25-Oct-2011 - Bot-Nuking Day: Making RuneScape Fairer and More Fun!

[Crossed_Body]

Telling these kids you're bringing your bot back in 3 days certainly questions that humanity!

Lying to your custumers is not a characteristic I'd find suitable for an employee of mine. Maybe your moral code is different from mine, but I believe that lying to the people who pay you is a deplorable act.

 

Taking a job offer because you're very well educated in that line of work after profiting from something along the same lines - acting somewhat as the competition, is a horrible act.

 

Nice strawman. I never claimed that, you're twisting my words and oversimplifying the act of what leaving for the competition actually means in this situation.

 

Yes, being human is a severe character flaw. Seeing an opening for profit is huge sin and something no-one can ever change from.

Another nice strawman. I never said having an eye for profit is wrong, you're just assuming I think it is.

 

 

Fact is, I wouldn't want somebody who lies and turns his back on his custumers to work for me, because who knows maybe one day he'll figure my company isn't good enough and starts selling company secrets, or leaves for a competitor while bringing his work with him. Honesty and integrity are values that I find are required in any field of business (aside from attorneys, perhaps).

[Sy_Accursed]

*customers or *consumers

[Auror]

they should bring back nature rune alching price so graahking becomes good moneymaker as it should be

 

100% Agree

[Carl]

Taking a job offer because you're very well educated in that line of work after profiting from something along the same lines - acting somewhat as the competition, is a horrible act.

 

Nice strawman. I never claimed that, you're twisting my words and oversimplifying the act of what leaving for the competition actually means in this situation.

 

I never said you claimed that. I'm filling in the blanks. You mentioned severe character flaws that might become a problem.

 

 

Yes, being human is a severe character flaw. Seeing an opening for profit is huge sin and something no-one can ever change from.

Another nice strawman. I never said having an eye for profit is wrong, you're just assuming I think it is.

Again, never said you said it. Filling in blanks.

 

Fact is, I wouldn't want somebody who lies and turns his back on his custumers to work for me, because who knows maybe one day he'll figure my company isn't good enough and starts selling company secrets, or leaves for a competitor while bringing his work with him. Honesty and integrity are values that I find are required in any field of business (aside from attorneys, perhaps).

 

He's still in school/college, he's still learning. He's not the CEO or the owner of a multi-million pound company with millions of customers. He sells scripts to kids. There will be no "selling company secrets", I'm sure - there's lawyers for that kind of lark. You can't argue that he might leave to join the competitor. If you're working for X and Y offers you a job with a higher salary and better benefits - you'll take it. It's common. Shit happens.

[Crossed_Body]

I never said you claimed that. I'm filling in the blanks. You mentioned severe character flaws that might become a problem.

 

Again, never said you said it. Filling in blanks.

 

Then why say it? You're just putting words in my mouth. If I wanted to say those things, I would have done so, and "filling in the blanks" really isn't an argument or a counterargument, it's just pointless.

Especially when the blanks are filling according to your ideas, and you're quoting me.

 

He's still in school/college, he's still learning. He's not the CEO or the owner of a multi-million pound company with millions of customers. He sells scripts to kids. There will be no "selling company secrets", I'm sure - there's lawyers for that kind of lark. You can't argue that he might leave to join the competitor. If you're working for X and Y offers you a job with a higher salary and better benefits - you'll take it. It's common. Shit happens.

You don't learn honesty and integrity in college; That's taught to you during your childhood, hopefully.

Truth is, he lied to his customers and actively deprived them of their product, which is arguably worse than simply joining a rival company.

It's true that if somebody offers you a job with a better paygrade, you should take it. But you should also take into consideration what the consequences are to your customers if you are the key member of a developing team. People paid for things they no longer can access because you left. And lying about it while escaping is not the right way to go at it, and it only goes to show the lack of integrity and respect you have towards the people who pay you.

[Yay0siris]

sometimes you just have to jump a sinking ship. who cares if he let down a bunch of adolescents. it doesn't make him less of a person. he offered them a service and they [the botters] should be thankful. anyone in their right mind would have taken jagex's offer had it been something they were interested in, and he is clearly interested in programming AND runescape. he said to anyone who made a purchase 7 days prior would get a refund and that's an admirable thing of him to do. maybe 8 days prior he didn't know jagex would offer him what they did. it's his life so he should take any given opportunity to further himself in what he enjoys. it's a proven fact that those who are more "ruthless" get ahead further in the economy.

[Carl]

 

He's still in school/college, he's still learning. He's not the CEO or the owner of a multi-million pound company with millions of customers. He sells scripts to kids. There will be no "selling company secrets", I'm sure - there's lawyers for that kind of lark. You can't argue that he might leave to join the competitor. If you're working for X and Y offers you a job with a higher salary and better benefits - you'll take it. It's common. Shit happens.

You don't learn honesty and integrity in college; That's taught to you during your childhood, hopefully.

Truth is, he lied to his customers and actively deprived them of their product, which is arguably worse than simply joining a rival company.

It's true that if somebody offers you a job with a better paygrade, you should take it. But you should also take into consideration what the consequences are to your customers if you are the key member of a developing team. People paid for things they no longer can access because you left. And lying about it while escaping is not the right way to go at it, and it only goes to show the lack of integrity and respect you have towards the people who pay you.

 

(Skipped the bullshit "I don't want to argue with you" (LOL STRAWMAN))

 

Well, you don't learn honesty and integrity when it comes to business decisions and things that will change your future, when scribbling on pages or doing tests in school. People can very easily change.

 

I'm not entirely sure how their system works, but I presume it's a once-off payment for each script. Saying that, they weren't being deprived of its use. They purchased the goods - batteries not included. I'm going to presume it wasn't stated when purchasing that it would always be working. He's offered a refund to anyone who purchased a script on or after the 25th of December. Before that, everything was working.

 

From my point of view - he's done the honest thing, Crossed. By calling it a day.

Why have you put an end to RSBuddys bot client?

 

Bots have changed the gameplay of RuneScape. With the use of bots becoming increasingly widespread since the introduction of free trade, and the recent announcements by Jagex, it is clear that bots have become flagrantly detrimental to the game. If youre like any of us and you enjoy playing RuneScape, youll have noticed that bots are anti-social and make the time you spend playing feel diminished in worth. At the same time, bots are abused heavily by gold farmers to ruin the game to a significant extent only for their profit. We hope to assist in the selfless movement by Jagex in fixing this problem and hope that you will join us in playing the game with real people.

 

Take that as you will.

 

 

I'm wondering if anyone can enlighten me as to how this RSBuddy thing worked. Did people buy a script, and a script only. But the script had the capability of operating on RSBuddy's free client?

[Crossed_Body]

sometimes you just have to jump a sinking ship.

That is true. However, he shouldn't have lied to his customers.

[RU_Insane]

We don't have an idea under what circumstances he lied, why he chose to lie as opposed to alternatives, or why lying in this particular instance means that he's prone to do it again in a completely different situation. I'll note that we're passing judgment on this person's values by his actions when in fact he could cherish those same values (honesty, integrity) as much as you or I do. You can't claim the person doesn't honor those values when you essentially have no idea what criteria he used to come to that decision, and what specific circumstance he found himself in that influenced the weight of a particular set of criteria would have over another. In other words, his actions in the past don't necessarily determine his actions in the future.

 

What if that decision was in fact the best possible decision he could arrive at in that situation with regards to his legal and financial well-being? Would you not do the same as he did? Honesty and integrity can step-aside when your well-being is involved and honestly, when the work you find yourself in is deplorable in itself to much of the game's population. Not saying that's entirely why he chose to lie, but it could've been a prominent factor. There are many paths he could've chosen under those conditions. The fact that he chose to lie, out of other options he possibly considered doesn't mean that he doesn't value truth, honor and integrity any less as some here seem to be implying. If you're implying that, you should know that's a severe error in logic.

[Carl]

We don't have an idea under what circumstances he lied, why he chose to lie as opposed to alternatives, or why lying in this particular instance means that he's prone to do it again in a completely different situation. I'll note that we're passing a judgment on this person's values by his actions when in fact he could cherish those same values (honesty, integrity) as much as you or I do. You can't claim the person doesn't honor those values when you essentially have no idea what criteria he used to come to that decision, and what specific circumstance he found himself in that influenced the weight of a particular set of criteria would have over another. In other words, his actions in the past don't necessarily determine his actions in the future.

 

What if that decision was in fact the best possible decision he could arrive at in that situation with regards to his legal and financial well-being? Would you not do the same as he did? Honesty and integrity can step-aside when your well-being is involved and honestly, when the work you find yourself in is deplorable in itself to much of the game's population. Not saying that's entirely why he chose to lie, but it could've been a prominent factor. There are many paths he could've chosen under those conditions. The fact that he chose to lie, out of other options he possibly considered doesn't mean that he doesn't value truth, honor and integrity any less as some here seem to be implying. If you're implying that, you should know that's a severe error in logic.

 

4.2 Save in respect of your User Account being disabled for any breach by you of the terms of use thereof, or for any breach of this licence, we agree that if any Premium Script fails to function properly due to a defect in the Software or matter affecting the Website and/or your User Account during the 14 working day period from purchase then you shall be entitled to notify us of the same, and if we do not make available to you a fix of the same then you shall be entitled to a full refund of the purchase price.

 

As far as I can find - it's pretty much customers purchasing goods as-is, with no guarantee that they will function. But if they're not of usable quality, within 14 days, they will be refunded.

 

And RU_Insane, as one bot poster said:

"Stable job > Scripting with the chance of getting sued"

[RU_Insane]

We don't have an idea under what circumstances he lied, why he chose to lie as opposed to alternatives, or why lying in this particular instance means that he's prone to do it again in a completely different situation. I'll note that we're passing a judgment on this person's values by his actions when in fact he could cherish those same values (honesty, integrity) as much as you or I do. You can't claim the person doesn't honor those values when you essentially have no idea what criteria he used to come to that decision, and what specific circumstance he found himself in that influenced the weight of a particular set of criteria would have over another. In other words, his actions in the past don't necessarily determine his actions in the future.

 

What if that decision was in fact the best possible decision he could arrive at in that situation with regards to his legal and financial well-being? Would you not do the same as he did? Honesty and integrity can step-aside when your well-being is involved and honestly, when the work you find yourself in is deplorable in itself to much of the game's population. Not saying that's entirely why he chose to lie, but it could've been a prominent factor. There are many paths he could've chosen under those conditions. The fact that he chose to lie, out of other options he possibly considered doesn't mean that he doesn't value truth, honor and integrity any less as some here seem to be implying. If you're implying that, you should know that's a severe error in logic.

 

4.2 Save in respect of your User Account being disabled for any breach by you of the terms of use thereof, or for any breach of this licence, we agree that if any Premium Script fails to function properly due to a defect in the Software or matter affecting the Website and/or your User Account during the 14 working day period from purchase then you shall be entitled to notify us of the same, and if we do not make available to you a fix of the same then you shall be entitled to a full refund of the purchase price.

 

As far as I can find - it's pretty much customers purchasing goods as-is, with no guarantee that they will function. But if they're not of usable quality, within 14 days, they will be refunded.

 

And RU_Insane, as one bot poster said:

"Stable job > Scripting with the chance of getting sued"

 

Could you clarify how the quote's relevant to what I said, if that's directed at me :P

 

And yeah, I understand there's greater income opportunity in way of stability and higher salary. That explains why he accepted the job, even if he weren't threatened with legal action. But why did he choose to lie to his community? I don't know. I wouldn't use that as an example of his moral tendencies though.

 

Off topic, but I love how I got the first post on page 23 and 24 :mrgreen:

[Ellac]

I was just standing at Daemonheim, the previous banking hub for a good bunch of Nature RC bots.

I saw a bot log in. Then another. Then a third, a fourth and a fifth. I got worried that bots might be returning. Then they all disappeared.

 

All 5 bots that had logged in and tried to RC just went *poof*. Gone. They were gone so fast I didn't have time to report them.

 

It was wonderful.

Wait, how did you know they were bots?

They all wore very similar gear ( mithril sq shield, addy pickaxe, glory, mithril platelegs, nature tiara), they all were skulled, they all were level 95, they all had spirit graahks summoned, and they all had names similar to 'tuhfginkj'. Either a very elaborate joke which wasn't very funny, or they were bots who logged in and out again.

[Contractor]

 

I'm wondering if anyone can enlighten me as to how this RSBuddy thing worked. Did people buy a script, and a script only. But the script had the capability of operating on RSBuddy's free client?

 

 

Only several select scripts were actually premium which you had to pay for an authorization code to use it for your RSBuddy account. There are hundreds of free scripts that anyone can write and then submit to use with the RSBuddy client. Some of them get selected and made into a VIP script which only VIP members of RSBuddy could use, which you have to pay a monthly fee to RSBuddy for. Scripts usually go from free > Vip > Premium once they work out all the kinks, antibans, bugs, etc

 

Basically RSBuddy Client was free and anybody could use free scripts, pay for VIP status then you could use VIP scripts, pay for separate premium scripts then you get that premium script

[Crossed_Body]

We don't have an idea under what circumstances he lied, why he chose to lie as opposed to alternatives, or why lying in this particular instance means that he's prone to do it again in a completely different situation.

People's values are hard to change. I doubt that if another situation presented itself, he would follow a different course of action.

 

I'll note that we're passing judgment on this person's values by his actions when in fact he could cherish those same values (honesty, integrity) as much as you or I do. You can't claim the person doesn't honor those values when you essentially have no idea what criteria he used to come to that decision, and what specific circumstance he found himself in that influenced the weight of a particular set of criteria would have over another. In other words, his actions in the past don't necessarily determine his actions in the future.

 

Honesty:

2.

truthfulness, sincerity, or frankness.

He lied, therefore his honesty is questionable.

 

Integrity:

1.

adherence to moral and ethical principles; soundness of moral character; honesty.

His last "goodbye" speech is a clear example of his lack of integrity. For years he stood as a bastion of runescape botting, and when facing difficulty, he turned to the community and said "lol jagex said botting is bad and now after all these years I agree", completely contradicting his previous stances and his past moral and ethical principles. Lack of honesty also reflects poorly on his integrity.

 

What if that decision was in fact the best possible decision he could arrive at in that situation with regards to his legal and financial well-being? Would you not do the same as he did?

If it went against my moral code, no, I wouldn't. That's the whole point of morality.

 

The fact that he chose to lie, out of other options e he possibly considered doesn't mean that he doesn't value truth, honor and integrity any less as some here seem to be implying. If you're implying that, you should know that's a severe error in logic.

The word "choice" implies that alternatives exist. And there is always an alternative to lying (for example, telling the truth :rolleyes:).

It doesn't matter if his criteria was logical. Morality sometimes implies choosing a tougher course of action for the sake of others.

[RU_Insane]

People's values are hard to change. I doubt that if another situation presented itself, he would follow a different course of action.

 

Indeed, people's values are hard to change when you progress beyond a certain point. So can't you consider the possibility that his lie is merely a blip in the track record as opposed to it being representative of a contrary set of values? Why should the fact that he lied in this instance mean he's prone to do it again in a different situation? That's a couple of points I'd like for you to consider.

 

He lied, therefore his honesty is questionable.

 

Questioning his honesty raises the question of how justified you'd be to be suspicious of him in the first place. Suddenly because he lied, that's enough to override the precedent which established that he was trustworthy? Well, I'll concede to an extent by agreeing that while lying was in itself deplorable, he likely thought he was justified in doing so. And that he thought he was justified in doing so indicates that he weighed his decision on a specific set of criteria we're not privy to. This is evident because you not only don't agree with his decision, you think it's immoral. You two are using different measurements for gauging this situation. I could say he acted morally because the end justified the means. Now if he only had enough reason to lie in this case, considering this, why should he value honesty any less? If I didn't care about honestly, I wouldn't even bother with rationalizing my position on an issue concerning it.

 

Essentially, if he thought he was doing a greater moral good according to the outcome, shouldn't that be a greater indicator of what he actually values considering that has greater weight (according to moral consequentialism's axiom)? This isn't to suggest he was judging his actions by this principle. Essentially what I'm saying is that the fact he even chose to rationalize his position (by judging his decision according to weighted criteria) shows to me that he does in fact value certain virtues like you or I would. The difference I'm seeing is that so far, you seem to think an action's immoral if the means to realize its goal are perceived as immoral. I'm not certain on this point; I'm going off by what you've said up to this point. In contrast, he seems to think he's justified and may or may not think the issue extends into morality.

 

You can clarify why you think his apparent lack of integrity is deplorable but that isn't relevant to my argument. In the end I think Jacmob has seriously considered his options and whatever moral consequence comes out of it has little value in comparison to the alternative path he could've taken. Note I'm no longer comparing morals by this statement, I'm broadening my argument to a wider scope. Literally, whatever moral consequence resulting from his decision has no value in comparison to the financial and legal distress he would've faced, even if he were honest in going about it. That's a small detail in the greater scheme of things.

 

His last "goodbye" speech is a clear example of his lack of integrity. For years he stood as a bastion of runescape botting, and when facing difficulty, he turned to the community and said "lol jagex said botting is bad and now after all these years I agree", completely contradicting his previous stances and his past moral and ethical principles. Lack of honesty also reflects poorly on his integrity.

 

We can't say he violated his ethical principles unless we know they were clearly defined. We also can't quantify for certain to what degree he considers botting to be an ethical issue such that he'd incorporate it as an ethical value. I agree however that he violated his integrity for whatever value it may count. The real question I think should be asked is why does his integrity count for so much, knowing that even if he'd told the truth, something of greater effect had been achieved: botting as an industry has largely disintegrated. Also, why does his violating his integrity necessarily mean he that he doesn't value honesty and integrity as highly as others would? Perhaps he reached a breaking point and reasoned to himself that even if he lied, he was justified. However, in normal circumstances, he'd act with honesty and commitment to his values. Why should this past action bear so much weight on what he's capable of doing in the future knowing that he'll likely stay consistent with his values?

 

If it went against my moral code, no, I wouldn't. That's the whole point of morality.

 

This assumes that you operate on a strictly different set of morals contrary to his. Isn't it possible that you two have similar ideas about morality and good character, but have different ways of how to apply it? Hence my comment on moral consequentialism. I'm not saying you two do have similar ideas, but that you're crudely judging his values based on how he handled the situation, in my opinion.

 

The word "choice" implies that alternatives exist. And there is always an alternative to lying (for example, telling the truth :rolleyes:).

It doesn't matter if his criteria was logical. Morality sometimes implies choosing a tougher course of action for the sake of others.

 

In fact, if the criteria (which I'll note are subjective) were logical despite this quality, that'd speak more to his values than an apparent moral absolute, as I've already explained. You've said you find that lying undermines integrity, which I can understand but I'd like you to explain why you think this means he doesn't value honesty. As I see it, if the criteria were logical, there'd be no room for his values to be undermined because one could not contradict the other.

 

It's important to note that it's very difficult to practice absolute values. I'm sure you've lied in situations where it'd be easier to tell the truth, in hindsight. Stealing a cookie from the cookie jar? No? I agree, tougher courses of action sometimes need to be chosen. But we're also prone to shy away from these and then realize in hindsight that it would have been easier to tell the truth and bear the brunt. We can't consistently predict how we'd react in a situation, and we judge how we act in a situation by the values we hold. So when we act contrary to our values, does that make us hypocrites? Untrustworthy?

 

At the end of this post, I honestly think Jacmob made a stupid decision. I agree that he should've told the truth, honestly. Not for moral reasons, but because it seems more sensible. But I can't say much more than this because if it had been easy to tell the truth, I think he would've done it. I know I shouldn't pose unprovable assumptions but it seems there's a deeper reason why he chose to lie than what seems apparent to most, in my view. That's all I can really say in this matter.

[Kimberly]

Jacmob starts working for Jagex and the preachers come out of the woodwork, who not a month ago would've vilified him. That's...kind of funny.

[RU_Insane]

Jacmob starts working for Jagex and the preachers come out of the woodwork, who not a month ago would've vilified him. That's...kind of funny.

 

I think it's strange at least. You can't please everyone though. Someone will always find something to nitpick >.<

[stonewall337]

Another question: will high level accounts be "worth" more on the black market because people can no longer bot as easily/safely?

[Carl]

Jacmob starts working for Jagex and the preachers come out of the woodwork, who not a month ago would've vilified him. That's...kind of funny.

 

The situation now is the complete opposite of what it would have been a month ago -- the discussion would not be at all similar. The discussion then would be different. Opinions change. Just like how people like you have shown their hate (Or "Strong dislike") for Jagex. Would you still continue to show that strong dislike in a discussion? Despite what's been said and done since then? Or must we all discuss as if everything has been written in stone?

[Kimberly]

Or must we all discuss as if everything has been written in stone?

 

It certainly is for some people.

[Crossed_Body]

Another question: will high level accounts be "worth" more on the black market because people can no longer bot as easily/safely?

Yes. Basic market rules. The price of gold has already gone up.

[Stev]

Another question: will high level accounts be "worth" more on the black market because people can no longer bot as easily/safely?

Yes. Basic market rules. The price of gold has already gone up.

Incorrect. Prices to sell high level accounts to companies have dropped by several hundred dollars due to people selling their accounts that they can no longer bot - aka. Quitting RuneScape.

 

 

Here's another surprise: Jacmob developed a bot client that worked after the Bot Nuke. As sources on that forum have it, Jacmob took his bot client to RuneFest, showed it working with no problems in front of the mods (he had balls to do that, huh?) . Mod MMG et al. freak out. The two parties then discussed related matters privately and he apparently came out of the meeting with a job. :lol: Lucky guy. He'd been making cash selling scripts beforehand, now he has a legit career. Like others, I'm thinking he was threatened with legal action if he released the client. Either way, I wouldn't reject that job offer. He's making bank now.

 

Fairly certain I read a quote from Mark on the RSOF (Probably eaten by Page 51) that said he'd offer a Job to a developer if they managed to get a bot up and running with 14 days. I'll dig further.

 

"Well, if they do it in 14~28 days as promised I'll offer them jobs at Jagex, but then again, they said they would be backup in a few hours a few days ago.

Alternatively, instead of a career at Jagex or McDonalds if more relevant, they could more likely end up spending their time in those lovely orange jumpsuits with the nice writing on the back

 

EDIT: So many exciting possibilities, only time will tell. "

Really [bleep]ing wish I'd seen that post by him sooner. I'd have a job at Jagex. Lol.

[Troacctid]

Jacmob starts working for Jagex and the preachers come out of the woodwork, who not a month ago would've vilified him. That's...kind of funny.

Hey, remember, this is the same guy who said this:

 

On 12-Aug-2011, Andrew Gower and Mark Gerhard announced that RuneScape has been nominated for a Golden Joystick award in the category "Best Free to Play Game". Following this announcement, there has been some controversy over the quality of F2P gameplay in particular as a result of advertisement bots used by gold selling websites.

 

We at RSBuddy love to see people no longer spending hours of their time performing repetitive in-game tasks, and to see our software become more and more human-like. We're not intent on ruining people's experience of RuneScape when starting up their account, or taking part in activities with friends or clanmates. Our goal is to make our bots as seamless and human-like as possible.

 

Unfortunately, some people are fine with abusing automation software to spam their websites and have caused a spam-bot epidemic in F2P. Although Jagex is in the best position to end this activity, we don't want to assist in making this harder for them and as a result we have taken the following steps:

 

1. All scripts that support or encourage spam advertising are removed from our repository.

2. All scripts that are designed solely to "troll" or otherwise irritate legitimate players are removed from our repository.

3. All text input methods are added to our greylist and scripts will be rejected from the repository if they perform any of these actions (human-like talking is, of course, still allowed).

4. We will deny the use of RSBuddy by account and network bans to users reported and shown to be performing any of these actions.

 

Although we cannot put a complete end to this, we are wary that our continuing additions to our minimal-cpu botting features should not be allowed to make this issue worse. We understand that the companies in question have access to other automation platforms, and encourage other websites to take similar action against these activities.

 

I can respect that. *shrug*

[Kimberly]

I said that more for the community's muddled views on the issue rather than against Jacmob himself :P

[Blyaunte]

Jacmob starts working for Jagex and the preachers come out of the woodwork, who not a month ago would've vilified him. That's...kind of funny.

 

Interestingly enough, it was Wicked/Stev who suggested that Jagex should hire a bot maker to find a way to beat the bots. It looks like they listened to his advice ...

 

:lol: