Solving the bot problem
 

Letter identification is a nice step ahead for Party, and they have made sure that at least WH bots require an intricate dual comp setup to avoid immediate detection.
Upon detection, users are warned or banned with seizing of funds.
This is not enough. The final step to defeat bots is to remove the financial incentive for them. One account with seized funds is merely a bump in the road.

Here's my proposal:
* Demand ID and utility bill for cashing out.
* Add a line in T&C, stating that detected bot usage will render a fine of $10k or more.
* Use a few % of their income to hire lawyers and SUE the bot users. This will make the financial risk of bot usage exceed the potential financial gain.

It's time to bust those bastards.

Re: Solving the bot problem
 

[ QUOTE ]
* Demand ID and utility bill for cashing out

[/ QUOTE ]

How is this going to help? They're not actual robots, they are being controlled by, humans you know. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: Solving the bot problem
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
* Demand ID and utility bill for cashing out

[/ QUOTE ]

How is this going to help? They're not actual robots, they are being controlled by, humans you know. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

It is kinda hard to file law suits if bot users can open bogus accounts. By having to use their real identity they become vulnerable for legal action. You know.

Re: Solving the bot problem
 

IMO everyone should be forced to send in their fingerprints to prove they are human and identify themselves. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: Solving the bot problem
 

also they should require a live cam so that they can monitor you at all times

Re: Solving the bot problem
 

Are peopling intentionally misunderstanding me or whats up? ID is used for *identification* (just like ID usually is), not to prove that a human is playing...

Re: Solving the bot problem
 

[ QUOTE ]
Letter identification is a nice step ahead for Party, and they have made sure that at least WH bots require an intricate dual comp setup to avoid immediate detection.
Upon detection, users are warned or banned with seizing of funds.
This is not enough. The final step to defeat bots is to remove the financial incentive for them. One account with seized funds is merely a bump in the road.

Here's my proposal:
* Demand ID and utility bill for cashing out.
* Add a line in T&C, stating that detected bot usage will render a fine of $10k or more.
* Use a few % of their income to hire lawyers and SUE the bot users. This will make the financial risk of bot usage exceed the potential financial gain.

It's time to bust those bastards.

[/ QUOTE ]

This will not work:

- You want to make it hard to play online poker for the average person.

- $10K fine. Enforcable? NO!

Why don't I say a $5,000 fine for anyone who walks on my lawn. You just can't do that.

Re: Solving the bot problem
 

[ QUOTE ]
detected bot usage will render a fine of $10k or more.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, this makes a lot of sense.

[img]/images/graemlins/ooo.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Re: Solving the bot problem
 

How is this going to help? They're not actual robots, they are being controlled by, humans you know.

The saga of poopoop proves this to be false!

Re: Solving the bot problem
 

[ QUOTE ]

This will not work:

- You want to make it hard to play online poker for the average person.

- $10K fine. Enforcable? NO!

Why don't I say a $5,000 fine for anyone who walks on my lawn. You just can't do that.

[/ QUOTE ]

The average player will have to send in scanned ID/Utility bill - this may keep some customers out, but if it can save the Internet Poker business it may be needed. Some Prima sites are already enforcing this, btw.

Regarding enforcement and your example; what if you sign a contract with a person renting your house, not to step on the lawn - since the grass is very fragile - risking a fine?
Yes, this would probably be enforcable to a certain degree (I am a law student myself, granted it's mainly Swedish law, but I have studied some international contractual law). What you are saying is that no legal contracts including a fine for breaking the contract is enforcable. This is wrong.