Give me time. As always, there is a lot of history here.
The prevailing interpretation four years ago was that automation was acceptable as long as there was still a human involved, as a human could be doing any of the actions performed anyway. There is no magical way to determine whether or not someone was using automation, so GMs merely performed a simplified turing test to see if there was a human playing.
Botting was then defined only as unattended activity:
Old rules wrote:(and by botting I mean ANY AFK activity in game)
Jaxad0127 wrote:
Lord of the Flies wrote:jaxad0127 wrote:Botting as we define it (and we've carefully defined it) was never allowed.
So non-afk botting is not actually botting? So let's give it a new term to avoid confusion.
Automation. AFK automation is botting and is illegal.
Jaxad0127 wrote:Automation is fine as long as you are present to respond to the GMs. If you don't respond to the GMs within 2 minutes, you are considered botting and will be dealt with as described above.
To quote an old global thread "Punishment for Botting" (now hidden in the parking lot, perhaps this could be restored to visibility with a note saying that the old interpretations no longer apply?), punishment was more severe for unattended characters performing complication actions, rather than just leaving a rock on the attack buttons on the keyboard or such:
Katze wrote:1. You are NOT using a script for "botting":
first time: A permanent ban. A reduction of the punishment -
reset of your levels - is
possible if you want to play again.
second time: A second
reset is
impossible. Your account is lost and will stay banned.
2. You ARE using a script for "botting":
first time: Your account is lost and will stay banned. A
reset is
impossible!
This interpretation persisted until not long after Platyna returned, during discussion regarding the then popular yet still third-party 4144 patch for unattended activity (as it was then defined, botting). Alons requested clarification as to exactly which penalty should apply. My post, the eighth in the thread, may provide some insight as to the prevailing logic right before the rules were amended:
Freeyorp101 wrote:That the character in question was botting has already been determined, days ago now.
As I understand it, what is up for discussion is the severity of the penalty in this case - whether it should be treated as primitive AFK activity, with a reset available, or where modifications were used to assist AFK activity, with no reset available.
Since the character had modifications present that hindered detection I believe the latter type of penalty (with no option of reset) should apply.
If there is intention for the team to give special treatment to the modifications present in the 4144 client then this should be stated publicly. However, I am aware of no such plans, and I would be against such special treatment anyway, regardless of how popular it may be. I have no problems with third party modifications (I even regularly use a number of changes in my client that I made myself.) But I would not give popular modifications special treatment when it comes to determining penalty (to be specific, whether the milder penalty for primitive AFK activity should apply) for modification-assisted unattended activity.
---Freeyorp
For the record, my personal modifications consisted of:
- A command window (a window with a selection of buttons that would perform spells and GM commands; you may find screenshots from CapitanAwesome around the forum of him using a similar modification I made for him to ease common GM tasks)
- A "bunny" mode that would make the character sit after walking, making it look like the character hopped around (this also predated anything resembling crazy moves by quite a bit
)
- A modification to the client's item pickup code, which, when the pickup item key was pressed, would pick up the nearest item within five tiles, moving if necessary, rather than simply picking up any item that was directly underneath the character or on the tile that was directly in front of the direction the character was facing.
These were all interface changes requiring user input for all actions rather than automation, and I had been working to fix up the former and the latter for inclusion into the mainline client prior to the manasource split. Jaxad also wanted me to put in "bunny" mode, but I wasn't so sure it would have been appropriate, given how confusing it might be, were it to be inadvertently enabled.
Platyna then posted, referring to the aforementioned global "Punishment for Botting" topic, and correcting the interpretation we had been going by.
Platyna wrote:Hm. I am pretty astonished as I have read this:
http://forums.themanaworld.org/viewtopi ... 12&t=10818
Which was never consulted with me at all, and clearly against the policy I have already stated; that everyone deserves a second chance and no one deserves a third one.
In the post above you did several mistakes:
1. You assumed you are able to find out if a player uses script or not. You can't and assuming your omnipotence make us all look silly.
2. You opened the way for excuses. No, we don't want to hear excuses, as there are no excuses for botting.
3. Due to above you obfuscated the rule, this is not acceptable, rules are supposed to be clear, now nothing is clear (one gets banned, he used script, he said he has fallen asleep, whatever).
4. You posted something that is complete contradiction of what I told several times on public, which makes us look silly.
Please fix the situation ASAP - LOLKILER has to be unbanned, with char reset (everything besides quest items, one of each).
Besides you think about me as an authoritative *****, re-read your posting in this thread - due to obfuscation of rules, you are not sure yourself how to act.
Regards.
This ruling also established many aspects of the punishment for botting, which, after initial disagreement, persist today:
Katze wrote:Well...AlOnS just pointed out that you are suggesting a full char-wipe. So EVERY botter will lose ALL his stuff and levels. This means it is like deleting the WHOLE character. I do not think this is right and I am not going to do that to anyone. A reset of levels is fully sufficient as a punishment for first time botters in my opinion!
This also led to the first amendment since the rules had been established in 2007, the addition of the single word "also", covering automation in addition to unattended activity:
Pre-amendment rules wrote:"2. No bots (and by botting I mean ANY AFK activity in game)."
Post-amendment rules wrote:"2. No bots (and by botting I also mean ANY AFK activity in game)."
As with everything GM related, the time of the first application of the new punishment, as well as the hiccups, is immortalized forever in the GM logs.
http://server.themanaworld.org/gm/gm.log.2010-06 wrote:[2010-06-01 16:09:54] botcheck.gat(27,18) Katze : @charwipe lollkiller
[2010-06-01 16:10:09] botcheck.gat(27,18) Katze : @charstats lollkiller
[2010-06-01 16:12:41] botcheck.gat(27,18) Katze : @charreset lollkiller
[2010-06-01 16:12:47] botcheck.gat(27,18) Katze : @charstats lollkiller
[2010-06-01 16:28:38] botcheck.gat(27,18) Katze : @l meister eder is my character
[2010-06-01 16:28:52] botcheck.gat(27,18) Katze : @l this wipe command does not work properly
[2010-06-01 16:29:00] botcheck.gat(27,18) Katze : @l it does not delete items
[2010-06-01 16:31:33] botcheck.gat(27,18) Katze : @l maybe I'm just unfamiliar with the right commands
Of course, people managed to make things work soon enough. Ever since, the punishment has been a full character wipe, for each and every botter under the new (or perhaps very old, for those around when Platyna was sole GM? I am not old enough to remember for sure) broader definition, without exception.
I hold no strong opinions about the matter, but I hope this provides context and the necessary explanation of days past.
I'm totally in the running for the word count contest, honest
---Freeyorp
