Post Suppression Throttle

[Eluvatar]

A tool such as you describe may actually run afoul of this rule, as it would allow users to make further "restricted action" requests before the original requests are complete.

By no means do I understand tools or scripts, but by what you've just described, you don't need a tool to break this rule.

Rapidly Ctrl+Click two "withdraw embassy" buttons and you're greeted with two new tabs, each of which I assume is in the middle of processing separate "restricted action" requests. Once they've loaded, it'll look like I've just withdrawn two embassies simultaneously.

But there was no tool involved. Confirm or deny?

Yes, nationstates.net itself is not subject to this rule, and does not limit the interface it provides on this basis. It's only user-scripted content that is subject to the rule.

There is an ejection rate limit, added after the addition of Regional Officers.

I know.

Then I'm afraid I don't understand the point of your remark.

[General Knot]

By no means do I understand tools or scripts, but by what you've just described, you don't need a tool to break this rule.

Rapidly Ctrl+Click two "withdraw embassy" buttons and you're greeted with two new tabs, each of which I assume is in the middle of processing separate "restricted action" requests. Once they've loaded, it'll look like I've just withdrawn two embassies simultaneously.

But there was no tool involved. Confirm or deny?

Yes, nationstates.net itself is not subject to this rule, and does not limit the interface it provides on this basis. It's only user-scripted content that is subject to the rule.

Does "user-scripted content" include moving a button to another position on the page?

[Flanderlion]

Wasn't the illegality not the 'one click to suppress entire RMB' type scripts - that's the obvious ones, but the ones that don't finish the action before allowing the next click to happen? I swear we went through this before on the forums, and I've definitely argued with at least someone on Skype about the legality of one of these things post the first time suppression scripts got dinged.

[Caelapes]

Wasn't the illegality not the 'one click to suppress entire RMB' type scripts - that's the obvious ones, but the ones that don't finish the action before allowing the next click to happen? I swear we went through this before on the forums, and I've definitely argued with at least someone on Skype about the legality of one of these things post the first time suppression scripts got dinged.

Scripts that do not wait for NationStates to fully finish processing an action before starting another restricted action are illegal.

The Red Fleet has aggressively policed scripts for violations of this rule. No scripts authorized and made available to sailors for the past ~ten months have, to the best of our knowledge, violated this rule. In addition, our scripts voluntarily identify themselves to NationStates when executed to make it easier for moderators to conduct investigations into their use.

It is possible that people using old versions of TRF scripts or using modified versions of our scripts that maliciously impersonate us and self-report themselves to NationStates as TRF scripts are using illegal scripts. These people use them at their own peril. We do not have any control over this, except to say that anyone in The Red Fleet found to be using illegal scripts will be swiftly expelled. Only authorized sailors of The Red Fleet have access to our modern toolkit, which we have voluntarily turned over to NationStates administration for their legality review.

[McMannia]

I know that I handed off this to Tom Vasentius and McMannia in April

I dont remember recieving any tool/script from you knot. I don't even know how to use tools or scripts. if you did send me something I dont have it.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

There was an investigation of suppression/unsuppression scripts, which led to a decision to implement a technical solution to the problem.

Like happened before with telegram scripts, we sometimes have to shift the playing field because of illegal scripts, regardless of whether we feel confident enough in specific players having performed specific rulebreaking to be penalized.

That being said, penalties might yet be in the pipeline.

Any update on this? Discussion still pending? Discussion over with no punishments? What goes?

[Caelapes]

Any update on this? Discussion still pending? Discussion over with no punishments? What goes?

For what it's worth, I have not heard anything back on my own GHR in which I shared a complete breakdown of The Red Fleet's tool and provided source to our tools in question. My nation is still here, so I suppose that's an encouraging sign.

I would really appreciate it if Sedgistan could clarify what he meant with this post, which has sparked a lot of discussion and assumptions that The Red Fleet in particular uses illegal scripts, when we have worked very hard -- harder than most militaries, it seems -- to ensure script legality with all of our projects:

That script was looked into at our end, and the admins' conclusion was different to yours. It didn't look at all legal.

[Eluvatar]

After an examination of two different tools used for the purpose of mass suppression of RMB posts, and considering the technical solution adopted to the general problem of rampant mass RMB suppression, it has been decided that as both tools appear to have been designed in good faith to comply with the rules, no penalties will be issued for their use. As concerns anything like this, which would be transparently illegal, anyone who used it could be penalized.

However, regarding the tool General Knot has claimed authorship of, I should be clear:

Any script, extension, custom styling, or other way of accessing NationStates that is not a 'vanilla' unadulterated web browser which lets a user (more easily) make multiple parallel restricted actions is illegal. The stylesheet which was distributed and relocated RMB post buttons to a single place for easy access would not be legal.

One suggestion that might possibly help avoid the inconvenience of an investigation in the future would be to include, in addition to the script=yourscriptname parameter for any requests facilitated by a script, a userclick=millisecondtimestamp parameter.

For example:

Code: Select all

url = url + "/script=exampleScript_"+GM_info.script.version + "/userclick="+Date.UTC();

[Caelapes]

After an examination of two different tools used for the purpose of mass suppression of RMB posts, and considering the technical solution adopted to the general problem of rampant mass RMB suppression, it has been decided that as both tools appear to have been designed in good faith to comply with the rules, no penalties will be issued for their use. As concerns anything like this, which would be transparently illegal, anyone who used it could be penalized.

However, regarding the tool General Knot has claimed authorship of, I should be clear:

Any script, extension, custom styling, or other way of accessing NationStates that is not a 'vanilla' unadulterated web browser which lets a user (more easily) make multiple parallel restricted actions is illegal. The stylesheet which was distributed and relocated RMB post buttons to a single place for easy access would not be legal.

One suggestion that might possibly help avoid the inconvenience of an investigation in the future would be to include, in addition to the script=yourscriptname parameter for any requests facilitated by a script, a userclick=millisecondtimestamp parameter.

For example:

Code: Select all

url = url + "/script=exampleScript_"+GM_info.script.version + "/userclick="+Date.UTC();

Thank you for clarifying that our scripts were indeed designed legally and in good faith, as we have said all along.

I will be adding the "userclick" parameter to The Red Fleet's scripts and re-enabling them for users later this evening, although I'm sure with the throttle they won't find as much use in the future.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

After an examination of two different tools used for the purpose of mass suppression of RMB posts, and considering the technical solution adopted to the general problem of rampant mass RMB suppression, it has been decided that as both tools appear to have been designed in good faith to comply with the rules, no penalties will be issued for their use. As concerns anything like this, which would be transparently illegal, anyone who used it could be penalized.

However, regarding the tool General Knot has claimed authorship of, I should be clear:

Any script, extension, custom styling, or other way of accessing NationStates that is not a 'vanilla' unadulterated web browser which lets a user (more easily) make multiple parallel restricted actions is illegal. The stylesheet which was distributed and relocated RMB post buttons to a single place for easy access would not be legal.

One suggestion that might possibly help avoid the inconvenience of an investigation in the future would be to include, in addition to the script=yourscriptname parameter for any requests facilitated by a script, a userclick=millisecondtimestamp parameter.

For example:

Code: Select all

url = url + "/script=exampleScript_"+GM_info.script.version + "/userclick="+Date.UTC();

Can you clarify exactly what you're saying here a bit more? Am I correct in reading it as "Knot's and TRF's tools were both made in good faith, so there will be no punishments, but knot's is illegal and should not be used here on out. Also, you can move the supression, ejection, or endorsements buttons to make hitting them eaiser."

[Eluvatar]

I believe General Knot's tool is illegal and should not be used going forward (though it may be somewhat difficult to use it illegally now).

You can move buttons to make them easier to find and click, but if the intended use is to make it easier for the user to make multiple clicks in quick succession, you need to adjust them to not allow illegal simultaneous requests.

[Caelapes]

So, for full clarity: Knot's tool was (and still is, but cannot easily be used anymore with the addition of the throttle) illegal, while TRF's and another unnamed script were—and still are—legal?

[Eluvatar]

General Knot's tool is not legal but no penalties for its (past) use will be applied. The two tools which were closely examined were yours and General Knot's.

[Reventus Koth]

After an examination of two different tools used for the purpose of mass suppression of RMB posts, and considering the technical solution adopted to the general problem of rampant mass RMB suppression, it has been decided that as both tools appear to have been designed in good faith to comply with the rules, no penalties will be issued for their use.

Are you kidding me? Pardon my attitude Elu, but I had my nation deleted and served out a 3 month WA ban (extended to 6 for actual bad faith posting) for using Predator, a tool I wholeheartedly believed to be legal and had no reason to doubt, before Halcones was declared delete on sight . But in this instance, no punishment for the users of this script because the script authors were more transparent in the wake of the Predator scandal? That really isnt fair. Can I have Ambroscus Koth un-deleted because I used Predator in good faith?

[Atagait Denral]

no penalties for its (past) use will be applied.

Why, exactly? Predator's been brought up, and I'd Point out that a lot of people who got DEATed and WA banned hadn't used it for years. Is there a good reason that this script violation is being dealt with in such a wishy-washy manner?

[Eluvatar]

There may be a better response coming at some point, but in the mean while, I will attempt to clarify by pointing out that it is hard to comply with the simultaneity rule. Much harder than complying with... any of the other script rules. It's the only rule for which I've posted a how-to guide. It applies far wider than one might expect, on first reading.

Separately, I believe a key factor in the Predator matter was an assessment that Predator had apparently been deliberately designed to evade the limits placed on scripts.

[Caelapes]

Maybe I'm belaboring the point, but is there a reason that it has not been explicitly stated that The Red Fleet's tool is legal?

I mean, we can read between the lines that there were two scripts examined, and the one script has been explicitly stated as being illegal is not The Red Fleet's, but unless I missed it, TRF's script has not been explicitly cleared as legal after Sedgistan accused our script of not looking "at all legal." I'd appreciate the clarification.

[[violet]]

Are you kidding me? Pardon my attitude Elu, but I had my nation deleted and served out a 3 month WA ban (extended to 6 for actual bad faith posting) for using Predator, a tool I wholeheartedly believed to be legal and had no reason to doubt, before Halcones was declared delete on sight . But in this instance, no punishment for the users of this script because the script authors were more transparent in the wake of the Predator scandal?

[edit: This is all regarding a tool that self-identifies as "trf_suppress".]

There's been some confusion on this one, which is my fault, because when I was asked to look at the server logs, I initially declared that the click activity was from a bot. On further inspection, I decided it was inconclusive. It's good that the script authors have apparently been scrupulously transparent and careful to ensure rule compliance, but acting in good faith alone wouldn't have made any difference if there had been concrete evidence of illegal activity.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

Are you kidding me? Pardon my attitude Elu, but I had my nation deleted and served out a 3 month WA ban (extended to 6 for actual bad faith posting) for using Predator, a tool I wholeheartedly believed to be legal and had no reason to doubt, before Halcones was declared delete on sight . But in this instance, no punishment for the users of this script because the script authors were more transparent in the wake of the Predator scandal?

There's been some confusion on this one, which is my fault, because when I was asked to look at the server logs, I initially declared that the click activity was from a bot. On further inspection, I decided it was inconclusive. It's good that the script authors have apparently been scrupulously transparent and careful to ensure rule compliance, but acting in good faith alone wouldn't have made any difference if there had been concrete evidence of illegal activity.

So are you saying Elu was incorrect in stating the following?

I believe General Knot's tool is illegal

General Knot's tool is not legal

Like, I understand there's a bit of hypocrisy in flopping from "hey can we have an update on this" to "can y'all be on the same page before telling us what's up like it's fact" but there is a middle line to talk there. Can we get a straight-up normal-person's-english version of what exactly happened/is happening/will happen regarding this? Preferably one that either clears people of wrongdoing or alternatively fulfills the very clear statement by Sedge in the Predator thread, instead of riding this middle murk?

[[violet]]

Which one is Knot's? The CSS one that just moves the buttons? I don't know a lot of the actors or history here, I just look at scripts and logs.

Elu asked me for my opinion on the CSS one and I said I thought it would technically be illegal, since it's a tool, and it doesn't abide by the simultaneity rule. But it's also the first time I can remember a simple stylesheet being considered a tool, and it seems like a gotcha if we're saying that it's fine for the vanilla site to have a button, but if you restyle it, that button is now illegal, even though you didn't change anything about what it does. In fact, I think we explicitly say somewhere that it's fine for tools to move things around. So there's a contradiction there, and we probably need to have a mod/admin discussion about how to treat that kind of thing going forward, and shouldn't punish for it retrospectively.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

Which one is Knot's? The CSS one that just moves the buttons? I don't know a lot of the actors or history here, I just look at scripts and logs.

Elu asked me for my opinion on the CSS one and I said I thought it would technically be illegal, since it's a tool, and it doesn't abide by the simultaneity rule. But it's also the first time I can remember a simple stylesheet being considered a tool, and it seems like a gotcha if we're saying that it's fine for the vanilla site to have a button, but if you restyle it, that button is now illegal, even though you didn't change anything about what it does. So we probably need to have a mod/admin discussion about how to treat that kind of thing going forward, and probably shouldn't punish for it retrospectively.

Yes, I agree that it seems like having this discussion as a team, getting on the same page, and informing us clearly what's going on would be a good thing. Because right now, your statement on the table is, as previously quoted -

General Knot's tool is not legal

which, considering your other previous team quote -

If any player above is involved in use of an illegal script in the future, they will be DOSed.

...Puts you currently in a position of not following your very clear statement.

Or alternatively, if what you're implying is true, and there is no actual proof that the tool in question was breaking any rules, then it's not fair to Knot to have the current standing statement be a solid "It's not legal." At worst, it should be along the lines of "we're not sure if it's legal." It would also be helpful to clarify exactly the status of each tool in question - the TRF one claimed by Misely, and the one claimed by Knot.

More communication with us on ongoing matters like this is awesome, but it's be even more awesome if it didn't spawn twice as much confusion because we've got two admins posting that don't seem to be on the same page.

[General Knot]

So after sorting through the technical fluff as a person who has zero knowledge on all things technical, this is what I'm getting:

Moving a button is okay unless its intent is to perform multiple "restricted" actions in quick succession. However, the execution of multiple "restricted" actions in quick succession is okay as long as there was no button moved.

Is my "tool" even called a script, if there was no programming involved?

[[violet]]

Or alternatively, if what you're implying is true, and there is no actual proof that the tool in question was breaking any rules, then it's not fair to Knot to have the current standing statement be a solid "It's not legal."

Wait, the tool I initially said was illegal and later revised my opinion on was the "trf_suppress" one. Knot's one, as far as I know, is the completely unrelated CSS one. I'm not sure why you're linking them.

Knot's is definitely illegal under a technical reading of the rules (it's a tool and it breaks the simultaneity rule), but the same Script Rules also say, "It is acceptable to use a tool that merely modifies how pages look to you." Which is exactly what it does. So there's a contradiction there because nobody noticed before that a tool could do both at once, which we need to resolve, and which as far as I know the script author probably shouldn't be blamed for.

More communication with us on ongoing matters like this is awesome, but it's be even more awesome if it didn't spawn twice as much confusion because we've got two admins posting that don't seem to be on the same page.

We're completely on the same page. The reason for the trf_suppress confusion was that I said a tool was illegal and then changed my mind. The reason for the CSS confusion is that it's exposed a rule contradiction that we haven't decided yet how to sort out.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

Or alternatively, if what you're implying is true, and there is no actual proof that the tool in question was breaking any rules, then it's not fair to Knot to have the current standing statement be a solid "It's not legal."

Wait, the tool I initially said was illegal and later revised my opinion on was the "trf_suppress" one. Knot's one, as far as I know, is the completely unrelated CSS one. I'm not sure why you're linking them.

Knot's is definitely illegal under a technical reading of the rules (it's a tool and it breaks the simultaneity rule), but the same Script Rules also say, "It is acceptable to use a tool that merely modifies how pages look to you." Which is exactly what it does. So there's a contradiction there because nobody noticed before that a tool could do both at once, which we need to resolve, and which as far as I know the script author probably shouldn't be blamed for.

More communication with us on ongoing matters like this is awesome, but it's be even more awesome if it didn't spawn twice as much confusion because we've got two admins posting that don't seem to be on the same page.

We're completely on the same page. The reason for the trf_suppress confusion was that I said a tool was illegal and then changed my mind. The reason for the CSS confusion is that it's exposed a rule contradiction that we haven't decided yet how to sort out.

Well, side note, if we're sorting out confusing/contradictory wordings, mind finally getting to this one too?

[[violet]]

Well, side note, if we're sorting out confusing/contradictory wordings, mind finally getting to this one too?

Give that thread a bump; mods should update mod docs. Tell 'em I sent you.