Kotaku: Hundreds Of Players Banned In Final Fantasy XI

[Brill Weave]

Kenji if you would care to follow up a little further most large companies that bring forth a warning of possible litigation also carry with it a gag order warning of future legal action should it be discussed. It is not BG's responsibility to report exploits, dupes, cheats, or hacks. BG's responsibility is to discuss endgame dynamics and events with other people of a like mind. This isn't mini-SE.com

[Brill Weave]

Seriously dood, stop taking the holier than thou crusader role and shut up already. The nonstop spewing of higher ground rhetoric is pointless and played out. You've established your stance more than a page ago despite how ludicrous is it. If you really loathe how much big bad BG and how those evil evil players shafted poor SE, go to another fucking site. This isn't your personal soapbox to preach about the good and evils of proper playing. Opinions are like assholes you know.

Before I go though, for my own curiousity(I'm being serious) can you show me where in the ToS it states it is our responsibility as the paying customer, to report an in game exploit to the developers/GM's/SE?

[Xno Kappa]

As I said before, it's irrelevant whether BG posts any information or not for said exploit. If SE can't receive the information through the channels they themselves set up then there's already a failure in the company to begin with. Even if the glitch was difficult to deal with and was thus put on the back-burner a simple POL mesage like;

"We are aware some individuals are exploiting a certain error in Salvage/Nyzul/Sandworm zones, we are monitoring this situation and warn players to refrain from such conduct."

Not only would it have been an "oh shit" to players already abusing it, but it would've helped to prevent those innocently dragged into such a situation. Which there was. Look at that, I instantly handled and managed this situation better then SE in the span of a couple of minutes. According to some in this thread though obviously coding this sentence into the POL website would have taken months so I could be wrong.

[Day]

We should warn the RMT that we are about to ban them too!!

[Khalil]

Seriously dood, stop taking the holier than thou crusader role and shut up already. The nonstop spewing of higher ground rhetoric is pointless and played out. You've established your stance more than a page ago despite how ludicrous is it. If you really loathe how much big bad BG and how those evil evil players shafted poor SE, go to another fucking site. This isn't your personal soapbox to preach about the good and evils of proper playing. Opinions are like assholes you know.

Before I go though, for my own curiousity(I'm being serious) can you show me where in the ToS it states it is our responsibility as the paying customer, to report an in game exploit to the developers/GM's/SE?

I just quickly glanced at this and I don't see any mention of us, the actual players, having to report any game exploit to anyone. It just informs us not to use the specific game exploit in any shape or form.

[ringthree]

Blue Gartr's purpose is to provide information on this game, nothing else. And it does a dam good job of it.

The only problem is that, even though it is probably the best informational forum for FFXI, SE fails to acknowledge this and take advantage of it to better their game. Instead, you got their lawyers calling Bancat for stupid shit.

How about Blue Gartr is a forum where people post information? It's run by people that can do whatever they want with the forum, the posts on the forum and anything related to the forum. It is very good at supplying information.

None of that means that we can't have opinions about the moderators and their actions.

None of that means that we can't post our opinion in relevant threads.

The BG mods can then do whatever they want with those posts. It's completely within their rights to do whatever they want. A vast majority of the time, they do the right thing. I just believe that there was one poor decision, and that the usefulness of this forum and the generally good nature of it's moderators does not mean that we should forget or more importantly rewrite history to ignore this point.

Wafik has no problem discussing this situation, I don't know why others are so quick to sweep it under the rug. I believe that Wafik's decision was a poor decision, and that there were mods that defended the decision improperly and didn't take action to resolve the issue in a proper manner. This is just my opinion. You can have your opinion about the situation. The only problem I have is the statement that they did nothing wrong. I just believe they made a bad decision or at least had poor motivations for their actions. I also believe that one bad decision does not damn them for eternity, and I also believe that Wafik has already stated what needs to be said about the situation. It was his decision, he takes the blame for it (or credit if you believe the opposite of me). I am not condemning Wafik, I don't think that is necessary. I am just trying to prevent this kind of historical revision that some people are choosing to engage in.

On a more technical note: It is not SE's fault that BG is not a sponsored site. As I understand it there are two issues that will prevent BG from being a sponsored site.

One, BG does not wish to meet the requirements that SE lays out for being a sponsored site. I think this is good idea for BG. It would require a much higher level of moderation, including moderating posts not just for vulgarity but also for content. Not only would this be a pain, but it completely defeats the purpose of BG to begin with.

Two, the BG forums themselves may not contain the content necessary to become a sponsored site. SE usually requires a separate database of information which is consistently maintained. A forum does not met their requirement even if it is laden with good information because it lacks persistence.

The BG Wiki might be able to met those requirements if there was some separation created between it and the forum.

And you know what that means right?

You should stop acting like you a Pheonix Wright and you should help to update the wiki!

[Brill Weave]

You should stop acting like you a Pheonix Wright and you should help to update the wiki!

Well played sir lol.

[Kenji]

Kenji if you would care to follow up a little further most large companies that bring forth a warning of possible litigation also carry with it a gag order warning of future legal action should it be discussed. It is not BG's responsibility to report exploits, dupes, cheats, or hacks. BG's responsibility is to discuss endgame dynamics and events with other people of a like mind. This isn't mini-SE.com

In the strictest sense, you're right; BG can do whatever it wants. If they are afraid of vague, possible legal threats, then their policy makes sense. Kind of makes me scratch my head, because I've generally seen BG as a place where people push the boundries, and work for a better game. But they can do as they wish; I merely laid out another option.

Although history has been filled with people who have said, "It's not my responsibility to report any wrong-doing I may or may not have seen!"

It's also true that you're not required to report it, in a sense. I concede that point. It's just that it's a lot riskier, in my opinion, when the bannings come around. Reporting it, and making a record of it, is a great way to save your account, as well as the accounts of others. How many banned people here, would have loved the exploit to have been fixed much, much sooner, and thus prevented you from ever having been exposed to the bug?

As I said before, it's irrelevant whether BG posts any information or not for said exploit. If SE can't receive the information through the channels they themselves set up then there's already a failure in the company to begin with.

I believe we've covered this. I already hold SE to blame for some of this. If I were in their shoes, I'd be looking to see where those GM reports were, and why they weren't elevated. And scheduling GM classes to train them into knowing what a serious exploit would be, and fast channels where they could fast-track that information.

Not only would it have been an "oh shit" to players already abusing it, but it would've helped to prevent those innocently dragged into such a situation.

That would be one way. As I've pointed out, there was another way to prevent those from being innocently dragged into such a situation.

At any rate, I've set down my challenge. I'll take responsibility for getting the next exploit enough visibility so that it gets fixed (and any others as long as I play) to save your accounts. Provided I am informed about it, and it's of sufficient severity.

But I have a sneaking suspicion, no one will tell me about it, because if it's beneficial to the players, they won't want it fixed.

[Day]

Wait whos fault is it today? Back to SE's now?

[Kenji]

Wait whos fault is it today? Back to SE's now?

Why do people want to always associate blame with just 1 target?

Personally, I think there's enough blame to go around. Although, as Kaako noted in his LJ, inherently blame doesn't matter much, since only the player is punishable.

[Damane]

are we still discussing all this Massbannings shit? Its realy boreing, only things I see everywhere discussed is the bannings of the people. Shit happens ---> move on.

[Correction]

If they are afraid of vague, possible legal threats, then their policy makes sense.

They are not vague legal threats when they sufficient precedent, fuckwit.

[Kenji]

They are not vague legal threats when they sufficient precedent, fuckwit.

Has SE ever issued a DMCA?

Your point is moot if not. Plus, a DMCA notice is only for copyright violations, which would not apply in this situation. If SE tried, one could only point to the many times SE has encouraged community sites. Also, a DMCA takedown notice is not legally binding much. It's simply a notice. You then have rights under the DMCA to send a letter back saying why their claim is irrelevant. Cheap and easy. Corporations are using it as more of a bully letter, though. They try to push you around with it, even when they don't have legal standing.

But since copyright doesn't apply here, I suggest you actually try to understand the stuff you link to.

[aurik]

(On defining an exploit)
The best answer, is whatever SE decides is outside of intended gameplay.

THANKS, THAT IS SO MUCH CLEARER TO EVERYONE NOW.


BTW, there have been things posted on major FFXI forums in the past which have caused SE lawyers to threaten legal action against said forums. If you were not aware of that, well, now you are. Try to be more informed in the future.

[vagus]

BTW, there have been things posted on major FFXI forums in the past which have caused SE lawyers to threaten legal action against said forums. If you were not aware of that, well, now you are. Try to be more informed in the future.

I've always wondered why SE has yet to take legal action against FFXIAPP forums / creator.

[ringthree]

I've always wondered why SE has yet to take legal action against FFXIAPP forums / creator.

I could be completely wrong here, but I always thought it was because they were located or at least registered in a place that wouldn't allow it. Like China or Singapore.

[Devek]

Naw... SE is just retarded. The app site is in no way protected from a legal takedown. Especially when... nvm lol

[Kenji]

THANKS, THAT IS SO MUCH CLEARER TO EVERYONE NOW.


BTW, there have been things posted on major FFXI forums in the past which have caused SE lawyers to threaten legal action against said forums. If you were not aware of that, well, now you are. Try to be more informed in the future.

Links?

[Cow_k]

So no one is allowed to bash Square, but it is perfectly acceptable to bash BG for not doing our jobs? No one here wrote a single line of code that is used anywhere in FFXI, no one here is a GM, no one here receives a cent from Square for the work on these forums or our wiki, Square hasn't given us so much as a penny to keep these forums going. You act like we didn't live up to our end of a contract, like there is some responsibility that we have to Square to make sure that their game is running properly. It is Square's game, not BG's; the responsibility to make sure that it is in proper working order is Square's, not BG's. Yet a bunch of people want to attack us because we didn't do what they thought was the right thing. Well you know what, boo-freakin'-hoo. If you don't like it, hit the door; our primary obligation is to keep these forums here and not shut down by Square's lawyers, not to let everyone know about all of the exploits and details about how to perform them that is out there so that Square will maybe see it and perhaps take care of it even though people have already gone through the proper channels to get it fixed.

Man... Responding real late to this, but I think you completely missed my point. I never said it wasn't ok to bash Square. I think people have the right to bash or praise whatever they want. My point was only the irony in the people who bash Square and get pissed at the people who say they shouldn't be able to, but then go into super defensive mode at the first sign of any questioning of the sometimes unknown methods of moderators of these forums. It's just hilarious irony. I don't have any problems with people who speak out against Square when they feel cheated somehow. Unquestioned authority almost always leads to tyranny and corruption.

As for my stance on legal issues with Square, I understand deleting things based on fear of the forums being shut down, but there's stuff all over these forums that go against the ToS and other things that Square doesn't approve of that doesn't get deleted. It would seem that there's no way to know what Square will take legal action against and what it won't until they've contacted BG. I'm not trying to scream corruption or put down BG, there's a ton of useful information here. I personally just don't understand why some things like aps can be discussed here whereas other things can't.

Lastly, I don't see why people keep acting like any questioning has anything to do with BlueGartr as a linkshell when these forums themselves are so much more than just a linkshell website. Not all the people who keep these forums going every day are members of Blue Gartr as a linkshell.

[aurik]

Links?

no