Why was my account closed? (Continued)

#0 - May 22, 2008, 2:26 a.m.
Blizzard Post
Original thread: http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=6440902058&sid=1

In effort to keep "Blue" responses accessible, this thread will replace the one provided above. Please feel free to continue your discussion(s) herein. :)

Thanks!
#60 - May 22, 2008, 8:16 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
Quick!

Someone tell Orylia that the other (now locked) thread has been abandoned due to forum bug! She's still linking the old one (I was going to tell her, but the post I noted it in is now locked)

edit: Sri, I think we'll see a pickup, 16:30 here, got the evening of Oceanics signing on to get through, first ;)


Eeep - just noticed that Nack - thanks. Haven't had my morning coffee yet *grumble*.

Course - my morning starts at midnight here : )
#75 - May 22, 2008, 3:02 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Then pursue this matter admirably through Account Administration, Fonte. And, in the meanwhile, become more aware of what, precisely, is active on your operating system.
#79 - May 22, 2008, 3:07 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
banned for something i did not do......sent in email to wowAA......
...*several days go by*.....sooo coollddd..


It's been two days. Two. I realize this is absolutely frustrating, but please try to maintain a bit of perspective.


Given that thousands of folk—even the genuinely guilty—are disputing account closures via email, and given that our representatives within Account Administration intend to review each case thoroughly, it's likely going to be a week, if not two, before everyone hears back. We're not snubbing anyone or giving them the cold shoulder, there's just a lot of work to be done at this juncture.
#89 - May 22, 2008, 3:23 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
How come this long? i mean i understand how you are busy but it is usually 24-48 hours normally before you get a reply.


The loose definition of a "turn-around time" is an equilibrium, that between incoming query and corresponding response. As the scales are presently tipped in favor of such incoming queries, it's going to require more time for us to "balance" the flow and respond equally to everyone.
#93 - May 22, 2008, 3:26 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
It says before ANYONE hears back. So even if you sent in an email first you might not hear back for 2 weeks even though your email was the first that AA recieved?


Negative. The word I used was "everyone." Big difference. :)

Regardless, I speak in means and averages, not the experience of the individual.
#95 - May 22, 2008, 3:28 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Not a problem, Fonte. Our brains do tend to play tricks on us. :)
#108 - May 22, 2008, 5:23 p.m.
Blizzard Post
It can come at any time, Fonte.
#117 - May 22, 2008, 6:37 p.m.
Blizzard Post
There's a couple:



Edit: I misinterpreted your question. Giresse covered you. :)
#120 - May 22, 2008, 6:40 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Have him start with one of the trials I listed above. He can upgrade through Account Management.
#126 - May 22, 2008, 6:59 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
How can he just purchase another key? Are you saying he can buy another Auth key w/o having to buy another box? Where on the WoW site can he buy another auth key?


Point your friend here: https://signup.worldofwarcraft.com/trial/10dayfreetrial.htm

After he sets up that trial, refer him to Account Management: http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/account

From there, he will able to upgrade the trial to our Classic, full client and continue to play.


Should he wish to upgrade to The Burning Crusade after upgrading to our Classic client, he may do so here: http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/account/burning-crusade-direct-online-upgrade.html
#129 - May 22, 2008, 7:10 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Did he create a trial account already?
#135 - May 22, 2008, 9:10 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
I think that Blizzard should not ban people by just having bot software on their computer. I also have a question How do they KNOW it's bot software? It could be anything. In my opinion this is not fair. On the other hand if they have seen it working in-game and know that they use it they should be permenatly banned. If they had this proof that they used it INGAME and it's not just on their computer there would be a lot more people still enjoying the game.


That is certainly your opinion and you're entitled to it. There's quite a bit of understanding and knowledge, however, that cannot be gleaned simply through public perception and discourse. We trust our methods; you do not have to.

Should anyone believe their account penalized erroneously, they are welcome dispute the closure via Account Administration.
#208 - May 23, 2008, 11:47 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Where, precisely, was the "Huge FUBAR"? That we closed accounts for using automation software or that, should accounts be actioned incorrectly, we'll rectify the error?
#212 - May 24, 2008, midnight
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
Naa, that's just an excuse.


No. That's simply, truly how it works.

I'm sure that as soon as these closures became public, the authors and creators of the programs involved immediately began to revise their software; they began to search for what possibly "slipped through," working to prevent any such event from happening in the future. Should we permit or divulge any unnecessary information, it will be used against us to achieve this goal.

That's unacceptable. We won't be aiding this endeavor.
#216 - May 24, 2008, 1:09 a.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
So if you where hacked and subsequently banned because of activity that took place on that hacked account the 'official' response is TOO BAD! Gotta love that kind of customer service lol


No. Not at all.

Our response is "let us know." You are responsible for your account, yes, and, following, will be penalized should any exploitative activity be found while its active. But usually not for long if compromise is to blame.

Point being: We cannot know that an account is compromised unless we're notified; otherwise, it just appears as though unscrupulous actions occurred at the behest of its owner. We're happy to work with a holder should the infractions not be of their doing (given, of course, that we can prove that unauthorized access was to blame). There's many testimonies herein that advocate this fact.

You're misinformed, Jazzit. Sorry.
#221 - May 24, 2008, 1:49 a.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
Actually his little brother was banned for using a keyboard that enables him to use macros that blizzard doesn't make money off of. Blizz advertises the Zboard which it makes money off of yet has the same macro capability that the G15 has. Why is one allowed and the other not if they are both capable of the same macros, etc.


No. You're wrong. Also, a bit absurd.


Q u o t e:
Sharing an account between spouses may technically be against the ToS but keep in mind that Blizz is in California and subject to California laws and Cali has community property laws. What one spouse owns so does the other, 50/50, etc. So legally they can probably share that account, etc.


No. This is false.



Stop spreading misinformation. It's very unbecoming and hurtful to the point of this thread.
#227 - May 24, 2008, 2:13 a.m.
Blizzard Post
Both keyboards are permitted—aye, even G15s. It's just a matter what you choose to do with the capabilities of either, not which can glean more profit.

Here's a bit of good reading:





The Terms of Use apply to in-game activities. It is a legal document into which the account holder must enter. It dictates in-game play and expectations, delineating what is and what is not considered acceptable within the world itself. Regardless, Blizzard Entertainment owns all provided accounts and thus may dictate who specifically can access their property.

Also a good point: When people say "legality" within World of Warcraft, the word or term is usually referencing how a particular activity relates to policy and not necessarily common law. :)
#258 - May 28, 2008, 8:44 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
I wanted to bring this topic up again because I heard some people mention "false positives" which is a very real issue concerning tests, whether it be from Warden, or even things like cancer.

To start off, lets use the total probability rule

It states that

P(A|B) = P(B|A)*P(A) / P(B|A)*P(A) + P(B|A')*P(A')

where

P(A) = Probability that a person is not a botter

P(B) = Probability that a person is identified as a botter by blizzards software.

P(A|B) = Probability that a person is not actually a botter, given that they were identified as a botter.

P(B|A) = Probability that a person is Identified as a botter, given that they don't use bots.

P(A') = Probability that the person is not-not a botter, or more simply, the person is a botter.

Lets give some generous numbers here and say that Warden has a 99% accuracy rate (Almost no test has that high of a accuracy rate)

Lets also say that 1,000,000 of users actually use bots. (that's ~1/10th of blizz's customer base...surely not actually this high).

Now for filling in the blanks...

P(A|B) = (.01*.90) / ((.01*.90) + (.99*.10)

P(A|B) = .009 / (.009 + .099)

P(A|B) = .009 / .108

P(A|B) = .0833 = 8.33%

That means that based on these numbers, 8.33% of the people who were banned, were banned falsely.
Given that reportedly 350,000 accounts were banned, that would mean that roughly 29,000 of them were banned incorrectly. That's a pretty staggering number.



Not even remotely close. "Not even remotely" doesn't even begin to describe how far off that number is.

Don't make up statistics. Especially on hot-button issues.
#272 - June 4, 2008, 1:40 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
I have a question about a friend’s account that recently (this Monday) was closed. The first e-mail he got said something about exploiting the economy and that he had a 72 hour ban. Now he gets an e-mail saying he used third party software and that the account is closed. All this after he talked to a CS rep and was told that they think the account was hacked. This friend has played the game since release and has never shared his account or used any said programs.

I guess I was just wondering why the e-mail would conflict in such a manner from one to the next. The first was saying a 72 hour ban and it was for exploiting the economy and then he’s told he’s banned totally for using third party software. Needless to say he’s pretty upset. He has put a ton of work into his toon and it has all been done in a legit manner.


Those are both excellent indicators he's been compromised Persona - and continues to be if he got mail AFTER talking to a GM.

He needs to review both of the stickies at the top of this forum.

Security

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=1778038509&sid=1

Compromise Info Center

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=3773308319&sid=1

He also needs to go over his system with a finetooth comb and make sure it's secure - and I highly recommend changing his email password after he knows it is.

First step is contact Account Administration and getting them to review this - after he knows he no longer has a security breach.

Best of luck.
#279 - July 2, 2008, 11:21 a.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
Orlyia,

When you did that massive sweep and banned all those accounts can you be 100% sure that all those Accounts Banned were Guilty?


What folks often refer to as 'false positives' are exceedingly rare Bruddawulf. That's why our Account Administration is always open to review any cases where the player would like to contest an action.

Usually one of two things has occurred. Player really HAS done something, and has hidden it very well from friends, guildies and simply refuses to fess up - but Account Administration has evidence to the contrary.

Or option B) Player has been compromised and doesn't even realize it, or shared with someone else that isn't as scrupulous about following the rules. Option B is actually far more common than one might think. The activity that produced the action is VERY legitimate - but it may not have been done by the true owner of the account . It's incredibly important not to share your account with ANYONE. Every player is ultimately responsible for the security of their own account - and sadly, sometimes reaps the consequences of another's actions.

It's in everyone's best interests to be very careful what criteria are applied when actions like this are taken. I'll never say never - but we are extremely careful. That's where the human touch comes in and all it takes is a review request to have an individual case looked at. That's what the last paragraph of that email refers to - contacting Account Administration to have a review done.

Players also tend to presume that actions like this are from recent activity. That may not necessarily always be the case. Let me also assure you - 'mods' do not trigger this.

While we may not have a phone number to contact Account Administration - players can always 'talk' to them through emails. The nature of their work is very indepth - and time intensive. It may take quite awhile to do research on an issue, far longer than is normally reasonable to expect our customers to remain on hold. If you'd like to see this considered, the Suggestion Forums would be the place to post so our policy makers could review your request.

I hope this answered some of your questions. I know this can be frustrating.
#281 - Aug. 17, 2008, 12:44 a.m.
Blizzard Post
You have my apologies for any confusion, Thizer, but this thread was related to a specific event that occurred when the thread was made.

You'll want to contact our Account Administration department at [email protected] if you wish to dispute any actions that were taken against your account. Please be aware that sharing your account with your friend would be considered a violation of our policies.

Please feel free to create a new thread.