So there ARE still TR? Thought that program was ended... Is admitting that also breaking NDA? Hmm... Also let me ftfy-- "I have nothing constructive to add so I'll attack people attempting to stop spoofing instead of attempting to help end spoofers." The forums never cease to amaze. 🤣
On that note, know we've locally seen FT tickets sitting open indefinitely as well since at least friday and spoofer still active with impossible travel times. Whee.
The TR program ended, but AFAIK the last group are still bound by NDA's even though the program is over. It's a common thing in business that you're NDA'd for 5-10 years after the purpose ends, for commercial in confidence reasons.
Cool. How are you adding to the conversation again? Seems like an "XM Ambassador" should do better.
I also have an open ticket that's now over 7 days old.
As I mentioned in this thread before:
While the customer support system regarding anti-spoofing reports are obviously not doing the job effectively as expected, some forum users do have a robust systematic way of questioning and despairing anti-spoof volunteers.
From the "I Was a Trusted Reporter AMA" reddit thread of approximately 3 years ago...no NDAs were signed.
The TR program has gone through multiple iterations. The iteration following the one from that Reddit post (if memory serves correctly) did require NDAs:
Both the Vanguards and the Trusted Reporters have agreed to a non-disclosure agreement and will be unable to discuss the details of the program.
I do not know the identity of the TR I referenced, I was merely told that one was involved...therefore I cannot say with any certainty which iteration of TR program that individual was associated with. Can you?
That sounds very, very hard to enforce even from a legal perspective. This isn't anything with their product from a coding or business standpoint, it's their effectiveness of performing an action.
Yeah I was part of that second iteration, but it ended long ago. The later round had an NDA and were apparently not supposed to reveal their identities to people.
The point being that "Even a TR reported" given that all those programs have ended, may not have as much weight as people think. Niantic has taken full involvement over spoofing back into the Support team alone, for better or worse.
I did note that the field that someone above claimed was generated by a spoofer in Russia, is being recharged, so apparently spoofers can place their accounts outside the country and recharge inward, so the block on play there isn't complete.
The irony: legitimate players in Russia can't play, but the spoofers can and do.
Maybe a good chance to clean up cheats in Russia. Ban any active account :)
Im curious how accurate the block is. Does it work 1km inside Russian border, 100m etc.. how much if any overlap.
From my understanding, it's based on any cell of a given level that overlaps Russia, as there were some complaints in larger border cities in Estonia and Finland, but I haven't done an exacting study of it.
I imagine it's based on the same algorithm that determines whether a Wayfarer POI is shown to Great reviewers because its "In the country where they're active".
I have a situation here where an agent spoofed, got his accound banned, then created another one, which was banned, then he created yet another one (see a pattern ?) etc
My question is: how long should we go with that ? Banning one spoofer can take months sometimes, despite strong evidences, but this person already had 3 account banned for spoofing and is know playing his 4th. Is there any point of reporting this account ? Do we want to see which name will be given to the 5th ?
how long should we go with that ?
The espoused logic from Niantic is that if someone starts again, and plays legitimately, problem solved. The issue with that logic is that when they're succeeding in their goals even though an account is banned, they're not being punished and so will repeat the process.
Exactly, and since their goal is mainly to ruin the game for others from their couch it can last for long…
For an eternity, unfortunately.
Another thread about the fight that cannot be won. And also does not want to be won by niantic. The costs of mitigating the spoofing / multi-accounting or other methods of cheating sits fully with niantic and honest players in the community. Zero costs for spoofers and cheaters. Unless that is reversed and costs occur for creating throw away accounts - this fight cannot be won.
It's ultimately the legitimate players who shoulder most of the cost in mitigating the spoofing/multi-accounting. Niantic passes the cost to its consumers. While the spoofers and cheaters can get away with anything.
@Otrera35 and that is where the problem is. Why would any legitimate player be happy in the long run to pay for or invest into a situation in which the perpetrators go free? It will just lead to more and more players leaving the game. Or at least unsubscribing from CORE.
niantic need to find a way to slip the costs onto the spoofers or cheaters or multi-accounters. And the only way I can think off is to introduce some sort of fee for account creation. But others may have smarter ideas
A fee for account creation will also stop many people from even trying Ingress, even if you introduce that fee at a later stage (say after reaching L4), plenty of damage can be done by L3 accounts.
Your suggestion concerning introducing a fee for account creation seems feasible. There has to be another method to deter spoofers and cheaters that will encourage them to think twice and make them play this game because they have a stake in it. On the other hand, the problem is that Niantic has not been consistent and uniform when they enforce the anti-spoofing policies in all of its games. If players can get away with spoofing and using other apps/programs that make it easy for them to get what they want in the other game which is PoGo; they have this mentality that they can do the same thing in Ingress Prime. While the legitimate players not only shoulder the costs of the damage created by the spoofers/cheaters but get penalized with the rule changes made by Niantic to cover the damage created by spoofing/cheating. What does this cycle do to legitimate players of this game? They quit.
Yeah, Niantics stance on multi n spoofing has been whishy washy to say the least.
I'm sure ppl like Taiwanese Grandpa are well known but good publicity and money so ignored
The recent spoofing reports is a perfect example of the inefficiency of Niantic in handling this problem. It just so happen that there is a conflict in Ukraine right now and the whole issue has been swept under the rug, paving the way for an easy bandaid solution to the problem, but it fails to address the spoofing issue as a whole.
From what I'd heard, they'd have banned him if they could identify his specific accounts, but I don't know how they couldn't, when 70 accounts all move around together every night.
I have started to believe that the best way for the future will just be one of two ways.
a) everybody just accepts that spoofing and cheating will always be part of ingress. And basically amend your game play for not being affected by spoofers.
b) for ingress to die and niantic to sell off the POI database to another game company who creates for example a profitable subscription-only business model that can support adequate customer support.
You pay 100USD to 200 USD per year but get proper support with the target to get human review and response within 24h.
The idea of getting the current problems in ingress solved by using a different server type or algorithms have all failed in the past.
unrealistic travel times between two remote locations without any airfields nearby cannot even be spotted by current algorithms.
multi accounters who are all moving around together cannot be spotted
I am no IT / Developer - but in my head if the current systems cannot even spot and flag these blatant cases, then you are not “90% there” to fix the problem. You are not even 10% into a solution.
So I cannot see where from a resolution of the current problems should come from?
There is another option which is (c) Finding another game developer that has good products and good support. A bonus is that the game offers free-to-play options too. I guess the former players of this game chose the said option.
They have done something similar before, perhaps.
One of our agents flew 1000km. Could not link until support ticket lodged.
Not really acceptable as time is of the essence sometimes. (Charter flights, stopovers etc).
Agree that if current systems cannot pick up regular gear transfers from accounts that don't show on Intel, groups of accounts always together or 1000km/hr+ travel then somethings broken.
To anyone who is all "I like not showing on Intel, I only like hacking etc"... Tough, enough with excuses that don't fix a broken system. The odd deploy etc won't **** you.