• 1726 Players on Java
  • us.mineplex.com
  • 7191 Players Online
  • 5465 Players on Bedrock
  • pe.mineplex.com
!
Attention Internet Explorer Users
To have the best user experience on our site please consider upgrading to Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox

Change the Rules to Stat boosting specifications

Discussion in 'General Idea Discussion' started by Pangaea_, May 6, 2021.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Hello to all members of the Rules Committee and staff/community members,
    I'm not sure this has any potential as Arjun has largely discouraged any thought into this idea, so before anyone locks the thread please allow ample time for people to see it. As I have been told, one alt account is not enough of advantage to warrant a stat boosting punishment. My argument that I am making here is that it is enough of an advantage to nearly always secure a win. Two players that I have seen doing this(who I won't mention because this shouldn't be a report), should certainly be punished for boosting the stats of one account. I understand that punishments for stat boosting often result in permanent bans or the account's stats are completely wiped(in more serious scenarios), so it makes sense why staff are hesitant to punish for stat boosting and RC wants to make the rules rigid as possible to avoid false bans.

    On the Link above I recorded a video (I'm sorry it's not very good, it's the first video I ever recorded+uploaded). Hopefully you will see that the account that wins, and the one that gets 3rd are clearly boosting. The advantage that the player who ends up in third gives to the player that wins is significant. Now, not to come off as arrogant but I am a pretty good Draw My Thing player, as I play the game a lot, so if the advantage provided by the alt is significant enough to beat me, it is almost certainly significant enough to beat me. Now, I understand you may watch this and say yes one account helps the other so, but still, it doesn't warrant wiping the stats of the boosted account. Since they aren't high up on the leaderboard yet, I agree. Which means the only solution I see left is a permanent ban, which I doubt RC would agree is appropriate to this case. I'm not necessarily sure as to what the punishment should be to this case, but it certainly deserves a punishment. Almost every game one of these players are in, the other will be there. Perhaps there is a way to only allow one account of the same ip on the network at a time, or maybe that doesn't exist. I would certainly show this video in a report, the only problem as things currently stand is that it would be denied, as the staff do not punish for using an alt to get many wins in draw my thing. I don't blame or hold anything against the staff for this, I simply feel the Rules Committee is allowing a major loophole to stay open.

    Another argument I thought of that doesn't hold merit, it that these two accounts could be two different people(like siblings in the same house). The fact is that these two accounts are always together if one of them is going to finish a game. Also, they never move around at the same time, when one moves the other it standing still. So, my proposition is that the rules are altered on stat boosting so that 1 alt is considered enough of an advantage if evidence that boosting is occurring is present. In Conclusion, I doubt RC will see any potential in this, but it has great potential to stop players from doing this in future. This is not the only example to have ever occurred, where a player uses an alt to boost their number of wins. I know it is easier to punish a player who is boosting beyond a reasonable doubt when they have several confirmed alts(with obvious alt names). But please allow for this new rule to be made, beyond helping draw my thing become a better game, it would show that RC is a subteam isn't just made up of a few people who never change their minds about anything.

    I could get a longer recording if that what you want, but I'm sure you've already made up your mind.
     
    Posted May 6, 2021
    slx, Jinxxxxx, antiRepellent and 2 others like this.
  2. This is a direct quote from Toki addressing this same issue,
    I know that you have evidence that points to some sort of teaming or alting, but RC has determined the evidence is not solid enough to issue a punishment, even with the whole not moving at the same time thing or guessing quickly.
     
    Posted May 6, 2021
  3. So, as Toki said here "...we would not be able to gather evidence that would be sufficient enough to punish for.", I understand there is no way of knowing if they are in a call or whatever on a third party platform. However, a 3rd party platform is ideal if the users are teaming, which does not matter. As many mods have told me, and I'm sure you can restate it (if you want) teaming is not punishable because evidence can not be gathered. I'm talking about stat boosting with alts, not teaming.

    As far as I understand it, moderators or staff on some level (I'm not really sure what roles have these privileges) can check IPs. That is something staff can control, and as far as I'm concerned (and you should be too), that is a valid way to gather evidence. Of course I would only ask for moderators(or whoever does it) to check IPs in a report. Seeing that this is not a rule(although it should be), I have no reason to make a report and ask for an IP check, to see if the two accounts IPs are the same. I just hope someone on the Rules Committee watches that video and says "yep, thats all alright, it's exactly how the game should be played", and then thinks to themselves they made the right choice by doing nothing about these players.

    Despite the fact that you seem to be already stating RC has decided to not go ahead with rule changes, I look forward to someone on the team (whether is Arjun, Toki, or whoever), responding and telling me why doing IP checks for reported players for boosting stats can't lead staff to "... the conclusion that we would not be able to gather evidence that would be sufficient enough to punish for." If the IPs are the same, it obvious what is going on. Doing nothing about it would worse than actually breaking a rule.
     
    OP OP
    OP OP Posted May 6, 2021
    thiccnicky and Midoriya like this.
  4. If the IPs are the same, it's still not obvious what's going on. It could be siblings that are sharing the words out loud while playing together in the same room. Just because both accounts aren't moving at the same time isn't enough evidence. While teaming is unfair, it doesn't make sense to punish someone for teaming with their sibling in or friend in the same room, especially if one sibling is significantly younger and just trying to play some fun online pictionary. I understand that you believe that is not what is going on with these specific players, and I believe you, it's likely that they are using an alternate account. But we simply can't prove that's exactly what's going on.
     
    Posted May 6, 2021
  5. I suppose this is the part where I admit defeat, the rules will not change. However that still leaves me with two questions.
    1) "...at the same time isn't enough evidence.", so what is enough evidence. Despite the fact that I find it hard to believe, I know at least one account (who will remain nameless), that I seriously think is banned for for boosting for wins in draw my thing, although it being more blatant with multiple accounts. Yet, couldn't all of these accounts that he used have just been his siblings? If so, why even have this rule if it is impossible to prove? In Hypothetical, If Steve52 is impossible to beat and Steve1, Steve2, Steve3, and Steve4, all give Steve52, the word through a 3rd party platform, can he really be punished? (If Steve1-4 are just siblings with the same ip in the same room). Arjun used this example to define stat boosting in dm.
    2) In reference to the specific case that I mentioned relating to players in the video, "...if one sibling is significantly younger and just trying to play some fun online pictionary.", this should seem beyond a reasonable doubt to be false. If one of the accounts was really another player and we check their stats we seen 532 loses and 1 win. Whoever has those stats in a game likely isn't having fun. One sibling would have to be forcing the other to play with them somehow. Now, hypothetically if these were two players I would say the one with 532 loses and only 1 win, is likely not having fun, yet if we think about what will happen in the future, this hypothetical, logically falls apart. I know, (and you should too), that the account will go from 532 loses to 1000 loses, and 1500, and the loses will increase until the other player who is getting a win for all these boosted games, gets bored of DMT and quits. Maybe the alt will even make it the leaderboard for loses by boosting the actual player. No one continues to play a game constantly while losing it. I've lost OITQ about 92 times, and I'm not glad to play it again, because I know I won't win. If I had 532 loses and 1 win in OITQ, that would not encourage me to play it anymore.

    I understand RC won't change the rules for the Siblings Hypothetical, even though it completely implausible, as I have just showed it to be even less likely than you may have previously thought. I guess that shows RC allows for loopholes even when the problem is staring them right in the face. Perhaps before you lock this thread you could answer my question in #1 though. Thanks.
     
    OP OP
    OP OP Posted May 7, 2021
    thiccnicky likes this.
  6. Hey,

    It could simply be a case of two siblings playing from the same IP address, or it could be two friends playing from the same IP address and reading the words aloud to each other. If one player is significantly younger than the other then it is almost understandable that they would want to team in order to have fun and win at the same time. The problem is, you have no evidence whatsoever that it is a player using an alt and therefore I do and don't believe you and I do believe you at the same time because it causes a paradox.

    Ever heard of Schrödinger's cat? It's essentially the same principle. You cannot see the player who is stat boosting, therefore, until you can prove otherwise, they are both using an alt themselves and playing with a friend or sibling.

    Mineplex rules cannot be enforced based off of beliefs or assumptions, it has to be hard, factual evidence. Simply saying "this player is stat boosting" is the equivalent of a "just trust me bro" source on the internet. The issues are, the player could genuinely be playing with a friend or sibling which I believe is NOT a direct violation of any of Mineplex's rules. As well as this, even if they did get banned for stat boosting, they could instantly appeal saying they were playing with a friend or sibling, or they could even just say they were extremely lucky, and with no evidence to prove for or against, there would be no choice but to unban the player.

    How would you ever prove that the player is using an alt? You could hire a private investigator? You could get in touch with their local governance constituency and ask for birth records and family records to prove whether or not they don't have a sibling? Or you could submit some shabby evidence along with a **** and bull story that could easily be dismissed as luck.

    Sorry but the logic seems completely flawed and I have to completely disagree with you on this. I'm not saying it's not frustrating, but what I am saying is, the rules cannot change to a format in which issues could occur regarding unfair bans. The staff team put a lot more effort than you might think into creating rules and successfully running the server, and I think you should have a bit more respect and understanding towards them. Especially calling both Arjun and Hubble as conducting "bad modding" on Discord, they both are amazing and work extremely hard to ensure the server runs like clockwork. Frustration and "unfair" rules occur an awful lot in life, sometimes you have to learn to accept them and move on. The sooner you do this, the sooner you will begin to enjoy your experience on Mineplex.

    Please also try and erase your "I'm never wrong" mentality, it is both extremely infuriating and also extremely immature.

    I don't think any rules need to change here, it seems like a minor and issue-provoking rule change which also leads me to believe that this child is simply a troll looking to antagonise people and cause general confusion and chaos. It's almost hardly worth any time discussing by the Mods on this one, the rules are fine as they are.

    Sorry if this isn't too coherent, it's 02:14am.

    Have a great night!

    Matt
     
    Posted May 8, 2021,
    Last edited by a Moderator May 8, 2021

  7. Innocent until proven guilty.
    I wouldn't know anything about this, as this particular device has youtube kids, also drawing my thing or whatever is only on Java, so I would have no idea.
     
    Posted May 8, 2021
  8. Here
    Maybe you could try saying it in a nicer way? Just an idea
     
    Posted May 8, 2021
  9. Why does it say I said something that I didn’t lol
     
    Posted May 8, 2021
  10. You can retype the stuff in the quote box
    (Dont abuse this)
     
    Posted May 8, 2021
  11. It would be far easier to give an insightful response if you:

    a) Didn't just re-qoute what was already said by Dulciloquy; "It could simply be a case of two siblings playing from the same IP address, or it could be two friends playing from the same IP address and reading the words aloud to each other. ". Restating what has already been said never adds to a discussion, it only shows your support.

    b) Not mock a thread that I made actually seeking a rule change; "How would you ever prove that the player is using an alt? You could hire a private investigator? You could get in touch with their local governance constituency and ask for birth records and family records to prove whether or not they don't have a sibling? Or you could submit some shabby evidence along with a **** and bull story that could easily be dismissed as luck."

    c) Didn't come across with a disrespectful attitude "... it seems like a minor and issue-provoking rule change which also leads me to believe that this child is simply a troll looking to antagonise people and cause general confusion and chaos. It's almost hardly worth any time discussing by the Mods on this one, the rules are fine as they are." This adds nothing to your response and doesn't help further a discussion on the issue I am discussing at hand.

    Not that I ever said anything negative about any moderators on this server, who do a great job, but I never said anything negative about any moderators, so please don't mention it. I didn't seek a necessary rule change for you to try to make me look bad. Hopefully Arjun can answer my questions above before locking this thread.

    Also CatFan105, you're a bedrock player. I don't post on bedrock threads because I don't play on the server. I don't think you play on the java server, so you are unlikely to know the frustration I have faced within the game.
     
    OP OP
    OP OP Posted May 9, 2021
    thiccnicky likes this.
  12. Hey again,

    First off, to clear the air, the hypothetical sibling scenario does not change anything. I highly doubt that RC stated that siblings helping each other in some way is allowed as the matter at hand CAN BE stat boosting. If Steve1, Steve2, Steve3, and Steve4, the siblings of Steve, sacrificed their lives to farm kills for their sibling, that's still boosting and they would be punished accordingly. Same thing in regards to DMT -- if all of these siblings linked to the same IP boosted one specific account by feeding them words, this would be boosting. If you're ever unsure just ask RC to avoid any discrepancies!


    Pretty sure I mentioned this somewhere at some point, but all stat boosting punishments are case by case. We do follow a general criteria, but obviously, there are creative ways to boost stats that can come along frequently, so we're always observing and expanding our mindsets to punish players accordingly. 3-4 alts boosting a single player not only shows that they have a "higher chance" of winning but also shows that half the game of DMT or even more is contributing to the matter. This is clearly boosting. Having one alt can help, and even if we sit here and debate how much of an impact that holds, doesn't solidify a severe form of boosting. Why? There's a good chance the player can still lose the game, or maybe it really is a sibling helping out. If it's one sibling, should we ban them both for something... not so severe? It all depends.

    I might have gone off on a tangent, but this thread had a lot of clutter so apologies if I did not directly comment on something that brought up. My DMs are open, and I would be pleased to provide more insight and discuss!

    to the OP: I will lock this thread as you requested, but please PM me if there's something you want to add. I mentioned this before, but getting more opinions won't be enough to change the rules solely based on a majority opinion. You would need valid points that RC can agree on as a whole in order to make change.
     
    Posted May 9, 2021
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page