more likely to be punished.

[Goregasmic]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Like many of the rules here, the 2-boxing rule's enforcement is all about being caught in the act.

The hate farmer has done all his cheating (for years) when no one, or only a single player (eg. me) could see him do it. Until someone records his cheating, the staff's policy appears to be:
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But if a player violates the player agreement by turning in when they didn't win a roll, they do so in front of a whole mess of witnesses (one of whom might even be recording), so that player is far more likely to be punished.

The castle alliance report on that guy seemed pretty clear cut to me. Also seemed easy to verify on the dev's side.

[WarpathEQ]

We did get pet tracking nerf and new PoH rulesets out of it. So while it wasn't a clear rebuke, lifetime ban, and acknowledgement that this person is the biggest scum in EQ history (something that I understand already occured on Blue, yet somehow they allowed it to repeat on Green with the same person and they still aren't banned....) atleast there was some form of action to correct the issue.

But yeah it took castle publishing a full on disertation of unrefutable evidence, investing probably hundreds of hours of player time to continually monitor one bad actor, to even get to that point.

[Goregasmic]

Originally Posted by WarpathEQ [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

We did get pet tracking nerf and new PoH rulesets out of it. So while it wasn't a clear rebuke, lifetime ban, and acknowledgement that this person is the biggest scum in EQ history (something that I understand already occured on Blue, yet somehow they allowed it to repeat on Green with the same person and they still aren't banned....) atleast there was some form of action to correct the issue.

But yeah it took castle publishing a full on disertation of unrefutable evidence, investing probably hundreds of hours of player time to continually monitor one bad actor, to even get to that point.

Seems easy to me to check if the guy is spamming pet attack 24/7. Yet they decided changing the ruleset and making pet tracking not classic was the prefered option. I guess they could have wanted to future proof the process but it kinda shows they don't seem to care much about automation.

[cd288]

Originally Posted by Goregasmic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Seems easy to me to check if the guy is spamming pet attack 24/7. Yet they decided changing the ruleset and making pet tracking not classic was the preferred option. I guess they could have wanted to future proof the process but it kinda shows they don't seem to care much about automation.

Who knows, maybe they will do something automated in the future. That would seem to be something that would take a lot of time for unpaid volunteer staff to dedicate to code, implement, etc.

Maybe the pet attack change is their way of acknowledging the problem and finding a temporary fix (or if not a fix a way that makes it more difficult) with the intent of a more permanent technological solution eventually (say, when they launch a new server for example).

[Goregasmic]

Sorry, by automation I meant someone automating their play.

[shovelquest]

I am getting carpel tunnel so bad when I play everquest that automation is the only way I will be able to enjoy this game in the near future.

Sooner or later we're all gonna be so old we're going to have to accept that making javelins is a hazard to our health.