Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: Getting others' worlds banned out of spite has never been easier!

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    233

    Default Getting others' worlds banned out of spite has never been easier!

    Look, the rules are designed to make legitimate players' lifes better. Rules are not supposed to make players suffer, that's what features are for; if a rule openly increases the probability of an innocent player getting punished, it's a sh-rule.

    As my main argument I'm using a situation where TorBoob is using a network of bots to try to ban BoobTor's BFG world out of spite. In this case the rule goes like "if you can track the time when the owner is offline/busy and get two of your bots 720-blazed in the same world, you get to ban that world for 30 days", and that's a very lovely situation for TorBoob. And if for some reason he has a vendetta, he can get the next 60 days started right away (why 30-60-720 and not 30-720, I have no idea, assuming the rule is targeting deliberate tolerance for bots).

    You get a warning first time!
    If someone decides to snipe your BFG, this warning can be read as "hey, someone just tried to get us to ban your world, just saying that they'll actually do it next time". Because again, effectively the newest way to lose a world is to a) own a functional BFG, and b) drop your phone in a manhole so you can't enter the game for a while.

    It's only that world and not the account!
    That doesn't make anything better or more justified. Still punishing innocent people.

    Let's focus on taking action to reduce the number of bots!
    That doesn't make anything better or more justified. Still punishing innocent people.

    If there are any other points that our lovely community manager has brought up in defense, let me know so I can react to them.

  2. #2
    Master Sorcerer
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,821

    Default

    With the new rule you can get any world with public locks nuked if you really want to.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joni2 View Post
    With the new rule you can get any world with public locks nuked if you really want to.
    Actually, scratch the BFG part, this does in fact apply to any world with public locks. The whole "owner's full-time responsibility" thing.

  4. #4
    Master Sorcerer Craftyisheretohelp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    burning your world
    Posts
    506

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by whatsisname View Post
    TorBoob.
    Nice name
    May or may not have trolled you in a horrible way

    I love spikey hair!

  5. #5
    Master Sorcerer HugeLock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    2,096

    Default

    Notice that there's almost nobody who agrees with this rule. Only a few Mini-mods who dream of becoming a mod soon agree with it because of just that.

    1 step in the right direction, 2 steps in the opposite direction.

    The new mods have pretty much almost quit the game, since they have probably burned out and realized that it's not so great being a mod, and that it takes responsibility.
    🇫🇮 Ephus (GL)

    ______________________________________
    Started in July, 2013. But only recently joined the forums!

    "No act of kindness, no matter how small, is ever wasted."
    -
    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ephusgrow/?hl

  6. #6
    Master Sorcerer SnowyFox1000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    4,895

    Default

    It’s like the prohibition of alcohol, good intentions but ended up working horribly.
    IGN: SNOWYFOX

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    summer!
    Posts
    1,490

    Default

    Wait so Ubisoft said they have tools to detect autofarmers but do not use it to ban them to prevent innocent players from being unfairly banned.
    What if we used that for our good? Say, if a world is set to "BFG" category, suspected auto farmers will be autobanned from the BFG (world ban)

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GrowStone View Post
    Wait so Ubisoft said they have tools to detect autofarmers but do not use it to ban them to prevent innocent players from being unfairly banned.
    What if we used that for our good? Say, if a world is set to "BFG" category, suspected auto farmers will be autobanned from the BFG (world ban)
    Well intentioned, but terrible. Instead of acting on what "tools" say, these "tools" should form a separate list of reported players for mods to check, and then decide whether to clear them or ban from the game entirely. Otherwise innocent people may find themselves banned from BFGs for no reason, and more innocent people will be punished or highly suspected for forgetting to set their BFG category.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    summer!
    Posts
    1,490

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by whatsisname View Post
    Well intentioned, but terrible. Instead of acting on what "tools" say, these "tools" should form a separate list of reported players for mods to check, and then decide whether to clear them or ban from the game entirely. Otherwise innocent people may find themselves banned from BFGs for no reason, and more innocent people will be punished or highly suspected for forgetting to set their BFG category.
    They could make the tool atleast accessible by the BFG owner so that he knows if the system suspected an autofarmer in his world.
    An addition to the above would be to let the system PM the BFG owner when it suspects someone in their world autofarming

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GrowStone View Post
    They could make the tool atleast accessible by the BFG owner so that he knows if the system suspected an autofarmer in his world. An addition to the above would be to let the system PM the BFG owner when it suspects someone in their world autofarming
    Both of those still end up punishing a suspected player. A world owner will either trust the system more than the player, or just ignore all warnings. And imagine if the owner decided to trust a player, but it turned out to be a bot - all hell breaks loose.

    The key is to prevent punishment for inaction, unless it's blatant in-your-face approval of the bots.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by HugeLock View Post
    Notice that there's almost nobody who agrees with this rule. Only a few Mini-mods who dream of becoming a mod soon agree with it because of just that.
    Shame the idea for what it is. Don't shame it for whoever supports it, and don't shame people who support it, because it's pointless.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Outside, curing the world
    Posts
    794

    Default

    When you want to be a good player it should be easy : dont scamm and autofarm, now your telling me its a challenge to be a good growtopian when you do bfgs this doenst make sence

    HELP

  12. #12
    Master Sorcerer Judavid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    MACS0647-JD
    Posts
    955

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by -LI0NE- View Post
    When you want to be a good player it should be easy : dont scamm and autofarm, now your telling me its a challenge to be a good growtopian when you do bfgs this doenst make sence

    HELP
    But you are now responsible for others and not only yourself. Is it a challenge to be good and make every other player that enters your world good?
    The answer is yes because you don't control who enters and don't fully control who can enter and who can't.
    IGN - Jud
    Main world - LR

    Goal -
    Title - 07%/100%

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Judavid View Post
    But you are now responsible for others and not only yourself. Is it a challenge to be good and make every other player that enters your world good?
    The answer is yes because you don't control who enters and don't fully control who can enter and who can't.
    Except that you lose the world if you lose the challenge.

    It's great that they're trying to take steps to get rid of harmful players, but this particular solution doesn't work.

  14. #14
    Lesser Wizard dcArmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Indonesia
    Posts
    376

    Default

    If you lose your world, you waste your 35+ dl cuz your unintended action cuz cant monitor all of the visitor. Thats smoother words about bfg world getting banned
    Last edited by dcArmy; 06-03-2019 at 10:11 PM. Reason: Its a big no no
    Quote Originally Posted by JamSandwich View Post
    Are you looking to be banned?

  15. #15
    Master Sorcerer Judavid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    MACS0647-JD
    Posts
    955

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by whatsisname View Post
    Except that you lose the world if you lose the challenge.

    It's great that they're trying to take steps to get rid of harmful players, but this particular solution doesn't work.
    Mate there is no challenge it's as simple as I am not and won't be responsible for anyone else's actions that's simple right?
    Good.
    The steps they are taking are NOT steps it's lazy, they are dropping their own responsibility and putting it on you yet they are the ones with the wage packet for the job and we are the ones playing and making them jobs possible.
    The only people that loose here is honest players that have zero idea.
    IGN - Jud
    Main world - LR

    Goal -
    Title - 07%/100%

  16. #16
    Master Sorcerer
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    A lonely room.
    Posts
    7,485

    Default

    Watch there now be more autofarmers because players want to get others banned.

    LOL.
    IGN: Tevoir
    Level: 125

    Time for a true display of skill!


    Turned myself to ash once more.

  17. #17
    Lesser Wizard Oakum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Out of my mind.
    Posts
    388

    Default

    True. Also doesn't seem quite right that by banning bot users from your world, you've doomed someone else's world.
    IGN : Jackass

  18. #18
    Master Sorcerer No Emotions's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    In a club room
    Posts
    1,355

    Default

    Ubisoft: *tries to reduce autofarmers with this "owner rsponsibility thing" rule*
    Autofarmers: *autofarms harder to intentionally make the world banned*
    Other players: *starts autofarming to make the world owned by someone they hate banned*
    Ubisoft: and I oop-
    Can't find motivation to life. Ugh.
    Quote Originally Posted by Monaca
    I'm done. Monaca out.
    Discord tag: Neisse#4039
    IGN: NoEmotion
    Yes, I'm mean sometimes. Deal with it.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    233

    Default

    Mods will investigate first before giving a punishment to any BFG world suspected with autofarmers. Please note that if we confirm 100% that the owner was aware of the autofarming we will apply the maximum sanction directly (world permaban). The 4 strike system will actually prevent us from banning BFG worlds directly.
    Latest addition. Problem solved.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    233

    Default

    Now I want a clarification that the bans will be carried out right when the botfarming occurs, and not delayed. Otherwise it's too easy for actual bot supporters to avoid losing their Magplants by moving them around multiple worlds, which is something that a lot of people to anyway.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •