I was waiting and waiting for this...can't believe it took so long for the first banning bots proposal!
As far as this specific proposal goes, while it would be easy enough to make the ToS updates being proposed, there are no details at all about how this restriction should actually be enforced (or maybe it's not intended to be enforced at all?). For example, is Splinterlands responsible for identifying accounts that are using bots? If so, how should we go about doing this? What should be done if an account is found to be violating this ToS policy? What happens if someone feels that they were incorrectly identified as a bot? Is there some type of review/challenge process? There are probably even more things I couldn't come up with off the top of my head here, but the point is that there is a lot to think about and detail out when it comes to a realistic plan to ban bots and it's not just as simple as updating the ToS.
That being said, even though I don't personally support any type of ban on using bots, I do fully support the collective, super-majority decision of the SPS stakeholders via the proposal system. So if you, or anyone else, is serious about a bot-banning proposal, here's what I would propose:
Since the SPS DAO controls the SPS token, but not the Splinterlands game or things like the Splinterlands Terms of Service, I would suggest that the proposal be structured around not allowing bots to earn SPS rather than updating the ToS and/or banning them from the game. The proposal could be for SPS stakeholders to elect a committee that would be responsible for identifying which accounts are using bots to play and then no SPS tokens would be awarded to accounts on that list for winning ranked battles, in loot chests, or other areas that the committee decides. The committee would be responsible for coming up with a reliable mechanism for detecting bot use and for handling any disputes or other issues that come up from accounts identified as bots. If it is the wish of the SPS stakeholders then the Splinterlands company would work with the elected committee to provide any relevant information and data they may need for performing their duties.
There would need to be some more details about how the committee gets elected and things like that, but at a high level this would be a workable proposal to prevent accounts using bots (or at least those identified as using bots) from being able to earn SPS tokens in the game, which is fully within the control of the DAO and not up to the discretion of the Splinterlands company as something like updating the ToS would be.
I just want to clarify that I in no way would be in favor of such a proposal, and would likely vote my personal SPS stake against it. I don't ever think there should be a person or group of people responsible for deciding who can or cannot participate in a supposedly free and open system like this and it leads to a very slippery slope of censorship, personal biases, and politics, which can easily bleed over to other areas of the ecosystem.
However, like I said above, even though I am personally against it, it is not up to me (which is a good thing), and I would be happy to work with the community to effectively implement any solution they collectively approve.
I would support a ban on (gameplay) bots in general. But having a "committee" to identify and judge who can and cannot obtain SPS seems like a terrible idea and I would in no way shape or form support that. I'd support dao funds going to the SPL team to take an anti (gameplay) bot stance and implementing tools to deal with them. These should ONLY target bots and not even remotely go close to anything involving personal bias, politics, etc. Of course, nothing is ever going to be perfect, but it should heavily discourage the use.
Well you're just saying that the SPL team should be the committee then, which is definitely an option, but it is still a "committee" (meaning a small group of people) that will be deciding these things and choosing who can obtain SPS through gameplay and who cannot (which is the result of "implementing tools to deal with them").
If only that were actually possible. There is NO way to 100% determine if someone is using a bot or not. So whoever is in charge of determining that will have to do the best they can and then the question comes down to how to deal with disputes, which is mainly where personal biases and politics come in. That stuff is just human nature so it doesn't really matter whether it's an elected committee or the SPL team, if it's humans then human biases come into play.
So basically to me you're saying you don't support a committee to judge who can and cannot obtain SPS through battles, but then you say you'll support basically the same exact thing as long as it's the SPL team that is the committee, if I'm reading this correctly.
I absolutely disagree. Like I said, it should be a system only going after accounts for botting. This is not making them a commitee of anything else. It could also expllicitly mention that any ruling on any other basis than suspicion of botting would not be within the authority of this system. Of course, SPL team could ignore it and rule on politics or whatnot in secret, but they could do that already if they wanted to. It's not like you don't have the power to ban people at the moment. This would merely extend what falls under bannable behavior to include botting gameplay.
Like I said, it's never going to perfect, but you can heavily disincentivize it. It should err on the side of caution when making judgments. Just like a court would (or, rather, should). You might as well say it's 100% impossible to know for sure if 99% of crimes committed have actually been committed, therefore we should abolish the legal system. That makes very little sense to me. The people who go after bots, should only judge based on bot behavior. If any other motive is suspected, it should be cracked down on. Just like you should crack down on a corrupt judge or juror.
A lot of your reply doesn't match up with what's currently being proposed. It was not without reason it did not try to create guidelines of how to enforce or even if it will be enforced at all.
"the point is that there is a lot to think about and detail out when it comes to a realistic plan to ban bots and it's not just as simple as updating the ToS."
I agree 100% here.
It's meant to be a deterrent to botting and a building block for experts to make their proposals/suggestions on how to enforce this in the future, if it's approved at all. I believe more people will be willing to work on IDing bots and what to do about them if botting battles for SPS is actually considered against the rules.
Thank you for your insight on how you'd go about this though, appreciate your time.
I understand that, my reply was to help other people reading this understand that there is a lot more than this that needs to be done to actually ban bots, and to provide an idea of how it could be accomplished. I appreciate you getting the ball rolling on this though!
this is a rabbit hole splinterlands doesn't want to go down. Blizzard has an asston more $ than SPL ever will and botting is prevalent . its just a sink of assets. if bots need asets to get rewards whats your beef? stop being triggered and move on with your life.
I don't think the idea is to enforce anything related to bots. I think the idea is just to make it forbidden, so that those people who currently run bots would stop unless they don't mind going against terms of service. So basically the idea is to reduce botting by trusting that at least a portion of current bot runners would stop simply because they know it is not allowed.
Again this is a catch 22, how do you decide who will be part of that comity and how can you enforce to make sure anyone in charge to decide what is bot and what's not don't get bribe or use and protect their own bot, collusion or Ban hammer abuse by those with this power etc.
I'm not a big fan of bot but I agree with Matt original vision that is to try and build the game itself in a way to keep it decentralized and where both bots and human player can be part of the same ecosystem and trying to find a balanced way without having to police the game all the time which cost money and time and that will pissed off over what looks like 80% of the players out there that looks like they have both main account and dozens of bots to generate more value for themself.
I still think we should try to focus on finding ways to reduce exploiting overall and find ways that whether you are a human or bot account, the fact that you play our game = you generate and bring to the game as much value as you can take out to avoid having only leeches bots.
Right now, Player Staking SPS to earn reward and soulbound cards are already a good step in that right direction without the need for this bots crusade IMO.
And really, the entire "ban bots" rhetoric is always about bots = bad but without any constructive solution to solve the real problem suggested to back that.
Personally I will vote against that proposal until someone can come up with a fully detailed way how to get rid of bot that make sense and that is not hurting the economy itself like cards rental or affecting the time it takes between battles if you get rid of the 3/4 of the current account that are not players.
I'll gladly vote in favor when someone can come with a detailed solution plan that hold the road but until then, that's a no for me.