Why bother?

[Scabadus]

Talking of the anti-spam bots, has anybody ever seen them give a false positive?
For example, flagging someone who asked for a wrangle once too often as a spammer?
'Cos if not, then FC might want to speak to these bots' owners and see about using the coding to activate not a total ban, but a chat ban. Obviously legit users could have the ban /petitioned away, or it could not ban people over level 11, or something like that.

[Berinda]

Originally Posted by Scabadus Talking of the anti-spam bots, has anybody ever seen them give a false positive?

I've seen it flag people spamming "join my froob org!" and shopping messages too vigorously, though that was early on in the bots - it may have been fixed.

[Ayria]

Originally Posted by Perfekt And to the left, class, we have nocredspam, a very nice bot in it's day. Did wonders to filter out what was credit spam and what wasn't and then it provided us with /ignore links.....until the GD insulted the bot owner that is. To the right, we have all of the other chat bots that filter out commands in whatever channel it's stuck in. That concludes the field trip class. I hope you had a wonderful experience.

Lol. You truly are a moron aren't you. I don't think Means insulted Xyphos, I think Xyphos took offense because Means didn't praise him and give him a pat on the back for his efforts; basically his pride got hurt because he relies on others opinions of himself to feel good.

His bot did a job, but to many people it spammed more then the credit spammers and in the end was more annoying and was the one to be ignored.

And by other chat bots I assume you mean org bots, which look for ! (most often) at the beginning of the command. This allows them to look at a 0,0 pos in the string and check if it's a ! (or whatever prefix you want) and if not then totally ignore it. That means, again, that a simple filter blocks chat before it hits the need to compare to a large DB.

So, Im-Perfekt, care to comment on the NPC quest givers and all the other arguments you're dropping like flies each time I respond?

Just face it, client-side chat filters do not work. Mereditche already posted a simple, and more effective solution then chat filters.

[Hacre]

Originally Posted by Perfekt until the GD insulted the bot owner that is.

You should write propaganda, you're quite excellent at taking things out of context as well as flat out lying.

The conversation between Means and Xyphos had absolutely nothing to do with his bot. It had everything to do with Xyphos making wild accusations that CRU should be NODROP.

Originally Posted by Xyphos "Hi, stay in my team so I can pull mish?" I've lost count how many people have asked this; honestly, stopped counting after the total of 28 different characters have asked. most of who, don't know how to respond anything you reply. sounds innocent, right? WRONG! these thugs (for the lack of a better word) are CRU farmers, who sell their CRU's to people in game for credits, then sell those credits to the credit sellers who then spam our chats, roll countless alts, wreak havoc in many ways upon FunCom's servers, and resell those credits at higher prices then when bought.

Xyphos then went on to propose that:

Originally Posted by Xyphos completly removing CRUs from the game stop CRU's from dropping off of mobs - the only way to get one, is to buy em from the fixer shop. add NODROP flags to this item. personally, I'd go with option #3.

Would solve a big problem with credit sellers. Which was absolutely preposterous. Stop people from farming CRU and they'll go on to farming something else. I eagerly await the thread proposing that Pearls be removed from the game.

Now, the oh so scathing insult from Means, the GD?

Originally Posted by Means I don't really think this has been thought through. I will not be removing CRU missions...especially with instanced cities on the horizon.

He observed (and wasn't alone in the thread with the same assertion) quite rightly, that the effectiveness and ramifications of such a change hadn't been thought through. Xyphos' response to this was to then remove his anti spam bots totally out of service, the effectiveness of which has received mixed review.

The bots didn't stop the spammers and as I understand it at one point, they caused issues with the petition system.

Now, if multi million dollar companies cannot completely obliterate the spam problem, in a text medium that is non real time and can be processed totally in the background, where in high traffic areas whole server farms are dedicated to the cleansing of email, how come all of a sudden it's easy and completely possible to police and sanitise real time text chat?

I suppose you'd also expect to see a total non false positive system in place as well?

When approaching issues such as spam in any environment where no current policing takes place, even with email you can't just wade in and start blocking anything that looks like spam or scores highly as spam. Filters have to be trained, the best filters require a lot of end user interaction, which presents us with a further problem. If our end user interaction is required to help train a new filter, what's stopping asshats from marking someone as a spammer when they're not?

Stop simplifying the issue and making out as if it's an easy fix, or that you have even the remotest idea of how to begin properly fixing the issue. If you're so qualified, then you go ahead and fix the problem, thereby making yourself filthy rich.

[Ayria]

Originally Posted by Hacre I eagerly await the thread proposing that Pearls be removed from the game.

Been there done that.

Originally Posted by Hacre how come all of a sudden it's easy and completely possible to police and sanitise real time text chat?

Because he's a moron who has no clue and just has to go on fanatical flame fests against Funcom and anyone supporting them.

[Lektronik]

Originally Posted by Ayria And by other chat bots I assume you mean org bots, which look for ! (most often) at the beginning of the command. This allows them to look at a 0,0 pos in the string and check if it's a ! (or whatever prefix you want) and if not then totally ignore it. That means, again, that a simple filter blocks chat before it hits the need to compare to a large DB.

It doesn't matter what the bot looks for. The fact that it is "looking and can take action on what it sees" is what means that filtering is possible. And for the record, you don't have to use any symbol before the command on an org bot. The bot can read the first word of all chat in the org and determine if it is a command keyword.

Not only that, but nocredspam didn't even need to see the first word.....it could see spam keywords in all of the chat.

Originally Posted by Ayria So, Im-Perfekt, care to comment on the NPC quest givers and all the other arguments you're dropping like flies each time I respond?

You haven't made a logical comment as to why client-side filtering wouldn't work yet. You keep pointing out lame details that do not refute the possibility of client-side chat filtering and refuse to accept that I am right.

Originally Posted by Ayria Just face it, client-side chat filters do not work.

Yes, I suppose the profanity filter in some games just randomly select words to turn into gibberish.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swear_filter

Originally Posted by Hacre The bots didn't stop the spammers and as I understand it at one point, they caused issues with the petition system.

Nocredspam wasn't designed to stop the spammers. It was designed as a more efficient means of dealing with them. And you understand wrong, FC has stated that the problem with the petition system at that time was due to ghosting and not nocredspam.

Originally Posted by Hacre Now, if multi million dollar companies cannot completely obliterate the spam problem, Stop simplifying the issue and making out as if it's an easy fix, or that you have even the remotest idea of how to begin properly fixing the issue.

You obviously don't read well. I've said that I don't expect 100% spam removal and that I know it won't be easy. But if they had started back when the major spam was around, they'd already have a filter out by now...or some means of fighting it. It's not impossibly hard and it's definitely worth the investment of happy players...and with a little creativity, a more interactive game.

Edited to add:

Originally Posted by Ayria Because he's a moron who has no clue and just has to go on fanatical flame fests against Funcom and anyone supporting them.

I think it's funny that you keep calling me a moron and such, but it doesn't do much for your case. Insulting is the actions of children. Do you really want to be labeled like that?

[Ayria]

Originally Posted by Perfekt It doesn't matter what the bot looks for. The fact that it is "looking and can take action on what it sees" is what means that filtering is possible. And for the record, you don't have to use any symbol before the command on an org bot. The bot can read the first word of all chat in the org and determine if it is a command keyword. Not only that, but nocredspam didn't even need to see the first word.....it could see spam keywords in all of the chat.

*shakes head* You still don't get it. Yes a bot can look for the first word you say; that means then that it is parsing the string into a list using space as the separator, it's not that hard to do. However, again, this is a small check compared to something like checking every word against a database of examples.

And guess what, you know that for nocredspam to see the spam keyword in all of chat; it has to read and check the db against each word as I have been trying to tell you. Ask Vhab or Xyphos they'd probably tell you the same thing. In order to find a key word in a string you have to break it up into each word and check each word until you find one that is in your db marked as spam.

Originally Posted by Perfekt You haven't made a logical comment as to why client-side filtering wouldn't work yet. You keep pointing out lame details that do not refute the possibility of client-side chat filtering and refuse to accept that I am right.

Riiight, so you dropping the arguments such as the old quest NPCs etc are because you were right and not because I disproved you. My logical comments are everywhere, it's called the fact that (while not as good as people like Vhab or Funcom) I know coding and I have been telling you and others over and over and over again that chat filters will not work.

Ignoring facts and saying you win because nobody posted anything factual isn't going to get you anywhere.

Originally Posted by Perfekt Yes, I suppose the profanity filter in some games just randomly select words to turn into gibberish. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swear_filter

No they don't select random words, they search through each sentence ever spoken word by word before it's even sent out to other players, hence it is server side. It's no surprise that Blizzard has the servers that can handle the load; they have a few more subscribers then Funcom does. Are you offering to pay more per month so that Funcom can upgrade and implement the same filters that WoW has?

Originally Posted by Perfekt I think it's funny that you keep calling me a moron and such, but it doesn't do much for your case. Insulting is the actions of children. Do you really want to be labeled like that?

I keep calling you a moron because every time you post you give me new reason to.

[Lektronik]

Originally Posted by Ayria I know coding and I have been telling you and others over and over and over again that chat filters will not work.

Ok, so it's late here but I decided to google some on this matter. I chose WoW because I knew it had a profanity filter already (which I believe to be client-side but I have no proof at the moment).

It turns out that a few people in the community have released client-side chat filter addons for the game.

(EDIT) WARNING: PLEASE VISIT THE BELOW LINKS AT YOUR OWN RISK. [They were clean when I went there though.]

http://www.wowinterface.com/download...pam2.html#info

http://wow.curse.com/downloads/wow-a...am-me-not.aspx

http://worldofwarcraft.filefront.com...Reporter;98611


But yeah....chat filters will not work. /sarcasm-off

[Ayria]

You do realize that WoW client != AO client. If Blizzard designed their client, originally, to contain such a filter and made sure it worked with the filter then ya, they'll have a filter.

Retrofitting AOs client to have a chat filter, when there are other simpler and effective solutions is a massive waste of time. It would take a lot of work to re-write the client so that it can draw on your PC more to run a filter.

To my thinking, in it's current state, the AO client wouldn't be able to handle a filter. The existence of them in WoW etc doesn't mean AO can. I'm talking about AO, what game are you playing?

[Lektronik]

Originally Posted by Ayria You do realize that WoW client != AO client. If Blizzard designed their client, originally, to contain such a filter and made sure it worked with the filter then ya, they'll have a filter. Retrofitting AOs client to have a chat filter, when there are other simpler and effective solutions is a massive waste of time. It would take a lot of work to re-write the client so that it can draw on your PC more to run a filter. To my thinking, in it's current state, the AO client wouldn't be able to handle a filter. The existence of them in WoW etc doesn't mean AO can. I'm talking about AO, what game are you playing?

So now you go from "chat filters will not work" to "retrofitting ao's client is a waste of time".

As stated before, AO already has a variation of chat filters implemented. Players have used bots with full chat filters. The chat system just needs some modifications and *maybe* a module addition(s). I'm fairly confident that it wouldn't require more effort than the instanced cities they are working on....or the social tab that is implemented.

The only thing probably holding it back is that chat filters aren't a shiny new toy to play with in-game lol.

[Technogen]

No, AO has CHID filters, that's all.

[lazarus]

Originally Posted by Perfekt Players have used bots with full chat filters.

eh what?... bots are not filtering ****.

at least not for other players.

[Lektronik]

Originally Posted by Technogen No, AO has CHID filters, that's all.

Nope.

Originally Posted by lazarus eh what?... bots are not filtering ****. at least not for other players.

Nocredspam filtered. It might not block out chat but it's filtering nonetheless.

[Scabadus]

Well it's been a few days now and oh look, no spam on Shopping Channels. Because they were locked. Does this constitute a succsessfull test? Is this enough to prove that locking channels works? I hope so, because that will mean that FC will lock the OOC channels and stop the TORRENTS of spam now coming through them.

[Technogen]

Originally Posted by Perfekt Nope.

As someone who's seem some of the code, YEP.

Originally Posted by Perfekt Nocredspam filtered. It might not block out chat but it's filtering nonetheless.

The filter was not in real time, and I don't think you want your chat delayed any. Though, knowing you, you would love for it to be so you can bitch about something else about this game.

[lazarus]

Originally Posted by Perfekt Nocredspam filtered. It might not block out chat but it's filtering nonetheless.

if it dont block chat, it dont filter anything.

[biohazardep]

To end this silly argument about needing a 1.21 Petaflops computer to filter chat;

I run 3 bots, they are neutral, one placed in borealis, one in old athen, and one in rome. They can listen to all shop channels (had to level them to 11 :S) and they match (at this time) about 300 different regular expressions to each and every message they see in all the shopping channels in the 3 main cities.

This is so I can have a bot-maintained wtb list and the bots send me a tell in real time whenever someone mentions something I want in a shopping channel.

One of them (the one in borealis) is the same bot I use as org bot, and there's no delay in the response to the commands we send it.

They run on an old athlon 64 machine, and they combined barely use 2% of the cpu. This machine I play ao in with no slowdown due to the bots.

It took me no more than a day to write these bots and a couple of days more to tweak little stuff. They've been running nonstop since November 2007. I even have logs of everything said in the monitored shopping channels since that day. The logs are 373mb (27mb compressed).

They're written in PHP, which is a very slow programming language because it's interpreted not precompiled. FC's code would be obviously precompiled so it would be orders of magnitude faster.

So server-side and client-side keyword filtering would be easily doable. It may even reduce lag if done server-side, because FC wouldn't have to use bandwidth to send the spam messages to every player seeing those channels.

[Ayria]

Originally Posted by biohazardep 3rd party bot stuff

*sighs* Again, that's all well and good, I know bots can monitor chat. However they cannot alter chat nor are they part of the client, both of which are required if we are to eliminate credit spam via a filter.

I can run as many bots as I want to, that doesn't change the fact that the client may not be able to run the game (ie the graphics engine etc) along side a bot without crashing. Please, stop comparing 3rd party programs that run independent of the client with an integrated chat altering filter that would run from inside, not outside like bots, the client.

[biohazardep]

And why would it crash? Do you have any concrete reason to think that or are you just guessing?

[Ayria]

Originally Posted by biohazardep And why would it crash? Do you have any concrete reason to think that or are you just guessing?

I have no concrete proof, just knowledge of coding and the fact that the client is old. It crashes, constantly, from what it has to do now; what makes you think the resource heavy task of parsing strings, checking them word for word against a indeterminable quantity of examples every time someone speaks would not alter it's performance?

At the very least you would have a noticeable increase in lag, chances are it would overload the already old, derelict and frankly; cobbled together POS, that is the current client. Perhaps when they release the new engine (should I say if..) they may release a new client with it too, perhaps then it can be more modern and draw resources properly and allocate memory use properly and be able to handle such things as a chat filter.

As of right now, as of this client; I do not believe it can handle the load. And I say this not on hard facts because you and I both know I don't have them. I say this with my knowledge of just how resource heavy the task is and how old the client is. (It has more memory leeks then a sieve)