Well, talk to PA about it. They decide now.
1 Like
Tbh, all you are trying to do is de-rail thread as somekind of interfering smart-ass.
You can go and talk to PA, if you wish.
If you wish to discuss the change of ownership to PA, that is in a thread on Dev-blog board.
Here, we are discussing solutions to botting to be presented onwards.
Do you understand, or is that too complicated for you?
Oh I understand it perfectly.
You just do not want to hear that circumstances for the challenge of getting rid of bots have changed. Because of this your first reaction is to start throwing unfounded ■■■■ around, your second reaction is to relentlessly repeat yourself.
If you want people to engage you in a discussion, it is an idea to not throw ■■■■ in their faces. It helps. It keeps things constructive. And sure, sometimes we do not like hearing or reading things. We are human, we want to stick to what has our attention, we want that to stay the same, we don’t want new stimuli or information or circumstances to change.
The problem is, whatever we may come up with to combat botting is irrelevant up to any such a point where it becomes clear for PA as new owners what their options are for determining IF botting is a problem and how it competes with their monetisation focus. CCP prior to the sale already put the groundwork for that in place.
I do not like this. I’d much prefer to just focus on this little trench without any bigger picture. Problem is, not only is the picture bigger anyway, it’s suddenly changed, and a lot of CCP’s behaviour and choices over the past year suddenly make a lot more sense. Case in point, policy changes, stripping Team Security and so forth.
To be blunt, it signals a deliberate and consistent deprioritisation of botting as a problem. That massively decreases the potential weight of anything the little technical anti-bot discussion might come up with.
At this point it actually, and I really do not like this, would be far more productive to not focus on that little discussion and exploration, but to start mapping out impact of botting in New Eden so that a case can actually be made to make the problem a topic once again.
1 Like
Bots are a huge and increasing problem in EVE, RIGHT NOW.
This is not something to be put aside by trolling and shilling like your ■■■■■■■■ above.
If you don’t want to discuss how to fix the bot problem, post somewhere else then.
Oh, I forgot that CapsLock is an argument. My apologies. Incidentally, did you miss the part on best practices for approaching a discussion for constructive purposes? It would help, to actually have the topic going forward.
Look, if all you want to do is to have a circle jerk of repetition based on selective blindness but rooted in the firm belief that you are now magically enabled to actually do something about the problem, by all means. But the way you are going about it is not helping. Not one bit.
1 Like
Again, not one single point of any relevance to the topic.
Go elsewhere, if you have nothing to contribute regarding how to fix the bot problem.
You are derailing and trolling, deliberately.
Its getting pretty clear your only purpose here is to troll the topic, so as to sabotage discussion on how to fix the bot problem, because you are benefiting from them in isk/materials ingame, either as a botter yourself, or by an associates botting.
If you can’t stay on the topic, go post somewhere else.
1 Like
The bot problem will be solved by PA. /thread 
Alright, so if someone disagrees with you he or she is a troll. If someone says something you do not want to hear, it is a troll. If someone takes a different approach towards the established problem, it is a troll. And if someone points out that because circumstances have changed drastically one might consider evaluating the impact of that on the established problem and solution finding it is also a troll.
So, in a nutshell, unless someone says exactly what you say or stipulates to agree with whatever you say, he or she is a troll.
Right.
Look, I do not mean to be rude. But you are not part of a discussion, You are not even having one. Your focus here boils down to the equivalent of a masturbation excercise.
Now you’ve had ample reactions, suggestions, questions, considerations and observations from plenty people with a constructive focus on the established problem. You have not engaged on any of that a single time.
On the contrary, you have just been attempting to negate anyone’s participation, repeating yourself consistantly while being quite offensive to anyone arriving in the topic who has the misfortunate of not immediately making clear to unconditionally agree with your subjective perspective.
For all intents and purposes, you who in that other topic stated to have said goodbye to EVE, are the only troll present. How you are approaching the subject and other people is counterproductive to engaging the established problem. There is a fundamental choice to make here, for yourself.
If you ever make that choice, and your participation becomes constructive, by all means let me know - because from other topics I have seen that you can be reasonable and open to exchange and goal driven approaches. For some reason, for this subject, it appears impossible.
Let me provide one bit of on-topic context. As you know CCP has been sold. PA, the new owner, has anti-botting policies on a venture level, in the sense that unlike CCP they do not just consider RMT competition, they also consider bot providers competition.
One might think that this would make the challenge of taking on the problem easier. Unfortunately, it does not. PA’s approach to this has been to ignore player behaviour in such matters, to disregard necessities of having a human security presence, but instead to solely rely on a launcher embedded rootkit to make botting - within the mechanisms of their product line - impossible.
This is a completely different approach. And one which would create enormous legal issues if ever implemented in EVE. So, considering they are not open to communications on form of solutions, nor do they engage in community feedback processes, something will have to be done eventually to convince them to not have things done their way. But a different way, requiring different approaches.
That is where the fruits of this discussion would come in. But that depends on getting them to fundamentally change their position and methods. In other words, if you want to tackle the problem, you will first have to demonstrate to them that it is a problem. For us, it’s clear there is one. And we can reasonably agree on how to tackle it. But that will not get anywhere if nobody is listening because they insist there is no such problem because the rootkit prevents it all - while in reality it does no such thing.
I don’t think anybody likes the impact of CCP having been sold on the subject of botting and automation. But it is what it is. That puts a big litmus test on the table. Does someone really care about getting rid of bots? If they cannot recognise how the challenge has fundamentally changed now, they are not really interested in getting rid of bits, but are either just in the discussion to hear themselves, or to distract.
2 Likes
Fully agreed. Before any suggestion can be put forward we need to know if PA’s attitude to botting is different and what if anything they have in their other products that could affect this.
1 Like
PAs attitude to botting will be the the same as CCPs and as is stipulated in EVEs TOS/EULA, that it is not allowed.
As to what PA have in their products, CCP is still the developer that is faced with bots in EVE on its client/platform, and best positioned to deal with them.
If anything PA will pressure CCP to crack down on mining and ratting bots harder, making this discussion even more important.
That PA owns CCP now, doesnt change the severity of the existing bot problem.
This notion of “PA bought CCP, so stop all discussion on development of EVE” is ridiculous, and nothing but an attempt to stop discussion on what can and should be done about bots.
If you dont want to discuss how to fix the bot problem, or think its futile to discuss it, then go troll some other thread instead.
Who are you quoting?
I didnt quote anyone, obviously.
If I had, you would see a quote box with that posters name attached, as you see above now of your quote.
Ok. I was confused by the punctuation you used. A sentence enclosed in inverted commas denotes a quotation, usually.
Are you referring to this?
Is no-ones specific quote. Its a summation of the notion I’m addressing, as is clear from the context.
Sorry if that confused you.
Might have helped if you had actually indicated what you where referring to instead of gish posting more off-topic.
Well I dont feel that the recent aquisition is offtopic, as it affects how the bot question will be addressed if/when anything different is done.
Knowing whether they already employ systems like your recommendations already, for example, or if they have a different view on botting is vital to forming a clearer picture of the subject of the future of botting in EvE.
However if it is offtopic Im sure someone will be along to clean up the thread.
CCP is still the staff/company running and developing EVE.
You are confusing the change of ownership, with PA somehow taking over development of EVE feom CCP, which is not the case at all.
If you think PA will not care about botting, well, thats your prerogative.
CCP still needs to fight bots on their own client/platform, and the TOS/EULA rules against botting have not changed.
If you dont want to discuss how to fix botting in EVE, in this thread on official CCP board, well, go ahead and hush and wait till PA makes an announcement, if ever.
If you dont want to accept that the owners of a company can do as they wish with the product lines of that company and that their previous history is relevent to any discussion regarding any part of its future, thats your choice.
But saying its not relevent in a conversation regarding that product line does not make it so.
2 Likes
Well, you said it several times now.
You can hence go ahead and wait for the day till PA makes a statement regarding botting (if ever), which seems to be your pre-condition only after which you think discussing how to fix botting should be resumed.
Lol you took me wanting to look at their history as waiting for a future statement?
Id ask how you made that leap but the answer wouldnt make any sense, would it?
Go ahead and wait for the day that happens, if you wish, till you can by your own criteria put suggestions forward
Meanwhile you can move on and let others resume discussing how to fix botting in EVE, in the here and now.
You can review and research PAs past strategy against botting in BDO on your own time and cognisance. Its all a matter of public record.