The Special Task Force report (06/15/2007)

[Fellina]

Personally, I think the idea of giving and entire alliance a time-out because someone's hacking would be a brilliant idea: as long as two other conditions occur.

1) Anyone not hacking in the alliance shouldn't have their temp ban put onto their "permanent record".

2) Everyone in the alliance is told exactly who the hacker is, and what hack they were using.

I can practically guarantee that it would happen once, maybe twice at the most. The hacker would almost certainly be booted instantly from their ls, and said shell would then immediately come here and provide a screencap of the GM saying Bobthetard was using claimhack as a warning to other shells. Bobthetard would be SOL, but Joehacker and everyone else who's been botting will certainly think twice about doing so. And if they continue to use hacks anyway, they'll just serve as the next example in Bob's footsteps. Eventually they'll all see that the cost of hacking is too high, and the playing field will be truly level again.

Plus another upside . . . think of all the sweet, juicy drama we'd have brightening our Flameboard. :nyam:

 

[Mariox]

I saw it saying thay going to ban for gilbuyers, wish thay did that all along. cause not only would thay reduce RMT sites, but thay reduce the buyers for other sites. Where as before, the buyers would just find a different site to buy from.

Did it say thay going to ban people associated to people using 3rd party programs? Only gilbuyers and people buying rare/ex items (byakko shorts etc.).

At least now you can shout "buy that byakko haiates from this RMT, and SE might ban you!"

 

[Pompidou]

Personally, I think the idea of giving and entire alliance a time-out because someone's hacking would be a brilliant idea: as long as two other conditions occur.

1) Anyone not hacking in the alliance shouldn't have their temp ban put onto their "permanent record".

2) Everyone in the alliance is told exactly who the hacker is, and what hack they were using.

I can practically guarantee that it would happen once, maybe twice at the most. The hacker would almost certainly be booted instantly from their ls, and said shell would then immediately come here and provide a screencap of the GM saying Bobthetard was using claimhack as a warning to other shells. Bobthetard would be SOL, but Joehacker and everyone else who's been botting will certainly think twice about doing so. And if they continue to use hacks anyway, they'll just serve as the next example in Bob's footsteps. Eventually they'll all see that the cost of hacking is too high, and the playing field will be truly level again.

Plus another upside . . . think of all the sweet, juicy drama we'd have brightening our Flameboard. :nyam:

That'd be a good idea. I don't think hackers ever just work of their own volition. I equate hackers in FFXI linkshells to the sorts of black-ops agents that do government dirty work with the government's blessing and request, but fully aware that if things go sour the gov will pretend they don't exist. It's easy for shellmates to say they had no idea, but I'm certain they usually do. I'd support a less conditional punishment for everyone in the alliance with a hacker. It should be a lesser punishment, because being an accomplice doesn't yield the same punishment as committing the actual crime in real life, but it should be substancial. People that encourage cheaters are cheaters nonetheless, just cheaters without balls to do the crime themselves. Thinking about it now, I'd say ban them all without distinction.

 

[K. Ishitar]

I personally vouch they call themselves Special Task Force Unit (STFU)