Gil stolen through market board

[Vahlnir]

My point is broadly that both manual or using a tool to do so are a circumvention of the system

Gonna have to stop you there. Manually clicking is not the same as using a tool, and one is not "circumventing" the system, that being manually clicking. Circumventing the system is using a tool that's against the ToS, and that is not okay regardless of one's point of view.

[TurtlesAWD]

Do you believe the intent of the housing system is to require players to click for upwards of 12 hours in a row in order to be able to buy a house?

[Doozer]

Do you believe the intent of the housing system is to require players to click for upwards of 12 hours in a row in order to be able to buy a house?

Do you think whatever the intent was, people should be allowed to break the ToS because the system may be flawed?

[TurtlesAWD]

Do you think whatever the intent was, people should be allowed to break the ToS because the system may be flawed?

As a separate consideration from housing, if the ToS disallows the use of software which can provide disability accessibility, I am inclined to think that yes, the ToS should in that case be ignored - and the type of software that allows a player to click automatically may be the kind of tool that allows some players, or potential players, the capability to click at all. I'm not sure you could have a tool that is the latter without also being the former. As a consideration for housing, software can be used situationally to bypass some game systems but I'm deeply suspicious that this is different in a relevant, specific capacity than say, taping a button down (itself a form of absentee game automation) or using a wireless mouse from the other side of my house while I watch TV and am not even at the computer. For what reason should a software based method of input be considered under different rules than a hardware based one, if either is used to circumvent a specific system?

I've yet to see a justification for why the use of non-invasive software to circumvent the intended system is different than a physical or manual method of circumventing the intented system - I assume by not answering the question of whether it's intended that players click a house for 12 hours that we are in agreement that it isn't intended, and therefore by doing so a player is circumventing the intended method of house attainment, whatever method they choose to do so.

[Packetdancer]

Do you believe the intent of the housing system is to require players to click for upwards of 12 hours in a row in order to be able to buy a house?

I think the intent of the housing system was to avoid people reselling houses by having large sums of money exchange hands, then abandoning their plot at a set time while the purchaser sat outside to immediately click on the placard.

I think the effect is to require players to click for anywhere between 45 minutes and 12 hours in order to be able to buy a house.

I think the system is horribly broken as a result, as I said, so I'm not going to hold people being tempted to cheat against them. I'm not going to call for them to be strung up or pilloried in the metaphorical village square, even if I think it's a Bad Idea. (But sitting there clicking on a placard for 14 hours isn't a great idea either, I grant.)

But if the cheaty methods lead to having your gil drained, I'm also not going to have a lot of sympathy; saying "it should be okay for me to break the rules when it benefits me, but this person whose rule-breaking harmed me should be punished and the damage undone" feels a little hypocritical. (Especially since dropping a retainer at the front of your house with expensive junk listed for sale is, so far as I know, not against any particular clause of the ToS, even if it is demonstrably exploiting the way the system works for personal gain.)

[TurtlesAWD]

But if the cheaty methods lead to having your gil drained, I'm also not going to have a lot of sympathy; saying "it should be okay for me to break the rules when it benefits me, but this person whose rule-breaking harmed me should be punished and the damage undone" feels a little hypocritical. (Especially since dropping a retainer at the front of your house with expensive junk listed for sale is, so far as I know, not against any particular clause of the ToS, even if it is demonstrably exploiting the way the system works for personal gain.)

Yeah I'm inclined to say both feel like more or less different manifestations of the same thing to me - "gamifying/manipulating the UI in ways for personal benefit to the potential detriment of other players" or something along those lines. I compared the retainer trick to housing pvp earlier in the thread and I basically stand by that - of the kinds of game systems housing is supposed to open for players it doesn't feel like teleporting owned plots around to catch people in a misclick was on the list, y'know. I don't think a healthy housing system would have people doing either.

[Packetdancer]

Yeah I'm inclined to say both feel like more or less different manifestations of the same thing to me - "gamifying/manipulating the UI in ways for personal benefit to the potential detriment of other players" or something along those lines.

My gatherer jobs are at a point gear-and-stats-wise where I can consistently do exactly the same actions and get 1000 quality on collectibles. If I made a macro on my gaming keyboard that did those actions in the appropriate order, then just hit the key when I went to a node, I don't see that as being wrong, nor do I imagine anyone else would. I'm still there, I'm still walking up to the node, I'm still doing the things; I'm just dragging those actions onto a hotbar and making a macro to do them so I only need to press one key at each node.

If, however, I wrote a program that would go to the node, do those actions in the appropriate order, stop, walk to the next node, do those actions in the appropriate order, stop, go to the next node after that one, do those actions in the appropriate order... that would be considerably less okay, since I could then just walk away and binge a show on Netflix or whatever while WALL-E merrily wandered around on my account grabbing botanist materials. ("Plant!")

And with the houses, if someone were sitting there hitting a macro that did the four steps for the placard over and over, I don't think anyone would take it amiss; as noted, that's little different than an accessibility tool. If someone made a wireless remote that let them click to perform that macro from in another room while watching Netflix (as you hypothesize), and had the PC's screen streaming to their phone so they could glance over and keep an eye on it, I don't think anyone would object to that, either.

But if they write a program so they can just walk away and ignore the computer for 14 hours, that's different. When you write a program that sits there and plays the game for you, wholly unattended, while you go off and do other things, that is not accessibility.

That is botting.

And if you say they're fundamentally the same thing... I'm sorry, but I have to disagree.

And yeah, the housing system is in a state where people are going to be tempted to resort to that, because it's broken as heck. And people who want houses and don't choose to do that are also going to be understandability bitter about it, because bots do have something of an unfair advantage inasmuch as they never need to step away for a restroom break or sleep.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[ItMe]

Yeah I'm inclined to say both feel like more or less different manifestations of the same thing to me - "gamifying/manipulating the UI in ways for personal benefit to the potential detriment of other players" or something along those lines.

The difference being that UI tricks are just players using the in-game tools. Anyone can do this. SQEX has no problem with it.

Using a bot is not something provided by the game. It's not even something everyone has access to (rip PlayStation players). Also it's explicitly against the ToS too, so you have to risk your account if you want to have any chance against a bot.

[MrMagic]

As a consideration for housing, software can be used situationally to bypass some game systems but I'm deeply suspicious that this is different in a relevant, specific capacity than say, taping a button down (itself a form of absentee game automation) or using a wireless mouse from the other side of my house while I watch TV and am not even at the computer. For what reason should a software based method of input be considered under different rules than a hardware based one, if either is used to circumvent a specific system?

Super convenient how none of your examples allow you to just straight up leave the house or go to sleep. Also there are not just the 2 ways to get a house, bot or click for 12 hours. I mean, this keeps being said and you keep glossing over it so I think I’ll leave you to your “difference of opinion”.

[Themarvin]

Date & Time: 2/9/2021
Frequency: 7 times
World name: Jenova
Character name: Chotan Kaen
Retainer name: N/A
NPC name: N/A
Monster name:N/A
Class/Level: 57
Party or solo: Solo
In-game time: 10:25-10:26 am
Area and coordinates: Unsure, sometime between walking from Plot 9 goblet to plot 12 mists
Housing: None

Steps:
1. Left plot 9 in the goblet via teleporting to Limsa Misa
2. Used crystal to check for open slots in mists
3. Teleported to ward 15
4. Walked to plot 12
5. Noticed gil was gone
6. Panicked
7. Researched how it could happen
8. Noticed fish I didn't remember
9. Checked market history



Connection Specs
- Type of internet connection/provider: Centruylink DSL

Then you should not use botting tools they are rigged and got back doors... like here you just bought fish... hope you are a Miqo at least... cat got hungry?