Isn't it the bot owner's job to make sure the bots are running properly? Not the staff's job?

 

Staff actually created most of the bots

 

Probably the best way in my opinion. We keep a known, public list of bots and monitor for malicious activity.

EDIT: To add on, perhaps an application process where:

• The bot owner presents the features
• The community can express their opinions
• Staff have final say

Almost like staff applications, but for bots. It may be over complicating it but it's a nice first step.

 

Can absolutely confirm. Pivillean's data has become extremely unreliable since the Lobby and SkyBlock were introduced.

Unfortunately yes.

What kind of abuse, exactly?

However, as Frosty said, that's something the bot creators have to deal with and not the staff team.

 

I don’t actually remember fully as was on break from staff for a few months when the abuse actually happened. I believe it had to do with automation, but I don’t know exactly what. What I do know was the public only had use of bots for not even a week.

Yes, I understood what Frosty said. Hence why I said

I don’t think it was clear with what I said. Staff not only owned the bots, but created most of them as well (I’ll edit my response to reflect that)

 

I mean...I’m guessing not everyone will be allowed to run bots. Like, we aren’t going to allow a new builder to run a bot, but we would allow a 4 year member to run a simple bot. Ect.

 

Thing is, even 4 year plus can abuse bots

 

some more things bots can do:

* hold stage plays
* dance, alone or as a group
* operate redstone machines (math can be handled by the bot, interacting with a relatively simple redstone creation in a complex way)
* allow for temporary "/warp" points, by accepting and offering tps on command
* march in formation, optionally following a user
* grief detection/logging
* add or remove permissions for subsections of towns (when a user is detected in/out a small area, add/remove perms)
* add/remove permissions for multiple towns at once, in a batch process
* provide banking services, (withdrawls, deposits, interest)
* provide gambling services, (raffles, lottos)
* automate construction (pixel art or otherwise; with user provided materials)
* connect chat across platforms (discord, irc, etc) (this includes chat commands)
* collect donations


edit: yes the forum has a bulleted list, no I didn't use a bulleted list. suck it.
edit edit: Jamie asked me to explain "why bots should be allowed" and not just "what bots can do" so here goes:

Allowing bots caters to users that enjoy programming by extending the number of ways one can play Minecraft on ECC. It rewards users with more versatile gameplay, and extends the value of time spent on ECC as a whole for those who participate.

Furthermore, it encourages people with technical skills (specifically programming) to play on ECC, which can potentially support the available staff for future Developers as ECC requires.

 

Doesn't that violate the current bot rules, though?

Doesn't that violate the server rules, though?
(Removing members without 3 day eviction notice & player-run lotteries.)

 

The intent was things bots CAN do, not things bots SHOULD do. Which seems applicable if we're considering a rule change

edit: thank you jdawger, yes this was not meant as a comeback but rather as an explaination, no ill intent intended