False reporting and automated ban

[Fesz-cenarius]

Well it still exists for a reason for those times that reporting someone is justified.

Players should be able to report players that they believe are violating the CoC. That option to report simply does not need to be tied to a player imposed punishment, nor should it be, IMO.

Slippery slopes are considered an argumentative fallacy for a reason. We’re not all getting banned on live, there’s nothing to worry about. Calm down.

As noted previously, the environment in BFA is vastly different than the environment in Classic will be. A player imposed punishment system will likely have far grater repercussions in Classic than it does in BFA.

I have suggested that the target report number required to trigger that player imposed punishment be raised significantly. This would still leave that player imposed punishment tied to reports while making it more difficult to abuse the system by requiring a significant number of players to be negatively impacted and submit a report before that player imposed punishment is triggered.

[Ziryus-doomhammer (Ziryus)]

Well it still exists for a reason for those times that reporting someone is justified.

Slippery slopes are considered an argumentative fallacy for a reason. We’re not all getting banned on live, there’s nothing to worry about. Calm down.

The conditions on Live are radically different from those in Vanilla. First, the reasons to abuse the system don’t exist in BfA. There’s no competition for anything. There’s no scarcity in anything. Secondly, the repercussions from getting squelched are nearly irrelevant in Current WoW. Whereas they’re game-breaking in Classic.

It’s a completely different gaming experience that requires a different moderation approach.

People have made suggestions in this thread that are somewhere between the squelch and no moderation what soever and the same people who don’t want auto squelch don’t want those either because at the end of the day they simply don’t want any moderation.

[Galdor-maelstrom (Galdor)]

First, the reasons to abuse the system don’t exist in BfA. There’s no competition for anything.

Nah, it’s not like there’s a tremendous amount of money to be made in the World First Mythic race.

It’s way more believable that people would abuse the system in Classic in order to stop someone from getting a Thorium node.

[Fesz-cenarius]

I have suggested that the target report number required to trigger that player imposed punishment be raised significantly. This would still leave that player imposed punishment tied to reports while making it more difficult to abuse the system by requiring a significant number of players to be negatively impacted and submit a report before that player imposed punishment is triggered.

Sort of like those that insist upon having the option to conspire to squelch any other player at any time for every little slight they think they had to suffer refuse to even consider any suggestion that does not include that option?

I have suggested that the target report number required to trigger that player imposed punishment be raised significantly, say to 100 reports. This would still leave that player imposed punishment tied to reports while making it more difficult to abuse the system by requiring a significant number of players to be negatively impacted and submit a report before that player imposed punishment is triggered.

Would you find that to be acceptable, since it does leave that player imposed punishment in place, even if it does require a higher number of reports to trigger that punishment?

[Celessi-turalyon]

As noted previously, the environment in BFA is vastly different than the environment in Classic will be.

Why are you obsessing with comparing BfA and classic? This has been around for:
Wrath - no abuse
Cataclysm - no abuse
Pandaria - no abuse
Warlords - no abuse
Legion - no abuse
BfA so far - no abuse

But in classic, it’s suddenly going to be massively abused? Seriously?

[Fesz-cenarius]

As noted previously, the environment in BFA is vastly different than the environment in Classic will be.

Why are you obsessing with comparing BfA and classic? This has been around for:
Wrath - no abuse
Cataclysm - no abuse
Pandaria - no abuse
Warlords - no abuse
Legion - no abuse
BfA so far - no abuse

But in classic, it’s suddenly going to be massively abused? Seriously?

Actually, there has been abuse of the system.

I say BFA because that is the current expansion.

Let’s look at those expansions, though.

All of those expansion had cross realms. Why report a player you will likely have little interaction with in the future, if you even see them again?

Wrath had the LFD tool, and all the others had both the LFD and the LFR tools. Why try to squelch a player when they can just queue and essentially bypass that squelch?

Everyone of those expansions in which the system existed has had an entirely different environment than Classic will have.

Classic will likely be single server and there will likely be no auto grouping tool to bypass the need for players to use chat to communicate.

[Celessi-turalyon]

Still nobody is abusing the report. They still have their own server and their own players that they can abuse, but don’t, because they’re not 5 year olds.

[Fesz-cenarius]

Still nobody is abusing the report. They still have their own server and their own players that they can abuse, but don’t, because they’re not 5 year olds.

When almost everyone is self sufficient with regards to professions due to large stables of alts with high level professions (with those stables of alts spanning multiple servers in some cases) what need is there to abuse the system to try to squelch a competitor selling the same good or service at a lower price?

When resource nodes are multi-tap, what need is there to abuse the system because someone is farming the same resource you are?

In Classic, few people will be self sufficient with ll professions. Even fewer will be in the early days.

Resource nodes will not be multi-tap.

There will be much more competition.

Would you like to be the one camping that black lotus spawn point waiting the last minutes before it spawns only to find yourself DC’d because the person that just walked up had his buddies report you to squelch you so you would DC and he could get that black lotus when it spawned?

I’ll repeat a suggestion I put forth and ask you the same thing I asked Ziryus.

I have suggested that the target report number required to trigger that player imposed punishment be raised significantly, say to 100 reports. This would still leave that player imposed punishment tied to reports while making it more difficult to abuse the system by requiring a significant number of players to be negatively impacted and submit a report before that player imposed punishment is triggered.

Would you find that to be acceptable, since it does leave that player imposed punishment in place, even if it does require a higher number of reports to trigger that punishment?

[Celessi-turalyon]

Still nobody is abusing the report. They still have their own server and their own players that they can abuse, but don’t, because they’re not 5 year olds.

When almost everyone is self sufficient with regards to professions due to large stables of alts with high level professions (with those stables of alts spanning multiple servers in some cases) what need is there to abuse the system to try to squelch a competitor selling the same good or service at a lower price?

When resource nodes are multi-tap, what need is there to abuse the system because someone is farming the same resource you are?

In Classic, few people will be self sufficient with ll professions. Even fewer will be in the early days.

Resource nodes will not be multi-tap.

There will be much more competition.

Would you like to be the one camping that black lotus spawn point waiting the last minutes before it spawns only to find yourself DC’d because the person that just walked up had his buddies report you to squelch you so you would DC and he could get that black lotus when it spawned?

Well, historically, when people weren’t self-sufficient with alts, they weren’t spamming reports to squelch players

When resource nodes weren’t multitap yet, they weren’t spamming reports to get rid of the competition.

History in this game has already proven you wrong. Every scenario you’re going to think of, the players have already proven that it’s not going to be abused.

And it doesn’t take just one player reporting, it takes many, which means if you’re going to run around abusing this, you need a team dedicated to it, which will quickly lead to a ban from the game for you. This is a 10 year old function. We know how it works, it’s not going to be anything like what you’re trying to claim.

Let me guess, you were one of the ones against the armory for “invading your privacy?”

[Galdor-maelstrom (Galdor)]

Let me guess, you were one of the ones against the armory for “invading your privacy?”

“This user’s public profile is hidden.”

[Mogar-stormrage (Mogar)]

It was added in 2011. Cata, not Wrath. And Cata isn’t Vanilla.

[Galdor-maelstrom (Galdor)]

It was added in 2011. Cata, not Wrath. And Cata isn’t Vanilla.

That is a possibility.

It is also possible that I am incorrect in thinking that both the player imposed punishment of an auto squelch and the Blizzard imposed punishment of a silence were added at the same time. If so, then I apologize and concede the point.

You’re not incorrect. It was added in the Legion Pre-patch.

[Mellga-area-52 (Mellga)]

I’m just gonna leave these here:
https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/20752258341?page=2#post-26

Orlyia
Dec 2, 2016

Spam is in the eye of the beholder.

My personal level of tolerance when playing - if you are doing it often enough that I start to get annoyed, yeah - you are going to get reported.

People tend to not like advertising very much, and you’ve not mentioned what you are advertising. Not only do you run the chance of getting silenced, you are alienating potential ‘customers’. I’m making a very large presumption here that whatever you are advertising is indeed within the rules.

https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/20762116812#post-9

Vrakthris
Apr 5

I think overall you are misunderstanding what the Game Master you spoke with said.

So once more, to be clear, speaking about non-Trade subjects in the Trade channel does not violate our chat policies.

With that said, and to reiterate what the GM told you, each chat channel is designed for the purpose of the title of the channel. So Trade Chat taking place in the Trade channel is the suggested use of that channel. If you are discussing other subjects in the channel, other players on your realm can consider those unwanted messages as spam. They may report it as such and therefore the penalties associated with spam may be applied to the person reported.

Let me resurrect two old Posts, made in this Thread (within the first 200 Replies):

The rules are clear, laid out, easy to follow and plain as day for anyone who pays attention.

I dont see why anyone can say otherwise.

Again, what is considered to be “harrassment”, “griefing”, and/or “abusive chat”? These are VAGUE descriptions.

What is considered “unreasonable” undermining and/or Gameplay interferance of others?

As far as deliberate inactivity, anyone who AFKs, should be squelched/banned.

And how do we know something is a “deliberate” disconnect?

And what other “violations”, are there? What are the specifics? Where’s the line?

EDIT: And “common sense” isn’t all that common…

EDIT 2: I mean, I have my definitions, but we all have our own interpretation on what all these mean…

Multiple Edits: Spelling.

That’s all I have to say to that.

The very post in that thread has a guy saying that “GM’s have been telling (him) it is now an actionable offence to use trade chat as a normal chat channel” .

Vrakthris
Apr 5

I think overall you are misunderstanding what the Game Master you spoke with said.

So once more, to be clear, speaking about non-Trade subjects in the Trade channel does not violate our chat policies.

With that said, and to reiterate what the GM told you, each chat channel is designed for the purpose of the title of the channel. So Trade Chat taking place in the Trade channel is the suggested use of that channel. If you are discussing other subjects in the channel, other players on your realm can consider those unwanted messages as spam. They may report it as such and therefore the penalties associated with spam may be applied to the person reported.

The keyword is “may”.

I read it exactly as it is written. Why would I read it differently? What makes you think it needs to be translated into “my own words”?

https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/20752258341?page=2#post-26

Orlyia
Dec 2, 2016

Spam is in the eye of the beholder.

My personal level of tolerance when playing - if you are doing it often enough that I start to get annoyed, yeah - you are going to get reported.

People tend to not like advertising very much, and you’ve not mentioned what you are advertising. Not only do you run the chance of getting silenced, you are alienating potential ‘customers’. I’m making a very large presumption here that whatever you are advertising is indeed within the rules.

Key phrase: “in the eye of the beholder”.

Oh lets see what happens when we italicize OTHER words…
“ I think overall you are misunderstanding what the Game Master you spoke with said.”

That whole “eye of the beholder” thing? It also applies to the GMs making the decisions on reports.

Yes, and I rather a GM than a Player.

I don’t know if I’ve ever said that. On a personal level, I care absolutely nothing about what people say in-game. I’m not offended by naughty language or memes.

However, I greatly despise Gold Seller Spam. The auto-squelch was primarily introduced to combat that and if the auto-squelch is removed, you can almost certainly be guaranteed that the Gold Seller Spam will be much more prevalent.

Especially since we’re not going to have the WoW token purchasable from the auction house. Gold Spam is already going to be an issue and without the ability to remove those spammers from chat in a very timely manner, they will be far more successful in their ability to communicate their messages to a wider audience.

I concur with you which is why everything locked in with the Report Feature (excluding the Auto-Silence) should remain. This includes and not limited to the following: Right-Click Report, Auto-Ignores and Text Disappearance. Let the GMs handle the Silencing.

This particular thread is 19 days and counting. It is obvious none of us know exactly what is affected in the current game let alone try and figure how it could work in classic.
I’m not even saying talk about classic. I’m saying come in here with an official post showing exactly how it currently works. Maybe answer a few of the questions that can be answered. That is not asking much. Then again maybe we should be asking in CS.

Seriously 19 days of “no this is how it works!” Little ridiculous considering it’s currently used and Google turns up old links?

Sorry once a week communication? Sorry the Pony Express went out of business over a century ago. Communication is not just a one way street. Nor is it always on a time table. Only reason we got communication when Yth got laid off is because the forums were starting to catch fire over it.
He did a great job of calming that too. No denying that. This here. Shouldn’t be some secret I have to access the dark web to find. It’s currently in use. Lol

It’s been linked, constantly: https://us.battle.net/support/en/article/44277

You Cannot

• Reply to Whispers from WoW Friends/Non-friends
• Talk in global channels (General, Trade, etc.) or Instance Chats (Raid, Party, Battlegrounds)
• Create Calendar Invites/Events
• Send in-game mail, party invitations to Non-friends, or War Game and Duel invitations
• Create a new listing or update a listing for a pre-made Group listing
• Speak in Blizzard Chat (including communities and Real ID

You Can

• See Whispers from WoW Friends/Non-friends
• Party/Raid Chat (with Invited friends)
• Talk in Global Channels that have a moderator
• Share Quests
• Sign up for a pre-made group
• Use Guild Chat

It’s just that, everyone is more interested in arguing why the Silence Penalty needs to Stay/be Removed instead of discussing the effects that will hinder Silenced Players’ Classic Time.

Hmmm, I don’t know. It’s an additional fee that hits everyone, whereas the abuse you fear from the auto-squelch, I still believe is going to be very rare.

How can a Silenced Player get into PuGs without Whispering? Also, the inability to be utilize your own BNet Chat, I find to be a punishment regardless of what Padre says. Every Blizz Game utilizes it. They can only depend on their Guild and random Party Invitations

And yet we still have hypocritical posters that say they’re against the squelch (which they say can be abused to prevent people from playing the game effectively), and are in favor of server blacklists (which can be abused to prevent people from playing the game effectively.)

If blacklists are allowed, auto-squelch should be allowed.

As someone against the Auto-Silence, I never advocated for a Public “Name and Shame” System. I just wanted to make that clear, to those who keep categorizing “all” Anti Auto-Silence, under the same umbrella.

And 10 years later, those concerns never became a reality. Calm down, you’re all obsessing over a system that the majority of players don’t even know exist in this game, and judging by the uproar on the forums, went a very long time not knowing.

The complaints have to start somewhere, and it’s starting today/the time this thread was made.

Well it still exists for a reason for those times that reporting someone is justified.

Slippery slopes are considered an argumentative fallacy for a reason. We’re not all getting banned on live, there’s nothing to worry about. Calm down.

Doesn’t mean we cannot advocate for change.

This has been around since wrath… We’ve had 10 years to abuse it, and it hasn’t happened

Evidence/proof? Also:

Doesn’t mean we cannot advocate for change.

People have made suggestions in this thread that are somewhere between the squelch and no moderation what soever and the same people who don’t want auto squelch don’t want those either because at the end of the day they simply don’t want any moderation.

No, we just don’t want Players determining the fates of our Accounts.

Why are you obsessing with comparing BfA and classic? This has been around for:
Wrath - no abuse
Cataclysm - no abuse
Pandaria - no abuse
Warlords - no abuse
Legion - no abuse
BfA so far - no abuse

But in classic, it’s suddenly going to be massively abused? Seriously?

Because this system is going to be in Classic, and do you have evidence/proof of “no abuse”? Also, read what the Silence Penalty does, then come back to see how a Silenced Player can get around Classic with this Penalty.

Still nobody is abusing the report. They still have their own server and their own players that they can abuse, but don’t, because they’re not 5 year olds.

Evidence/proof? Also:

Doesn’t mean we cannot advocate for change.

Well, historically, when people weren’t self-sufficient with alts, they weren’t spamming reports to squelch players

When resource nodes weren’t multitap yet, they weren’t spamming reports to get rid of the competition.

History in this game has already proven you wrong. Every scenario you’re going to think of, the players have already proven that it’s not going to be abused.

And it doesn’t take just one player reporting, it takes many, which means if you’re going to run around abusing this, you need a team dedicated to it, which will quickly lead to a ban from the game for you. This is a 10 year old function. We know how it works, it’s not going to be anything like what you’re trying to claim.

Let me guess, you were one of the ones against the armory for “invading your privacy?”

How can a Silenced Player get into a PuG without Whispering, BNet Chat and/or the Public Chat Channels? And they’re in no Guild. Again:

Doesn’t mean we cannot advocate for change.

And, no, I wasn’t. My Posting History is free for your amusement. I have nothing to hide

[Fesz-cenarius]

Still nobody is abusing the report. They still have their own server and their own players that they can abuse, but don’t, because they’re not 5 year olds.

When almost everyone is self sufficient with regards to professions due to large stables of alts with high level professions (with those stables of alts spanning multiple servers in some cases) what need is there to abuse the system to try to squelch a competitor selling the same good or service at a lower price?

When resource nodes are multi-tap, what need is there to abuse the system because someone is farming the same resource you are?

In Classic, few people will be self sufficient with ll professions. Even fewer will be in the early days.

Resource nodes will not be multi-tap.

There will be much more competition.

Would you like to be the one camping that black lotus spawn point waiting the last minutes before it spawns only to find yourself DC’d because the person that just walked up had his buddies report you to squelch you so you would DC and he could get that black lotus when it spawned?

Well, historically, when people weren’t self-sufficient with alts, they weren’t spamming reports to squelch players

When resource nodes weren’t multitap yet, they weren’t spamming reports to get rid of the competition.

History in this game has already proven you wrong. Every scenario you’re going to think of, the players have already proven that it’s not going to be abused.

As I have said previously, it remains to be seen exactly how the right click report system will be implemented in Classic.

Will the player imposed punishment be removed for Classic? Will the player imposed punishment be retained for Classic? If the player imposed punishment is retained for Classic, will it be adjusted to be more compatible with the Classic environment or will it be implemented exactly as it is in retail?

IF the player imposed punishment is implemented exactly as it is in retail, and we are correct about it being abused and the extent to which it will be abused, will you be back here apologizing to us and admitting that we were correct?

And it doesn’t take just one player reporting, it takes many, which means if you’re going to run around abusing this, you need a team dedicated to it, which will quickly lead to a ban from the game for you. This is a 10 year old function. We know how it works, it’s not going to be anything like what you’re trying to claim.

Exactly how many players does it take to trigger a squelch? How large does that “dedicated team” really need to be?

Is it 5 players? Is it 10 players? Is it 100 players?

I do not know. Do you?

Let me guess, you were one of the ones against the armory for “invading your privacy?”

As for the armory, I never had a problem with people being able to see my characters or their achievements.

I did have a problem with the way many people chose (and still choose) to use that system and the information to which they had access.

More often than not, it became a weapon used by people to belittle and attack those that did not agree with them.

I never had a problem with the tool itself. I found the way that the tool was often used and those that used that tool as a weapon to be problematic, to say the least.

[Fesz-cenarius]

Let me guess, you were one of the ones against the armory for “invading your privacy?”

“This user’s public profile is hidden.”

I make no secret of the fact that I chose to hide my profile.

As I said, I find that the armory is more often than not used by many posters as nothing more than a weapon to belittle and attack those with whom they do not agree.

[Celessi-turalyon]

Evidence/proof? Also:

You caught me. I was wrong. It was actually added in patch 2.1.0, in TBC. So there’s actually even longer of a history of a lack of the kind of abuse you’re claiming it’s going to bring.

[Mellga-area-52 (Mellga)]

You caught me. I was wrong. It was actually added in patch 2.1.0, in TBC. So there’s actually even longer of a history of a lack of the kind of abuse you’re claiming it’s going to bring.

So, no. Now, let’s discuss how a Silenced Player can get into PuGs without Whispering, using their BNet Chats and/or the Public Chat Channels. And they’re not in a Guild

[Celessi-turalyon]

You caught me. I was wrong. It was actually added in patch 2.1.0, in TBC. So there’s actually even longer of a history of a lack of the kind of abuse you’re claiming it’s going to bring.

So, no. Now, let’s discuss how a Silenced Player can get into PuGs without Whispering, using their BNet Chats and/or the Public Chat Channels. And they’re not in a Guild

Easy, don’t get silenced. You’re not going to have 20 enchanters report you for selling enchants. It didn’t happen at any point in the life of this game, it won’t happen in classic.

[Mellga-area-52 (Mellga)]

Easy, don’t get silenced. You’re not going to have 20 enchanters report you for selling enchants. It didn’t happen at any point in the life of this game, it won’t happen in classic.

That wasn’t the question. And just because it hasn’t happened to you, doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.

[Ziryus-doomhammer (Ziryus)]

People have made suggestions in this thread that are somewhere between the squelch and no moderation what soever and the same people who don’t want auto squelch don’t want those either because at the end of the day they simply don’t want any moderation.

No, we just don’t want Players determining the fates of our Accounts.

Right and a lot of those suggestions deter trolling chat without being quite as harsh a complete squelch.