Free Market Spot AFK/Camp/Hog/Selling Shenanigans

Umm, no. The sequence of events in that screenshot directly contradicts what you claim, as you first mentioned the '30 seconds' after he'd already whispered you.

I'm going to file a report for GM abuse. You can explain your context with the administrators.

 

It depends. If someone reports you for suspected shop botting, then the staff will come to you to see if you're around. If you respond within the given time frame, you're fine.

Okay.

 

Bro , have u ever fight fm spot at ch1 fm1-3?
Don’t u know if open spot = let other ppl ez steal ur store? If u reopen, while store closed , ppl have eyes , so ez to steal and take ur spot . Lul

 

While I think Kaii forcing the player to open a shop when it was clear he is present and wasn't breaking TOS isn't ideal, I think there is no guideline for them to deal with those types of situations, especially while other players pressure him to take action. But like I said, perhaps it will inspire them to make more protocols on how to deal with this type of situation better. I am surprised that Boredxz didn't explain to Kaii the whole situation. It just looks more like an issue of bad communication and not so much a power abuse issue.

Staff is great at many things, but not many of them are merchants or aware of the unwritten rules we players follow.

 

I think the whole idea is not to say but to do. I assume you understand what we are discussing about. Also I would like to quote Joez -

I believe this topic should be discussed as well. I have seen some ban appeals (which I'm sure Joez did as well), that people are being banned and are denied being shown the evidence against them. Even despite the defendant requesting for it. Feeling obligated to not show evidence you gathered is wrong, and it obviously renders the defendant helpless simply due to the fact that you dictate if you ban or unban the person. At that point, the staff is banning people based on personal intuition rather than conscious reasoning. If there is a good reason for you to be obligated to not show evidence warranting the ban, I would like to hear that.

 

There is nothing to explain though. He proved that he wasn't afk, which was the only thing Kai wanted to find out as part of his investigation to whether he was shop botting or not.

We can agree that this does not prove he is not a shop botter, nor that this is a reasonable or intelligent way of investigating during a time when the spot was already being held, but this is the method that Kai chose and followed.

Thus, upon knowing that BoredXZ is not afk, Kai's subsequent action of enforcing him to open his shop is entirely unwarranted, as was his threat to disconnect him in 30 seconds.

I do not believe staff should have this kind of power enforced upon players who are otherwise enacting legitimate play.

For reference, although most report abuse threads are kept private I'd like to share what I wrote here. I think I made fair statements and although frustrated that this was the conclusion we came to I think it's important for the community to recognise where I'm coming from in making this report. This does not deter from the initial purpose of this thread, which I think most who have replied have reached consensus that players that hold spots with unopen shops should not be subject to afk checks, but it is those that camp already opened afk shops that perhaps should, if the opportunity allows them to.

Spoiler

 

I believe we are going way off-topic.

99% of the players getting banned had it coming and will return and break the TOS again if given the chance, especially if the offense discussed is a very serious one. The staff does not disclose evidence not because they have none, but simply because if an offender returns and evidence are disclosed, he would use those evidence to make sure they are not caught in the same way. Needless to say, I believe the final say goes to the admin's and not the Gms.

Let's not start a witch hunt and point our fingers at all the wrong places.

 

First post: "but please do not take this as a specific attack upon you or your actions Kai"

Last post: "I'm going to file a report for GM abuse. You can explain your context with the administrators."

I think it would have been much better to keep staying neutral at least in this thread as you said in the first post by yourself. Now you have clarified your stance and I think this post wont be constructive feedback on FM hogging issue anymore.

People will fight.

 

I will reply to your question, because I understand where this is coming from. But, if you would like to further talk about the subject, I believe it would be more appropriate in another feedback thread, since it would make the title misleading.

When someone is banned, it is almost never a mistake. Let me emphasize the "almost" part, because as you know, we are all humans.
99% of the people asking to see our evidence, are hackers, looking for a way to breach our system, and avoid getting caught again. Same goes to RWTers. You can bet that someone who has enough money to spend on a maplestory private server has enough time to ban evade and do it all over again.
If we were to share evidence, we would definitely have a surge in hackers, due to them enhancing their programs and finding ways to avoid our methods of tracking them down.
Again, I said 99% and not 100% because we all make mistakes. But I assure you, when someone asks for us to review the evidence, we do that. The fact that we don't show the evidence, doesn't mean we don't double, or triple check, by multiple members, and make sure that the ban was justified.



About this topic, since you filed a report, I am not sure where this is going.

 

I think you may be a little uninformed about the subject, or maybe you're just playing devil's advocate (get it? hehe).

Let's say you are holding a spot. If you're forced to have to open it publicly, you're only inviting more people to camp under it. Pixel autoclickers can now work. Legit spot campers can now can react to the store closing. Any fm spot hunter strolling by can now give it a go for a few minutes thinking the spot will free up soon.

By just holding the spot without it opened publicly, you eliminate pretty much any chance of it being taken legitly since you can't spam click it w/o getting dced

 

Apologies.

I made the first post with that comment and I still stand by that comment based on the information I had available at that time. This thread is feedback on the issue of FM hogging, stealing, camping, selling and thoughts on how GMs should react to report threads in this situation. Kai's comments where he felt he should reasonably investigate any believable claim is appropriate, and I absolutely agree that GMs have that responsibility to. I didn't agree with his means because I felt that didn't address his intent (of finding out if shop botting was in fact present) but I respected it and endeavoured to review this with the community to see if this is appropriate.

What doesn't go well with me is that upon recognising with his own means that BoredXZ is in fact not afk, he subsequently went and threatened him with disconnection anyway. He had already proven, using his own method, that BoredXZ was not a shop botter (whether his method actually does this is an entirely different matter). The comments that followed were undeserved and is thus an example of GM abuse.

My report against Kai is based off the second comment because I feel that is the part where he overstepped his boundaries as staff, but not to the first comment because it is the means that I wanted community input on.

So I'm sorry if my report felt like a digression to the thread and I'm sorry if you feel I am no longer neutral in this discussion. I hope I have explained my rationale behind my comments, as contradicting as they may seem.

 

I didn't file a report by the way, I believe that is a misunderstanding. Anyways thanks for the reply on that and I apologize for the topic deviation. I understand now, thank you for the clarity.

 

You are within your rights to close this thread as forum moderator if you feel this thread has digressed beyond its initial purpose.

Multiple members of the community have chimed in and on reading through I think most would agree that 'spot hogging' is not a bannable offence, does not equate to shop botting, and should not be subject to the so called 'afk checks' that are being conducted, because they don't prove if a shop hogger has used a objectionable third party software or not.

Of course, further comments related to this are more than welcome if you choose to leave this thread open.

I have to say I am disappointed in Kai's response on scene after looking through all the screenshots that have been presented, specifically the parts after BoredXZ had whispered him. This does not preclude me from thinking that arriving to the scene to investigate a believable report is more than appropriate as staff and reflects his dedication and responsibility to his work.

 

Last winter you would be lucky if a GM would even see your post in the shoutbox and you would be forced to make a very detailed report for any action to be taken.

Even if he didn't act according to most of our point of view, he went out of his way to investigate a potential offense. From here on, he can only learn and receive feedback on how he can handle it better in the future.

I guess you just can't win in some situations.

 

On to the point, can we stop DCing players at FM based on spot hogging? Unless there is considerable evidence on Staff's end that is truly shop botting, it's not justified.

 

Hi everyone,

I would like to thank you for the feedback.

Going forward we will revise our internal policy regarding how to best handle these types of situations, and be more cautious before taking actions.