RE: SPS Governance Proposal: Update Terms Of Service To Prohibit Use Of Battle Helpers in Modern Ranked, Tourneys, and Brawls
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
the use of professional services as well as sharing of spreadsheets, data bases, and match algorithms between users.
When is a spreadsheet/database illegal? How much data must it contain? How good does the data have to be?
Also, how exactly do you want to enforce this? How can you differentiate between a good player and one that uses a battle helper? How can you make sure that a good player is not mistakenly punished for being good?
0
0
0.000
Hey thanks for the reply @therealwolf ... I realize we disagree on this, and respect your right to vote on it however you want.
On the first part, its not the creation of a spreadsheet or a database, its the sharing that matters. Having said that, there are a few people that have suggested language to be more clear and I am happy to do an Edit before this is live to give more clarity if possible. Feel free to let me know of any language you would suggest should be added to better define the intent.
This is a simply vote of the DAO community to set a rule. If such a rule is passed by the community, then as stated in the proposal then it will be up to the team to enforce such a rule. Here's the relevant points:
The purpose of the proposal is to set the rules, period. Once rules are set, then over time then they can be a) enforced b) changed or c) removed.
Again, thank you for your questions and feel free to ask more if you have them!
If the rule is set and the ToS updated, then that means public battle helpers will most likely stop their service, even if nothing is enforced. Which means that private ones will dominate. Please dave, think about this: if private ones have a monopoly (aka. a few smart ones dominating the plebs), do you really think that this outweighs the benefits of everyone being able to use them? I'm not saying that BH are not a problem, they are - but disallowing them will only hide the symptom. :/
Hey @therealwolf, I agree the public services will stop (and that's good), and its also possible the private ones will have a monopoly, but there are other things you are not considering.
For instance, who are the "private ones"? Do they play brawls? Do they play tournaments? Are they in guilds? How much of the pool will they take in Modern ranked?
We don't know any of those questions. How can we because it hasn't been against the terms of service?
I ask you to think about this as well Wolf. I realize you and others are concerned about the "private bad actors", but how will we ever know if we don't make it against the terms of service?
Put another way, you think its a huge problem and all the private bad actors will take the rewards from the well meaning players. I look at it like a) we know most of the big players and card holders b) if its against the terms of service we will clearly see which players "stick out" and break the rules and c) we can make a decision AFTER WE KNOW TO DETERMINE THE BEST WAY TO HANDLE THE PROBLEM.
And to answer this question:
Absolutely 100%. And here's the reason. As you said BH are a problem, in fact if we don't do anything NOW they will become a HUGE problem very very fast. They will fundamentally alter the game permanently as the arms race develops.
If I'm right, the game will be hurt at a time its weak, and it could be a negative blow that causes very big damage. You said yourself Battle Helpers are a problem, lets not make it bigger.
If I'm wrong, and for some reason we are overrun with bad actors running private battle helpers and taking a massive chunk of the rewards, then we can fix that easily. We simply have another vote, I will co-sponsor it with you. I don't want to see bad actors running private battle helpers taking a large chunk of the reward pools either.
The point is I do agree that the benefit of this outweighs the risks by far, not even close. And if I'm wrong, I think the damage mitigation is far simpler by following my "lets try and see first" strategy.
I think you should consider the risks involved. And look at the remedies.
I believe you (and others) are sincere in your thinking and are truly worried. But IMO you are NOT seeing the damage that is done and how it affects attraction and retention to the game. I also feel you are NOT thinking that we could pass a vote to correct any negative consequences. We would for sure.
I ask you Wolf as a prominent developer and person who cares about the long term growth of the game to understand that we (the people for this proposal) are also on your side of wanting to see the game to grow. We are not even saying that there can't be Battle Helpers in different modes. We are not saying that we won't vote to allow battle helpers if "private bad actors" cause massive damage.
I ask you to consider voting for it because it is the right process to follow. Defining what the community considers the proper rules will go a long way to ending all these destructive debates.
Once we define the rules, then we can all see what the consequences are and adjust. I think the fear that we as a community won't adjust quickly to any bad actors is not right. We will. And I'm pretty sure that me and you and everyone we know will be on the same side.
ps. I know we have crossed swords in the past, but I want you to know that I appreciate your professional way of discussing this. While I really wish you would take my thoughts and understand them, and of course change your mind, I also respect your right to vote how you want and based on your own beliefs. I do think we both care about the game, we just disagree on the right path forward on these issues. So again thank you for being respectful and for voicing your thoughts and concerns.
pps. I also invite you to discuss further either publicly here or privately via Discord DM anytime. I would be happy to discuss with you anytime.
You are an employee of Splinterlands, is that correct? Your employer, your boss Matt mentioned to us that he has a solution. We are not privy to the details of the solution. I trust Matt and I think he will provide a solution. If you have further questions regarding details you can ask your boss.
By the way, this is current sentiment of the community regarding the proposal, it is 91% and 73% in favor for the two proposals respectively. Rarely I see community comes together with wuch overwhelming unity.
You didn't go into any of my questions, instead you're trying to bring some argument about Matt being "my boss". I respect Matt and his judgment, but this is my account and I'll write whatever I believe is right on here. And if my brain tells me, that banning battle helpers will stop public ones but will benefit those with their own spreadsheets, tools and battle helpers which can't be detected, then I'll write that.
And by the way, I voted in favour of the tournaments/brawl proposal, but you probably already knew that ;)
Matt is your boss, it is a fact.
Matt is not my boss, and I am not an employee of Splinterlands. Do you see the difference? If not I will mention it. I don't have any conflict of interest. You do. This is a fact.
Yes you can write and express whatever you want from your personal hive account. So can I, which is what I did and am doing.
Individual with spreadsheets is not something we are trying to prevent. We are trying to prevent commercially available mass production services. How is this hard to understand?
Thats what I was wondering too. In chess they do it by comparing the moves to the optimal engine solution and determine accuracy. But in chess you can kindof see inhuman decisions that involve planning all possible scenarios for the next 20 moves of action and reaction. In SL you submit your team blind from the ruleset (and you have some hint about what cards your opponent has available). Every possible team combination could always have been conceived by a human player.
I don't want to see people running around and calling every winning opponent a cheater. Thats a pandemic wherever it occurs.
and the loose wording of the proposal gives a lot of grounds for accusations of ToS violations and calls for enforcement.