[Official] Statement about Arenas and Battlegrounds

Okay. Thanks for conceding to my argument in its entirely? Or are you still misconstruing my stance?

 

Again, allowed is different to supported i dont know why you find it so hard to grasp the concept.

 

Look, we're really done. I don't want this debate to loop around, so that you end up talking about how your drug dealer friend wasn't really supporting drug use again. The fact is, if you knowingly harbour content on a website, you are supporting its use. It's really that simple. If anyone is having trouble grasping a basic concept, it's you. Have a great day, though.

 

that's incorrect, but thankyou for sharing

 

I think your dealer friend has been slipping you drugs without you realising, either that or you are just clinically retarded. Just imagine trying to use that rationale if you were caught by the police and you would see how ridiculous it is, "I never supported drug use, I only provided people drugs for the money!".

 

I cannot believe people are still arguing about this crap. What's done is done. Leave it alone....

 

My fiance and I own a business.. we quite often have other businesses / charities come in and ask if they can leave their cards / flyers / fundraising merchandise for people to take and we allow it out of common decency.

We don support their businesses / charities in any way shape or form but we allow them to leave their stuff behind so they can attach new sales... the business we own is very busy and lucrative and people often wait and look over said flyers etc... Even if they paid me for leaving the stuff behind or gave me a cut of their new client sales who mentioned they saw the advertisement in my shop I would not have to support them.

Just because I allow things to be displayed in my shop does not mean that I support them, if a customer had an issue with their product and they came to me it isn't my problem I'm just the middleman between the seller and them I just had a nice place for them to advertise their products.

 

#rekt

 

Long story, short. You have two groups of people, here. You have the people that were negatively impacted by the removal of Arena support and lack the maturity to get over it. And next to them, you have everyone else. The people from each group that choose to voice their opinions are NOT going to get along or agree.

Then, of those people, you have the ones who are so butthurt and obsessed that they work to spread reputation around for multiple opportunities to down rep others with their MASSIVE influence (3 rep power lol).

It is what it is.

 

No, there actually is no more risk. What you guys are going off is implied risk...

The risk of being banned has always been 100%. If you bot, you will eventually get banned. That is a fact. You may not be banned instantly. Hell, it could be 10 years before you get banned...But you will get banned some time in the future. That is a 100% fact.

There is no more risk than there's always been. A ban wave doesn't raise the risk, as you can't raise it above 100%.

 

>posting #rekt after the ass-whooping you received in this thread

do you have no shame

 

This is a pretty dumb analogy, i mean going by what your saying, when i go on a plane, theres 100% risk of crashing, cuz planes crash, so i guess its just a matter of time before mine does.

Plenty of people have been botting between 2010 and 2015, many who have since quit the game and probably never recieved a ban because they did not play during this ban wave. Statistically speaking, up until this banwave, i would bet my right arm that a very small percentage of Honorbuddy users experienced bans during the lifetime of their use. If HB between the years of 2010 and 2015 had a banrate precentage of 5%, and after the banwave had 60% of its userbase banned, guess what, statisically speaking, the risk of AVOIDING a banwave and as such, USING HB, has increased.

Exactly as you would say that there is a very small risk of getting fined for jaywalking, because theres not a lot of cops around to spy on pedestrians, but if the government suddenly hired another 2 million cops to catch pedestrians jaywalking, suddenly the risk of being caught jaywalking has increased.

Its very simple, its actually logic.

 

Your whole post is a contradiction. You are retarded for thinking that you don't support them... You say common decency but you are giving them the space to advertise....so you are supporting them by giving them business... Or what you are saying is that if I want to come in and bring in my "Hail Satan" calling cards and my collection of 2 million donation jars for some of the most ridiculous reasons on the planet(IE Boob job for my pet monkey). I would get the same treatment. Or another way to say this would be to imply that if I wanted to set up something you felt strongly against. Let's say my donation fund to bang your fiance over and over again in a hot German porno. You'd probably not support that... Get my drift?

Edit: What if you had let me put things in your shop that would scare away your business? Obviously not!

 

^^^^

Exactly.

Matt, you and the other guy are arguing over two separate distinctions of the word "support," and as much as you'll hate to hear it, you're using it wrong. The fact of the matter is that regardless of whether you agree or disagree with someone's ideologies, intentions, motivations, etc, by providing a means to an end (in this case, a means for those other businesses or charities to advertise in your shop via cards, word of mouth, posters, whatever), you are in fact supporting them. Why? Because with that advertising comes possible revenue, and revenue is what supports of a successful business. Without revenue (in all its forms), that business fails, just like your friend with his drugs and the money (revenue) he receives from distributing those drugs.

This is a basic, irrefutable fact. There's no semantics to argue. Support is not restricted to "agreeing with" which is what you're arguing. It means to "enable to function or act." You enable that business to receive revenue via your business by supplying free advertising for theirs, just as HB supported Arena by receiving and continuing to benefit from the revenue that Arena/PVP CRs brought/bring. You can't cherry-pick an interpretation of the word "support" and use it to disprove someone giving you the very definition of that word. That's not how it works.

 

Speaking entirely about rotation botting(interruptbot, and other things the bot can react to with inhuman speed).

It is the point where the bot is no longer a bot, but becomes more like a cheat.
Automating gameplay is one thing, cheating is an entirely different story.

 

Well, that's stupid.

You can't say that game play automation is only cheating when it is being done in PvP. The whole premise of botting is cheating according to Blizzard's definition. Game play automation is the same whether it is in PvP or PvE.

The problem here is that Bossland has this mindset that disabling arena will get Blizzard off their back. Arena rotations was MUCH harder to detect than the bot trains that happened in BGs thanks to BG Buddy.

I just don't get the reasoning. It's fine to alienate one aspect of the bot I guess. The PvPers will go elsewhere, especially as other devs go to the same competition.

Instead of disabling, they should have just removed AFK functionality in all aspects of organized PvP.

 

I certainly didn't use Blizzard's definition when I wrote my post. People start to get pissed when a rotation/arena bot can outplay them, and Blizzard eventually acts on that.
My opinion being using such a thing is cheating, for reference I can compare it to a Chess Grandmaster getting beaten by a chess engine.

Bots usually do tedious things, like lvling or grinding, things that don't directly affect other players.
It is hard for me to seperate the two from one another, sure they would both be considered cheating, but I would argue they are different, the most obvious way being that lvling/grinding realistically only gives you a "time-advantage".

I hope I got my point across, although you might not agree, which is fine.

 

Sorry I hate to hear nothing, in times I've even disagreed with some of the material that has been displayed because it essentially could have been considered direct competition to my business but I still allowed it to be displayed, i dont judge what people want to raise money for so long as it's legal.

But even in times when I've considered saying no i still allowed it and u reserve the right to take down said material as I see fit.

In fact the only thing we officially support is a local sports team because it's clearly shown in the shop and we also sponsor them and being branded on their uniforms, i guess much like the buddy team has official products for what they officially support.

 

I sure hope you are trolling and are not actually that obtuse

 

do you need to result to personal attacks on people with all your replies? is that all you have going for you?

it's not obtuse at all, it's factual... just because i present examples that you dont agree with does not make it any less factual or correct.

The Fact is that is the only Officially Supported Affiliate my business has.


Edit - anyway, people are going to spin this however they want, and neither side is going to disprove the others argument in a way that one side will step down.. so i'm leaving this thread.