Ban people who falsely report multiboxers. They are botters trying to draw attention away from their own activities by reporting multiboxers, who will not be banned because they’re following the rules.
1 Like
Found the multiboxer sympathizer scrum, ban him too
1 Like
I tear 
No they have not said this.
This goes both ways, multi-boxers using their multiple accounts to falsely report one person should be subject to even harsher penalties than any single individual.
1 Like
Apocryphal information is not informative at all. We have no evidence that this happens. And multiple accounts on the same bnet would flag for investigation.
My personal opinion is that people who are serial false reporters probably get all their reports put on permanent ignore.
We have seen a lot of people in the forum saying that they falsely report every multiboxer, thus removing resources from investigation of bots. What reason could they have for interfering with investigation of bots, but that they’re a botter?
2 Likes
YES! I don’t think people that multi-box or have more than one account should use them to flag / false flag people.
Seems kind of pitiful if you ask me, if people actually do that.
You mean aside from the threads popping up both here and on reddit about being slapped because a multiboxer used their multiple accounts to mass report and trigger the auto-silence?
I agree, false reporting should be punishable. But this goes both ways.
I love it when people make up stuff.
1 Like
Like, 5 seconds of searching.
1 Like
That didn’t prove anything.
All of that you can do with the in game macro system and a wireless keyboard dongle plugged into multiple game towers. So whats the issue? Using scripts with isboxer is automation and against the rules, but I can macro or set up my bars in whatever way I want and press 1 on my keyboard and have my team all do whatever is in the 1 slot.
If you would have actually read it and not just the clickbait title it was found out that it was not even a multiboxer that did the reports its was a rival guild that was giving 6 months ban for report system abuse, they were reporting all their rival guilds to get them automatically banned using blizzards report system. It was not even 20 reports it was more like 200+ reports.
2 Likes
I don’t get it either, because the end result is still the same regardless if people multi-box with hardware alone or with software alone.
I can understand to some degree the concept of, “It’s one player and they are playing x toons” Okay, I get that. It still doesn’t change the fact that X toons can be played by different players and still get the end result.
It really reminds me of like the logic of:
Teacher: You must do 2 + 2
Me: But isn’t 3 + 1 or 5 - 1 still the same thing?
Teacher: NO! because it’s not 2 + 2
Me: 
Well, it hasn’t sunk in after 15 years, so maybe after another 15 and the anti-multiboxers might finally get the hint.
Don’t forget them limiting nameplate view distance in classic (20 yards) that then somehow cause of spaghetti code forcing nameplate view distance to be set to 60 yards. And no you cannot change it.
People have been multiboxing in World of Warcraft for well over a decade and a half, you are just NOW confused about all of this?
one of the attractive features of multiboxing is using these types of “one-button” programs. I think it’s impossible to multibox without using them which is ironic because multiboxing is allowed but third party programs aren’t…so it’s like riddled with contradiction. I think both should be considered cheating
I’m not confused on the two. I’m confused on the thought process of the circle logic of from the people that claim that multi-boxing is automated gameplay.
Acti / Blizz doesn’t like automated gameplay, yet multi-boxxing is supposed to be a form of automated gameplay. Yet for some really odd reason, they are going full force on botting, but seem to leave the multi-boxers alone.
If multi-boxxing is supposed to be automated gameplay, then why is Acti / Blizz leaving the multi-boxers alone, but have no issue going after the botters.
I hope that clears that up.
A recent statement on the topic.