Account suspension discussion [merged]

[mrstealth.6701]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Jinks.2057" said:

> > Anet never proved a single person cheated

> And you, contrary to what you claim, haven't proven even a single innocent person was banned.

> Even though you keep bringing that up as a fact.

>

> By the way, using a GW2 specific cheat program in parralel with GW2 is clearly a ground for suspension and not a result of a mistake, so you have already a number of confirmed cheaters here.

>

 

The most compelling reason we have to think there was anyone banned without actually cheating is the statement Anet released. Its wording indicates that they were banning based only on a cheat program being run along side GW2. Despite players and at least one major game news site (Kotaku) asking for further clarification on that statement, they've said nothing else at all on this entire incident. If that statement was inaccurate, I would have expected a correction/clarification by now, especially considering the backlash and media coverage it got them.

 

If that is how they went about these bans, CheatEngine would give a pretty high probability of someone that was not cheating still being banned. Normally, that would not be a huge problem, but the fact that Anet is not accepting any appeals means that any innocent players have no option but to accept the punishment.

 

It's far less likely to happen, but there is a definite possibility for even a GW2 specific cheat to be incorrectly detected. This would require that the MD5 hash for the real cheat program to match the hash of some other program they player had running. This type of false positive has definitely happened with other games/anti-cheat systems. Again it's quite unlikely, but the possibility of it happening and fact that other games have had it happen, show that some appeals process needs to exist to handle such cases.

 

The entire problem here stems from the fact that appeals are not being considered. If they were, any potential wrongful bans could be sorted out and there would probably be a lot less outcry outside of the lingering spyware accusations.

[mtpelion.4562]

> @"Jinks.2057" said:

> > @"Galaa.8475" said:

> > Dang! yall still on this? what's done is done. time to move on and get along lil doggy. this horse is dead. the ship has sailed. the sun has set. GET OVER IT ALL READY KIDDO'S!

>

> Anet hasn't addressed the issue of installing spyware on our computers.

 

There isn't anything to address. Every game company does this, except that most of them are better at it than ArenaNet and run it via memory calls versus client-side installation. Besides, you agreed to let them do it when you clicked "I Agree" and signed in.

[Ardenwolfe.8590]

Let me say this: If I was banned without merit, I would never touch this game again much less come to their forum to discuss it. I would, however, contact certain people to prove my innocence as mistakes do happen. If, in this scenario, my suspension was reversed with apologies, I would return here to voice it and thank ANet in public and private. If, however, it was not, I would be done with this game and its forum . . . if I was completely innocent, regardless.

 

However, if I was guilty, I might drag the discussion on and on for around sixty pages or more on how ANet went about discovering my suspicious behavior. This would be especially true if I happened to be guilty of such behavior, yet not suspended in this go-round. Case in point, I was very much worried that TacO could result in suspensions given I've used and endorsed it in the past. Now? Not so much since ANet hasn't listed it as a 'problem' program. So I don't feel the need to discuss it for another sixty pages.

 

That said . . . yes, this horse is very much dead.

[Jinks.2057]

> @"mtpelion.4562" said:

> > @"Jinks.2057" said:

> > > @"Galaa.8475" said:

> > > Dang! yall still on this? what's done is done. time to move on and get along lil doggy. this horse is dead. the ship has sailed. the sun has set. GET OVER IT ALL READY KIDDO'S!

> >

> > Anet hasn't addressed the issue of installing spyware on our computers.

>

> There isn't anything to address. Every game company does this, except that most of them are better at it than ArenaNet and run it via memory calls versus client-side installation. Besides, you agreed to let them do it when you clicked "I Agree" and signed in.

 

ToS doesn't always hold up to scrutiny

[mtpelion.4562]

> @"Jinks.2057" said:

> > @"mtpelion.4562" said:

> > > @"Jinks.2057" said:

> > > > @"Galaa.8475" said:

> > > > Dang! yall still on this? what's done is done. time to move on and get along lil doggy. this horse is dead. the ship has sailed. the sun has set. GET OVER IT ALL READY KIDDO'S!

> > >

> > > Anet hasn't addressed the issue of installing spyware on our computers.

> >

> > There isn't anything to address. Every game company does this, except that most of them are better at it than ArenaNet and run it via memory calls versus client-side installation. Besides, you agreed to let them do it when you clicked "I Agree" and signed in.

>

> ToS doesn't always hold up to scrutiny

 

Unless you can show monetary damages, you have no standing to even initiate scrutiny. However, even if you could sue them, this particular case would hold up quite well since they have a large, vested financial stake in ensuring the integrity of their online game. No aspect of what they did is unreasonable in that regard, nor did it cause anyone any harm (other than those who were guilty of causing harm to the game who were the targets of the sting).

[mrstealth.6701]

> @"Ardenwolfe.8590" said:

> Let me say this: If I was banned without merit, I would never touch this game again much less come to their forum to discuss it. I would, however, contact certain people to prove my innocence as mistakes do happen. If, in this scenario, my suspension was reversed with apologies, I would return here to voice it and thank ANet in public and private. If, however, it was not, I would be done with this game . . . if I was completely innocent, regardless.

>

> However, if I was guilty, I might drag the discussion on and on for around sixty pages or more on how ANet went about finding out about suspicious behavior. This would especially true if I happened to be guilty of such behavior, yet not suspended in this go-round. Case in point, I was very much worried that TacO could result in suspension given I've used and endorsed it in the past. Now? Not so much since ANet hasn't listed it as a 'program' program. So yes, feel free to search my running programs ANet. Whatever it takes to get rid of cheaters and their ilk from this game. I click, "I agree."

>

> That said . . . yes, this horse is very much dead.

 

I know I could not walk away quietly if I was wrongly accused and punished. I wouldn't want to play the game again unless they apologized and reversed it, but I definitely would not be quiet.

 

Now, if I had actually cheated I would probably be quietly, and shamefully, walking away. I think there'd be a low chance of success, and a very good chance of public shaming with evidence.

 

I can't speak for anyone else. Only they know how they would react to this situation.

[Ardenwolfe.8590]

@"mtpelion.4562" So . . . in layman's terms . . . people want to sue ANet for not letting them play their game any more. As if the justice system wasn't already clogged enough with frivolous lawsuits.

[Ardenwolfe.8590]

> @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> Now, if I had actually cheated I would probably be quietly, and shamefully, walking away. I think there'd be a low chance of success, and a very good chance of public shaming with evidence.

>

> I can't speak for anyone else. Only they know how they would react to this situation.

 

Have you never seen an episode of COPS? Or any televised court show? Guilty people tend not to behave in the manner you suggest. At all.

 

 

[mrstealth.6701]

> @"Ardenwolfe.8590" said:

> > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > Now, if I had actually cheated I would probably be quietly, and shamefully, walking away. I think there'd be a low chance of success, and a very good chance of public shaming with evidence.

> >

> > I can't speak for anyone else. Only they know how they would react to this situation.

>

> Have you never seen an episode of COPS? Or any televised court show? Guilty people tend not to behave in the manner you suggest. At all.

>

>

 

I generally avoid those types of shows. I don't think any of them are on Netflix/Amazon anyway. I very rarely watch actual TV.

 

Do innocent people really tend to behave in the way you suggest?

I assume that someone falsely accused probably doesn't sit idly by while they are prosecute and punished.

 

I think it should be pointed out that people in shows like those are facing real world punishments like jail time or hefty fines, not the loss of a game account (that for many of these players, is likely not their main or only account). The stakes are considerably higher, which is probably going to change how they react.

 

Not that real cheaters don't go throwing a fit on forums. We've seen it before, and we've seem them get nailed to the wall with proof. It's something that cheaters do to try and hide among innocent players(though, there are not always innocent players in the mix). But it's not something unique to cheaters, as we've also seen innocent players have their name cleared.

 

It happened to myself and several hundred other players in GW1. It was years ago, but I'm fairly certain the main unoffical forum(there was no official one then) was not silent about the incident.

[misterman.1530]

> @"Oldirtbeard.9834" said:

> What do you think insulting me is going to do, make me cower in subservience and hold out my wallet to ANet? Warden by Blizzard is public and open, nothing to hide there; ANet was sneaky and under handed that is my problem and it is on them to bring me back into the fold. I've dropped Cable Providers and Cell Phone Carriers for less.

 

Er. So drop Anet/GW2? No one is stopping you....and if you were one of the ones banned for 6 months, hey, you have a head start? I really so no issue here.

 

[mtpelion.4562]

> @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > @"Ardenwolfe.8590" said:

> > > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > Now, if I had actually cheated I would probably be quietly, and shamefully, walking away. I think there'd be a low chance of success, and a very good chance of public shaming with evidence.

> > >

> > > I can't speak for anyone else. Only they know how they would react to this situation.

> >

> > Have you never seen an episode of COPS? Or any televised court show? Guilty people tend not to behave in the manner you suggest. At all.

> >

> >

>

> I generally avoid those types of shows. I don't think any of them are on Netflix/Amazon anyway. I very rarely watch actual TV.

>

> Do innocent people really tend to behave in the way you suggest?

> I assume that someone falsely accused probably doesn't sit idly by while they are prosecute and punished.

>

> I think it should be pointed out that people in shows like those are facing real world punishments like jail time or hefty fines, not the loss of a game account (that for many of these players, is likely not their main or only account). The stakes are considerably higher, which is probably going to change how they react.

>

> Not that real cheaters don't go throwing a fit on forums. We've seen it before, and we've seem them get nailed to the wall with proof. It's something that cheaters do to try and hide among innocent players(though, there are not always innocent players in the mix). But it's not something unique to cheaters, as we've also seen innocent players have their name cleared.

 

An innocent person generally starts with the belief that the system works, so even if they are being wrongly accused, they tend to let the process play out before getting up in arms as they believe they will be vindicated in the end. A guilty person knows that if the system works, they will be punished in the end so they need others to believe that the system doesn't work in order to cast doubt on their ultimate verdict.

 

There is a reason for the famous expression "The lady doth protest too much, methinks".

[ZhouX.8742]

Wait Jinks got banned for cheating?

 

HAHAHAHAHAHA how ironic

 

-Tanbin

[Shikigami.4013]

> @"Jinks.2057" said:

> > @"Shikigami.4013" said:

> > > @"Jinks.2057" should have said:

> > > Fun fact: people who said they weren't cheating got banned

> > >

> > Corrected that for you. Just because someone says he wasn't cheating doesn't mean he wasn't.

> >

> > If everything someone says could be seen as "fact", courts would have it so much easier.

> > "Did you kill that person?"

> > "No"

> > "Ok not guilty, you can go".

>

> Because you believe something does not make it true.

> Using evidence like we are does

You believe that people who claim they did not cheat but got suspended for running cheatengine actually did not cheat. How does your "Because you believe something does not make it true." work with that? And if you say that you do not just believe that but have evidence, where is that "evidence" that they did not cheat?

Regardless, the next paragraph makes this irrelevant anyway.

 

> What's funny is you are referencing an example of innocent until proven guilty. Murder.

> If Anet abided by those rules needed to convict a person for murder not one person would be banned.

That is not funny because ArenaNet does not suspend game accounts on the terms of the law but on the terms of the tos, so whatever "example" I bring, there is no point in comparing it with things that do not work under the same ruleset. ArenaNet is not obligated to keep players playing until they have proven the player cheated, so they didn't do it. That does not make the suspension "wrongful". Furthermore the players did not even get suspended for cheating but for running cheatengine at the same time as GW2. Therefore you calling the suspension "wrongful" makes you wrong.

[mrstealth.6701]

> @"mtpelion.4562" said:

> > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > @"Ardenwolfe.8590" said:

> > > > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > > Now, if I had actually cheated I would probably be quietly, and shamefully, walking away. I think there'd be a low chance of success, and a very good chance of public shaming with evidence.

> > > >

> > > > I can't speak for anyone else. Only they know how they would react to this situation.

> > >

> > > Have you never seen an episode of COPS? Or any televised court show? Guilty people tend not to behave in the manner you suggest. At all.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > I generally avoid those types of shows. I don't think any of them are on Netflix/Amazon anyway. I very rarely watch actual TV.

> >

> > Do innocent people really tend to behave in the way you suggest?

> > I assume that someone falsely accused probably doesn't sit idly by while they are prosecute and punished.

> >

> > I think it should be pointed out that people in shows like those are facing real world punishments like jail time or hefty fines, not the loss of a game account (that for many of these players, is likely not their main or only account). The stakes are considerably higher, which is probably going to change how they react.

> >

> > Not that real cheaters don't go throwing a fit on forums. We've seen it before, and we've seem them get nailed to the wall with proof. It's something that cheaters do to try and hide among innocent players(though, there are not always innocent players in the mix). But it's not something unique to cheaters, as we've also seen innocent players have their name cleared.

>

> An innocent person generally starts with the belief that the system works, so even if they are being wrongly accused, they tend to let the process play out before getting up in arms as they believe they will be vindicated in the end. A guilty person knows that if the system works, they will be punished in the end so they need others to believe that the system doesn't work in order to cast doubt on their ultimate verdict.

>

> There is a reason for the famous expression "The lady doth protest too much, methinks".

 

How can an innocent person have faith that the system will work when the ones running the system are refusing to consider appeals?

 

Anet considered the matter closed as soon as they'd done it. There is really no other option than to get up in arms.

[IndigoSundown.5419]

> @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > @"Ardenwolfe.8590" said:

> > > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > Now, if I had actually cheated I would probably be quietly, and shamefully, walking away. I think there'd be a low chance of success, and a very good chance of public shaming with evidence.

> > >

> > > I can't speak for anyone else. Only they know how they would react to this situation.

> >

> > Have you never seen an episode of COPS? Or any televised court show? Guilty people tend not to behave in the manner you suggest. At all.

> >

> >

>

> I generally avoid those types of shows. I don't think any of them are on Netflix/Amazon anyway. I very rarely watch actual TV.

>

> Do innocent people really tend to behave in the way you suggest?

> I assume that someone falsely accused probably doesn't sit idly by while they are prosecute and punished.

>

> I think it should be pointed out that people in shows like those are facing real world punishments like jail time or hefty fines, not the loss of a game account (that for many of these players, is likely not their main or only account). The stakes are considerably higher, which is probably going to change how they react.

>

> Not that real cheaters don't go throwing a fit on forums. We've seen it before, and we've seem them get nailed to the wall with proof. It's something that cheaters do to try and hide among innocent players(though, there are not always innocent players in the mix). But it's not something unique to cheaters, as we've also seen innocent players have their name cleared.

>

> It happened to myself and several hundred other players in GW1. It was years ago, but I'm fairly certain the main unoffical forum(there was no official one then) was not silent about the incident.

 

Watch some European Football. Few players accept foul calls without challenge, "innocent" or "guilty." Most of them use arm signals to influence the ref (raise their arms asking for a call to go their way, pointing at the ball even though they know they did not get in a touch) even if they have to know they are wrong to do so. The stakes don't matter -- it could be a trivial call in a relatively pointless mid-table game, or a pivotal call in the Champions League final. The only real difference between the rightly and wrongly accused is that the innocent may feel more aggrieved -- though even that is not always a given.

 

I think both you and Ardenwolfe are somewhat atypical. People in general have a tendency to want to believe they are right. Being vocal, protesting innocence, shifting blame, citing nonsensical arguments, all of these tactics are commonplace. Many treat being wrong -- or being found to be wrong -- as a much more serious matter than the situation might warrant.

[mrstealth.6701]

> @"Shikigami.4013" said:

> Furthermore the players did not even get suspended for cheating but for running cheatengine at the same time as GW2.

 

That's precisely the part that some people are upset over. Not so much that Anet doesn't have the right to do it (they basically gave themselves the right to do whatever they want), but that it's a really crappy justification/reason to do it. And to make matters worse they refuse to look at any appeals.

 

If Anet operated strictly according to what the ToS allows, they'd probably have a lot less players around. Both from banning a lot more and from people just not wanting to bother with a very authoritarian game. But for the most part, Anet has been pretty reasonable, even when it comes to mass bannings and innocent players getting caught up in them. I'm not really sure what prompted them to start a Tyrian Inquisition this time 'round, instead of handling things as they usually do.

[Shikigami.4013]

> @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > @"Shikigami.4013" said:

> > Furthermore the players did not even get suspended for cheating but for running cheatengine at the same time as GW2.

>

> That's precisely the part that some people are upset over. Not so much that Anet doesn't have the right to do it (they basically gave themselves the right to do whatever they want), but that it's a really crappy justification/reason to do it. And to make matters worse they refuse to look at any appeals.

>

> If Anet operated strictly according to what the ToS allows, they'd probably have a lot less players around. Both from banning a lot more and from people just not wanting to bother with a very authoritarian game. But for the most part, Anet has been pretty reasonable, even when it comes to mass bannings and innocent players getting caught up in them. I'm not really sure what prompted them to start a Tyrian Inquisition this time 'round, instead of handling things as they usually do.

 

I am perfectly ok with them being upset over it. They may announce that they do not like it, that they think ArenaNet should not have done it, they can tell us about their opinion all day long. But that is not what Jinks is doing.

 

He lables the suspensions as "wrongful" because ArenaNet did not prove that the players were cheating, and ignores the fact (despite loving the word fact) that the ruleset that governs the suspensions do not require any such proof and that ArenaNet acted within the rules when suspending for running a certain software and not specifically for using that software to cheat. A suspension that is completely inline with the ruleset in place is not "wrongful".

[mrstealth.6701]

> @"Shikigami.4013" said:

> > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > @"Shikigami.4013" said:

> > > Furthermore the players did not even get suspended for cheating but for running cheatengine at the same time as GW2.

> >

> > That's precisely the part that some people are upset over. Not so much that Anet doesn't have the right to do it (they basically gave themselves the right to do whatever they want), but that it's a really crappy justification/reason to do it. And to make matters worse they refuse to look at any appeals.

> >

> > If Anet operated strictly according to what the ToS allows, they'd probably have a lot less players around. Both from banning a lot more and from people just not wanting to bother with a very authoritarian game. But for the most part, Anet has been pretty reasonable, even when it comes to mass bannings and innocent players getting caught up in them. I'm not really sure what prompted them to start a Tyrian Inquisition this time 'round, instead of handling things as they usually do.

>

> I am perfectly ok with them being upset over it. They may announce that they do not like it, that they think ArenaNet should not have done it, they can tell us about their opinion all day long. But that is not what Jinks is doing.

>

> He lables the suspensions as "wrongful" because ArenaNet did not prove that the players were cheating, and ignores the fact (despite loving the word fact) that the ruleset that governs the suspensions do not require any such proof and that ArenaNet acted within the rules when suspending for running a certain software and not specifically for using that software to cheat. A suspension that is completely inline with the ruleset in place is not "wrongful".

 

I've used the term "wrongful" myself, but you're right his context of it was definitely misplaced. I think...I hope...that most of the rest of us are using it in the sense of morality/justice or right/wrong, not legal wrongdoing.

 

I'd really like to stay away from more legal debate. They're too easy to get caught up into and drag out for ages, especially with EULAs being such a contentious topic.

[Jinks.2057]

> @"ZhouX.8742" said:

> Wait Jinks got banned for cheating?

>

> HAHAHAHAHAHA how ironic

>

> -Tanbin

 

nope lol

 

You still in awe of my doings?

 

Good to see ya and keep safe

[Oldirtbeard.9834]

> @"Jinks.2057" said:

> > @"Deihnyx.6318" said:

> > Double standards are a funny thing, especially

> > > @"Jinks.2057" said:

> > > > @"Voltekka.2375" said:

> > > > > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > > > > @"Voltekka.2375" said:

> > > > > > > @"Jinks.2057" said:

> > > > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > > > > > > @"Jinks.2057" said:

> > > > > > > > > Fun fact: people who weren't cheating got wrongfully banned

> > > > > > > > Fun fact: you don't actually know that. You only know there were people that were _claiming_ to be wrongfully banned, and that's definitely not the same thing.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Fun Fact: Anet confirmed it

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > So how about you volunteer for that ban?

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > In fact **ANYONE** who is advocating that they are ok with Arenanet invading private property and wrongfully banning people need to volunteer for a 6 month ban.

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Fun fact: it is Anet's game, they make the rules on cheating. Hell, they could even ban people whose username starts with a V.

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > But just imagine if Anet or any other game dev actually did that. While they are almost surely within their rights (even if it's the most broad interpretation of them) to do it, I can't see them having many defenders, if any at all. Even if they could clearly see for themselves that the players had V at the beginning of their username, an absolute proof of "guilt", most people would not be defending the idea that they deserved to be banned.

> > > > >

> > > > > One of the big differences between that scenario and what is going on now, is the perception of the accusations made. When someone is labeled as a cheater, more people are willing to accept it as the truth without any evidence. And to make things worse, going by Anet's own statement, some of these banned players aren't even accused of actually cheating.

> > > > >

> > > > > It's just so easy to rail against someone that the authorities have accused/labeled, without considering anything else.

> > > >

> > > > One of those people who were labeled as cheaters, labeled a company as "privacy violator".

> > > > Funny how people are willing to accept that, as well, as the truth, with insufficient evidence. And, to make things worse, going by that same person's later statement, it wasnt a privacy violation after all, yet people still keep saying "i lost my trust in Anet, they monitor everything i do". Remains me of a saying in my country, "Keep saying stuff constantly. Something is bound to stick"

> > >

> > > Its accepted as the truth because it's been proven.

> > >

> > > Anet never proved a single person cheated

> >

> > "My mother can't install UNF therefore I don't cheat." is not proof of truth.

> > MD5 hashing value having a (1/2)^128 chance of collision (or 2^64 as explained https://stackoverflow.com/questions/201705/how-many-random-elements-before-md5-produces-collisions) is however a fact, but that doesn't seem to stop you from accusing.

>

> You keep commenting yet fail to volunteer to banned.

>

> The funniest part in all this is I've yet to see any of the people who support unabridged violation of private property volunteer to be banned. It's quite hilarious you don't practice what you preach

 

Why would I volunteer to banned, I have no desire to be a martyr, I just want to know from ANet what they pulled off my machine, and why they did it behind my back.

[Oldirtbeard.9834]

> @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > @"Jinks.2057" said:

> > Also no one has brought up a VERY important fact about the legality of what they did.

> >

> > What is the ESRB rating of GW2?

> > Did you verify you are of the age of consent before agreeing to the ToS/EULA?

> >

> > I thank you all for participating

> >

>

> Doesn't matter, go read the User Agreement and you'll figure out why.

> But seeing as you haven't and won't all the while retaining some fantasy land idea that Anet is some big bad evil cooperation for using the tools at its disposal everything you say is moot.

 

Minors can not sign contracts.

[Oldirtbeard.9834]

> @"Ardenwolfe.8590" said:

> Be a decent human being and respect your fellow gamers, don't cheat, and don't run programs that allow you to cheat while playing this game. Never read any EULA, but I've never been banned from a game in the over twenty years I've been playing games . . . online or otherwise. You know why? Because I use common sense.

>

> Don't let people fool you. They know what they're doing. This sudden outrage of ignorance is nothing but performance. The rules aren't the problem. The problem is the people trying to make others jump through hoops in some poor man's attempt to look innocent and discredit those who caught them doing something shady.

>

> They'll discuss everything and anything . . . except what _they_ did wrong. Personal responsibility prevents us from having to make excuses for poor decisions. And this is not only true for online gaming, but for life in general.

>

> And if anyone is in doubt about what can and cannot be done in a game? Ask. Developers and the community will be more than happy to say.

 

I did not cheat, I was not banned. I find it insulting that you lump all dissenters in the same category.

[Ardenwolfe.8590]

> @"Oldirtbeard.9834" said:

> > @"Ardenwolfe.8590" said:

> > Be a decent human being and respect your fellow gamers, don't cheat, and don't run programs that allow you to cheat while playing this game. Never read any EULA, but I've never been banned from a game in the over twenty years I've been playing games . . . online or otherwise. You know why? Because I use common sense.

> >

> > Don't let people fool you. They know what they're doing. This sudden outrage of ignorance is nothing but performance. The rules aren't the problem. The problem is the people trying to make others jump through hoops in some poor man's attempt to look innocent and discredit those who caught them doing something shady.

> >

> > They'll discuss everything and anything . . . except what _they_ did wrong. Personal responsibility prevents us from having to make excuses for poor decisions. And this is not only true for online gaming, but for life in general.

> >

> > And if anyone is in doubt about what can and cannot be done in a game? Ask. Developers and the community will be more than happy to say.

>

> I did not cheat, I was not banned. I find it insulting that you lump all dissenters in the same category.

 

I find it equally interesting that you responded since I called no one out specifically.

[Oldirtbeard.9834]

> @"Ardenwolfe.8590" said:

> > @"Jinks.2057" said:

> > > @"Galaa.8475" said:

> > > Dang! yall still on this? what's done is done. time to move on and get along lil doggy. this horse is dead. the ship has sailed. the sun has set. GET OVER IT ALL READY KIDDO'S!

> >

> > Anet hasn't addressed the issue of installing spyware on our computers.

>

> In the meantime, would you like to return to the original topic of why certain players were suspended from the game?

 

It's related, since said banning was caused by a reckless dredging tool.

[Oldirtbeard.9834]

> @"Ardenwolfe.8590" said:

> > @"Oldirtbeard.9834" said:

> > > @"Ardenwolfe.8590" said:

> > > Be a decent human being and respect your fellow gamers, don't cheat, and don't run programs that allow you to cheat while playing this game. Never read any EULA, but I've never been banned from a game in the over twenty years I've been playing games . . . online or otherwise. You know why? Because I use common sense.

> > >

> > > Don't let people fool you. They know what they're doing. This sudden outrage of ignorance is nothing but performance. The rules aren't the problem. The problem is the people trying to make others jump through hoops in some poor man's attempt to look innocent and discredit those who caught them doing something shady.

> > >

> > > They'll discuss everything and anything . . . except what _they_ did wrong. Personal responsibility prevents us from having to make excuses for poor decisions. And this is not only true for online gaming, but for life in general.

> > >

> > > And if anyone is in doubt about what can and cannot be done in a game? Ask. Developers and the community will be more than happy to say.

> >

> > I did not cheat, I was not banned. I find it insulting that you lump all dissenters in the same category.

>

> I find it equally interesting that you responded since I called no one out specifically.

 

No you just generally all labeled us together, you might as well have said 'you people'.