Boosting Communities Deleted from Discord, Remote FollowUnit Script to be Disabled

WoW Boosting Communities Deleted from Discord
Today, several months after the Policy Update for Organized In-Game Services, a few boosting communities in Europe got their discord server deleted.

Servers affected by this include Dawn, Nova, Oblivion, Sylvanas and Twilight. The owners of these servers also had their Discord account suspended and received the following message: "Your account participated in selling, promoting, or distributing cheats, hacks, or cracked accounts."

According to multiple sources, this is not a mass report on the discord servers. This is more likely a follow-up from Blizzard's risk team since communities simply ignored the new policy update from January and continued to offer escrow services.


Remote FollowUnit Script to be Disabled in Dragonflight and Wrath Classic
Originally Posted by Blizzard (Blue Tracker / Official Forums)
So, Blizzard has recently issued heavy-handed anti-boosting measures. However, addons are still able to accept a remote /follow command from another player. This makes boosting services more attractive as boostees can then be fully AFK for a very long time. This is (or was) a common practice for boosting on Faerlina.

How this looks in practice: A booster advertises that they are doing slave pens boosts, and that they have the auto-follow weakaura. 1-4 boostees join, and then the booster shares a weakaura with them that will accept a remote /follow command. Now after they pay the booster they can just go AFK for 30 minutes, since the booster can just type a command in party chat and the boostee characters will automatically follow the booster out of an old instance ID and into a fresh one without them even being at the keyboard.

If the above doesn’t give you an idea of what this would look like, just look at the first 10 seconds of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6voUtTiLz0

I don’t see how the ability to remotely issue a /follow command meaningfully benefits anyone except multiboxers and people selling a service that allows someone to AFK for exp/gear, and Blizzard have now shown that they don’t really appreciate either of these gameplay styles, so I’m wondering why it’s still in the game. While boosting has taken a heavy hit, there do appear to be some boosting options still available albeit not as accessible as before, so in my mind it makes sense to make whatever’s left as inconvenient as possible.

I reached out to our UI and accessibility teams and we’re investigating this.

In general, we agree that accessibility is important, but that doesn’t mean that every effort to stop automation or botting is an attack on accessibility. There are lots of game functions that the game requires a hardware event for, and it makes sense for /follow to be added to that list, based on the behavior Kruffzz suggested. We’re targeting that change for both Wrath of the Lich King Classic, and Dragonflight releases.

Before making decisions like this, we reach out to gamers with disabilities. To be clear, the change we’re planning will still allow a disabled player to follow a guide, including through the use of a Macro or UI Mod to issue the follow command. The behavior it prevents is for UI Mods to initiate a follow on their own based on receiving a message from another source, such as a message from another player.

Thanks for the suggestion, Kruffzz!
This article was originally published in forum thread: Boosting Communities Deleted from Discord, Remote FollowUnit Script to be Disabled started by Lumy View original post
Published on 2022-08-05 02:06 PM
247 Comments
Comments 247 Comments
  1. Somic's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by chaoticcrono View Post
    boosting is not against the rules, advertising them outside of the game is.

    I don't know if he still doesnt it or not and it doesnt really matter as its not against the rules to do so.

    that said im just repeating myself now so ill just let onlookers make up their own mind.

    at the end of the day imo discord shouldnt have messed with their accounts though it not really surprising with platforms trying to enforce bans across multiple platforms for an offense on one.

    - - - Updated - - -



    again breaking the rules does not mean that its cheating, but you dont care and youre just gonna call me dumb so theres no reason to continue.

    as for blizz contradicting their rules, well i guess its just rules for thee. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    You are 100% right, I am going to say you’re wrong and I am going to call you dumb because they specifically said it was. So it is. So you’re wrong. There’s nothing more to it. The fact that you still hold this opinion absolutely baffles me.
  1. Zenfoldor's Avatar
    So I guess the companies are teaming up to apply the social contract now. If all companies adopted the same terms for service, we would have a social scoring system required to purchase items. The people selling the items create the system. IMO that would be bad.

    If the grocery store finds out you use those bananas on a pizza, you’re permabanned.

    For me, hard to say wow is worth it anymore, lots of crap to put up with.

    As far as discord, I would think the World of Warcraft stigmatized software would want to appear agnostic, considering how limiting World of Warcraft is nowadays. but apparently not.
  1. Somic's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by chaoticcrono View Post
    yep im wrong, rhole communicated it in a better way.
    I literally fucking linked you the exact same thing he did, you just had to click on a link instead of embedding it for you like you’re 5.
  1. Accendor's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Abysmo3420 View Post
    You realize blizzard has to ability to do this with any website or service that uses their content? Its the reason twitch bans streamers from private servers and YouTube must take down private server videos if they request a copystrike. Just because its on a discord server doesn't allow discord to not follow blizzard rules. Its blizzard's content that they allow to be used by third party platforms.
    Doesn't change my argument
  1. Somic's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by chaoticcrono View Post
    youre bad at communicating. being snarky and insulting doesnt tend to get through to people.
    I don’t care if it hurts your feelings if I’m being snarky, quit saying dumb stuff and people won’t say snarky stuff to you. Don’t blame others for your actions.
  1. Alcsaar's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by SinR View Post
    Well that's interesting. Surprised Discord stepped in and did anything.
    Discord has been very much aggressive about banning any servers that prelude to illegal (or TOS breaking) things. For example they're particularly aggresive about banning discord servers that revolve around hacking/botting in games.
  1. Funkyjunky's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Zenfoldor View Post
    So I guess the companies are teaming up to apply the social contract now.
    Discord transparency report shows it is not a new practice that Discord ban users for the exact same reason. Which has nothing to do with the social contract

    Nothing new here. But feel free to make up your own assumptions.
  1. Cæli's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Somic View Post
    They can act against any website. I already explained to you how they can. What in the actual fuck aren’t you understanding? They can find out who they are and sue them if they wanted to.
    no, blizzard cannot act against "any" website. you obviously have no clue about how websites work. mostly anyone can host a website at home and even if they don't get a domain name there's ways to make it accessible. and even if some particular people get somehow kidnapped by the us (lol) in their own country, it doesn't mean that the site won't be run by someone else. if the provider is determined there's nothing blizzard can do, which is a feature of the internet.
  1. rhorle's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Cæli View Post
    no, blizzard cannot act against "any" website. you obviously have no clue about how websites work. mostly anyone can host a website at home and even if they don't get a domain name there's ways to make it accessible. and even if some particular people get somehow kidnapped by the us (lol) in their own country, it doesn't mean that the site won't be run by someone else. if the provider is determined there's nothing blizzard can do, which is a feature of the internet.
    All you are doing is describing how someone could evade such action. You do realize that the need for a provider to do those things means that Blizzard, or any other entity, can act against any website. It isn't like this is anything new because DMCA strikes and copyright infringement have been around on the internet for years. These type of disputes even pre-date the internet though in obviously different forms.
  1. Cæli's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by rhorle View Post
    All you are doing is describing how someone could evade such action. You do realize that the need for a provider to do those things means that Blizzard, or any other entity, can act against any website. It isn't like this is anything new because DMCA strikes and copyright infringement have been around on the internet for years. These type of disputes even pre-date the internet though in obviously different forms.
    I don't know what is your point. the provider here meant the persons operating the website. if the local jurisdiction doesn't want to cooperate with blizzard or the us, then too bad. dmca is a usa law fyi...
  1. rhorle's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Cæli View Post
    I don't know what is your point. the provider here meant the persons operating the website. if the local jurisdiction doesn't want to cooperate with blizzard or the us, then too bad. dmca is a usa law fyi...
    DMCA is the US version of the law but countries that have signed WIPO treaties have their own versions or procedures. The local jurisdiction not cooperating still indicates your original statement is wrong. You keep describing how someone can evade action taken against their site but it still means that Blizzard, or anyone else, can go after any other website to stop them from doing something.
  1. Djuntas's Avatar
    This is like the war on drugs. Wont help, and people will just die due to shitty drugs or in wow's case getting scammed and more annoyed by bad boosters.
  1. Cæli's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by rhorle View Post
    DMCA is the US version of the law but countries that have signed WIPO treaties have their own versions or procedures. The local jurisdiction not cooperating still indicates your original statement is wrong. You keep describing how someone can evade action taken against their site but it still means that Blizzard, or anyone else, can go after any other website to stop them from doing something.
    you're not making your point clear. maybe blizzard can go after someone with the "intent" to stop a website. doesn't mean they will succeed.
  1. Ealyssa's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by SinR View Post
    The other day I bought a WoW Token and blew 120k gold in a heartbeat.

    No Regrets at all. 11/10 would do it again if I didn't need to.
    And that's fine. Boosting isn't forbidden, only boosting communities are (cross-server organisations who are doing it on an industrial scale).
  1. Somic's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Cæli View Post
    you're not making your point clear. maybe blizzard can go after someone with the "intent" to stop a website. doesn't mean they will succeed.
    Trust me brother, he is making his point crystal clear, you haven’t proven to anyone here that you are even capable of understanding much. The issue lies within.
  1. rhorle's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Cæli View Post
    you're not making your point clear. maybe blizzard can go after someone with the "intent" to stop a website. doesn't mean they will succeed.
    Right. You keep describing ways a site can avoid having action taken against them. The point is I called a specific part of your statement as incorrect. Blizzard or anyone else can act against any website they want. It is as if you understand the point but refuse to connect the dots for whatever reason.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cæli View Post
    no, blizzard cannot act against "any" website. you obviously have no clue about how websites work.
  1. Delekii's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Lora View Post
    thats actually dogshit. discord doesnt need to adhere to blizzards bullshit. not that im really torn up about it but thats an extremely slippery slope to get actioned on by something that happened outside of your platform. actions that occurred before the ToS was changed should not result in anything happening if they were done within the ToS at the time. i dont get how people dont see how thats a massive fucking issue.
    Discord doesn't want to be involved with ToS breaches either, not sure why that would be a surprise.

    Everyone keeps acting as if they were forced by Blizzard, when in all likelihood they were perfectly happy to comply.
  1. Cæli's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by rhorle View Post
    Right. You keep describing ways a site can avoid having action taken against them. The point is I called a specific part of your statement as incorrect. Blizzard or anyone else can act against any website they want. It is as if you understand the point but refuse to connect the dots for whatever reason.
    "act", cambridge dictionary : act verb (HAVE AN EFFECT)

    "have an effect"

    I said that blizzard cannot have an effect against "any" websites. this is not incorrect. blizzard can try to take down a website, but it doesn't mean they will succeed. someone who don't want to be impacted by anything blizzard tries will host the website in a country that will ignore them, or will use decentralized solutions, or something else. pretty sure some countries in asia, russia, maybe the netherlands, I don't know which one, but there's surely some places where you can freely ignore blizzard.

    you're a big fan of semantics it seems? I'm finding it kind of annoying personally, way to discuss anything but the actual substance

    Quote Originally Posted by Somic View Post
    Trust me brother, he is making his point crystal clear, you haven’t proven to anyone here that you are even capable of understanding much. The issue lies within.
    his point wasn't very clear, as shown by the fact that he needed 3 lines of text and multiple sentences to answer. I've stated facts, but you seem willing to ignore many things, including how websites work, that you imagined something I didn't said, which is here for everyone to see.
  1. Somic's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Cæli View Post
    "act", cambridge dictionary : act verb (HAVE AN EFFECT)

    "have an effect"

    I said that blizzard cannot have an effect against "any" websites. this is not incorrect. blizzard can try to take down a website, but it doesn't mean they will succeed. someone who don't want to be impacted by anything blizzard tries will host the website in a country that will ignore them, or will use decentralized solutions, or something else. pretty sure some countries in asia, russia, maybe the netherlands, I don't know which one, but there's surely some places where you can freely ignore blizzard.

    you're a big fan of semantics it seems? I'm finding it kind of annoying personally, way to discuss anything but the actual substance



    his point wasn't very clear, as shown by the fact that he needed 3 lines of text and multiple sentences to answer. I've stated facts, but you seem willing to ignore many things, including how websites work, that you imagined something I didn't said, which is here for everyone to see.
    The fact that he is required to write *more* sentences in order to explain it to *you* isn’t a reflection on his ability to explain things. It’s a reflection on your ability to comprehend. You are now talking with two people who are attempting to explain something to you and you aren’t understanding still. Do you need 3? 4? 15?
  1. rhorle's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Cæli View Post
    I said that blizzard cannot have an effect against "any" websites. this is not incorrect.
    It is incorrect because in your very first post on the subject you described how a website would have to shift their operations in order to "hide" from an entity trying to stop them. Even now you indicate you understand it will have an effect because of needing decentralized solutions to hide. You keep making statements that indicate you agree with my point yet refuse to allow yourself to be wrong for whatever reason. This isn't semantics either and deflecting to insults only shows that you aren't interested in anything of substance but merely bullying your way into being correct no matter what.
Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst ...
3
4
5
6
7
... LastLast

Site Navigation

Social Media

Services

My Account

Support

Advertise

Resources

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

Our Communities

© 2023 Magic Find, Inc. All rights reserved.