Well they are free to buy new accounts after the ban and continue cheating and get banned again. But naming and shaming doesnt help there, if account 1 Gabe gets banned and he buys new account called Funkypants then putting Gabe on the list doesnt help.
That’s not at all what the downside to naming and shaming is.
It’s because people often call out someone who didn’t do anything wrong. Several callouts are legit, but if you allow it, it simply opens the floodgates for witch hunting, which we’ve had plenty of here.
But this thread is about Blizzard and that they for years are not doing enough. Why have a live server game, if you are not enforcing the rules of the players on it?
It’s even worse to see streamers cheating. They make money of it and shows others that it is okay to do so.
Even with proof they do nothing against it.
1 Like
This thread was about that indeed, but the thread and the solutions go all over the place. The name and shame solution is now being discussed and thats something i dont think is a good solution or help to anything
I seem to have a vague recollection that I am trying to confirm. My recollection was that Blizzard itself in some region/country did post a list of cheaters by battletag.
While searching that, I did come across that Blizzard banned 270,000 WoW account in December 2023.
Blizzard Bans a Record Number of Cheaters from World of Warcraft (msn.com)
You could be right, you could be wrong, i still dont know what good a list of battletags will do when they buy new accounts.
Let’s take the old multi-year cheating thread as an example. A good number of the accounts that posted there were later banned by Blizzard for cheating.
Players being able to see that would have been informative.
A Blizzard-banned list would also discourage cheaters more so than the current situation.
Really dont see that, dont see how that is informative in the big picture, it could be slightly informative in that thread i can imagine but thats only with hindsight.
I think it would provide more info than simply hindsight. It would inform on the current discussion on cheaters.
How would that help on the current discussion? If for example Joe#1234 posted on the old discussion, was banned, took a new account and posts as Bob#4321, how does it help that you know that Joe#1234 was banned?
Besides if blizzard would post a list it wouldnt be naming or shaming, it is a fact that those battletags were banned. I still dont think it helps much, but it doesnt hurt either, but what i oppose more are these lists would be under influence of the community. I know that isnt what ahnuld suggested, but it is what metalhead has suggested many times and is now also hinting towards.
Plus dont see it happening after 12y.
In some cases no. In others, sure. And specially now, since Blizzard is not banning anyone. I get you can witch hunt others, happened to me with a clan in game, they just mass reported me and wham, got a silence. And they refuse to listen to you if it happens more than once. But still, people should be dealt with, when reports coming in. Not being able to keep playing. The lack of respect for the rest of us and that they don’t even enforce their rules says it all
1 Like
There have been many cheater streamers over the years the either never got caught and moved on, or got banned and bought another account with a similar name, then cheat streamed again.
No one has that info lol.
Even if Bliz decommissioned warden, they wouldn’t announce it for obvious reasons.
Its an outlet for them and their fellow cheaters clan members or friends.
Most likely trying to protect their prescious cookies aka bounty bots.
Because no one is there.
Here is what I have noticed with anti cheat in D3 over the years.
They only ban a few cherry picked cheaters.
They make a few forum posts every few years saying botters beware.
They dodge any actual anti cheat work with “send an email with proof”.
No one is there, and when they do put in effort, its a bandaid to keep the peace.
2 Likes
And that, right there, is literally the EXACT thing we’ve all been warning about.
Where’s your proof that literally ANYONE in this entire thread, ANY SINGLE ONE of the 1,050 posts (assuming mine is 1,050), ANY of them are 100% verified cheaters?
Where’s. The. Proof?
But we already have the seed of doubt planted. Mattelot goes “It’s rather sus people are arguing against a shame list. Kinda makes me wonder why they’re protecting cheaters” And then YOU go “it’s cuz they’re all in it together”
All we need is a literal gif of someone raising a pitchfork and going “RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE”
1 Like
Why are you sealioning?
First of all, I wasn’t aware of that term so thank you (genuinely) for expanding my vocabulary today.
Secondly, I vehemently disagree that we should be allowed to name and shame. That’s not arguing in bad faith. That’s me not wanting to get witch-hunted because Metalhead makes a public accusation of anyone disagreeing with him as being in cahoots with cheaters.
Naming and shaming is a butchered term. It’s been made to be or sound derogatory.
I’m fine for calling out a cheater or fraud if you have proof. And I mean irrefutable proof, like a video, etc.
It’s when people like that merco, Marcos Rena or whatever his name was that used to accuse everyone who was better than him, played differently than him as a cheater with zero proof, just conjecture or “hunches”.
What Metalhead did, was be skeptical of people who seem to spend a lot of time or even go out of their way to make excuses for people who are known cheaters. It’s highly suspicious. It’s been seen many times before when cheaters use burner accounts to try gaslighting people in order to take the spotlight off of them.
Because it is. It’s not a nice thing to do. It’s not like you wake up in the morning and go “oh boy, I can’t WAIT to get name and shamed!” It’s a derogatory, mean thing to do. And it should be treated as such.
And when you have a public space like an internet forum with low levels of daily moderation, it can very easily become a flood gate. Isn’t that the point you made, actually? I’d scroll up but I’m about to eat dinner.
Being skeptical is fine. Being accusatory isn’t. There’s a line, there.
You’re saying it like that because you’re thinking of it like that. You can do that with just about anything. If the person is guilty, stating it out loud is not a problem. If I post, saying “Jodi Arias is guilty”, she was. She was proven in a court of law. That’s not derogatory.
I said that if… it becomes full of people making those claims with no proof. That… is when it’s a problem.
So you’re telling me YOU wake up in the morning going “oh boy, I can’t WAIT to get name and shamed?”
If someone’s guilty of a crime according to a court of law, presumably their punishment spelled out during sentencing doesn’t include a provision for “and you shall be forevermore publicly name and shamed in the Diablo 3 forums.” About the closest thing I can think of to that, would be the sex offender registry, which is obviously apples and oranges compared to cheating in a video game.
You want to protect children or assault victims, that’s fine. You want to shame some botters? I find that harder to justify from a moral standpoint.
That’s being disingenuous. I did nothing wrong.
We don’t have to agree. I don’t aim to change your mind, just show you why others will think different.