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

[MoanaLisa]

I mean, the devs themselves have been caught selling boosts. Multiple times.

I don't see anyone here making a distinction between selling boosts directly for real money on discord or elsewhere (against the rules) and selling boosts for gold (not strictly against the rules). That's BS of the highest order. Blizzard is not taking a side on where the gold comes from (unless obtained illegally) but very much is taking a side against boost selling for real money.

There's also the issue of guilds acting as escrow services for boosts which is very much against the rules.

[Somic]

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.

[Zenfoldor]

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.

[Somic]

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.

[Accendor]

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

[Somic]

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.

[Alcsaar]

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.

[Funkyjunky]

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.

[Cæli]

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.

[rhorle]

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.

[Cæli]

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...

[rhorle]

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.

[Djuntas]

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.

[Cæli]

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.

[Ealyssa]

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).

[Somic]

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.

[rhorle]

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.

no, blizzard cannot act against "any" website. you obviously have no clue about how websites work.

[Delekii]

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.

[Cæli]

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

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.

[Somic]

"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?