Honestly, I don’t want to argue but I NEVER said MISUSE. All I said is if a person has certain biases, all they have to say is " I saw it this way". First time, it’s don’t do that again because you can’t prove intent. Second time, maybe a verbal warning. Third time maybe first write up.
I also know this because in the past I have contacted support and things went a certain way. On my third time (over 15 years) the agent said not gonna happen. They got a manager and the manager said it’s never gonna happen. I explained how this was taken care of 2 other times and was told they don’t care. It’s not gonna happen. This mirrors exactly what I saw in my own CS department. People have biases and read the “rules” differently and enforce them differently. It’s subjective to the person reviewing and there is no EXACT correct answer
This sounds more like a case of them going above and beyond (which they are allowed to do in some cases, in a very limited capacity) twice, and on the 3rd request you were denied. This is GM’s following policy.
Highly doubt your story about them saying they don’t care.
Very easy for you to generalise without access to the full logs isn’t it?
Your own CS dept seems to have an issue then with following policy.
Blizzard does not generally. What you ran into is the following:
Blizzard has set policies for various things. Some things are within scope, some are special exceptions (limited use per account), and others are not going to happen.
Over time Policies change. What was done in 2008 may no longer be done in 2021. There are various reasons for that, but it usually has to do with Developmental changes to systems in game as well as creation of self help tools for players.
If you ran into them saying NO then you either used up the exceptions to a policy for your account or policy has changed. They are very much following the rules, not just “doing what they feel like”. That is why you got both front line and a supervisor both saying no - because that is what the policy was at that point.
Mirasol covers all of this pretty well, but I’m going to tack on that if there is some case of this, it is also part and parcel of why you’re allowed to appeal a decision until the staff warns you that no more appeals will be accepted. Mistakes can happen, everyone here and behind the scenes are human. Whether by bias, as you’re fixated on, or just misread information, all players are allowed a chance to appeal any decision and sanction so that a fresh pair of eyes will look everything over and make sure it’s all on the up and up.
There’s another dimension, too. Disciplinary action isn’t an immediate death sentence. The first violation on the account is usually given a brief suspension because the intent is to help the player learn to avoid actions based on their biases that are contrary to policy and terms. It’s only if the behavior persists that the account actions become punitive, and if a player persists in bad behavior in spite of warnings, “it’s just bias” is not a valid defense.
In regards to the specific changes to the policy referenced, back with the first wave banning in-put broadcasting software, there was a small window of a grace period where people did receive warnings, despite the Blue post announcing the policy change inferring it was the warning in and of itself, if I recall correctly. I would imagine they’d offer the same here, since while they should, not all people read the forums or stay up to date on announcements.
Contrary to the whole BLIZZARD IS ONLY OUT FOR OUR MONEY AND HATES ITS PLAYERBASE rhetoric, they do actually try and give people the opportunity to fall in line rather than recklessly swinging a ban hammer.
There are consequences to doing certain actions. If you do the same thing over and over again there comes a time when Blizzard will no longer fix your mistake.
If the three times you contacted support were for different issues, then comparing the results is like comparing apples to trout.
There have been policy changes around items purchased from vendors. There are sell-back timers on those items now. Outside of that timer, you only get the small vendor price.
Some items bought with alternate-currency (i.e. not gold) have sell-back abilities and some do not. The policy has always been “all sales final” on those items.
You were never told “they don’t care. It’s not gonna happen.”
That may be true in your CS department, but that isn’t how Blizzard works. In most cases there is an EXACT correct answer. Having worked in a couple of CS departments I know that companies can have a different standard on how policy exceptions are handled. The “biases” get handled through call-reviews and retraining.
I really wish players would stop with the false-narrative about GM biases or GMs not caring. Do you realize how insulting that sounds. It implies that all the employees aren’t doing their jobs properly. I understand you are disappointed with their answer, but that doesn’t mean they are biases or they don’t care. It means they are doing their job properly and following company policy.
That was put in because of the major change in policy. That software had not been banned for many years (not specifically permitted, just not banned).
Never assume that. If you are playing non-standard (i.e. one game client only), it’s on you to keep abreast of the policies.
Let’s be frank here, policies change over time. If people haven’t learned anything over the past year, public opinion sways in ever different directions. That influences change. Not always for the better.
So just like the game is ever changing, so is the policy. Blizzard will inform players of changes to that policy, but to expect the policy to never change is unrealistic.
Keep in mind, that anything that interrupts the play of others and done to excess will likely result in a change of policy. The game is here for the enjoyment of all, not just a few. Consider this when you head out into Azeroth each day.
EVERY person has biases. EVERY SINGLE one. Now if they act out on them it becomes an issue. Some people prefer vanilla, some prefer chocolate. In WoW terms, some may like multi boxing, others may not - some may think something is an honest mistake, while others see everything as an intentional act trying to circumvent rules. Yes, people really are different and see things differently.
It’s not insulting to say someone has them. It’s insulting to everyone to say people DON’T have them.
Except that the only players who talk about GM bias are the ones who don’t like the answer they were given. They imply that the reason they got the answer they did was because of GM bias rather than a GM following policy. A GM saying “no” and a manager also saying “no” is bias from two of them and not them following policy.
That’s not bias, unfortunately. Liking chocolate or vanilla is a personal, subjective preference. “Liking” something and being biased are two completely different things.
Bias is when you’re prejudiced towards one side or another for an unfair reason.
For example, “I like vanilla better than chocolate because chocolate clogs up your kidneys and makes your liver explode. Seriously. I saw it on Instagram.”
That’s bias. It’s more obvious when discussing more pressing matters like social inequality or racism, but such an example is a bit heavy for CS, yeah?
Some people aren’t biased. That’s completely attainable with the brains we are given. If someone else is insulted by me stating that I strive to be fair, equal and unbiased, then so be it. My apologies, but so be it.
No but it would send the clear message that what OP is thinking they can be actioned for (they cannot be actioned for it) is against the rules. If OP were correct in assuming merely having and logging into multiple wow licenses on the same bnet account could lead to suspensions then what reason would there be for Blizzard to technically allow such a thing to continue to happen instead of just straight up blocking it?
Because they would like to allow it, and it is up to them in the end. There doesn’t need to be, and probably isn’t, a technical reason why they allow it. “Because they want to,” is quite enough. Chalk it up to a bit of MMO tradition if you like, but honestly, their reasons are irrelevant.
They would like to allow you to log into two or more different licenses on one or more accounts simultaneously, with the caveat being you tab to each window and perform each action manually.
They would not like to allow you to use any method, hardware or software, to streamline this process. Pretty straightforward.
You tab to each window and do each action manually:
You use software, hardware, macros, magic, or shenanigans to facilitate the preceding:
That’s pretty much it. For me, it’s not confusing, there’s no grey area, it’s not hard to understand, and it doesn’t make me worry that I’ll get actioned when I want to herb with two or three toons.
edited to remove content some people took issue with apparently. Wasn’t trying to start fights or be uncivil but it was a bit snappy even if I think probably within rules
That is exactly what I said.
The OP was worried that merely having additional accounts and logging into them at once (not using mirroring of commands or keys or actions, but being logged into two or more at once) would lead to a ban. They based this on people, probably angry multiboxers who continued to break the rules lying to them and telling them they got banned for doing that.
I informed them that if Blizzard didn’t wish to allow them to simultaneously have two wow accounts/licenses running at once they could simply use technical means to enforce a limit of one logged in WoW account per bnet account. If it was indeed bannable to do otherwise there would be little reason for Blizzard not to implement such a fix, hence evidence it is allowed, approved, etc, just don’t use hardware or software that mirrors input across multiple copies of the game.
Sorry, sorry. Edited (hope that’s allowed). Just frustrated because I thought it was pretty clear and it’s a silly thing to pick a fight over. I know tensions are high regarding multi-boxing. I wouldn’t consider myself one but some people appear to think I am and are acting a bit uncharitable (and I think cherry picking/taking stuff out of context to put words in my mouth I didn’t say which IMO is uncivil). This thread has run its course however and I won’t be replying more here. OP’s question was answered by MVPs and a Blue and has been expanded upon and reassurance given by other players. Nothing more can constructively happen here.
Well yeah they kind of have been doing that. I’ve been seeing threads where people are saying they were being suspended for 6 months for multiboxing. Actually they weren’t told that but they can put two and two together. I was doing what everyone else was doing… ya know, rolling my eyes and saying “yeah right; suuuuuuuure you didn’t have third party software” until it happened to my husband.
We were floored. I thought he subs just expired at the same time since we got 5 refund emails in a row. This is a guy that in 44 years has never received a parking or speeding ticket because he’s so annoying by the book, always abides by the rules. He would never install anything that would be against the rules. When the multiboxing rules changed in Oct or Nov, he had ISBoxer uninstalled before the deadline.
He quit for a while but came back when he seen he could still MB but had to do it manually. So, he started herbing on his five Druids again and all he did was click through the windows. Had no special keyboard or mouse. Zero MB software installed. The only addons he had downloaded was Bagnon, DBM, Vudu and RaiderIO.
We could not figure out what happened. Blizzard team refused to give us ANY information. We know that they’re not allowed to be specific but they at least give people a ballpark. “Third party software.” “Win trading.” “Foul language.” We got nothing but crickets. Finally, after 2 weeks he was just told “cheating.” Ok. That can cover logging off with someone’s mats to rigging an arena match.
So the only thing we can come up with is Blizzard had egg on their face because we know people were reporting him at least 20x a day and I’m sure those people were getting letters that said “thanks for your report; we’ve taken action against this account” but those people will still see my husband out in the world and know they were being lied to. I guess they finally decided to actually do it before people just gave up reporting all together. Will you say this is wrong? Of course but since we don’t have another explanation on what happen, it’s going to be what we go with because it makes the most sense.