WoW BlueTracker Home | RSS | News | Contact
Recent | Search | Archive | CS Posts
Poster: Tephan at 2006-11-15 11:03:19
Subject: Blizzard Bans 100's of gamers for using Linux
  
100's of people using WoW under Linux with Cedga got banned today. They were all given a canned reponse. Not all of them could have been botting right?

http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/06/11/15/1652222.shtml

So question to Blizzard, is it now against the terms to use WoW under Linux with windows emulation software such as Cedga and Wine?

  http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=47009071&pageNo=1&sid=1#0
 
Poster: Tseric at 2006-11-15 11:46:23
Subject: Re: Blizzard Bans 100's of gamers for using L
  
We have been testing our security software with Cedega. Cedega was used and tested before the security procedures and during the security procedures. From this testing we have yielded no hits, meaning Cedega, by itself, does not incur an account suspension.

We have accounts of several Cedega users who have been playing normally during the time that these processes are running. Again, these people are not being suspended simply because of using Cedega or Linux.

We are in contact with the people at Cedega and following up with them regarding individual accounts.

To answer the OP's question, no it is not against the ToS to use Linux or Cedega. We continue to monitor the situation to prevent cases of false positives and to rectify them if they do occur.

[ Post edited by Tseric ]



How can I massage this intergalactic ulcer?

  http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=47009071&pageNo=3&sid=1#40
Poster: Tseric at 2006-11-15 11:56:46
Subject: Re: Blizzard Bans 100's of gamers for using L
  

Q u o t e:
I've heard a lot of people moaning about "false positives" and Linux but I've yet to see anyone offer up the slightest reasonable explaination about how Linux may cause false positives for Glider checks....


This is my concern as well. The opening line of the Slashdot article is:

Q u o t e:
Many Cedega (formerly WINEX) users claim to have been mistakenly caught up in a security sweep of the U.S. game servers performed by Blizzard's World of Warcraft Game Master (GM) staff.


The operative word in that sentence is claimed. Everyone is quick to point fingers at us for impropriety, but avoid the reasonable answer of "maybe they were using third-party programs to gain an unfair advantage". It really is a simple answer, yet it seems to be avoided, for the most part.

How can I massage this intergalactic ulcer?

  http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=47009071&pageNo=3&sid=1#53
Poster: Tseric at 2006-11-15 12:11:16
Subject: Re: Blizzard Bans 100's of gamers for using L
  

Q u o t e:
Tseric, keep in mind that glider was written for windows, I'm not aware of any bot programs that could have been used in linux. Have you guys considered that perhaps they have a back ground process running that may have caused a hit with warden? Or perhaps it's the difference between Gnome and KDE? Or even as simple as certain linux distros got banned an others didnt? All I ask is that you dont ignore the linux users, I'm sure there's more than a few that got unfairly banned.


That's fine. However, you did read the part where I said we are in contact with folks who develop these OSs, right? You know, the part where we aren't ignoring Linux users?

You are sure that they were unfairly banned? I am sure you have plenty of adequate proof, then. There is an appeal process which will take this proof into account. You will have to accept my apologies if I can not acknowledge your assertion outright.

How can I massage this intergalactic ulcer?

  http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=47009071&pageNo=4&sid=1#73
Poster: Tseric at 2006-11-15 12:14:17
Subject: Re: Blizzard Bans 100's of gamers for using L
  

Q u o t e:
After reading some of these topics that have been started, I was feeling sympathy towards those who were banned, because I actually believed them.


It's called playing off of emotions. This is why most people protesting their innocence will cite some human angle that involves an emotional response.

You know how many times I've heard the story, "My disabled 7-year-old son has to use modifications to allow him to play. I can't believe you would ruin his gaming experience like this" or a variation of such a claim? Many times.

Have I ever seen it to be true? Not yet, but hey, there's a first time for everything.

How can I massage this intergalactic ulcer?

  http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=47009071&pageNo=4&sid=1#78
Poster: Tseric at 2006-11-15 12:21:38
Subject: Re: Blizzard Bans 100's of gamers for using L
  

Q u o t e:

There is no "Law of Large Numbers" or anything of the sort. You are confusing correlation with causality. Using that same data I could easily say that linux users, specifically those that use Cedega, are more likely to cheat. Same data, two different valid answers. You can't say there is a causal relationship between the two unless you can explain WHY it is the case (with proof). Now, here is a question that would help prove your side of the case: Did ALL linux users who use Cedega and play WoW get banned or just some? If its all, then it is probably the software. If it isn't, then it is probably something else.

Also, how do you know that a sizeable chunk of those people weren't banned for actually cheating? Not all, but some? If a bunch of people were accidently banned, wouldn't it make sense for all/many of the people who got banned legitimately to jump on the bandwagon and complain too?


My thoughts exactly.

Or, what I should have said is, beat me to it. :P

[ Post edited by Tseric ]



How can I massage this intergalactic ulcer?

  http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=47009071&pageNo=5&sid=1#93
Poster: Tseric at 2006-11-15 12:56:55
Subject: Re: Blizzard Bans 100's of gamers for using L
  

Q u o t e:

First off Tseric I have large deal of respect for you. of the CM's you do a good job of shooting straight to the issue. Your frank and direct statements are very much appreciated of some of the CM's of the past. In this example you have crossed a line.

I do know of a kid that would love to play wow. he happens to be a quadriplegic. his mind is fine. his body was robbed from him before he was born. emotional yeah. the truth? you will have to trust me. point is he can use a computer. he uses a mouse system that works of camera based system that translates head and eye movement into mouse motion. This third party program automates a large part of the user interface of windows. because of this he is forced to watch his brother play rather then being able to play himself. why waste the money if he is only going to get banned when you get around to his account.

The point. Blizzard has been assuemeing botting and or automation without taking the time to contact the account holders and actually find out what is going on. hey its your right. it really is. The real question is does blizzard want to be a company that cares about its coustomers? Or just another money grubbing Corp looking at the botto m dollar. your example would seem to say that blizzard does not care to actually find out before acting. Assume. you know what that makes you and me...




My point was not that disabled children have no desire or are not allowed to play WoW. My point was, that while many have made this claim in direct response to account closure, I have not seen a single case where this was actually the case.

I didn't assume anything. I am basing my opinion off of events that I have witnessed first-hand.

You are the one assuming we don't care about our customers. We have an appeals process. Have mistakes occurred? Sure. However, those mistakes are not 'swept under the table', as many would claim. They are investigated and rectified, should they be in error.

Your closing questions are rather broad and subjective. How exactly are we a money-grubbing company if we are closing accounts that are in violation of our ToS, along with our overall game philosophy of a cheat-free environment? Wouldn't we want to keep those subscriptions coming in if we were money-grubbing? The motivation for your claim doesn't hold up.

[ Post edited by Tseric ]



How can I massage this intergalactic ulcer?

  http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=47009071&pageNo=8&sid=1#140
Poster: Tseric at 2006-11-15 13:02:31
Subject: Re: Blizzard Bans 100's of gamers for using L
  

Q u o t e:
I don't know what's more troubling. That the Law of Large Numbers was so incorrectly cited, that someone claimed that there is no such thing, or that a blue post agreed with the non-existence.

There is, of course, a Law of Large Numbers. It says, in a nutshell, that the more samples you have of a population, the closer the average of your sample will be to the average of the entire population.


I didn't agree with the non-existence. I merely thought that this law was applied incorrectly.

[ Post edited by Tseric ]



How can I massage this intergalactic ulcer?

  http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=47009071&pageNo=8&sid=1#148
Poster: Tseric at 2006-11-15 13:15:25
Subject: Re: Blizzard Bans 100's of gamers for using L
  

Q u o t e:
if you are so sure of your actions as being valiant then why all the posts trying to sway the popular opinion?


You make it sound like swaying popular opinion is a bad thing. I am simply providing our stance and what I know about the matter. Plenty of other posters are trying to sway popular opinion in the other direction with accusation, sensationalism, hearsay and conjecture. I am counter-balancing with reason and what information I have. It is what I get paid to do.

How can I massage this intergalactic ulcer?

  http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=47009071&pageNo=9&sid=1#160
Poster: Tseric at 2006-11-15 14:17:43
Subject: Re: Blizzard Bans 100's of gamers for using L
  

Q u o t e:
Sounds like Blizzard made a boo boo.


You haven't really read this thread, have you?

How can I massage this intergalactic ulcer?

  http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=47009071&pageNo=11&sid=1#206
Poster: Tseric at 2006-11-15 14:18:18
Subject: Re: Blizzard Bans 100's of gamers for using L
  

Q u o t e:

If pwning fools on the forums is wrong, he doesn't wanna feel right.


Sig worthy.

How can I massage this intergalactic ulcer?

  http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=47009071&pageNo=11&sid=1#207
Poster: Tseric at 2006-11-15 14:42:02
Subject: Re: Blizzard Bans 100's of gamers for using L
  

Q u o t e:

Maybe. And maybe they weren't. It's the cavalier "ban first and let the customer appeal" attitude that is offensive.


So, would you suggest we offer warning to all of the potential cheaters and hackers and give them adequate time to cover their tracks? To change their coding to make it avoidable? To give them any various clues that we may be on to them?

What exactly are you suggesting?

[ Post edited by Tseric ]



How can I massage this intergalactic ulcer?

  http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=47009071&pageNo=12&sid=1#232
Poster: Tseric at 2006-11-15 14:44:53
Subject: Re: Blizzard Bans 100's of gamers for using L
  

Q u o t e:

Actually, you did... go back and read your own post sunshine.

He wrote in his first sentence: "There is no "Law of Large Numbers" or anything of the sort."

You quoted him and replied with: "My thoughts exactly.

Or, what I should have said is, beat me to it. :P"

Pwnt.

Next time if you don't agree with the whole statement you quote, you should be more specific; but nice try on the back tracking though, it did fool at least one person.


Ok, you're right. I'll eat crow. Shall I just delete the comment, then? Care to refute any of the other claims I made that have actual bearing on the topic?

How can I massage this intergalactic ulcer?

  http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=47009071&pageNo=12&sid=1#234
Poster: Tseric at 2006-11-15 15:12:04
Subject: Re: Blizzard Bans 100's of gamers for using L
  

Q u o t e:

I agree with you. hoever you chose to bring that in when you said that i don't work for a security minded company. as for a suggestion, I wish I could. i really wish i could. but blanket bans with no warning or allowing a timely appeal process with a real person is not acceptable either.


And what, in your estimation, is a timely appeal process? There is an appeal process. Is it according to your time? Probably not. The investigation takes as long as the investigation takes. They do attend to them as quickly as they are able.

How can I massage this intergalactic ulcer?

  http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=47009071&pageNo=14&sid=1#266
Poster: Tseric at 2006-11-15 15:44:03
Subject: Re: Blizzard Bans 100's of gamers for using L
  

Q u o t e:

Well, considering the mistake would be made on the part of Blizz, I would THINK there would be something in regards to within a few hours of an appeal e-mail. I would imagine there would be adequate evidence in the first place once a ban had been issued for the appeals process to be a timely "You got caught, deal with it".


Perhaps you are right. I am not sure of average turnaround time for such a matter.

However, on days like this, when Account Administration is probably fielding more appeals than usual, turnaround time will likely increase.

And when people do get that "You got caught, deal with it" email, how many of them do you think re-petition, rightly or not? Again, we see an increase in turnaround time.

How can I massage this intergalactic ulcer?

  http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=47009071&pageNo=14&sid=1#279
Poster: Tseric at 2006-11-15 17:22:46
Subject: Re: Blizzard Bans 100's of gamers for using L
  
I had a hunch, but said nothing. That poem actually did godwin the thread.

Anyone care to dispute?

How can I massage this intergalactic ulcer?

  http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=47009071&pageNo=16&sid=1#318
 

Is this thread News or Fluff? You Decide!
News!
- OR -
Fluff!
What are you talking about?

View all recent official Blue Posts

WoW Blue Tracker: Archiving World of Warcraft Blue Posts
since March 2005
Home | RSS | News | Contact
Recent | Search | Archive | CS Posts
 

Why Ads?