Some would call it a hammer

[Bluerise]

Now that I have your attention

We're looking from players for view points on whether you think we 'the staff' are strict in terms of punishment for botting, hacking etc... Do you think some things that you're banned for, should be allowed? Is there an alternative approach that you believe should be taken?

Any posts that are simply 'i agree' etc without any thought put in, will be removed and you'll be given a forum warning.

Blue.

 

[EcoWOLFrb]

Absolutely not, in fact if anything you should crack down harder on botters and hackers. I don't see why they should just be given a warning or anything less than a ban, that's like finding a malignant tumor in your body and saying if it gets any bigger you'll remove it. I find that often GMs have to take their time and collect more evidence than they should before a ban, so the damage is essentially done to a degree by the time they're banned as they effect the economy and give things away to friends.

One thing I'd like to see fixed, that I feel might be slightly extreme is a ban for things like double clienting, "abuse" of some glitches as that's a loose term that can be applied to many things that shouldn't really be bannable, perhaps temp bans would be more appropriate. I'd also like to see a more liberal approach to how PG PWO wants to be, maybe it should be a little more "T for Teen"

 

[pieoffury]

No, keep it this way. Bans for botting, hacking, and other means to gain an advantage in the game is the right action for breaking the rules. Look at it this way, do you want an alternative approach of punishment for law breakers? They are banned for breaking the rules. Players joining the game are ideally signing a contract with the game that they will play with these conditions and if they break any of them, the staff has the right to punish them, in this sense, banning them. There is no "degree" really to cheating in this game. Botting, hacking, double clienting, transferring pokes from botting account to save them from being banned, they are all to gain an advantage over players who spend countless hours to get something good.

 

[Orean]

I'd also like to see a more liberal approach to how PG PWO wants to be, maybe it should be a little more "T for Teen"

Without going into explicit detail (for obvious reasons), can you put your finger on any specific infractions (or degrees thereof), which you have seen ruled as PG-inappropriate by GMs+, that you believe is being dealt with too strictly? Lower-degree profanity, such as completely masking profanity with symbols/asterisks, would be one example—I'm stressing that this is an example, not necessarily my own opinion.

Players joining the game are ideally signing a contract with the game that they will play with these conditions and if they break any of them, the staff has the right to punish them, in this sense, banning them.

While yes, the moderation staff can ban them, by empowerment of the contractual agreement that you mentioned (the ToS), it's still intended that they are ethical in their approach; they may have their own discretion at banning user for any reason that they deem warrants it, but whether or not they're taking the most ethical approach in banning is the main point of discussion here: are different degrees of punishment, for certain offenses, more practical and ethical than what is being enforced now?

Ultimately, the GM's job is to help protect the integrity of the community by enforcing the rules, with the betterment of the community/environment in mind, but it turns into a disservice and puts the community at more discomfort if it's being done too extremely, harshly, and unethically—which would, in part, work against what is intended.

Also, as it hasn't been brought up yet, what are everyone's thoughts on account sharing? Do you believe it is being punished too strictly?

 

[pieoffury]

Players joining the game are ideally signing a contract with the game that they will play with these conditions and if they break any of them, the staff has the right to punish them, in this sense, banning them.

While yes, the moderation staff can ban them, by empowerment of the contractual agreement that you mentioned (the ToS), it's still intended that they are ethical in their approach; they may have their own discretion at banning user for any reason that they deem warrants it, but whether or not they're taking the most ethical approach in banning is the main point of discussion here: are different degrees of punishment, for certain offenses, more practical and ethical than what is being enforced now?

Ultimately, the GM's job is to help protect the integrity of the community by enforcing the rules, with the betterment of the community/environment in mind, but it turns into a disservice and puts the community at more discomfort if it's being done too extremely, harshly, and unethically—which would, in part, work against what is intended.

Also, as it hasn't been brought up yet, what are everyone's thoughts on account sharing? Do you believe it is being punished too strictly?

I don't see bans being too extreme, harsh, or unethical. A player cheats, he/she had it coming. They should have known the rules and yet they chose to cheat their way around the game. On the point of account sharing, I see it would be fine say, I become busy with life but I still got membership or there's an event on going, so I'll let my sister play for me just so my membership doesn't go to waste since I paid for it or I don't miss out on anything in the events. I think account sharing would be fine, as long as it's not for multi-clienting purposes (this could easily be caught with 2 or more online users sharing the same email address or IP address). Giving away or selling accounts is an entirely different story and should still deserve a ban.

 

[Dovee]

On the topic of account sharing I have never really had an issue with it but I understand the reason to ban people for it as I have banned many in the past for that reason. I would be okay with account sharing as long as people understand that no matter what happens on your account it's your fault because you gave out your password. If you give out your pass there is a good chance that person may leak it and so on.

 

[EcoWOLFrb]

I'm not going to say that I've seen these things being dealt with too harshly Creo, but I'd suggest that even without punishment the overall attitude puts a damper on a good time. I'm not saying that people should be allowed to freely use the more insulting swear words, or suggest things that may be disturbing to others, but I think things like mild jokes, slightly off words like "dafuq, wtf, hell, damn" etc shouldn't be inevitably met with unofficial warnings on channels. It makes people feel like they're being babysat and deflates the fun somewhat IMO. As long as I'm not offending anyone I shouldn't have to be told to watch my mouth, but that's just me.

 

[Saurus]

Ban them I say! Lift thy ban hammer and pound justice into them!

But. It's common sense. If you do the crime, you'll pay the time. Why would you want to become more lenient? A crime is a crime, an offence is an offence. Why appeal to change it now?

Secondly, being strict is not giving botters, hackers, illegal program users, a second chance which PWO does by allowing them to create a new account if they were found guilty. And 99 percent of the time they turn out to be guilty with the odd confession here and there.

On the other hand I feel like there should be a reminder of what can happen if players decide to cheat in-game. Maybe a pop-up message, or the help channels can display a warning message periodically, that way no one can say they were unaware if they were banned. Just my opinion.

 

[The-Predator]

I dont see any problem with account sharing, it shouldnt be taken that serious, as long as it follow the rules it shouldnt be reason to get a ban, but i want to note that the "it wasnt me, was my brother the one that botted/hacked" excuse shouldnt be accepted, I think it isnt that hard to apply

edit* Botters, hackers, and scammers should be banned the same way it is now

 

[EcoWOLFrb]

I don't fully agree with account sharing, my problem with it is that that one account has the advantage of having 2-3 dedicated people playing on it constantly. That one account can literally be online 24 hours a day between a couple people, which would serve a big advantage in acquiring more pokemon, and not only would it be unfair to the people who don't share accounts and build up 2 or 3x as fast as those who would, but it would increase the community watch problems. I can see so many people posting about how their brother traded their pokemon when they weren't supposed to, causing a lot of spam and issues that are unnecessary. TBH people are going to share accounts regardless of whether or not it's against the rules, it's just a matter of if it's worth it to ban them for it, making it a "do so at your own risk" kind of thing might change the dynamic of how the game is played for better or worse though, and I can't see many benefits of enabling it publicly.

One benefit I see to this rule (and it's one of the main ones) is that GMs are able to put the conversation in ban appeals to a halt when someone makes an excuse like "I wasn't botting but maybe my brother was, he goes on my account sometimes". While this might seem a bit underhanded, it does undeniably save time in arguing

 

[Tecknician]

Ban them I say! Lift thy ban hammer and pound justice into them!

But. It's common sense. If you do the crime, you'll pay the time. Why would you want to become more lenient? A crime is a crime, an offence is an offence. Why appeal to change it now?

Speeding is a crime, running a red light, illegal parking, ect. Should everyone that do those be sent to jail?

 

[Julio~]

Botters and Hackers should not have reduced their punishments. Temporary bans or even warnings would encourage thoughts like: ''I will use bot/hack untill a GM catch me, I'll lose nothing, only some days waiting the ban end if someone catch me''. So, definitely, permanent ban is the correct punishment for them.

I guess there's some reason because sharing account is against the rules but I, personally, see no problem itself. The account security (e-mail, password, etc) is our responsability, as staff has constantly said, then if someone decide share his password it supposed he/she is assuming eventual risks and something else that could happens is also his/her total responsability.

Abusing of multi-client I think it's not banable, unless the player is using multi-client to earn points of reputation, wins, etc. I see no problem if I have 2 computers and I want to transfer pokémons and money to an alternative account, perhaps it's a securer way than getting help over.

 

[nemo55]

I love the way it is but in terms of other things that takes common knowledge to understand...especially for innocent by-standards like me in Sufyan case of Ban. View this topic. Please understand where I'm coming from. Learn to find other solutions then always depending on them screen shots....the topic explains it all...just have a read please. And don't give me that "you don't deserve special treatment". I propose a fair solution which makes sense, I would hope you see it the way I see it...IF I was GM I'd in fact be just like Brennan, if not worse. But for this part...I think a solution can be found.

http://forum.pokemon-world-online.net/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=30488

 

[PhantomsCV]

Anything that changes the way PWO plays should be a death sentence. They're agreeing to play fairly and upon the same market as the rest of us but they're going ahead and cheating (there's no other word for it than cheating). Changing the way PWO plays like botting or hacking is like taking a performance enhancing drug in sports.

Account Sharing should be a warning leading to worse. I think it should be something that if a player announces to staff in some sort of way, "My brother and I both play PWO on my account. We take full responsibility of what happens on our account and if any Pokemon are destroyed because of my sibling, I will not ask for any help."

 

[Saurus]

Ban them I say! Lift thy ban hammer and pound justice into them!

But. It's common sense. If you do the crime, you'll pay the time. Why would you want to become more lenient? A crime is a crime, an offence is an offence. Why appeal to change it now?

Speeding is a crime, running a red light, illegal parking, ect. Should everyone that do those be sent to jail?

Yes. They should. Or we could change things and let murderers free form prisons. I'm sure they won't kill again!

 

[Gobfather]

Ban them I say! Lift thy ban hammer and pound justice into them!

But. It's common sense. If you do the crime, you'll pay the time. Why would you want to become more lenient? A crime is a crime, an offence is an offence. Why appeal to change it now?

Speeding is a crime, running a red light, illegal parking, ect. Should everyone that do those be sent to jail?

Yes. They should. Or we could change things and let murderers free form prisons. I'm sure they won't kill again!

haha in Saurus world everyman goes to jail. Then the entire economy fails due to exceeding number of inmates awaiting a cell and the taxes to build thousands of new jails and keeping them fed would take 95% of all his peoples paychecks and they'd all starve to death HAHAHAHA. I don't understand the logic that every crime results in maximum penalty that is absurd, a murderer getting same sentence as a child stealing gum? lol.

Anyways I agree with everything for the most being said:
Botters = CYA. But I don;t understand why the individual player cannot be shown evidence only himself i think showing that player in PM is the fair way to go.
Scammers = CYA. I'm not to sure on sentence here, temp-ban is for sure, but I personally would rather see them gone account ban (not IP ban).
Multi-Clienting = Further investigation on accounts for botting, scamming, etc. Trying to entertain Julios idea here. Transferring between accounts is a risky thing, but i think investigation should be done first.
Account - Sharing = Lol is there really a reason to ban here? Seems pointless to ban someone simply because someone gave them the account. I understand it prevents perhaps sellig your account, but that kind of thinking is over the top imo. When I go I wouldn't mind passing on my account. Player sharing account should be aware and take full responsiblity of the reporcutions of this.


As for things like Nemos case, I really think Staff should let up on ONLY IF YOU HAVE SS, we don't have need to SS our guild members we've grown to trust. Also in cases like mine where all my things were sold by a hacker, I beleive in cases like this the victim (me) should be repaid with the banned hackers profits. (on the case of botting not being banned entirely sorry for off-topicness).

 

[Tecknician]

Ban them I say! Lift thy ban hammer and pound justice into them!

But. It's common sense. If you do the crime, you'll pay the time. Why would you want to become more lenient? A crime is a crime, an offence is an offence. Why appeal to change it now?

Speeding is a crime, running a red light, illegal parking, ect. Should everyone that do those be sent to jail?

Yes. They should. Or we could change things and let murderers free form prisons. I'm sure they won't kill again!

But they are released from jail after so long depending on how serious the original crime was, how well they behaved in prison and various other reasons.

 

[Shiningamisgirl]

O-m-g-o-s-h! I love this topic! I agree with everything! (Go on Blue, do it, forum warn meee..do it...<(;.> )

All kidding aside. I really do feel very much the same as my fellow posters (so far). The Staff in charge of handing out the bans need more then a hammer at their disposal. A shield, a whip and a flaming sword even! All three attached to a much larger hammer the likes of which would make Onin weep. Give em' some winged boots too! Just to speed things up. All the Red Bulls.

I agree with Eco that you guys should be harder on bots, hackers, scammers, etc. Anyone that cheats really. I myself never quite understood the ban process. I get that larger bans need larger amounts of evidence collected, but never quite got what effected the length/nature of the ban? IP bans and account bans. Permabans and temp bans. The lengths of time allotted to said things (for the bans that are temporary). I'm sure there's somewhere that explains this..

If there isn't, then there should be. Maybe a little 'here is what bans are and how they work' subforum. One that even more clearly, in huge bold red letters, lays out what is and is not considered 'bannable'. I know Pewds says there isn't a 'degree' to cheating. Though there must be or all bans/warnings would be the same.
As far as what Eco mentioned about exploiting glitches, and double clienting. Mm..I suppose it depends on what they did with those glitches and accounts..How much was damage, and how much was innocent derpness.

I expect the game to have glitches, and I expect that people will attempt to exploit a glitch. Whether or not they realize they shouldn't. Now they might also mention that the glitch exists, and needs fixing. Warnings for the idiots, something harsher for those with ill intent.

Personally I'm against the double clienting thing, and account sharing. It makes it to easy for people and their 'brothers' to be on at the same time, and benefit in ways that someone else could not. When someone wants to quit the game, they can give away all of their Pokemon/cash, they should then leave the account to die, or request its deletion. If someone wants to give their account away and not tell anyone about it..and the person they give it to doesn't know better than to shout it from the rooftops, or use that new/old account for botting (see that in ban appeals a lot lol!). Well, that's a learning experience.

Plus, this isn't a site like Gaia, or WoW, etc. The entire first half of this game is about the gyms. Without that, what's left except the market and PvP? There isn't much 'replay' value, for an account that's already done it all.

Still, I don't think we need a delicate approach to banning. People should fear the idea of loosing their accounts, not figure they can sneak around it, and then derp about all over again with a new account, or a new IP address, etc etc. After all, a good hacker wouldn't get caught in the first place, and the terrible/bad/obvious ones, should be stamped out of existence.

One thing I love about the staff here, and the bans, is that there is always a human behind it. It's not just the system banning you, a person looks over things before making a decision.

Anyone with half a wit reads the TOS, or at least glances at it. Even if they didn't so much as glance at it everyone knows (any player who's ever played any sort of MMO or game that's trying to be somewhat professional in its nature.) That any kind of hack that changes the way the game was originally intended to be played, shouldn't be allowed, unless of course stated otherwise in said TOS.

Or maybe if the name of this game was Pokehax, the game where you see how much you can hack the game! But the game is not Pokehax, or haxmon, or Pokehaxors-RUS. Nopes..They know better.

Also, gotta agree with ECO as well, in regards to upping the PG rating to T..or at least PG-13? As Creo mentioned, I think some of the words the censor system blocks are hilarious, also using the classic ******* . Are people like that annoying yes? Do they deserve warnings? No. Personally because this is a beta game, I don't feel young children should be allowed within a thousand miles of it. Not little kids, not their money, none of it. A 14-15yr old+ maybe. Simply because this is an online game.

Even Nintendo makes it very clear how they take no responsibility for 'online interactions' that may happen with/through their systems. (That little wii intro, that says they are not responsible for etc etc? lol!) It's more that they should be warned that they cant be protected, and should be careful. Then it should be that the staff need to go to such lengths to keep them protected. Besides, that's why /ignore exists. The fact is that, most people who would abuse this (if the game have less limits in regards to pg'ness) Would be knowingly inviting whatever they deserved upon themselves. There is of course, that fine line between Joking and being Offensive, and if the line were to be crossed, then the appropriate warning etc would take place. Unless the person deserved worse (which should be allowed, this isn't Trollemon).
I notice that there's a language barrier or something here, that allows a lot of that to get mistranslated. Or maybe it's that there are a lot of kids online, who are easily offended by something that would be funny to an older person? (Or immature teen/adults..not sure..should take a poll.)

Also, Creo is totes right. The staff have to act on ethical, moral, within the limits of their power. Which is why those powers are so carefully defined I would imagine? I really need to read more. I'm sure there's more than the wiki that describes the powers inherent to each staff member/staff position. Cause it'd be hilarious to see a Mapper handing out Bans.

I agree with Saurus and Kyppo to some degree. The 'it wasn't me, was my brother that hacked'. Never accepted. Also that pop-up messages would be interesting. Maybe you guys could make 'Beware of these scammers' alerts, lol.

Lol, also Teck. Not everyone should go to jail, but they sure as heck should all get those huge $500+ Speeding/light running/no seat belt wearing tickets. Also, because no one ever died by being hit by an MMO. -nods- Different scenario, different rules. Though If I had to compare the laws. Account Sharing is like Speeding, and Hacking is like Highway Robbery.

 

[Shiningamisgirl]

I love the way it is but in terms of other things that takes common knowledge to understand...especially for innocent by-standards like me in Sufyan case of Ban. View this topic. Please understand where I'm coming from. Learn to find other solutions then always depending on them screen shots....the topic explains it all...just have a read please. And don't give me that "you don't deserve special treatment". I propose a fair solution which makes sense, I would hope you see it the way I see it...IF I was GM I'd in fact be just like Brennan, if not worse. But for this part...I think a solution can be found.

http://forum.pokemon-world-online.net/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=30488

Also..This. -nods- Nemo is right, that there needs to be a way to return a persons stolen property, that requires something other than an SS. I understand why the rule is in place (to make sure the person who just got banned doesnt come back and say, wahhh my stolen pokemon! Give them to account X)

Though its my understanding that all trades can be seen, and I.d's matched. Etc. So maybe if the system shows the trade, and you know your pokemons I.d That wold be enough? There should be a better way to retrieve the stolen from the hacked and scammers..Even if it also goes to prove the 'Trust no One', 'Screen Shot everything', rule.

 

[Saurus]

Ban them I say! Lift thy ban hammer and pound justice into them!

But. It's common sense. If you do the crime, you'll pay the time. Why would you want to become more lenient? A crime is a crime, an offence is an offence. Why appeal to change it now?

Speeding is a crime, running a red light, illegal parking, ect. Should everyone that do those be sent to jail?

Yes. They should. Or we could change things and let murderers free form prisons. I'm sure they won't kill again!

haha in Saurus world everyman goes to jail. Then the entire economy falls due to exceeding number of inmates awaiting a cell and the taxes to build thousands of new jails and keeping them fed would take 95% of all his peoples paychecks and they'd all starve to death HAHAHAHA. I don't understand the logic that every crime results in maximum penalty that is absurd, a murderer getting same sentence as a child stealing gum? lol.

I get what Empress is saying however, this isn't the outside world. There are no cars, red lights or illegal parking on the internet. Botting, Hacking, Illegal programs is a form of crime, online. It should be treated as such. Brennan does a magnificent job because there has to be a no-nonsense individual in that department. You can't go thinking that everyone who has been caught doing these things need to be dealt with more leniency from now on. If you're willing to change that now then you might as well start unbanning all those who did wrong in the past.

Person A was caught speeding. Action taken: Banned.
Person B was caught botting: Action taken: Banned.
Person C was caught using illegal programs. Action taken: Banned.

And what i'm reading is telling me that the bans should be changed to days, weeks, months. Piece of advice, just because players have recently complained about the banning system doesn't mean the system should change. It means the system is working as it should.