False reporting and automated ban

[Fesz-cenarius]

He seems to want Classic to be as far from vanilla as possible so that those who have been requesting, for over a decade, that Blizzard provide a truer Classic experience do not get what they want.

That’s truly unfortunate if so.

Check his post history.

In a nutshell, in most cases, if those desiring a truer Classic experience favor something, he opposes it and if those desiring a truer Classic experience oppose something, he advocates for it.

I say “in most cases” because I do not specifically remember him advocating for flying. There may be a few other of the egregious non vanilla changes from which he shies away so as to not be too obvious about his goal.

His latest tactic is to intentionally misrepresent the “no change” philosophy as “the no changers only wanted 1.12 exactly and they are now changing their tune by asking for elements of vanilla that were not part of 1.12”. He is also claiming that “anything other than 1.12 exactly” is a “change” so any other non vanilla change from TBC forward (such as dual spec) is on the table.

[Williams-akama (Williams)]

Just imagine if he put in 1/5th The effort into promoting positive changes that could actually fix Modern WoW.

He would have the game he’s actually looking for and everyone would be happier.

[Gnocci-emerald-dream]

As opposed to all the innocent people who had to deal with people violating toc in chat and not being dealt with prior to right click reporting?

Ziryus, are you actually here to participate in the dialog or are you just trolling?

Maybe you can attempt to keep up from now on?

If you as a person who thinks trade should not be limited to trade do not see the irony of calling out someone as a troll for not adhering strictly to how you want a conversation to go in a thread, wow dude. The hypocrisy astounds.

(christ, now I am defending zyrius)

[Gnocci-emerald-dream]

By the by, you are doing that clumsy single sentence per paragraph thing that is painful to read.

[Padrepwn-kiljaeden (Padrepwn)]

[Ziryus-doomhammer (Ziryus)]

How does investigating only the cases that actually end up in an auto squelch and the person squelched think they can appeal it ever add up to investigating every individual report that lead to that squelch?

Is determining if the reports were made in good faith or simply to silence another player and if the intent was to silence another player that appropriate action be taken against the system abusing reporting players not a good reason?

Or is it that you just don’t want them to actually investigate the individual reports so that abusers are not punished and you can “get away” with conspiring to silence any player at any time for any little slight you think you had to suffer?

Well blizzard’s current stance seems to be that if there is no squelch whatever was said is generally okay with the community. I’m sure they’ve always had keyword searches for obvious issues and I doubt that’s changed. So given that they naturally have less that they actually need to review, why would they review a spam report if it didn’t result in a squelch for example?

[Mellga-area-52 (Mellga)]

If you as a person who thinks trade should not be limited to trade do not see the irony of calling out someone as a troll for not adhering strictly to how you want a conversation to go in a thread, wow dude. The hypocrisy astounds.

(christ, now I am defending zyrius)

I share a different stance. I much rather discuss the issue, than someone hiding behind a report button, in order to intentionally silence me. Like my story, to which Aehl admits, wouldn’t have reported. He would’ve discussed the different approach rather than cower behind the report button. That’s all I’m asking.

[Gnocci-emerald-dream]

I share a different stance.

Shocking development there. You do you.
In a public chat channel with a captive audience, “discussing the issue” would further hamper the communication of others.

Williams could have simply ignored zyrius, but instead showed the depths of his hypocrisy.

[Mellga-area-52 (Mellga)]

Shocking development there. You do you.
In a public chat channel with a captive audience, “discussing the issue” would further hamper the communication of others.

Williams could have simply ignored zyrius, but instead showed the depths of his hypocrisy.

Why is that shocking? I’ve said, time and time, again, I’d rather talk things out, which is why I would rarely put someone on ignore. I only ever have to avoid grouping with certain individuals, in the LFG System, but they don’t stay there long. I have tried communicating with them before, but they were more interested in screwing me over than anything else. That’s another story. This one doesn’t involve language. I’ve shared this story before.

Original Thread:
https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/20758556369

Direct Link, to my story: https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/20758556369?page=5#post-85

My Story, verbatim:

I can’t really say that I ever trusted someone, and they betrayed me. I have a hard time trusting people to begin with.

One story that sticks in my mind of the biggest jerk move I’ve ever had was in RFC LFG before Cata revamp. During Wrath.

I don’t remember everyone in that run group. I just remember the female human warlock of evil…fitting. At the time, the center boss would fulfill the finder group to which everyone leaves, afterwards. I’d be fine with it, had I not been farming for the mail bracers off the other boss (not up the ramp, but a fairly known boss besides center).

In order to not fulfill the completion, I would kill the non-center boss, first than be nice and kill center boss. I had been fighting with RNG Gods for 5 hours. I’d lose rolls to other Mail wearers, it wouldn’t drop at all, some DE’r wanted to DE for mats, etc. All understandable outcomes.

Then this Warlock of pure evil. Didn’t like my strategy. Belittled me, in front of the group (I didn’t care), they pulled the center boss and fulfilled the finder. It doesn’t end here.

The Warlock of death stayed in the group. I had wondered why. They got their wish of only completing that boss for their “bonus”. I was the Tank, I don’t remember who the nice person was, but they stayed, along with the callous Warlock. I don’t remember if the whole group stayed or not. I’m sure of one person leaving after center boss.

We get to the next boss, the Mail item dropped. I hit “Need”, and it occured to me that the Warlock is gonna hit “Need”, too. I was hoping and praying that they wouldn’t win it. Rolls end, and I had seen that the Lock and myself weren’t the only ones that hit “Need”, somebody else had, as well, but it didn’t matter.

The Warlock won. If it had been anybody else, I would’ve been less livid. The Warlock laughed in my face then expressed that they’re just gonna delete it instead of selling it. I get a whisper from a nice member in the group who apologized for not winning the roll. The only reason they did was to help “beat the odds” against the Lock. But it didn’t matter.

I was so outraged. Had the item had some worth via vendored, DE’d, worn, etc., I would’ve been fine. The only reason why that Lock did what they did was to hurt specifically me. That was my problem. I’ve NEVER encountered a stranger like that.

That they disliked me so badly, that they purposefully were trying to make my game experience a living hell. The Lock didn’t need on anything else. Just THAT item. It wasn’t even about the item. It was the intention behind what that player was doing. I logged out, and my fiance had to hold me because I was actually crying about it.

IK it sounds awful and stupid, but I had NEVER encountered that behavior before. There IS a happy ending. I wanted this item for my ALLIANCE toon. RFC is in Org, a HORDE city. I didn’t want to bother anybody about running me through there because there was a 100% chance of us dying LOL

I told this story to a guildie. They said they would help farm it for me. I questioned “are you sure”? They were OK with it. I died a lot, trying to get to the place, but we made it. First run and got 'em. I was very happy and couldn’t thank my guildmate enough. So, that’s my story.

I could usually handle most trolls, but that particular one is tough to fight. Very tough.

EDIT: Spelling.

[Fesz-cenarius]

How does investigating only the cases that actually end up in an auto squelch and the person squelched think they can appeal it ever add up to investigating every individual report that lead to that squelch?

Is determining if the reports were made in good faith or simply to silence another player and if the intent was to silence another player that appropriate action be taken against the system abusing reporting players not a good reason?

Or is it that you just don’t want them to actually investigate the individual reports so that abusers are not punished and you can “get away” with conspiring to silence any player at any time for any little slight you think you had to suffer?

Well blizzard’s current stance seems to be that if there is no squelch whatever was said is generally okay with the community. I’m sure they’ve always had keyword searches for obvious issues and I doubt that’s changed. So given that they naturally have less that they actually need to review, why would they review a spam report if it didn’t result in a squelch for example?

Another attempt to dodge and deflect from Ziryus. Who could have predicted that?

I do not disagree that they would not necessarily need to do an in depth investigation of reports that did not result in a squelch. I don’t recall ever saying that they should do an in depth in investigation on reports that did not result in a squelch. In the question which you asked and I answered, you said nothing about investigating reports that did not lead to a squelch.

Reports that do trigger an auto squelch, though, are another matter entirely. Even you yourself, in the question which I answered, specified “investigating every individual report that lead to that squelch”.

If Billy is squelched, then Blizzard SHOULD, IMO, do an in depth and thorough investigation of every report that contributed to that squelch to ensure that Billy was not simply the target of a coordinated effort to silence him for whatever reason.

That thorough, in depth investigation is especially important in cases where the squelch is overturned since Blizzard obviously determined that no infraction was committed if the squelch is overturned.

[Fesz-cenarius]

As opposed to all the innocent people who had to deal with people violating toc in chat and not being dealt with prior to right click reporting?

Ziryus, are you actually here to participate in the dialog or are you just trolling?

Maybe you can attempt to keep up from now on?

If you as a person who thinks trade should not be limited to trade do not see the irony of calling out someone as a troll for not adhering strictly to how you want a conversation to go in a thread, wow dude. The hypocrisy astounds.

(christ, now I am defending zyrius)

But it’s perfectly OK for you to determine how a public chat channel can be used? Anyone not adhering strictly to how you want that public chat channel to be used is showing hypocrisy?

[Gnocci-emerald-dream]

But it’s perfectly OK for you to determine how a public chat channel can be used? Anyone not adhering strictly to how you want that public chat channel to be used is showing hypocrisy?

If it is a specific channel like trade, it should be restricted to trade. I am a heck of a lot more “lenient” in my views when it comes to general: as I stated a bit earlier a chuck norris joke would get /ignored while politics would bet a /report. In trade, both would get reported. Anyone ing up a specific subject public channel like trade with jokes, politics, or anything else not trade-related is simply abusing the channel and everyone there for the channels intended function.

[Fesz-cenarius]

But it’s perfectly OK for you to determine how a public chat channel can be used? Anyone not adhering strictly to how you want that public chat channel to be used is showing hypocrisy?

If it is a specific channel like trade, it should be restricted to trade. I am a heck of a lot more “lenient” in my views when it comes to general: as I stated a bit earlier a chuck norris joke would get /ignored while politics would bet a /report. In trade, both would get reported. Anyone ing up a specific subject public channel like trade with jokes, politics, or anything else not trade-related is simply abusing the channel and everyone there for the channels intended function.

That is your opinion.

Blizzard obviously does not agree with you, since they permit /trade to be used for general discussion.

Do you feel that your opinion trumps Blizzard’s decision?

[Gnocci-emerald-dream]

I feel that them a) having a specific channel for trade and a separate channel for general discussion, and b) considering allowing us to right hand report which includes a number-triggered squelch, tells me enough about what they are comfortable with. It is not about my opinion trumping blizzards opinion.

Much like the classic subforum being here for classic subjects and moreso GD being for everything BUT classic discussion, I am led to believe that in most cases blizzard prefers things to be in the places provided for those things. Being lackadaisical about trade could simply be a matter of GMs being overwhelmed and having bigger fish to fry.

[Mogar-stormrage (Mogar)]

That is your opinion.

Blizzard obviously does not agree with you, since they permit /trade to be used for general discussion.

Do you feel that your opinion trumps Blizzard’s decision?

That’s the point of auto-squelch to some people. That they can dictate and enforce the rules better than Blizzard. You know what they say about power…

[Gnocci-emerald-dream]

That’s the point of auto-squelch to some people. That they can dictate and enforce the rules better than Blizzard. You know what they say about power…

No Mogar, it is about helping blizzard enforce when there simply are not enough GMs and enough time to do the job well enough on their own.

It is not about trumping
It is not about “doing better”
It is simply willingness to utilize the tool being handed to us to help them do what has always been an uphill battle for them.

[Mogar-stormrage (Mogar)]

So report away. No one is trying to remove that. But a GM still has to review that report. Then they have to review the reports of the report to see if people are abusing the system since auto-squelch just begs to be abused. So congratulations, you’ve now just massively increased the GMs’ workload.

[Gnocci-emerald-dream]

If they review what is reported and it is found to be a violation, there is zero need to review the reports. So no, unless the reported content is NOT a violation, the workload is actually lessened.

If the thing reported is a violation, how on earth could the people doing the reporting be abusing the system?

[Mogar-stormrage (Mogar)]

How is it lessened? It’s not. They still reviewed it. The auto-squelch system literally can only increase their workload. And you have immense faith people won’t abuse the system, because…they will.

[Mellga-area-52 (Mellga)]

If they review what is reported and it is found to be a violation, there is zero need to review the reports. So no, unless the reported content is NOT a violation, the workload is actually lessened.

Difference being the appeal. If one can appeal it, and the Silence is removed, it’s not really in violation. The AUTO Silence doesn’t determine the context of the reported post, in question. It goes off, when X Amount Report it, enough times. So, is it really in “violation”?