[DENIED] Make Clear What Is the Fault of Trainers

Recently in the Report a Scammer section we've seen Rodman get banned for causing the ban of other accounts.

The sythe ruling now is if an account is banned while in the possession of a service provider, liability falls on the service provider.
I'm here to argue this because I believe that both parties are entering into a contract. One party of the two wants their account trained, while the second is providing the training.

Also, what's the point of having a terms of service if it means literally nothing?

We all know that account training is against the rules, as well as RWT. Here are some possible scenarios that worry me:

Provider finishes account, gives to customer, and they get banned later while in customer's possession.

Provider is training the account, and it gets banned for RWT. How do you know who caused it? Was it caused by previous RWT, or did the customer paying the service provider for the training cause the ban?

Provider is training the account and it gets banned for Macroing, but the service provider can provide the images for training.

Provider is training the account, and it gets banned for Gold Farming, but how do you know who is liable? Gold farming ban may or may not be correct, the gold farming stuff is bullshit. People who have IPs commonly used for training may get banned.

I just think this should NOT be case by case, because that makes no sense IMO. If someone gets someone account banned, then there should be a clear punishment.

That's just my opinion on something that I believe really needs to be talked about.

 

I own a business.

One of my employee's does an MOT on a car we have booked in. Severely fucks up the MOT and causes a crash costing my customer in excess of ~$1,000.

Liability falls on me no matter what the circumstances, even if my guy has a momentary lapse in judgement, or passes out due to exhaustion and breaks the car. Doesn't make a difference, my customer will not be out of pocket. I will be.

My worker may be let go due to negligence, I may fire him.

I am still liable as you accept liability upon creating a business.

 

If you are willing to provide a service you have to take full liability that anything that happens to the account while in service, or up to 24hr after may be at your fault, even with proper proof of training the account. That's why I do quests, if someone gets banned while i'm questing i'm not at liability, I state it in my TOS and questing generally isn't a macro offence, but a RWT offence if you were to be banned for it. With that being said, it has to be case by case otherwise some cases would be heresay and some would be proven but still not enough proof, it is a gray area for sure. All I have to say, is clarify in your tos that anything that happens to the account past 24hr of completion is not held liable to the service provider. Then again, if there is a worker involved, the service provider can't prove the account was hand done, even with proof. So again, really gray area. Don't think this can be debunked.

 

That makes no sense, if you own a repair business there is not an entity trying to shut you down 24/7.
What if you fix it, he drives away saying everything is good, then comes back 1 hour, 7 hours, 2 days later saying there is a problem. What would you do then? It was working when you gave it to him, and you don't know what he did, he may have potentially broke it.

If hundreds of accounts are trained by a worker, and only 1 gets banned, then the % that your working is botting is near 0. Jagex has delayed bans for everything, so you never know if they caused the ban or you did. When someone orders something from a service provider, most service providers have a TOS. I have learned that TOS means fuck all, so there's not really a point to have one. Why should all liability fall on the service provider when both parties are voluntarily entering into a contract knowing that there is a not so small chance that the customer will get banned?

 

And that's why it's case by case. The scenarios you mentioned are not nearly the same as the Rodman case. They all happened while the account were under his control. They all happened at the same time with him being the only point of commonality.

It wasn't an isolated incident. It wasn't after the customer left. And we aren't shutting down Rodman, he needs to pay what he owes to return.

When people hire service providers it's usually because they trust there WILL NOT be an incident. I know I wouldn't hire someone if I thought there was a decent chance of a ban occurring.

If I drop off my car at a carwash and I come back and the car is totaled, I don't say "oh well, I knew there was a slight chance you'd destroy my car, thanks for taking my money."

 

I'm not talking about his case, I only care about it as it sets precedent.

The comparisons you guys make with car washes don't make sense.

This makes more sense: If you go to an illegal gambling joint and are playing, and the cops come and bust it, taking everyone's money, are you going to complain and blame the owner of the illegal gambling joint?

 

I've check the report section pretty often just to try to see who to stay away from and just bc drama is interesting.

I've seen a semi-big service provider in the last 2 months have 3? reports on him for accounts he trained being banned for macro, and he wasn't TWC, DNTd or held responsible for any because he had his runelite or osbuddy client whatever take screenshots upon levels. Pretty much the dude used ghostmouse/autoclicker but since the levelup screenshots were runelite and not a botting client, people can't prove he botted the accs (when its painfully obvious he macrod them)

Also; as a service provider i've stopped accepting services from people who say "Hold on let me buy gold real quick to pay you" because it now puts me at risk. I'd say more than half the time someone buys a service, they buy the gold to pay for it. My account that i use to collect payments is a level 90 combat 3+ year old account with a high total. I never trade level 3s and i don't sell my gold to level 3s/gold websites/gold farmers ect. I only trade accounts i train/do services on, and sell gold to actual players, not gold merchants. Yet if the player i do a service for is dumb and trades a level 3 gold farmer & buys 250m worth of gold then gives to me and gets himself banned for RWT, i'm somehow responsible..

I'd personally like to see more consistency overall; If service providers are going to be held liable for customers buying gold for the service they order, i'd like to see service providers responsible for macroing bans that happen less than 12 hours after their service is complete.

 

1)Provider providing images even despite botting is very easy, so that point alone can get thrown out of the window already. You can even automate screenshot taking by the bot. So obviously if the account gets banned during service, its the service provider's fault and he either refunds everything or get banned. Idk how is that a scenario that worries you.

2) In Rodman's case, it wasnt ONE user's account who got banned, but multiple different users so you can't pin the blame on any one user, rather its highly likely the worker himself was to blame. I see nothing wrong here in getting the service provider to refund.


Literally all the scenarios you yourself listed happen in a myriad of different forms, each unique in what happened. And you're saying we SHOULDNT treat each case separately and go case-by-case? Then what? Establish a sweeping punishment guideline regardless of what happened in each case? Makes no sense either.

 

About your first point, a service provider had multiple reports on him within a short period of time, both showing the account that the service provider played on was banned for macroing. Pretty sure one was a perma ban as well. The service provider WAS NOT held accountable for the bans, the person who paid for service WAS NOT given a refund as far as i know.

 

I guess i missed that report then. Could you link it here perhaps for us all to see? If what you're saying indeed happened, i'm sure mods have their own version of what happened as that's a pretty unreasonable ruling if the provider did get off scot free

For a recent case, we could refer to @LatinaPvp who was banned after two people came forward after finding their accounts perm-banned for macroing while under his service. Granted, he didnt bother to dispute it by posting screenshots(which in my opinion is pretty lame evidence.) but once mods saw the timelines of ban-order date matched, the user was banned and refunds given out(he used MM for most of his orders)

 

plankgang does not train accounts legit

I didn't want to name drop/call anyone out because i don't want to slander anyone. If mods find this post inappropriate by all means remove it, it's an archieved report on forums anyone can find it.

Edit; This is just one report, i'm positive there was AT LEAST another one within ~2 weeks of this report, and i'm PRETTY SURE there was a third one within ~2 months of this one.

Also; In the screenshots of the convo the service provider says "Oh that ban is for you buying gold, not me botting" Wouldn't that make him accountable? :shrug: idek man.

 

You guys aren't understanding I don't care about Rodman's situation, but I don't agree that service providers are solely liable for accounts even when they state in their TOS that they aren't.

 

I don't think you're understanding that from what i've seen, service providers AREN'T solely liable for accounts when they state in their TOS that they aren't. Only in EXTREME situations (Such as rodmans) are they held accountable.

Also IMO, this is wrong ^

As a service provider, if an account i handtrain is banned within 6 hours of me logging off of it for macroing, sure i know it wasn't my fault, BUT at the same time like examples above show;

If you take your car to get X fixed, only to find out a day later that Y broke in the process, the company who FXIED x but BROKE y should be held accountable.

ie; IF your account gets banned after my SHORTLY/IMMEDIATELY after my service, I should be held accountable.
IF your account gets banned for RWT after YOU bought gold, YOU should be held accountable.

 

But the thing is, how can the service provider be sure that the customer didn't order, then later bot on it, causing it to get banned. If you take your car and leave the repair shop, it's done, most places are not going to repair your shit for you if you bring it back cause you could have fucked it up.

Edit: Also, staff said that TOS doesn't mean much, and that the staff ruling can override any TOS.

 

Thats the problem. As the service provider you can't really prove you didn't bot same way the customer can't prove you did bot. Thats why rulings seem so inconsistent. pretty much every report is word v word, no outcome. BUT THEN you have the extreme situations where 3-4 people are effected at once and it's no longer word vs word, its word, word, word and word vs word.

It seems like as things currently sit, a service provider could have their client auto take screenshots (Like in report proof shown above), while having 3rd party programs (Ghostmouse, AHK, autoclicker ECT) open on their computer at the same time running macros. So long as the service provider has the runelite client setup to take autoscreenshots OF JUST THE CLIENT AND NOTHING IN THE BACKROUND, nobody can prove you botted since you have screenshots on a real client. This is where "Grey areas" come into play and consistency is tossed aside due to "Lack of proof".

Edit; to address your last point in above post, user ToS DO NOT trump sythe rules. SO if your ToS says "Im not responsible for blackmarks bc i don't but" but then 6 accs get chainbanned for botting under your control, obv mods are gona say yeah ok we don't care about your ToS, BYE.

I think some of your worry is justified, but for the most part it seems like staff tends to side with the service providers in cases of word vs word (Because the case ends up being closed with no punishments)

Unless there is CLEAR evidence you RWT and got accs mass banned, or you botted and got accs mass banned ECT, you really don't have much to worry about so long as you properly protect yourself (Take screenshots of ingame, chat logs, levelups ect)

 

True that, when seeing that Rodman had multiple accounts banned in a row, that makes sense.

 

The above report i posted goes to show how little imo you need to worry so long as you take precautionary measures.

It's pretty clear that the user reported DID use autoclickers/ghostmouse/AHK ect. Look at the angle of photots 1 & 3. He clicks north on his compass and then zooms in X amount. Probably bc his recorded ghost mouse script was made @ that exact angle and it's easy to return to should his camera angle ever get moved.

HOWEVER, since he has screenshots on a RUNELITE CLIENT, it shows he wasn't on a bot client, and to my knowledge theres 0 WAY TO 100% PROVE he was using 3rd party clients (even tho to me its painfully obvious) Innocent until PROVEN guilty, not Innocent until ASSUMED guilty.

For the rodman example; i don't think mods are saying it was him that RWT'd and got accs banned. I think it's mods saying you fucked over 3/4 people or whatever because you weren't careful about who you accepted gold from, therefor its your responsibility to refund what people lost due to your fuckup. (Which still sucks, but this is why you gotta be careful)

 

This exactly, I highly doubt accounts would get banned for RWT for just training for someone else.

 

I like where you're going with the whole botting/ghost mouse thing.
I'd like to add that these botting clients basically just mirror in osbuddy/runelite now and hook together so they can't do a client detection. This is mainly for premium members that pay a decent amount monthly for it. I can't remember who it was that mentioned this on a scam report on someone, but it is very true and maybe shouldn't be taken "as" lightly if an account gets a bot ban, but who knows