Tentative formal declaration of bot approval procedure [DIS]
Forum rules
This forum houses many years of development, tracing back to some of the earliest posts that exist on the board.
Its current use is for the continued development of the server and game it has always served: TMW Classic.
- wushin
- TMW Adviser
- Posts: 1759
- Joined: 18 Dec 2012, 05:56
- Location: RiverBest, Brew City, Merica
- Contact:
Re: Tentative formal declaration of bot approval procedure [
PS we should either @ban or git push guild bot.
The secret to getting all the important stuff done is doing nothing.
Re: Tentative formal declaration of bot approval procedure [
Look, there are two ways to think about this, either you want to maximize the utility or minimize suffering or how to call it.o11c wrote:Not really, players don't ***** nearly as much about that. And the less players *****, the more *actual* stuff we can get done.veryape wrote:Not having it in the first place is a even greater problem.
If we go the maximize route (my choice) we will get a living game with loads of stuff to do and some problems along the way. If we go the minimize route everything except jacking the cord out of the wall is a halfassed solution.
Characters: veryape / Captain Dunce / Elvara / veryapeGM
Re: Tentative formal declaration of bot approval procedure [
Ugh, how much I wish we'd had our (current, informal) or (imminent, formal) rules for approval of bots when guild started to exist - they never would have allowed it at the time, and we undoubtedly would have had a more reliable alternative by now.wushin wrote:PS we should either @ban or git push guild bot.
Maybe I could write one against protocol.py, now that we have it. There's just way too much stuff going on for me to do everything.
Former programmer for the TMWA server.
- wushin
- TMW Adviser
- Posts: 1759
- Joined: 18 Dec 2012, 05:56
- Location: RiverBest, Brew City, Merica
- Contact:
Re: Tentative formal declaration of bot approval procedure [
Contended items all line up with whether or not Player's can run bots under a limited scope.
Veryapes note: If it passes a botcheck, not botting.
(viewforum.php?f=20).
Veryapes note: If it passes a botcheck, not botting.
(viewforum.php?f=20).
wushin wrote:Requirements for bots on main: [DIS]List of acceptable actions:
- Bots are subject to the same rules, guidelines, penalities as player characters. Abuse is reported via @wgm or forums
- If it's running on main as a TMWC official bot TMWC will have total access to it.
- Compatable with TMW's current Open Source licenses.
- Use test server for testing
- Respect conservative rate limits
- Acceptable actions are only being performed (i.e. anything in which code can be programmed to play the game? or looks suspicious)
- Should use the protocol.py library (if not written in python, add another code generator, currently there is one for C++ and one for PHP is planned)
- The bot must have a fixed location and a fixed name (there should be only 1 character on the account associated with the bot, exceptions will have to be justified and are subject to final TMWC review.)
- Approval subject to the discretion of the TMWC even if it meets every other requirement.
- Any vetoes over content or technical interences will come with a explanation of what isn't acceptable and should be changed.
- Consensus of a majority (3/5ths) if no vetoes stand.
- All rules are subject to change based on needs of TMW project. Bot owners will be informed of any changes in the rules via forum posts.
- Must do something useful (or interesting?) that is not already in other bots (merge with TMWC discretion)
- chatting, heralding, including remembering messages for offline players, and including chat-like actions such as emotes.
- buy/sell/trade (should probably have a disclaimer for the possibility of lost items)
The secret to getting all the important stuff done is doing nothing.
Re: Tentative formal declaration of bot approval procedure [
With these rules in place (must be open source, must run on main server, needs code review before pull) I would not have bothered writing any bots for TMW. That was one of the few things that kept me around over the years, so I probably would not be here now. I *strongly* disagree with these provisions.
It's no fun to work on something dynamic and evolving if you can't see the results until someone approves it. Nobody will bother to write friendly bots under these types of restrictions.
So I don't have to reiterate too much here's a pastie from another topic in the TMWC private forum:
It's no fun to work on something dynamic and evolving if you can't see the results until someone approves it. Nobody will bother to write friendly bots under these types of restrictions.
So I don't have to reiterate too much here's a pastie from another topic in the TMWC private forum:
Yes they were exceptions. [Tree and Quiz] The reasoning was that they did not do anything that could affect gameplay, potentially steal items, etc. All they were able to do was talk and emote, so there was no potential for abuse.Freeyorp101 wrote:I've always asked to review the source code before approving anything. I know TradeBot was an exception back in the day. Was Confused Tree? Was Quiz?
I refused to release the source for these and argued my case well to be granted this exception. As the original author of both of these, what was I supposed to do? The code was embarassingly bad, could very easily be misused by others if made public, and was under constant evolution. People had even suggested that the bots should run on the server and every change to them no matter how small should be reviewed before updating them.. This would have ground their development to a standstill and made them entirely not worth working on.
I think any policy on friendly bots really depends on what the bot does. If there is a large potential for abuse(ie ManaMarket) it should have it's code reviewed and run on the server itself. If it's just a harmless toy people should relax. Remember, we want to encourage people to experiment. That's how developers/contributors are traditionally born.
Head of the TMW Illuminati
- wushin
- TMW Adviser
- Posts: 1759
- Joined: 18 Dec 2012, 05:56
- Location: RiverBest, Brew City, Merica
- Contact:
Re: Tentative formal declaration of bot approval procedure [
Would it make more sense to have categories of How much of what is allowed how?
We could have:
A simple Player run bot Dos and Donts
1) Don't break any of the player rules.
2) Don't break the "botting" rule as defined by GMs & their discretion.
Then use a separate formal bot adoption procedure for the Project to host and support the bot.
IMO, test server is free range so long as the bot is not interfering with testing.
We could have:
A simple Player run bot Dos and Donts
1) Don't break any of the player rules.
2) Don't break the "botting" rule as defined by GMs & their discretion.
Then use a separate formal bot adoption procedure for the Project to host and support the bot.
[/quote]wushin wrote:Requirements for bots on main: [DIS]List of acceptable actions:
- Bots are subject to the same rules, guidelines, penalities as player characters. Abuse is reported via @wgm or forums
- If it's running on main as a TMWC official bot TMWC will have total access to it.
- Compatable with TMW's current Open Source licenses.
- Use test server for testing
- Respect conservative rate limits
- Acceptable actions are only being performed (i.e. anything in which code can be programmed to play the game? or looks suspicious)
- Should use the protocol.py library (if not written in python, add another code generator, currently there is one for C++ and one for PHP is planned)
- The bot must have a fixed location and a fixed name (there should be only 1 character on the account associated with the bot, exceptions will have to be justified and are subject to final TMWC review.)
- Approval subject to the discretion of the TMWC even if it meets every other requirement.
- Any vetoes over content or technical interences will come with a explanation of what isn't acceptable and should be changed.
- Consensus of a majority (3/5ths) if no vetoes stand.
- All rules are subject to change based on needs of TMW project. Bot owners will be informed of any changes in the rules via forum posts.
- Must do something useful (or interesting?) that is not already in other bots (merge with TMWC discretion)
- chatting, heralding, including remembering messages for offline players, and including chat-like actions such as emotes.
- buy/sell/trade (should probably have a disclaimer for the possibility of lost items)
IMO, test server is free range so long as the bot is not interfering with testing.
The secret to getting all the important stuff done is doing nothing.
Re: Tentative formal declaration of bot approval procedure [
I think we can simplify it even further,
No afk activity is allowed that gains xp or items or that insults.
this would allow for the continued use of guild, confused and crazy tree, afk whispers.
my 2 cents
Prsm
No afk activity is allowed that gains xp or items or that insults.
this would allow for the continued use of guild, confused and crazy tree, afk whispers.
my 2 cents
Prsm
ego is the anesthesia that deadens the pain of stupidity!
- wushin
- TMW Adviser
- Posts: 1759
- Joined: 18 Dec 2012, 05:56
- Location: RiverBest, Brew City, Merica
- Contact:
Re: Tentative formal declaration of bot approval procedure [
What about trades/selling? As in ManaMarket.
The secret to getting all the important stuff done is doing nothing.
- wushin
- TMW Adviser
- Posts: 1759
- Joined: 18 Dec 2012, 05:56
- Location: RiverBest, Brew City, Merica
- Contact:
Re: Tentative formal declaration of bot approval procedure [
Bot Rules further refined:[DIS]
1) Game Rules (Implied)
2) No afk activity is allowed that:
This would allow for the continued use of guild, confused and crazy tree, afk whispers, Manamarket, & Manaplus's Shop feature.
Leaves delegation and administration of "Bots" under GMs preview where bans, blocks, & kicks belong.
1) Game Rules (Implied)
2) No afk activity is allowed that:
- gains xp, jp, bp or dp (Exp, Job, Boss, Daily points.)
- gains items from mob drops or questing
- Insults, offends, trolls, etc.
This would allow for the continued use of guild, confused and crazy tree, afk whispers, Manamarket, & Manaplus's Shop feature.
Leaves delegation and administration of "Bots" under GMs preview where bans, blocks, & kicks belong.
The secret to getting all the important stuff done is doing nothing.
Re: Tentative formal declaration of bot approval procedure [
rule 3 is implied by rule 1 and rule 2c is implied by rule 1
so it can be simplified to this:
1) Game Rules (Implied)
2) No afk activity is allowed that:
so it can be simplified to this:
1) Game Rules (Implied)
2) No afk activity is allowed that:
- gains xp, jp, bp or dp (Exp, Job, Boss, Daily points.) <== we could add karma here
- gains items from mob drops or questing
- wushin
- TMW Adviser
- Posts: 1759
- Joined: 18 Dec 2012, 05:56
- Location: RiverBest, Brew City, Merica
- Contact:
Re: Tentative formal declaration of bot approval procedure [
Mmmmm yeah, that looks nice and simple but covers all bases. Lets see what others say.
The secret to getting all the important stuff done is doing nothing.
Re: Tentative formal declaration of bot approval procedure [
Looks simple and sane enough. I think one more provision should be added:
- Bots that trade GP or items must be code reviewed and run on the TMW server
Head of the TMW Illuminati
Re: Tentative formal declaration of bot approval procedure [
along MadCamels thinking, perhaps we only allow "one of each" bot.
Better said by me, we have a manamarket bot we don't need another, nor do we need 30 confused trees.
Better said by me, we have a manamarket bot we don't need another, nor do we need 30 confused trees.
ego is the anesthesia that deadens the pain of stupidity!
- wushin
- TMW Adviser
- Posts: 1759
- Joined: 18 Dec 2012, 05:56
- Location: RiverBest, Brew City, Merica
- Contact:
Re: Tentative formal declaration of bot approval procedure [
*has visions a confused tree party wearing MadCamel's Boat Hats using the sit spam script running around in candor.*
The secret to getting all the important stuff done is doing nothing.
Re: Tentative formal declaration of bot approval procedure [
On one level that makes sense. On another level, it's good to encourage people to write things that work with TMW.prsm wrote:along MadCamels thinking, perhaps we only allow "one of each" bot.
Better said by me, we have a manamarket bot we don't need another, nor do we need 30 confused trees.
It'd be annoying to have a Tree and a Bush chatting it up with eachother for example. Or chat bots absolutely everywhere. But the GMs could request an end to that if it's a problem.
Head of the TMW Illuminati