Due to an issue with Alliance War Defense Tactic, we will be ending this Alliance War Season effective immediately. This current War will not count towards your Alliance War Season Score. War Season eligibility rewards will be reduced to 2 Wars in the Season.

We understand that this is not a perfect solution, but without the ability to remove or freeze the War Rating quick enough, the rest of our Alliance War season would be compromised.

This war will remain active, and in-game, you will still see the season until tomorrow. After we end the season tomorrow, we will be taking some time to collect data and remove the changes to the Alliance War Season score. Once that is complete, we will be able to send out Alliance War Season rewards.

We apologize for the inconvenience.

Account Sharing Bans - InfoBot "Services"

124

Comments

  • Etaki_LirakoiEtaki_Lirakoi Posts: 480 ★★
    56n9qf54bxrm.jpg
  • CapWW2CapWW2 Posts: 2,901 ★★★★
    Who is mark zunkenburg?
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 13,532 Guardian
    6. User Name & Password.

    ...

    You may not use anyone else’s Account at any time and you may not allow anyone else to use your Account at any time. You agree that Kabam will not be liable for any loss you may incur as a result of someone else using your Account, either with or without your knowledge, and you further agree that you will be liable for losses incurred by Kabam or another party due to someone else using your Account. Because of this, Kabam strongly recommends that you exit from your Account at the end of each session.

    Anyone that wants to bet on Kabam not banning people for account sharing is free to take their own fate in their own hands. But anyone saying it is not a violation of TOS or not a potentially bannable offense is simply factually wrong. It is a black and white violation of the TOS.
    Cheyneed wrote: »
    Cheyneed wrote: »
    Many interesting points raised here but the reality is this. There are no bans for account sharing. Bans are only given for modding. It would be an interesting step forward for Kabam to ban mercs or people that purchase their services, however it simply hasn't happened.

    I'm sure many will disagree. You have drunk too deeply of the Kool-Aid.

    This is simply not true. In the last week or so, there have been a number of Posts asking to reinstate their Accounts with only Account Sharing as the transgressions. If you're under the impression that Account Sharing alone is not bannable, you would be wrong. It's always been agaisnt TOS. The fact that people still believe it's acceptable is baffling to me.

    Ugh, your naivety is astonishing. It is as @DNA3000 stated, people have been banned for account sharing because the person they they shared with was using a mod. There may have also been some people banned for account sharing who were running the arena for 24 hours a day back in the early days. I will reiterate, people do not get banned for simply sharing accounts. If they did 90% of those in a top 100 alliance would be banned. @GroundedWisdom please refrain from speaking on things you know nothing about.

    To be precise, I said it was likely that people that were account sharing were *detected* because they shared with someone using a mod or performing some other violation. It is still the case that the could have been banned for account sharing.

    Account sharing is like jaywalking, in the sense that jaywalking is illegal, there are penalties for jaywalking, and yet people do it all the time and most people are neither caught nor penalized. However, do it in front of a cop and you can still be ticketed. Someone account sharing outside of any other TOS violation is unlikely to be *detected*. However, that's not the same thing as saying it isn't "really" against the rules. It is against the rules, and it can be punished. The fact that many people do it and aren't punished doesn't change the law, and isn't a defense if you are in fact caught.
  • xNigxNig Posts: 6,515 ★★★★★
    Actually, wouldn't account sharing be relatively easy to detect?

    Let's put it this way. Most people account share to clear content that they themselves can't clear. So just by monitoring login time, time spent, quests cleared eg LOL, IP address or maybe even Game Center details, it won't be too difficult to pinpoint the account sharing.

    Sharing for regular alliance events though...
  • VandalSavageVandalSavage Posts: 267 ★★
    xNig wrote: »
    Actually, wouldn't account sharing be relatively easy to detect?

    ...

    Scenario 1.

    Husband account moves in AQ. Logs out.
    Husband hands over device to wife.
    Wife logs on.
    Wife account moves in AQ. Logs out.

    Scenario 2.

    Husband accounts moves in AQ. Logs out.
    Husband pretends to hand over device to wife.
    Husband logs on using wife's account.
    Wife's account moves in AQ. Logs out.

    In both scenarios, the transaction logs would look like:
    1. Husband account moves in AQ.
    2. Husband account logs out.
    3. Wife account logs on.
    4. Wife account moves in AQ.
    5. Wife account logs out.

    Without having a camera recording all the actions performed in both scenarios, how would you detect account sharing?



  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Posts: 4,615 ★★★★★
    In that scenario you can't detect account sharing. Give them both thier own device and put them apart hours by plane. the husband then plays for the wife just after she finishes a daily quest and you evidence sharing.

    Wife's account is logged into from an IP in China and within minutes is then logged into from a new device and IP in the USA. Sharing.
  • Sharing...?

    Or...

    TELEPORTING!

  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 28,811 ★★★★★
    There's also the fact that a device has a footprint. If a certain Account is opened that's associated with a certain device, that leaves a footprint. In fact, every device we use does. It's simple to differentiate our multiple devices because the IP also tells a location. Now, when you have a device that is usually associated with one Account logging on to another repeatedly, that's a red flag. Especially when said devices are in different areas. There are other factors that could play into it such as Chat Logs, amount of time playing (more than humanly possible), fight skill, pretty much any internal data. Although we don't know exactly what their methods are, one thing is for sure. It's their game. It's the Internet. They will find out if they have sufficient reason. The process is thorough. It's not just a "maybe" action that's taken. That's not to say that anything is infallible. Just that it's not done lightly. The idea that they can't tell is not accurate. They have ways of finding out, and they're well within their rights. It's their property.

  • Actually your IP address that's used when logging in is attached to a region... so when act 1 husband is in Israel and act 2 wife is in USA then there poses an act sharing and the proof is it's unreasonable to get from point a to point b in that 2 minutes it took to pass the device between the hands of husband and wife.
    xNig wrote: »
    Actually, wouldn't account sharing be relatively easy to detect?

    ...

    Scenario 1.

    Husband account moves in AQ. Logs out.
    Husband hands over device to wife.
    Wife logs on.
    Wife account moves in AQ. Logs out.

    Scenario 2.

    Husband accounts moves in AQ. Logs out.
    Husband pretends to hand over device to wife.
    Husband logs on using wife's account.
    Wife's account moves in AQ. Logs out.

    In both scenarios, the transaction logs would look like:
    1. Husband account moves in AQ.
    2. Husband account logs out.
    3. Wife account logs on.
    4. Wife account moves in AQ.
    5. Wife account logs out.

    Without having a camera recording all the actions performed in both scenarios, how would you detect account sharing?


    xNig wrote: »
    Actually, wouldn't account sharing be relatively easy to detect?

    ...

    Scenario 1.

    Husband account moves in AQ. Logs out.
    Husband hands over device to wife.
    Wife logs on.
    Wife account moves in AQ. Logs out.

    Scenario 2.

    Husband accounts moves in AQ. Logs out.
    Husband pretends to hand over device to wife.
    Husband logs on using wife's account.
    Wife's account moves in AQ. Logs out.

    In both scenarios, the transaction logs would look like:
    1. Husband account moves in AQ.
    2. Husband account logs out.
    3. Wife account logs on.
    4. Wife account moves in AQ.
    5. Wife account logs out.

    Without having a camera recording all the actions performed in both scenarios, how would you detect account sharing?



  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 13,532 Guardian
    Mocaeona wrote: »
    Actually your IP address that's used when logging in is attached to a region... so when act 1 husband is in Israel and act 2 wife is in USA then there poses an act sharing and the proof is it's unreasonable to get from point a to point b in that 2 minutes it took to pass the device between the hands of husband and wife.

    It is more complicated than that. You might be right 90% of the time, but there are exceptions that make this much more complicated to write software to analyze.

    1. Husband could be in Israel but sometimes using a VPN that terminates in the US.
    2. Husband could roam to an internet cafe whose IP addresses are geo-misclassified.
    3. Husband could roam to his company that uses complicated BGP egress routing.
    4. Husband could play on one device, forget to turn it off, jump on a plane, land in US, start playing on phone.

    There's lots of ways for this to go awry. Alone, this would be inconclusive evidence of account sharing. But in combination with other information it could be part of a strong circumstantial case.

    On the subject of #2. One day, Google started displaying for me in Chinese at work. Turns out it was a geo-misclassification of our address space. There's a way to report that to Google so they correct their databases. The fact that there is a well documented procedure for doing this suggests how often it happens. Over the years I've seen this happen in person about a dozen times to myself or clients.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 13,532 Guardian
    Cheyneed wrote: »
    Here are the facts: 90%+ of top alliances account share.

    I have no first hand knowledge of the top tier alliances, but I'm skeptical of this statistic. One thing I can say with certainty is if the players in those top alliances are regularly sharing their account information with people they barely know over the internet, intelligence is not a prerequisite for top alliance membership.

    I won't give someone over the internet my Pandora password, much less give them complete control over my MCOC account. It gives me hope to think that 90% of top alliances account share, because between drunken rampages and stupid mistakes the lifespan of the average top alliance is likely to be short. Makes it easier to move up the AQ tiers.

  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 28,811 ★★★★★
    wray1976 wrote: »
    There's also the fact that a device has a footprint. If a certain Account is opened that's associated with a certain device, that leaves a footprint. In fact, every device we use does. It's simple to differentiate our multiple devices because the IP also tells a location. Now, when you have a device that is usually associated with one Account logging on to another repeatedly, that's a red flag. Especially when said devices are in different areas. There are other factors that could play into it such as Chat Logs, amount of time playing (more than humanly possible), fight skill, pretty much any internal data. Although we don't know exactly what their methods are, one thing is for sure. It's their game. It's the Internet. They will find out if they have sufficient reason. The process is thorough. It's not just a "maybe" action that's taken. That's not to say that anything is infallible. Just that it's not done lightly. The idea that they can't tell is not accurate. They have ways of finding out, and they're well within their rights. It's their property.

    Kabam can't release a update correctly I doubt they can check "footprints". You guys have way to much faith in them.

    Apparently they can because actions have been taken.
  • DarkestDestroyerDarkestDestroyer Posts: 2,570 ★★★★
    wray1976 wrote: »
    Dropfaith wrote: »
    @Kabam Miike would be nice if you guys showed bans for acct sharing happen

    maybe even ban the guy advertising these services
    kinda seem like a slap in the face to be like screw your tos ill do what i want

    They won't ban accounts for sharing. They know they will take a big $$$ hit. It would affect way more accounts then most people would think.

    Its the Merc's they don't want and hacks/3rd party cheats. This is my personal opinion so it holds no value but I know Kabam aren't stupid/naive.

    What this guy said, you really think those top ally's doing map 6 every day/AQ aren't account sharing?

    If they got banned a ton of £ is gone.

    Sad truth of it.
  • Average_PlayerAverage_Player Posts: 80
    Read between the lines.

    This is actually an attempt to encourage account sharing and there are multiple motivations for this.

    It is no different from saying "I see so many people speeding on the road so it must be okay to speed".

    For some, the end game is that alliance benefit from account sharers. Not everyone in the alliance needs to share but every one benefits from it. That is why there will always be this "need" to encourage sharing even by those who do not participate in it.

    For others, the end game is to encourage the competition to cheat in order to get themselves banned. I don't see this being too successful but whatever floats their boat. More power to them.

    Finally, another source of motivation is to create animosity against another group of players, mainly the top spenders or those viewed as being top spenders. It is pretty obvious that he is encouraging people to believe that a certain group of people are getting special treatment.



    Or, the fact that there are many that play fair and don't cheat... And want everyone on the same level playing field.. Only way for this to happen is if Kabam actually enforced their TOS and banned everyone whether it was for a hack, account sharing, or some other violation. Or, maybe give a warning for lessor offenses and then ban on the 2nd offense.

  • Average_PlayerAverage_Player Posts: 80
    People believe certain violations won't really get you banned because they've probably been doing it themselves for a long time and their account is still kicking. On a number of occasions, I've seen alliance members doing LOL and other "hard" content for players who suck too much to do it themselves... and I've yet to see or hear of any bans as a result. However, this doesn't mean Kabam doesn't ban anyone for such violations. It could be that Kabam randomly does it. Or, only a small percentage of such violations get banned compared to other bigger violations, such as hacking/modding.
  • SirnoobSirnoob Posts: 952 ★★★
    edited August 2017
    MoiraD wrote: »
    Account Sharing vs the Account Mercs are different in my opinion. One is helping fellow teammates for the betterment of the alliance while the other is selfish gains.

    Anyone else think the TOS needs to be amended. Even the USA Constitution gets an Ammendment at some point. Maybe this would shut some people up, you know those with wisdom of the web that they snatch the grounded information from.


    There the same thing logging into someones account and doing the conyent for them both cheat one just gets payed while the other does it for free
  • SirnoobSirnoob Posts: 952 ★★★
    Sirnoob wrote: »
    MoiraD wrote: »
    Account Sharing vs the Account Mercs are different in my opinion. One is helping fellow teammates for the betterment of the alliance while the other is selfish gains.

    Anyone else think the TOS needs to be amended. Even the USA Constitution gets an Ammendment at some point. Maybe this would shut some people up, you know those with wisdom of the web that they snatch the grounded information from.


    There the same thing logging into someones account and doing the conyent for them both cheat one just gets payed while the other does it for free

    And hes it's not eve. Free if they guy gets the 100 percent clear reward for cheatin
  • madmaxmadmax Posts: 59
    If kabam were open and honest about things all these posts would stop, I still don't understand why all the cloak and dagger stuff from them, 99% of the gossip and **** is caused by there lack of communication and honesty
  • SirnoobSirnoob Posts: 952 ★★★
    edited August 2017
    madmax wrote: »
    If kabam were open and honest about things all these posts would stop, I still don't understand why all the cloak and dagger stuff from them, 99% of the gossip and **** is caused by there lack of communication and honesty

    They said something is banable and some got banned for it don't know what's not open communication about that
    Threads like this will pop up in most competitive multiplayer games as people will always cause top of cheating
  • Half my alliance got banned,, I got really lucky
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 13,532 Guardian
    wray1976 wrote: »
    There's also the fact that a device has a footprint. If a certain Account is opened that's associated with a certain device, that leaves a footprint. In fact, every device we use does. It's simple to differentiate our multiple devices because the IP also tells a location. Now, when you have a device that is usually associated with one Account logging on to another repeatedly, that's a red flag. Especially when said devices are in different areas. There are other factors that could play into it such as Chat Logs, amount of time playing (more than humanly possible), fight skill, pretty much any internal data. Although we don't know exactly what their methods are, one thing is for sure. It's their game. It's the Internet. They will find out if they have sufficient reason. The process is thorough. It's not just a "maybe" action that's taken. That's not to say that anything is infallible. Just that it's not done lightly. The idea that they can't tell is not accurate. They have ways of finding out, and they're well within their rights. It's their property.

    Kabam can't release a update correctly I doubt they can check "footprints". You guys have way to much faith in them.

    Both iOS and Android have a mechanism for any app to generate a unique ID for the device it is installed on. At one time you could fetch the UDID for the device but due to privacy concerns Apple blocks this in iOS. However, every installation of MCOC would have a unique VendorID assigned which you can only reset by deleting and reinstalling the application. Everyone logging in to an installation with the same VendorID is logging into the same installation of the software on the same device. I believe there is a similar mechanism in Android although I'm less familiar with it.

    You seem to be inconsistent on Kabam. You believe they aren't "stupid/naive" when it comes to banning people who spend money on the game, but so incompetent they can't track the installation of their apps using the mechanisms the actual mobile OS vendors hand to developers to do exactly that.
  • Oliverb1980Oliverb1980 Posts: 97
    not sure if this has been brought up, but how do you go after those offering paid services? Not unless someone reports a user directly.
  • CheyneedCheyneed Posts: 95
    edited August 2017
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    6. User Name & Password.

    ...

    You may not use anyone else’s Account at any time and you may not allow anyone else to use your Account at any time. You agree that Kabam will not be liable for any loss you may incur as a result of someone else using your Account, either with or without your knowledge, and you further agree that you will be liable for losses incurred by Kabam or another party due to someone else using your Account. Because of this, Kabam strongly recommends that you exit from your Account at the end of each session.

    Anyone that wants to bet on Kabam not banning people for account sharing is free to take their own fate in their own hands. But anyone saying it is not a violation of TOS or not a potentially bannable offense is simply factually wrong. It is a black and white violation of the TOS.
    Cheyneed wrote: »
    Cheyneed wrote: »
    Many interesting points raised here but the reality is this. There are no bans for account sharing. Bans are only given for modding. It would be an interesting step forward for Kabam to ban mercs or people that purchase their services, however it simply hasn't happened.

    I'm sure many will disagree. You have drunk too deeply of the Kool-Aid.

    This is simply not true. In the last week or so, there have been a number of Posts asking to reinstate their Accounts with only Account Sharing as the transgressions. If you're under the impression that Account Sharing alone is not bannable, you would be wrong. It's always been agaisnt TOS. The fact that people still believe it's acceptable is baffling to me.

    Ugh, your naivety is astonishing. It is as @DNA3000 stated, people have been banned for account sharing because the person they they shared with was using a mod. There may have also been some people banned for account sharing who were running the arena for 24 hours a day back in the early days. I will reiterate, people do not get banned for simply sharing accounts. If they did 90% of those in a top 100 alliance would be banned. @GroundedWisdom please refrain from speaking on things you know nothing about.

    To be precise, I said it was likely that people that were account sharing were *detected* because they shared with someone using a mod or performing some other violation. It is still the case that the could have been banned for account sharing.

    Account sharing is like jaywalking, in the sense that jaywalking is illegal, there are penalties for jaywalking, and yet people do it all the time and most people are neither caught nor penalized. However, do it in front of a cop and you can still be ticketed. Someone account sharing outside of any other TOS violation is unlikely to be *detected*. However, that's not the same thing as saying it isn't "really" against the rules. It is against the rules, and it can be punished. The fact that many people do it and aren't punished doesn't change the law, and isn't a defense if you are in fact caught.

    This thread has been incredibly frustrating. In a final attempt I will attempt to clear up what I have said and not said. I have not once said that account sharing is not against the TOS. I have not once said account sharing isn't against the rules (@DNA3000 I have included this not because you accused me but for clarity). What I have said is people who are solely account sharing with no mods are not being banned. The exception to this, as previously stated, being arena scores that are ridiculously inflated because people were grinding for 24 hours straight.

    I said 90% are sharing, obviously this is a made up statistic insinuating a high degree of account sharing. I clearly have not done the research to ascertain the exact percentages of account sharing alliances. However, it is clear that most do not believe me that account sharing is far more prevalent than anyone realizes. Although this is just confirmation bias on their parts. It is easily discernible since nearly every counterargument is simply, "I don't believe you." I have given ample evidence and reasoned arguments. The funny thing is some will accuse and ask for "real" evidence, which ironically, would be against the forum rules.

    I truly do not have a dog in this fight, other than people being unreasonable and illogical annoys me. Believe me or don't believe me. I never would have thought it would be so difficult to convince people of something so obviously true. But, eh, lesson learned. Take care folks.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 28,811 ★★★★★
    Cheyneed wrote: »
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    6. User Name & Password.

    ...

    You may not use anyone else’s Account at any time and you may not allow anyone else to use your Account at any time. You agree that Kabam will not be liable for any loss you may incur as a result of someone else using your Account, either with or without your knowledge, and you further agree that you will be liable for losses incurred by Kabam or another party due to someone else using your Account. Because of this, Kabam strongly recommends that you exit from your Account at the end of each session.

    Anyone that wants to bet on Kabam not banning people for account sharing is free to take their own fate in their own hands. But anyone saying it is not a violation of TOS or not a potentially bannable offense is simply factually wrong. It is a black and white violation of the TOS.
    Cheyneed wrote: »
    Cheyneed wrote: »
    Many interesting points raised here but the reality is this. There are no bans for account sharing. Bans are only given for modding. It would be an interesting step forward for Kabam to ban mercs or people that purchase their services, however it simply hasn't happened.

    I'm sure many will disagree. You have drunk too deeply of the Kool-Aid.

    This is simply not true. In the last week or so, there have been a number of Posts asking to reinstate their Accounts with only Account Sharing as the transgressions. If you're under the impression that Account Sharing alone is not bannable, you would be wrong. It's always been agaisnt TOS. The fact that people still believe it's acceptable is baffling to me.

    Ugh, your naivety is astonishing. It is as @DNA3000 stated, people have been banned for account sharing because the person they they shared with was using a mod. There may have also been some people banned for account sharing who were running the arena for 24 hours a day back in the early days. I will reiterate, people do not get banned for simply sharing accounts. If they did 90% of those in a top 100 alliance would be banned. @GroundedWisdom please refrain from speaking on things you know nothing about.

    To be precise, I said it was likely that people that were account sharing were *detected* because they shared with someone using a mod or performing some other violation. It is still the case that the could have been banned for account sharing.

    Account sharing is like jaywalking, in the sense that jaywalking is illegal, there are penalties for jaywalking, and yet people do it all the time and most people are neither caught nor penalized. However, do it in front of a cop and you can still be ticketed. Someone account sharing outside of any other TOS violation is unlikely to be *detected*. However, that's not the same thing as saying it isn't "really" against the rules. It is against the rules, and it can be punished. The fact that many people do it and aren't punished doesn't change the law, and isn't a defense if you are in fact caught.

    This thread has been incredibly frustrating. In a final attempt I will attempt to clear up what I have said and not said. I have not once said that account sharing is not against the TOS. I have not once said account sharing isn't against the rules (@DNA3000 I have included this not because you accused me but for clarity). What I have said is people who are solely account sharing with no mods are not being banned. The exception to this, as previously stated, being arena scores that are ridiculously inflated because people were grinding for 24 hours straight.

    I said 90% are sharing, obviously this is a made up statistic insinuating a high degree of account sharing. I clearly have not done the research to ascertain the exact percentages of account sharing alliances. However, it is clear that most do not believe me that account sharing is far more prevalent than anyone realizes. Although this is just confirmation bias on their parts. It is easily discernible since nearly every counterargument is simply, "I don't believe you." I have given ample evidence and reasoned arguments. The funny thing is some will accuse and ask for "real" evidence, which ironically, would be against the forum rules.

    I truly do not have a dog in this fight, other than people being unreasonable and illogical annoys me. Believe me or don't believe me. I never would have thought it would be so difficult to convince people of something so obviously true. But, eh, lesson learned. Take care folks.

    The interesting thing is you mention Confirmation Bias, and that is the basis of your argument. You are not simply asserting that it is common at higher Tiers. You've stated that they never ban on the basis of Sharing alone, that 90% of the Top Tier does it, and that your proof is you see it happening. What you fail to see is that they have banned on that basis alone, that number is not exactly accurate, and all you're doing is emphasizing the reason that they are becoming more diligent in banning the behavior. There are people who actually believe it is not acted upon and have convinced themselves that they can get away with it, simply because they're at the top. In essence, you're showing the need for further action, not proving they never ban for it. Which they do. You can stick to the bias that they don't because you see it happening, but all that does is express the need to investigate further. They have and they will.
  • CheyneedCheyneed Posts: 95
    Cheyneed wrote: »
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    6. User Name & Password.

    ...

    You may not use anyone else’s Account at any time and you may not allow anyone else to use your Account at any time. You agree that Kabam will not be liable for any loss you may incur as a result of someone else using your Account, either with or without your knowledge, and you further agree that you will be liable for losses incurred by Kabam or another party due to someone else using your Account. Because of this, Kabam strongly recommends that you exit from your Account at the end of each session.

    Anyone that wants to bet on Kabam not banning people for account sharing is free to take their own fate in their own hands. But anyone saying it is not a violation of TOS or not a potentially bannable offense is simply factually wrong. It is a black and white violation of the TOS.
    Cheyneed wrote: »
    Cheyneed wrote: »
    Many interesting points raised here but the reality is this. There are no bans for account sharing. Bans are only given for modding. It would be an interesting step forward for Kabam to ban mercs or people that purchase their services, however it simply hasn't happened.

    I'm sure many will disagree. You have drunk too deeply of the Kool-Aid.

    This is simply not true. In the last week or so, there have been a number of Posts asking to reinstate their Accounts with only Account Sharing as the transgressions. If you're under the impression that Account Sharing alone is not bannable, you would be wrong. It's always been agaisnt TOS. The fact that people still believe it's acceptable is baffling to me.

    Ugh, your naivety is astonishing. It is as @DNA3000 stated, people have been banned for account sharing because the person they they shared with was using a mod. There may have also been some people banned for account sharing who were running the arena for 24 hours a day back in the early days. I will reiterate, people do not get banned for simply sharing accounts. If they did 90% of those in a top 100 alliance would be banned. @GroundedWisdom please refrain from speaking on things you know nothing about.

    To be precise, I said it was likely that people that were account sharing were *detected* because they shared with someone using a mod or performing some other violation. It is still the case that the could have been banned for account sharing.

    Account sharing is like jaywalking, in the sense that jaywalking is illegal, there are penalties for jaywalking, and yet people do it all the time and most people are neither caught nor penalized. However, do it in front of a cop and you can still be ticketed. Someone account sharing outside of any other TOS violation is unlikely to be *detected*. However, that's not the same thing as saying it isn't "really" against the rules. It is against the rules, and it can be punished. The fact that many people do it and aren't punished doesn't change the law, and isn't a defense if you are in fact caught.

    This thread has been incredibly frustrating. In a final attempt I will attempt to clear up what I have said and not said. I have not once said that account sharing is not against the TOS. I have not once said account sharing isn't against the rules (@DNA3000 I have included this not because you accused me but for clarity). What I have said is people who are solely account sharing with no mods are not being banned. The exception to this, as previously stated, being arena scores that are ridiculously inflated because people were grinding for 24 hours straight.

    I said 90% are sharing, obviously this is a made up statistic insinuating a high degree of account sharing. I clearly have not done the research to ascertain the exact percentages of account sharing alliances. However, it is clear that most do not believe me that account sharing is far more prevalent than anyone realizes. Although this is just confirmation bias on their parts. It is easily discernible since nearly every counterargument is simply, "I don't believe you." I have given ample evidence and reasoned arguments. The funny thing is some will accuse and ask for "real" evidence, which ironically, would be against the forum rules.

    I truly do not have a dog in this fight, other than people being unreasonable and illogical annoys me. Believe me or don't believe me. I never would have thought it would be so difficult to convince people of something so obviously true. But, eh, lesson learned. Take care folks.

    The interesting thing is you mention Confirmation Bias, and that is the basis of your argument. You are not simply asserting that it is common at higher Tiers. You've stated that they never ban on the basis of Sharing alone, that 90% of the Top Tier does it, and that your proof is you see it happening. What you fail to see is that they have banned on that basis alone, that number is not exactly accurate, and all you're doing is emphasizing the reason that they are becoming more diligent in banning the behavior. There are people who actually believe it is not acted upon and have convinced themselves that they can get away with it, simply because they're at the top. In essence, you're showing the need for further action, not proving they never ban for it. Which they do. You can stick to the bias that they don't because you see it happening, but all that does is express the need to investigate further. They have and they will.

    lol.
This discussion has been closed.