Discussion: How Can We Handle Botting Better?

[Vidu]

Notifying you with more than a generic message of "Thank you, we'll look into it" simply wont be possible for pirvacy reasons - not even if they dont notify you against who they're taking action (because if you've only reported one person, you'll know anyways).

Its not that I dont get the frustration, but I cant really see how they could inform people about what happend to their reports without violating the privacy of those who you reported. And you might say that they dont need to protect the privacy of someone whos breaking the rules, but I suppose we all know that thats a slippery legal issue and data they just cant disclose.

So, I really dont see what else is there to do than reporting and trusting them to look into it and take appropriate steps - I know its hard to do that when you see bots running around that you reported over and over again. But would it really be easier if they messaged you to tell you that they investigated, didnt had enough evidence and dropped the case?
I just dont know... either you trust them, that they're doing their job even without giving you a full report - or you dont. But if you dont trust them, because you're still seeing bots running around, I'm not sure if that would get any better if they'd straight out told you "Yep, we didnt ban that person".

[Jijifli]

Notifying you with more than a generic message of "Thank you, we'll look into it" simply wont be possible for pirvacy reasons - not even if they dont notify you against who they're taking action (because if you've only reported one person, you'll know anyways).

Its not that I dont get the frustration, but I cant really see how they could inform people about what happend to their reports without violating the privacy of those who you reported. And you might say that they dont need to protect the privacy of someone whos breaking the rules, but I suppose we all know that thats a slippery legal issue and data they just cant disclose.

Other games send you some form of alert when action is taken. League of Legends outright tells you if your report actually got the person in trouble (without saying names still) and that gave players, including myself, more reason to actually report the players in there.

Sure in that case it's toxicity as well as botting in this case, and botting on a MOBA is more rare, but it's still an example of this system promoting people's wish to actually help. Before that system, plenty of players, including myself, believed unless someone was sending death threats with somehow having the target's street adress attached to it, nothing would happen.

[Vidu]

Other games send you some form of alert when action is taken. League of Legends outright tells you if your report actually got the person in trouble (without saying names still) and that gave players, including myself, more reason to actually report the players in there.

Sure in that case it's toxicity as well as botting in this case, and botting on a MOBA is more rare, but it's still an example of this system promoting people's wish to actually help. Before that system, plenty of players, including myself, believed unless someone was sending death threats with somehow having the target's street adress attached to it, nothing would happen.

The only thing that I could see happening is them alerting you that they've closed the case and taken appropriate steps once they've done so - with leaving open what "appropriate steps" means. And if only to alert you that you can report that person again, should you spot something fishy without spamming them with reports while they're working on their investigation.

I dont want to be rude and I know that its probably human nature, but this idea of wanting to get someone in trouble and even more so wanting to know about it, doesnt sit right with me and reminds me more of some sort of "voyeurism" and not the legit will to make the game a better place by reporting people who are breaking the rules - to do that, you dont need to know what happens.
Yes, you do need to have trust in them taking appropriate action, but there has to be a way to build that trust without violating privacy - again: If you're only reporting a handful of people or maybe even just one person, you can pretty much tell who the person was they've been taken action against, despite them not giving you the name.

I agree that they should do more to communicate about actions being taken and rules being actually enforced, but sending the reporter an alert isnt the right way to go about this in my opinion.
I think if anything we should ask for a stricter enforcment of rules, not about them telling us all about their investigation.