Kediaq and Sazia/Oravia are idiots

[StrayRogue]

OK, so 'Dredrin IM's me saying how some tool keeps checking his other characters magical status. This was Oravia using Magic Ora. So he tries to tell her to just use Magic and stop bothering him. She persists and then spams him with magical requests and locates. She then threatens to come kill him unless he shuts up.

I'm on as a character who I'm migrating and training for a friend. So I spam them for a laugh.

So here comes Kediaq and Sazia to my table:

>Sazia says, "Hello there."
You give your eyebrow a little workout.

Sazia says, "I would appreciate if you left my friend Oravia alone."
You ask, "Who?"
Sazia says, "Or you will be bound to pay the consequences."
You give your eyebrow a little workout.
Sazia says, "You were checking on her magic skills repeatedly."
You say, "Er I cannot. I'm not a mage."
Sazia says, "Using the psinet."
You roll your eyes.
Sazia asks, "Can you explain yourself?"
You ask, "You're stupid. YOu realize psinet is ooc?"
You say, "It isn't part of the game."
Sazia asks, "The game?"
Sazia asks, "What game?"
Kediaq asks, "Yeah, but the messaging is disturbing?"
Sazia says, "(that is ooc)"
You say, "You are being ooc by talking about an ooc client."
You say, "Just like threatening to kill Oran."
Kediaq says, "Don't be foolish."
You say, "It is."
You say, "And you're bringing it in game."
Sazia says, "You will pay IG, however."
Kediaq peers quizzically at you.
You say, "Go ahead, and I'll report."
You say, "I've never met either of you."
>'So attack me and you'll get banned.You say, "So attack me and you'll get banned."
Sazia nods to you.
Kediaq says, "Well, foolish little one..."
Kediaq says, "Keep your matters to yourself.."
You say, "Atleast I can understand the difference between OOC and IC."
You roll your eyes.
Sazia says, "Oravia was threatened IG."
Sazia says, "And harassed."
Speaking to you, Kediaq says, "Using the client to disturb a player is a problem."
You say, "Psinet chat isn't IG."
You say, "Its an OOC issue that should be solved OOC."
You say, "She didn't get harassed. She kept checking my friends magic."
You say, "He asked her to stop."
You say, "And she didn't."
Speaking to you, Kediaq says, "After he insulted her repeatedly."
Sazia says, "It was accidental.
You say, "She seems to lack the intelligence of typing magic, and not magic ora."
Sazia traces a sign while beseeching the spirits for empowerment...
>Sazia gestures at you.
CS: +159 - TD: +63 + CvA: +25 + d100: +29 - -5 == +155
Warding failed!
An unseen force envelopes you, restricting all movement.

Sazia tried to hold your hand, but your group status is closed. Type "GROUP OPEN" to let her hold your hand."

You say, "Ha, pathetic."
Sazia traces a sign while beseeching the spirits for empowerment...

Sazia gestures at you.
CS: +159 - TD: +63 + CvA: +25 + d100: +15 - -5 == +141
Warding failed!
A pall of silence settles over you.
Kediaq says, "You have some nerve, talking as you do."

Sazia traces a sign while beseeching the spirits for empowerment...
>Sazia gestures at you.
CS: +159 - TD: +63 + CvA: +25 + d100: +53 - -5 == +179
Warding failed!
An unseen force envelopes you, restricting all movement.

>Sazia chants a reverent litany and clasps her hands while tightly focusing her thoughts...

Sazia says, "Now keep your mouth shut, and your business to yourself."
Lady Sazia's group just went out.


Ok, so they've decided to take OOG IG. So I keep it IG and think to one of my mage friends. Who happens to be pretty old. So I tell her the story and she goes and finds them. Suffice to say she told them not to bother me again.

You transmit your thought to Kediaq: "Be thankful I didn't have you killed"

You hear the faint thoughts of [Private]-Kediaq echo in your mind:
"I care?"

You focus on transmitting your thought.
You transmit your thought to Kediaq: "I don't think so. Most you idiots who can't distinquish between OOC and IC don't care. But then, you people are dumb."

You hear the faint thoughts of [Private]-Kediaq echo in your mind:
"Eight years of playing, I think I know the difference, this Psinet is the worst thing ever to happen to the game"

You transmit your thought to Kediaq: "Then why are you using it? Why are you taking OOG matters IG? Its idiots like you who give it a bad rep."

Yes, both idiots.

[Trinitis]

This is the log I got of Her showing him how to really make it so no one can do anything. Heh!

You are visible again.
You gesture at Kediaq.
CS: +412 - TD: +190 + CvA: +12 + d100: +54 - -5 == +293
Warding failed!
Kediaq's eyes roll up into his head as he slumps to the ground.
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.

[Edaarin]

PSInet is the worse thing to happen to the game? I'm not a big proponent of it, but if you have a problem with it UNINSTALL THE FUCKING THING.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I'm not sure how you spamming them is any different than them spamming your friend, other than you did it on purpose.

Granted, they are tools, but like you said, doesn't matter what you really do with them, they are still tools. Best to just ignore or wait for opportunity to report them.

Continued "conflicts" like that are ultimately what will get SIMU to take a stance on PSINET -- either through building better tools for the game, or banning Jamus's work.

[Artha]

There's no way they're going to successfully ban it.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Artha
There's no way they're going to successfully ban it.

You sure about that?

Ban the creator of the program from all products and continue to ban anyone else that picks up hosting duties and you successfully ban the program.

They have done it in the past.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

If you say so, I'm not a programmer so couldn't say one way or another. Maybe they just ban Jamus's account and IP, it does after all, say in the TOS something about software right? I don't know, and don't really care, I like PsiNet, just saying SIMU has got to be evaluating it's impact to their product right now.

Like all good things, the few will ruin it for the majority by abusing locates, magic, and shit like that, causing people to report. I'd bet money Simu keeps a tally of reports on PsiNet abuse and at some point will make a decision that it is too much maintenance on their end and take steps to make it obsolete.

[Artha]

You sure about that?

Ban the creator of the program from all products and continue to ban anyone else that picks up hosting duties and you successfully ban the program.

They have done it in the past.

They did that with a program in DR, because apparently it was used to compromise GM accounts and had a DLL that had the same name as a spyware one.

Jamus has said in the past that if he gets banned because of PsiNet, he's releasing it as Open Source, and releasing his scripting engine add on.

[Tsa`ah]

Read the portion after "and".

[Artha]

If you make it open source, you can pretty much eliminate their ability to see who's using it. Take out chat and take out the ability to find people and such and they have no way to see if you're using it.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Artha
If you make it open source, you can pretty much eliminate their ability to see who's using it. Take out chat and take out the ability to find people and such and they have no way to see if you're using it.

Thus it becomes a utility and not a client. There have been more than a few utilities people have used without issue. The biggest noise was made over auto-rollers, but those have become obsolete.

Taking out the interactive portion of the program would negate any complaint, we're talking about banning the program as is.

[Artha]

Perhaps...another option would be to let people set 'Usernames.' If they could do that, then banning someone for appearing to use it would be stupid, because it could just be someone using their name to chat.

[Tsa`ah]

The problem isn't the program, as has been pointed out. It is with specific users, as this thread proves.

If you could set the username to something other than the character name it would not alleviate any of the OOC crap take from psi-net into the game.

Jamus has a great product and released it with the best intent, unfortunately he has no way, nor is Simu going to offer any, to monitor the usage of the program. I'm sure he could come up with something, but would it be worth the massive amount of time?

I'm afraid this is probably going to end badly for Jamus, not because of Jamus, but because of the tards he allows to use his program.

[Scott]

I agree. I think the chat needs to be ditched. It may be as simple as PSInet UNLINK, but it's still a problem. OOC shit on the chat channel is brought into the game.

I can only see PSInet becoming a banned program in the future. SIMU is bound to get sick of the complaints and just make it against policy. If I was Jamus and I wanted to make sure my program was going to continue to be program accepted in Gemstone, I'd ditch the chat because it's going to be the downfall of PSINET.

EDITTED TO ADD: What I mean is, basically keep PSInet's options like PSINET MAGIC, The moveahead, the typo help, etc. but get rid of the interaction between one character with another character.

[Edited on 8-3-2004 by Gemstone101]

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

<Jamus has said in the past that if he gets banned because of PsiNet, he's releasing it as Open Source, and releasing his scripting engine add on.>

Sounds like blackmail to me. Perhaps I'm more vindictive than SIMU but I'd be getting a lawyer and testing that threat out, myself.

[Artha]

I agree. I think the chat needs to be ditched. It may be as simple as PSInet UNLINK, but it's still a problem. OOC shit on the chat channel is brought into the game.

Actually, it's as simple as never typing TUNE OOC.

[Tsa`ah]

Yep, that simple. However you have the idiot factor, you have the griefer factor, and the ever present jackass factor.

While you or I see it as that simple, there exist a greater ratio of people that get their jollies being disruptive. We have several examples on these boards. You then have an equal ratio of people who "don't want to back down".

The jackass factor isn't going to untune ... Why would they?

The people that won't back down aren't going to untune because the jackass wins.

The clueless people don't know how, or don't want to know how. Playing ignorant is easy.

In any scenario the jackass that is getting reported for the OOC crap from psi-net wins. Everyone else gets the shaft.

I think the best possible solution, and it's not all that great when you consider the idiot factor, is consentual contact (gets me hot just thinking about it). Ahem .... You install the program and contact of any sort is by allowed list only. People on your allowed list can chat amongst each other, locate ...etc. Everyone else can't.

The problem is when lists get large and lists cross, then you're right back at square one.

All other problems would be generally due to the idiot factor.

No matter how you do it, with the interactive capability, the problem remains and Simu will eventually give the add-on the axe.

[SanGreal]

There really isn't anything SIMU can do about PsiNet. It doesn't send anything but normal commands to Simu's servers, so they can't really detect its use. They could ban the creator, but that wouldnt do anything but put a stop to new versions at best. They could also do process checks, etc. but that is a constant cat/mouse game and with so many clients it is unreasonable. The only other thing I can think of would be encrytping the server/client communication, but that would involve coding to be done on each of the clients and the total scrapping of the java client (the java client can be decompiled with virtually no effort). I think PsiNet is here to stay whether Simu likes it or not.

[Tsa`ah]

You are absolutely sure about that?

As an interactive client ... I doubt it.

As a utility? Probably.

[SanGreal]

Well how do you suggest they ban it? Its interactivity has nothing to do with SIMU or its servers other than that it is displayed in the wizard.

All the interactivity is from your psinet client->psinet server->other psinet client.

[Bobmuhthol]

I don't remember Jamus's explanation of it, and I'm sure as hell not going to try to figure it out. However, Simutronics does not have any authority over PsiNet whatsoever.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by SanGreal
Well how do you suggest they ban it? Its interactivity has nothing to do with SIMU or its servers other than that it is displayed in the wizard.

All the interactivity is from your psinet client->psinet server->other psinet client.

Simple as this. Ban users.

Player assists, says so-and-so is harassing me via psi-net. GM says, psi-net usage is in violation of our TOS, good-bye."

GM pulls the harasser and says, "Psi-net usage is in violation of our TOS, good-bye."

GM does some detective work, dls the newly hosted Psi-net, Simu monitors usage for a couple of days. Spam Ban.

How many people do you think would use it if after a group banning?

Don't think they would? Another price hike is around the corner and I don't think the last one was enough to shake the crack habit.

Plenty of other interactive games have lists of banned ad-ons and they regularly ban just by picking up the tell-tale signs of usage. What makes you so sure Simu won't do the same thing?

You want to believe that they can't and they won't. I'm telling you they can, they would, and they probably will.


Originally posted by Bobmuhthol
I don't remember Jamus's explanation of it, and I'm sure as hell not going to try to figure it out. However, Simutronics does not have any authority over PsiNet whatsoever.

They have absolute authority over anything that plugs into their medium. Unless you are using a non-Simu product to connect to the game, Simu has a definite say in Psi-net usage with software owned by Simu.

[Artha]

GM pulls the harasser and says, "Psi-net usage is in violation of our TOS, good-bye."

Hypothetical situation...

I'm getting ready to cancel my account.

"Ciston/Tsin/Ardwen/Someonerandom is harrassing me via Psinet."

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Hypothetical situation.

GM logs onto Psinet, takes names, bans all accounts. Contacts lawyer and sues jackass kids who think everything on the net is free for them to fuck with. SIMU is a company, and if you affect their profit margin, I'm SURE something will occur to impact your ability to rapid fire locate someone because you feel like you should be able too.

No one is saying Psinet is a bad thing, but I challenge you to prove to me its not being abused and WILL ultimately be its own downfall because hormone overridden kids can't control themselves.

[SanGreal]

Originally posted by Tsa`ah

Originally posted by SanGreal
Well how do you suggest they ban it? Its interactivity has nothing to do with SIMU or its servers other than that it is displayed in the wizard.

All the interactivity is from your psinet client->psinet server->other psinet client.

Simple as this. Ban users.

Player assists, says so-and-so is harassing me via psi-net. GM says, psi-net usage is in violation of our TOS, good-bye."

GM pulls the harasser and says, "Psi-net usage is in violation of our TOS, good-bye."

GM does some detective work, dls the newly hosted Psi-net, Simu monitors usage for a couple of days. Spam Ban.

How many people do you think would use it if after a group banning?

Don't think they would? Another price hike is around the corner and I don't think the last one was enough to shake the crack habit.

Plenty of other interactive games have lists of banned ad-ons and they regularly ban just by picking up the tell-tale signs of usage. What makes you so sure Simu won't do the same thing?

You want to believe that they can't and they won't. I'm telling you they can, they would, and they probably will.


Originally posted by Bobmuhthol
I don't remember Jamus's explanation of it, and I'm sure as hell not going to try to figure it out. However, Simutronics does not have any authority over PsiNet whatsoever.

They have absolute authority over anything that plugs into their medium. Unless you are using a non-Simu product to connect to the game, Simu has a definite say in Psi-net usage with software owned by Simu.

Not only is it not reasonable (Waste of a GMs time to investigate issues of harrasment involving 3rd party chat programs -- the chat is only connected to gemstone in that it is displayed in the client), it simply is inefficient. All PsiNet has to do is stop displaying your character name, and use a username instead. He can even continue to make it unique to the character, but not identifiable. This wouldn't disrupt the system as the PsiNet server still knows who is who and can still relay locates, magic, etc.

PsiNet does not emit any signs of usage to the gemstone servers. The only commands PsiNet even sends to the servers are the typo fixes and move-ahead queue and spellup. PsiNet is almost entirely client-side, and the few interactive parts, again, deal with PsiNet servers. This is what sets it apart from other, more complex, 3rd party addons to other games.

You are right in that I do believe they cannot do anything reasonable to stop it, and you have yet to produce a conclusively way to do so.

[Tsa`ah]

Psi-net still interacts with Simu software.

I'm not saying it should go, I'm saying it probably will go.

You just seem a bit too sure that Simu can't and won't.

I'll say again, Simu can, would, and will.

I'll also repeat again, other on-line games have banned certain 3rd party clients. Can they prove one is using a client as easily as Simu can prove Psi usage? Nope, but if they suspect it results in a ban.

You can be as adamant in your stance as much as you want to be, history however does not agree with you.

[Artha]

>psinet who
The PsiNet lets you know that there are 156 people currently linked with it.

>who
Active Players: 331


This is the company that doesn't ban people who buy other accounts when they get banned once. I sincerely doubt that they're going to ban a significant portion of their customers simply because of a few trouble makers.

[Tsa`ah]

You assume that every one of those account holders will continue to use the client if Simu took a stance to ban it's use with their product.

I'm sorry Artha, while I agree there are a great number of idiots in game, I don't think the ratio is 50/50 yet.

Change that from 156 to 15-20 at one time... I'm willing to bet you would see a group ban.

[Artha]

The ratio of PsiNet users to normal people isn't usually this high, but there are at least 200 people on most of the time.

[Tsa`ah]

And I am saying that if tomorrow Simu said, "Psi-net usage is no longer acceptable in conjunction with Simu products. We will allow 1 week for the news to spread, after that usage will result in suspension of service." .... That number would drop to double digits with the first digit being no greater than 2.

The majority of people would not be willing to gamble their account status for the sake of a third party client.

[StrayRogue]

Simu won't ban Psinet. They aren't that stupid.

[Gan]

So PSINET will now check other player's magical status???

1. That is similiar to casting 405 on someone right? If so how is that balanced if professions that do not know the minor elemental spell circle use it on other characters or themselves? This does not take into account the use of imbeds.

2. I can think of only 2 uses that this feature could be used, if I am understanding it correctly. (If I'm not understanding it correctly please clarify?) The first is checking an associate's spells prior to hunting for those who dont know 405 (adding a skill that the game doesnt allow for that particular profession). The second is checking another players spells prior to engaging in PvP/CvC activity.

I'm inclined to agree that this will become a high maintenance issue in the future and I wouldnt rule out legal action if it jeopardizes the bottom line of SIMU with regards to client retention. I'm kind of glad I dont use it.

[StrayRogue]

Its pretty much always been able to check magic. You can also turn it off if you don't want others checking. You can only check those who are on Psinet. Its designed to help when spelling up, as it tells you a more accurate duration of the spells than 405 or any other methods. Its designed to help.

As for balance: anyone can check their spells without 405 OR Psinet, remember.

[Edaarin]

He played the "I've been playing forever" card. That automatically voids any viable argument he might have had.

[StrayRogue]

Whats more funny is the old wizard sent me a log of him saying something like, "get alife, no wonder you're level 100". Idiots. Atleast this goes to prove that its not just noobies who are the OOC ones.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Ganalon
So PSINET will now check other player's magical status???

1. That is similiar to casting 405 on someone right? If so how is that balanced if professions that do not know the minor elemental spell circle use it on other characters or themselves? This does not take into account the use of imbeds.

2. I can think of only 2 uses that this feature could be used, if I am understanding it correctly. (If I'm not understanding it correctly please clarify?) The first is checking an associate's spells prior to hunting for those who dont know 405 (adding a skill that the game doesnt allow for that particular profession). The second is checking another players spells prior to engaging in PvP/CvC activity.

I'm inclined to agree that this will become a high maintenance issue in the future and I wouldnt rule out legal action if it jeopardizes the bottom line of SIMU with regards to client retention. I'm kind of glad I dont use it.

No.. it only checks for magical spells on characters that are linked to PSInet.

For example:

My wizard spells up my thief and can use MAGIC FALGRIN to determine what spells were cast on Falgrin (If they were cast by someone on PSINET) and the time remaining. It's a very handy utility that calculates the spell duration when it's cast.

PsiNet is a great program.. and just like anything else can be abused by the dumbasses of the world. I don't see Simutronics banning the program though.. but possibly working with Jamus in order to somehow monitor it.

PS - Anyone that assists or reports because "Someone is picking on me via psinet" is a dumbass :loser:. You simply UNLINK and get over it.

[SanGreal]

Originally posted by Tsa`ah
Psi-net still interacts with Simu software.

I'm not saying it should go, I'm saying it probably will go.

You just seem a bit too sure that Simu can't and won't.

I'll say again, Simu can, would, and will.

I'll also repeat again, other on-line games have banned certain 3rd party clients. Can they prove one is using a client as easily as Simu can prove Psi usage? Nope, but if they suspect it results in a ban.

You can be as adamant in your stance as much as you want to be, history however does not agree with you.

Most of PsiNet's features don't require interaction with Simu's software, they could just as easily be implemented in a seperate window. Keep in mind also, that one can simply write their own client, which SIMU allows (there is even a forum and special server for it). I'm not saying SIMU wouldn't want to ban psinet, or that it isn't abused. It just isn't techinically feasible. Can you name one 3rd party addon to a game which doesn't replace any game files and only sends the occasionaly regular command to the game, which was banned?

Sure they can ban whoever they want if they suspect they are using psinet, but that doesn't sound very likely, since it is nearly impossible to prove. (Currently it is very easy because the author wanted to prevent abuse, but PsiNet could be changed to make it much much harder). Banning innocent accounts on pure suspician will cause them more grief than stupid people who abuse psinet. (Or the stupid people who don't know how to turn locatable, etc. off) All I'm saying is, from a techincal standpoint, psinet is (near) impossible to simply 'ban'. I'm not trying to be stubborn, or adament about my stance. It isn't like I have a stake in the future of psinet. Simply noone has given a technical way for them to detect and ban its usage (if it were to be made less 'open' about its users).

[MrFeature]

There are options in psinet to turn off certain features, every person using Psinet has the ability to disable other users from locating them, viewing their magical status and chatting to them. There is no reason anyone should complain to anyone for spamming them with locates or magic queries. Kediaq and Sazia are just idiots.

[Scott]

The problem is that it doesn't matter. Just like the fat people are suing McDonalds because they are fat. People will complain whether it's their fault or not. It's as simple as "PUT DOWN THE HAMBURGER," but it doesn't matter. Or the people that smoke NOW and sue tobacco companies for getting cancer. Awhile back there were no warnings and information out there and I can sort of understand that. But people who knew the warnings and still smoked sit there and say "It's the tobacco companies fault not mine!" All they have to do is put down the cigerette and quit (although it is difficult.)

PSInet is the same concept. All people have to do is unlink and it ends, but nope, people are going to report. SIMU will get tired of it eventually and take a stance. OOC from the chat is brought in game constantly. I can remember when Reltov got banned for trying to show off on PSInet and open imploded like 20 people. That never would have happened if the chat wasn't there...... SIMU will take a stance eventually. Assuming that they make it against policy, PSInet's users will drop off to about 10 or so..... and from there who knows.

[Bobmuhthol]

I'd like to know what part of PsiNet interacts with the Simu server.

[JamusPsi]

Not only is it not reasonable (Waste of a GMs time to investigate issues of harrasment involving 3rd party chat programs -- the chat is only connected to gemstone in that it is displayed in the client), it simply is inefficient. All PsiNet has to do is stop displaying your character name, and use a username instead. He can even continue to make it unique to the character, but not identifiable. This wouldn't disrupt the system as the PsiNet server still knows who is who and can still relay locates, magic, etc.

PsiNet does not emit any signs of usage to the gemstone servers. The only commands PsiNet even sends to the servers are the typo fixes and move-ahead queue and spellup. PsiNet is almost entirely client-side, and the few interactive parts, again, deal with PsiNet servers. This is what sets it apart from other, more complex, 3rd party addons to other games.


This is all very true.

The PsiNet client will not send any data to the game server which would indicate that it is in any way devient from a typical Wizard FE or StormFront connection. This was done on purpose.

The locate and magic features are not an additional skill. Both are technically illusions, because they only reflect what you the player could know. For instance, if your spells were to drop while logged in from another machine, your other computer's PsiNet would not recognize that those spells were no longer present- because it didn't see them fall. If you moved from one room to another without seeing a room description, the locate feature wouldn't reflect that, because PsiNet didn't see it. If a creature or player enters your room after your most recent LOOK, locate won't reflect that.

PsiNet is not magic. It cannot know what you cannot know. It has no special access or priveledges with the game server, and is in fact transparent. When you locate someone, you are actually requesting a copy of the text that was last received in a room description- NOT viewing that room. When you request someone's magic status, you are requesting what that person ESTIMATES his magical status to be, NOT viewing what is actually there.

PsiNet does nothing that any chat client of any type could not do. The magic feature merely performs calculations automatically. It is NOT authoritative, and can very easily be inaccurate.


1. That is similiar to casting 405 on someone right? If so how is that balanced if professions that do not know the minor elemental spell circle use it on other characters or themselves?

To reiterate, this is not similar to casting 405 on someone. It's similar to whispering or IMing them, "Hey, what spells do you have on and for how long?" and having that person tediously recite the information from memory.


'm sorry Artha, while I agree there are a great number of idiots in game, I don't think the ratio is 50/50 yet.

Change that from 156 to 15-20 at one time... I'm willing to bet you would see a group ban.

I believe that was probably a direct paste. Between 1/4th to greater than 2/5ths (25-40%) of Gemstone players at any given time use PsiNet.

On the issue of Simu 'blocking' PsiNet. This is increasingly unlikely.

I contacted Simu and gave them every opportunity to inform me that they wouldn't like the program to be created, BEFORE I even began. I received no such notification. I didn't want to get done working on it and then have it go to nothing.

I won't have that happen now.

I can overcome just about any technical interference that they place in their software, so that route would most likely lead to a war of update-counterupdate. The more likely route is that they would, as you say, bar the use of the client by their customers.

The instant this were to happen, I would modify policy to prohibit employees, representatives, and affiliates of Simutronics from using the software, and also prohibit the use of the information provided by PsiNet WHO and PEEK lists from being used in any other application other than for communication within the PsiNet service.

Failing that, I would, as was suggested, create aliases for players to register their character names with.

I think there were more points I wanted to touch on, and I'll continue in a later post.

Jamus

[JamusPsi]

Ah.



Ban the creator of the program from all products and continue to ban anyone else that picks up hosting duties and you successfully ban the program.

They have done it in the past.



As was mentioned by someone else, this would probably be a poor plan. With the end of my ability to play the game, so would come the demise of any concern I have for the balance of it.

So I would have absolutely no qualms about releasing the source for PsiNet and my personal scripting engine and letting them be distributed at will, along with whatever illicit perversions may arise out of them.

Incidentaly, the PsiNet server is not hosted by anyone associated with Simutronics, even as a customer. Thus, banning the host wouldn't cause any particular damage.

Of course, there's nothing to say I wouldn't simply get a new Simu account, program the server to alias me as Jamus on PsiNet, and continue about my business.


Sounds like blackmail to me. Perhaps I'm more vindictive than SIMU but I'd be getting a lawyer and testing that threat out, myself.

It's hardly blackmail, as I wouldn't be retaliating against Simu in any way. I personally don't believe it would be easy to make a case against me were that sequence of events to take place, because the software would, of course, not be specifically intended for use with any Simutonics system and would be compatible in form with any MUD service.

Additionally, as was mentioned, all psinet features can be disabled merely by UNLINKING from the server or individually disabling the features in question via PSINET OPTIONS.

Also, Kediaq can bite my ass, hypocritical shit face. :)

[Mistomeer]

It would be simple to ban. Ban the server IP at the Simu firewall. Just deny it, and you're set.

I'm not a Psinet user, but I don't think it's really done much bad for the game. Stupid peple do stupid things, and one program doesn't really change that.

[JamusPsi]

Uhm, no. The PsiNet server does not ever connect to Simutronics, and so banning the PsiNet server's IP would not affect.. anything at all.

You would have to ban the customer's IP.. which would kind of defeat the purpose.

There's a diagram on my website.

http://students.ou.edu/A/Brian.A.Arsuaga-1/images/howitworks.jpg

Jamus

[Bobmuhthol]

Woah, check out all the interactivity.

And once again I win.

[Mistomeer]

Ah, gotcha. Thought the server talked to the Simu. Of course, Simu could SSL the connection strings and change them. Only accept connections from the Wizard, Stormfront, etc. With the connection strings from those programs encrypted and changed, it would be tough to get the Psinet client to connect.

[Bobmuhthol]

Make a MUD compatible with only their front ends? That would be wicked, wicked dumb.

[Mistomeer]

Originally posted by Bobmuhthol
Make a MUD compatible with only their front ends? That would be wicked, wicked dumb.

How many people are using something other than Zmud, Wizard and Stormfront to play Simu games?

[Bobmuhthol]

Not many. It would still be a waste of time to encrypt the connection to the point where the only way to reach the GemStone server is through their front ends. ZMud isn't their property anyway, so have a good time editing the makeup of it to encrypt the connection.

[JamusPsi]

While possible, it's been my experience that Simu is VERY hesitant to make major connectivity changes, because their software often stops working for a good portion of their customers.

Point in case, the new SGE they released doesn't seem to work for at least 20% of the people that try.

Jamus

[Mistomeer]

Originally posted by Bobmuhthol
Not many. It would still be a waste of time to encrypt the connection to the point where the only way to reach the GemStone server is through their front ends. ZMud isn't their property anyway, so have a good time editing the makeup of it to encrypt the connection.

Um, as many things as Zmud changed to work with Simu, updating a simple connection string isn't a big deal. I'm not saying that they can flip a switch and do it, I'm just saying it's a way to block Psinet if they wanted.

[JamusPsi]

Making an SSL connection to a game is considerably more difficult than just changing the login string.

PsiNet doesn't login for you anyway, it just forwards whatever the FE sends.

[Mistomeer]

Originally posted by JamusPsi
While possible, it's been my experience that Simu is VERY hesitant to make major connectivity changes, because their software often stops working for a good portion of their customers.

Point in case, the new SGE they released doesn't seem to work for at least 20% of the people that try.

Jamus

They changed them with GSIV to try and stop things like wizbot.
Yeah, it's dumb, don't get me wrong. I'm just saying it's a possibility. They're already encrypting much of the sign-in process, so adding SSL to the initial wizard connection, especially with some of the options available from CA's, wouldn't be that much of an undertaking for a business.

[JamusPsi]

If the encryption was only added to the login portion and not the entire game stream, it would have no affect on PsiNet whatsoever.

>>They changed them with GSIV to try and stop things like wizbot. <<

Huh?

The connection and login processes haven't changed significantly in years.. including with SIV. (And yes, I'm including the SGE connection, as I also wrote AutoSGE)

Jamus

[Edited on 8-3-2004 by JamusPsi]

[Mistomeer]

Originally posted by JamusPsi
Making an SSL connection to a game is considerably more difficult than just changing the login string.

PsiNet doesn't login for you anyway, it just forwards whatever the FE sends.

I understand Psinet doesn't login for you.
Like I said, SSL could be done. They already have the hardware to support it.

[Mistomeer]

Originally posted by JamusPsi
If the encryption was only added to the login portion and not the entire game stream, it would have no affect on PsiNet whatsoever.

>>They changed them with GSIV to try and stop things like wizbot. <<

Huh?

The connection and login processes haven't changed significantly in years.. including with SIV. (And yes, I'm including the SGE connection, as I also wrote AutoSGE)

Jamus

[Edited on 8-3-2004 by JamusPsi]

Wrong. The connection string used to be the key twice. How Wizbot is setup to connect. It was recently change to Key Once, followed by an identifier for FE type.

EX:
<Key>
/FE: JAVA

[JamusPsi]

Wrong again. It was always that way. However, if you sent the key twice (as common lore had you do for zmud) it would still work, minus the special inline tags for wizard displays. (hp, mp, etc.)

[Bobmuhthol]

You see Kediaq waving at your table, clearly hoping that you will invite him and his group, including Sazia, to sit with you. If you would like, you may INVITE Kediaq to allow him to join you, or you may INVITE Kediaq GROUP to invite his entire group.

Thank God I was AFK.

[Mistomeer]

Originally posted by JamusPsi
Wrong again. It was always that way. However, if you sent the key twice (as common lore had you do for zmud) it would still work, minus the special inline tags for wizard displays. (hp, mp, etc.)

Exactly. Again, it was changed. Key twice disabled, FE tag required. Previously, that was not the case. You said there were no significant changes, I say that's fairly significant. I can't think of any functional reason for the change other than to try and limit the clients that connect to the server.

[Souzy]

WTF is with people biting off my characters names?!?!?!?!? I have a rogue named Sasia! Kill the bitch.