Possible way to Handle Hackers

[Bracewar]

I am not sure if many of you know what steam is. its a service where you can d/l games on.

With that said, valve (controller of steam) can ban your account if you are found cheating. this means you no longer get to play the games you purchased through steam.

How does this pertain to SC2?

As I understand it Bnet 2.0 wants to be similar to steam.

My two cents are if you get caught cheating blizzard should ban your account for a few days (No WoW, no Wc3, no sc2 etc..) and then let you play again. repeat offenders get the ole permanent boot.

Anyone else think this would drastically cut down cheating? If people faced the threat of losing their game forever and having to buy a new one would that be a serious enough punishment?

[Snippitydurf]

I would say go with perma ban on first offense because I have zero tolerence for cheaters but I dont want the innocent guy to slip through the cracks.

So yea, first offense gets a suspension, 2nd offensive gets a ban.

[Bracewar]

This model works very well for steam games. I really do not run into many hackers. I can't recall the last time I ran into a hacker in any steam game.

Many people have games they really like and do not want to risk losing it to a cheat.

[Wretched]

Pretty sure i remember something about they won't ban you from all you b.net games if you're caught hacking SC2, or being abusive in WoW etc.

Though i would say if you're caught cheating at SC2, ban your SC2 character permanently from playing on b.net, so you're stuck with the single player, the only way to play again is to buy another copy, and attach it to your b.net account.

[Seam]

Pretty sure i remember something about they won't ban you from all you b.net games if you're caught hacking SC2, or being abusive in WoW etc.



This is true.

My wow account is banned, but I still got a beta key.

Really makes me wonder why they sent it a key though, it had no active games other than WC3 on it. o.O

[Wretched]

This is true.

My wow account is banned, but I still got a beta key.

Really makes me wonder why they sent it a key though, it had no active games other than WC3 on it. o.O



They don't base it on what games you have, it's based on your PC specs mostly.

[Wretched]

And then %@@%s-and-giggles hackers have an incentive to break into accounts and "play one game".

if that where to happen, i'd think it be like WoW, blizzard would do everything to get your account back if you're hacked.

PS: everybody should have an authenticator.

[Fellows]

They don't base it on what games you have, it's based on your PC specs mostly.

Or Mac specs, as in my case. Even though there's no Mac client yet ...

[Sanctum]

This model works very well for steam games. I really do not run into many hackers. I can't recall the last time I ran into a hacker in any steam game.

Many people have games they really like and do not want to risk losing it to a cheat.


Ever try Modern Warfare 2 on the PC? They aren't as popular as they were a few months ago but there's still a good amount of them.

[Wretched]

Or Mac specs, as in my case. Even though there's no Mac client yet ...

yeh, i guess if you uploaded your mac specs, they ignore it, as they know there is a mac beta client coming, and the probably just give it to you incase you do perhaps have a windows machine lying around somewhere...or you're running that bootcamp thing i hear so much about.

[Wretched]

I don't have a problem with it if the damn things work properly.

you saying authenticators don't work properly?

mine works great, though i never did get hacked before i had one, and havn't since, it still works, I press the button and a number pops up, i type it in and I have access to my games, nothing i can see that prevents it from working.

[Wretched]

They have a nasty habit of breaking.

went camping, left mine in the sand and heavy rain for about an hour by accident, still works great.

if they break often for you, you just have a nasty habbit of breaking them and no looking after your own things.

[Fellows]

yeh, i guess if you uploaded your mac specs, they ignore it, as they know there is a mac beta client coming, and the probably just give it to you incase you do perhaps have a windows machine lying around somewhere...or you're running that bootcamp thing i hear so much about.

I thought they'd just ignore it as well until there was a Mac client, or that my invite was telling of one coming in the next day or so, but that was several weeks ago.

And they can obviously tell if I have an Intel machine, thus bootcamp, but it would just be a guess - my profile specs don't list any Windows aspects at all.

Oh well, I'm not complaining. It's a good thing I'm really enjoying this game and the Mac client is suppose to be coming soon, because I really hate booting into and using Windows.

[Stuff]

COnsidering this is beta.. I say it should be extra-gruesome.

Close their entire battle.net account. Including any associated World of Warcraft accounts, and ban any CD-key associated with them for any Blizzard game permanently.

Delete, Ban, Burn the Villages, Salt the Earth.

[Wretched]

Going off what I've read. And considering the process of disabling one involves giving personal information to Blizzard that I wouldn't give to a government employee, I'll only be down for one if they make sure the things don't fail in any capacity.

Haha, make them completely indestructable...

...also, i've had to go through that process before, i accidently re-formated my iPhone and didn't have the serial number written down somewhere.

but i have a proper one now, which the serial number written down in a safe place just in-case i lose it or it gets damaged.

[Endureth]

First time caught should = perma ban of player's battle.net account. Screw those bastards.

[Endrick]

Perma-ban on first offense, otherwise you're essentially telling players that haven't gotten the 3 day ban, that it's ok for them to hack as much as they want until they've been caught once.

[Bracewar]

I read something about MW2 cheaters.

Thing about steam is that is a bit difficult.

They distribute other games other then valve games.

If you are caught cheating in a valve game, cs:s, dod:s, tf2 etc, they ban the account.

They won't ban the account by hacking in non-valve games. MW2 handles their own servers and banning system, I'm pretty sure.

Blizzard is in a unique position here with their new bnet. They aren't distributing any content on there except content from them or for their games. So in essence they can ban your entire bnet account seeing as they have made all the games currently associated with it.

I am also leaning towards one time is perma-ban. My friend actually got perma-banned for aim botting in cs:s. He hasn't been on in 438 days and counting!

[Bracewar]

Also, lets try to keep discussion up so maybe a blue will read this and pass on the community's feelings on the issue of cheating.

How ever i wouldn't consider these forums to be representative of the community as a whole.

Maybe a poll on all their major game websites.

What actions do you think should be taken against cheaters/hackers?

1.) Perma-ban first time

2.) Suspension then ban for second offense

Things of that nature

[Aryxymaraki]

Permanently ban the battle.net account on the first offense.

*##! those mother*##!ers.

[Bracewar]

Permanently ban the battle.net account on the first offense.

*##! those mother*##!ers.

i think i felt your emotion through my screen on that one lol

[Wretched]

There's a lot that can go wrong with them, and I really don't want to have to way to play the game I purchased because one of their products broke on me.

Meh. Guess that's what ICCUP is for.

sorry but it just sounds like you havn't looked after yours, i know a lot of people that have them, and sure there's the occasional person how stood on it, or lost it, but that's all the users fault, nothing to do with the product, and I don't know of any that have failed in general.

I'm happy to not have access to my games for a day or 2 if i lose mine, it's much better than not having access for a couple of weeks because someone stole my account, they're only games after all, i can handle doing other stuff instead for a while, i am more of a casual player anyway.

...

Okay, i'm pretty sure blizzard is already reading this thread, and they probably have ways of they are planning on implimenting to detect certain hacks/cheaters etc.

Besides, don't they have a program that monitors your memory usages, watching for certain programs and functions being executed with their games? Think it's called Warden or something, primarily it looks for 'bots' in WoW.

I know it's a real cat and mouse game with things like that, once they update it to detect hacks, the hackers just work out how to bypass it and visa-versa.

[Vexorian]

Permanently ban the battle.net account on the first offense.

*##! those mother*##!ers.And this is great .

... as long as blizzard can be 100% sure there was a hack in use. I don't like the idea of false positives when there is a zero tolerance policy...

[Wretched]

I'll repeat: I don't have an authenticator. :\

sorry, i got the impression you had one since you explained about the info you have to give to blizzard if you lose it,.

[Stuff]

And this is great .

... as long as blizzard can be 100% sure there was a hack in use. I don't like the idea of false positives when there is a zero tolerance policy...

Considering all maphacks operate the exact same way, that isn't hard.

Basically what maphack does is it simulates the persence of a unit at regular intervals via a packet being sent that disables fog of war for X radius (where X is unit vision distance). It creates an easily recognizable pattern that you can pick up on a few seconds into the game.

If a certain # of these packets are sent at a point in the game (within the first 5-10 seconds) in which it is mechanically impossible to have unit vision over the entirety of the map, then that's a concrete bust.

Secondary way is replay viewing. Dead giveaway is the perspective feature. If people are regularly clicking at places under fog of war and viewing things that 'aren't there' from their perspective.. but are tactically valuable points when it's set to 'Everyone' (i.e, a scout incoming a massing force that they otherwise didn't see, an expand starting that they otherwise wouldn't know about) that's also a concrete bust.

[Bracewar]

Okay, i'm pretty sure blizzard is already reading this thread, and they probably have ways of they are planning on implimenting to detect certain hacks/cheaters etc.

Besides, don't they have a program that monitors your memory usages, watching for certain programs and functions being executed with their games? Think it's called Warden or something, primarily it looks for 'bots' in WoW.

I know it's a real cat and mouse game with things like that, once they update it to detect hacks, the hackers just work out how to bypass it and visa-versa.

Intriguing. I am sure they have programs to detect cheats. thats not what this is really about, its what to DO with the cheaters once found.

From what folks are saying they want perma ban immediately.

Now lets say you take the average user.

Would he take the chance of losing his bnet b/c he hacked? probably not.

Eventually you whittle down the cheater community to mainly just the folks making the cheat, because a.) people are getting banned left and right for cheating, or b.) people just do not want to cheat for the sake of losing their WC3 game WoW game, etc.

[Kharne]

imo it should be first offense:3 day ban and you get a tittle called noob or cheater next to you're name so people know they are douche bags second offense would indeed be a ban

[Bracewar]

imo it should be first offense:3 day ban and you get a tittle called noob or cheater next to you're name so people know they are douche bags second offense would indeed be a ban

Adding a pseudo "scarlet letter" to a name to identify them as a past cheater. Now that is an interesting proposition!

[Divine]

I am not sure if many of you know what steam is. its a service where you can d/l games on.

With that said, valve (controller of steam) can ban your account if you are found cheating. this means you no longer get to play the games you purchased through steam.

How does this pertain to SC2?

As I understand it Bnet 2.0 wants to be similar to steam.

My two cents are if you get caught cheating blizzard should ban your account for a few days (No WoW, no Wc3, no sc2 etc..) and then let you play again. repeat offenders get the ole permanent boot.

Anyone else think this would drastically cut down cheating? If people faced the threat of losing their game forever and having to buy a new one would that be a serious enough punishment?

I don't know why OP said on the second offense give them a ban because I don't know any gaming companies that doesn't perma ban hackers on their first offense (I work for a different gaming company but it's the same here) and it should be that way. I also do believe they should perma ban the whold battle.net account and block the user from accessing those keys ever again.

[Bracewar]

I merely said it to maybe give them some slack. Clearly that is not the way to deal with them!. I am to soft! haha

[Frozen]

I am not sure if many of you know what steam is. its a service where you can d/l games on.

With that said, valve (controller of steam) can ban your account if you are found cheating. this means you no longer get to play the games you purchased through steam.

How does this pertain to SC2?

As I understand it Bnet 2.0 wants to be similar to steam.

My two cents are if you get caught cheating blizzard should ban your account for a few days (No WoW, no Wc3, no sc2 etc..) and then let you play again. repeat offenders get the ole permanent boot.

Anyone else think this would drastically cut down cheating? If people faced the threat of losing their game forever and having to buy a new one would that be a serious enough punishment?

So many of these threads, you are all too tolerant. Ban your account. no second chances. And Steam has been cracked. there is a whole site called freesteam that's dedicated to it. To combat hacking, companies look to obtrusive watchdog programs that compromise your privacy and that encourages not just the hackers that look to break a game's protections, but also groups that are against these invasions of privacy. Blizzard's Warden protection will be the same way. All I can say to all that is, Play games on a computer that you don't do your online banking or DL porn on.

[Axiris]

Hacking definitely needs to be a zero tolerance policy. One and done. Ban the entire Bnet account of course but I would even go a step further. Ban the name and CC information as well.

Oh, do it publicly as well. Publish the account names (I would say private names as well but those are private and shouldn't be released) along with associated tags/guilds. Make the database searchable as well so the community can track guilds/tags that are tied with a significant number of individuals who cheat.

[Maged]

As much as I'll regret this, here's something you'll want to read from Ghetto's blog (*cringe*), including a Blue response:

http://www.ghetto-overlord.com/Blog/?p=932

[Terralisk]

This model works very well for steam games. I really do not run into many hackers. I can't recall the last time I ran into a hacker in any steam game.

Many people have games they really like and do not want to risk losing it to a cheat.


Just play off VAC protected servers and you'll see hackers in all their glory.

[Seaturtle]

Valve doesn't ban your whole account if you cheat.

Valve only bans in VAC-protected games, and bans only apply to the game engine in which the hack was used. So, for example, if you hacked in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 and was banned, you would still be able to play Counter-Strike: Source because they use different engines.

[Axiris]

As much as I'll regret this, here's something you'll want to read from Ghetto's blog (*cringe*), including a Blue response:

http://www.ghetto-overlord.com/Blog/?p=932

I understand the paranoia that guy talks about but not cheating is easy to do, relatively speaking. The only corner case I can think of is getting hacked. If you have an authenticator, the vulnerabilities are quite difficult compared to a simple password steal so the occurrence rate will likely be low. There will always be a petition system, so stuff can be recovered for those small number of users. As for the rest, if you are hacking, you get banned from everything and you get no sympathy and you don't deserve any. You made the choice to ignore the rules and the consequences for that behavior should be a simple dropping of the banhammer on your account.

[Maged]

Originally posted by Axiris.croce

I understand the paranoia that guy talks about but not cheating is easy to do, relatively speaking. The only corner case I can think of is getting hacked. If you have an authenticator, the vulnerabilities are quite difficult compared to a simple password steal so the occurrence rate will likely be low. There will always be a petition system, so stuff can be recovered for those small number of users. As for the rest, if you are hacking, you get banned from everything and you get no sympathy and you don't deserve any. You made the choice to ignore the rules and the consequences for that behavior should be a simple dropping of the banhammer on your account.
Except that banning an entire account would cause people to lose confidence in the Battle.net system, causing them to make a new account for every game they buy, defeating everything Blizzard has been fighting for with the Battle.net system. When a player with just SC2 gets banned, they'd just be out $50-$60. Another player, however, might be out hundreds of dollars. The punishments wouldn't be applied fairly, just because a person voluntarily added all of their games to a single account.

Clearly, you are in support of Universal Default on credit cards too, I take it?

[Axiris]

Except that banning an entire account would cause people to lose confidence in the Battle.net system, causing them to make a new account for every game they buy, defeating everything Blizzard has been fighting for with the Battle.net system. When a player with just SC2 gets banned, they'd just be out $50-$60. Another player, however, might be out hundreds of dollars. The punishments wouldn't be applied fairly, just because a person voluntarily added all of their games to a single account.

Clearly, you are in support of Universal Default on credit cards too, I take it?

Its one company we are talking about here and the integrity of their games and offered playing environments. If they hack one, then they are likely to hack others and be treated as such. Yes, that is an easy work around that will always exist and people will use (mostly those that are trying to game the system I might add).

Now, your argument about fairly applying the penalty is just plain crap. The penalty of knocking out all games is fair. You cheat while partaking in Blizzard's offered service, you get permanently banned from said service. Since your account is the leased avatar of yourself in that space (BTW it is leased from Blizzard, you don't own it, check the EULA and TOU), it would be appropriate for Blizzard to ban you from their service entirely. One company, one service, one response to cheating. Plain and simple. See the distinction from universal default? And on that note, if you default on one card you are risky for other companies. There is a reason credit checks exist to help determine interest rates.

[Bracewar]

All great points.

So I guess we have boiled it down to this.

If you get caught cheating BAN HAMMER!

Now the issue is if they should ban ALL associated games on the bnet account or just that singular game?

[Maged]

Originally posted by Axiris.croce

Its one company we are talking about here and the integrity of their games and offered playing environments. If they hack one, then they are likely to hack others and be treated as such. Yes, that is an easy work around that will always exist and people will use (mostly those that are trying to game the system I might add).
Take a look at the bolded point for a second. The people that game the system like that are most likely going to remain hackers no matter what. That I will not contest. The people that don't do that, however, are the people who just casually try hacks and don't think through the consequences. These are the people that can be redeemed if you give them a second chance. They don't deserve to lose access to every Blizzard game they own. In fact, for the first offense they should just be banned for a defined length of time (say, one month), but that is for a different thread.

Originally posted by Axiris.croce

Now, your argument about fairly applying the penalty is just plain crap. The penalty of knocking out all games is fair.
At the end of the day, you just end up punishing the idiots who hack more than the people who actually deserve extra punishment. It'd be like sentencing a shoplifter to death but a mob boss for just a few months. Do they both need to be punished? Hell yes! But let's get our priorities straight.

Originally posted by Axiris.croce

You cheat while partaking in Blizzard's offered service, you get permanently banned from said service. Since your account is the leased avatar of yourself in that space (BTW it is leased from Blizzard, you don't own it, check the EULA and TOU), it would be appropriate for Blizzard to ban you from their service entirely.
Technically correct if you define an "account" as being an individual game license. However, as I believe you are defining it, you are mistaken. Every game license comes with its own agreement, independent of other licenses on the Battle.net account. In fact, your suggestion may very well be illegal. I don't know if such an issue has ever been decided by a court.

Originally posted by Axiris.croce

One company, one service, one response to cheating. Plain and simple. See the distinction from universal default?
That may be the case right now, but what if Blizzard allowed other companies to use the service, like Steam? (I know, it's unlikely) Would this still be okay to you if, say, WoW was made by a different company?

Originally posted by Axiris.croce

And on that note, if you default on one card you are risky for other companies. There is a reason credit checks exist to help determine interest rates.
And that's why it's such a great analogy. If you hack on one game, there is a great risk that you'll hack in another. Yet, I wonder why it's going away...

The last thing Blizzard wants is people making multiple Battle.net accounts. The real reason for the Battle.net accounts is to make the average gamer hesitate about selling their account after they get bored of a game since they'd have to sell their other games in the process. It's one reason why you don't see many beta opt-ins selling their beta access. This is extra money in Blizzard's pocket.

[Axiris]

Take a look at the bolded point for a second. The people that game the system like that are most likely going to remain hackers no matter what. That I will not contest. The people that don't do that, however, are the people who just casually try hacks and don't think through the consequences. These are the people that can be redeemed if you give them a second chance. They don't deserve to lose access to every Blizzard game they own. In fact, for the first offense they should just be banned for a defined length of time (say, one month), but that is for a different thread.

At the end of the day, you just end up punishing the idiots who hack more than the people who actually deserve extra punishment. It'd be like sentencing a shoplifter to death but a mob boss for just a few months. Do they both need to be punished? Hell yes! But let's get our priorities straight.

Casually trying hacks sounds a lot like casually trying shoplifting or casually hijacking a car. Its still cheating (illegal in the other cases) and you made the choice to do it so you get banned just like everyone else. Is it really too much to ask people to not cheat in a game? Now, I do see your point a little but I am not very tolerant of any cheating because not cheating is so easy to do. As for priorities, the first priority is to prevent cheating and the best way to do that is have an immediate and quite costly punishment for cheating no matter who you are. You will remember that I am the one that suggested banning everything attached to that individual (highly unlikely and incredibly difficult problem).


Technically correct if you define an "account" as being an individual game license. However, as I believe you are defining it, you are mistaken. Every game license comes with its own agreement, independent of other licenses on the Battle.net account. In fact, your suggestion may very well be illegal. I don't know if such an issue has ever been decided by a court.
Check it out. I am certainly no lawyer so I may well be entirely wrong but as I read it, you are leasing your Bnet account from Blizzard. Anything connected with that account falls under the same legal agreements. Now, whether it has been held up in court, I have not a clue but I would be interested.


That may be the case right now, but what if Blizzard allowed other companies to use the service, like Steam? (I know, it's unlikely) Would this still be okay to you if, say, WoW was made by a different company?

And that's why it's such a great analogy. If you hack on one game, there is a great risk that you'll hack in another. Yet, I wonder why it's going away...

The last thing Blizzard wants is people making multiple Battle.net accounts. The real reason for the Battle.net accounts is to make the average gamer hesitate about selling their account after they get bored of a game since they'd have to sell their other games in the process. It's one reason why you don't see many beta opt-ins selling their beta access. This is extra money in Blizzard's pocket.
I have a hard time seeing Bnet as a competitor to Steam because it really isn't built as a digital distribution network right now but rather an identity tied to Blizzard games. If non-Blizzard (more correctly non-Activision-Blizzard) IP is added then the rule would need to change to banning all Blizzard games.

You make a good point on the hesitation bit and I would add to it. Blizzard wants to make the average gamer hesitate about using hacks as it keeps integrity of the online gaming community and more money down the road for Blizzard. A majority of hackers aren't the "hardcore" from above but rather those you characterize as casual. And, guess what, those that are hardcore really fall into two groups. One group is really all about hacking cause they can. They will continue to game the system and that won't change no matter the punishment. For some twisted reason, it brings them some jollies to cheat. The other group is casuals who keep hacking because they can get away with it and it doesn't really cost them anything. So, having a harsh punishment will deter most hackers and even eliminate a portion of the "hardcore" population because those that casually do it won't keep doing it.

[Maged]

Originally posted by Axiris.croce

Now, I do see your point a little
And that's all I ask.

I think we have enough here for Blizzard to make this decision on their own. I have nothing further to add.

[Anon]

Most likely,older games won't be tied to this (aka,they won't ban the keys as well),however newer games are

If they did this all people would do is not tie old games to it "just in case".It's just a convenience atm for sc-wcIII,not a pre-req.

SCII,WoW,and DIII however will suffer this.One gets banned they all get banned (since if you're banned from your b.net account,you can't enter anything in it).

Only problem here is it doesn't affect real hackers.They'll just make multiple B.net accounts.

EDIT:and no,B.net doesn't compete with steam.Not for a long shot.Even in social features B.net falls flat on it's face.

The overlay and ability to see where friends are (even in non-valve games) is priceless.I feel most steam users will just run B.net through steam.

[Crisischild]

Didn't steam get a ton of Flak for crap like that and stopped banning entire accounts? I hate hackers as much as the next guy but that's like seizing someones house for speeding in his car.

Blizz needs to be firm but fair to hackers. Don't ban them Blizz, send a Dark Templar and a Dark Archon to..."reeducate" them.

Edit: Blizz won't unban accounts. EVER. I can see keyloged accounts being used to hack, permabanned, and the victim is forced to fork out another potentially 120+$ for a new bnet account.

[Anon]

Didn't steam get a ton of Flak for crap like that and stopped banning entire accounts? I hate hackers as much as the next guy but that's like seizing someones house for speeding in his car.

Blizz needs to be firm but fair to hackers. Don't ban them Blizz, send a Dark Templar and a Dark Archon to..."reeducate" them.

Edit: Blizz won't unban accounts. EVER. I can see keyloged accounts being used to hack, permabanned, and the victim is forced to fork out another potentially 120+$ for a new bnet account.

The original post was about what happens when you actually get banned...but yeah,Steam could personally ban you for cheating i think....pretty bad since a machine judges you and IIRC Valve isn't willing to change the decision.

But i like your plan,i think DT's would be more effective :)

Or better yet,screw the subtlety,send a Marauder.


Edit: Blizz won't unban accounts. EVER. I can see keyloged accounts being used to hack, permabanned, and the victim is forced to fork out another potentially 120+$ for a new bnet account.

It's for reasons like your edit that Blizzard had an entire forum campaign towards advertising safe net usage and buying authenticators.They've done enough for the idiots imo.

[Zacd]

I think a year ban would be fine, this game will be played for years and kids change.

[Zachet]

Considering all maphacks operate the exact same way, that isn't hard.

Basically what maphack does is it simulates the persence of a unit at regular intervals via a packet being sent that disables fog of war for X radius (where X is unit vision distance). It creates an easily recognizable pattern that you can pick up on a few seconds into the game.

If a certain # of these packets are sent at a point in the game (within the first 5-10 seconds) in which it is mechanically impossible to have unit vision over the entirety of the map, then that's a concrete bust.

Secondary way is replay viewing. Dead giveaway is the perspective feature. If people are regularly clicking at places under fog of war and viewing things that 'aren't there' from their perspective.. but are tactically valuable points when it's set to 'Everyone' (i.e, a scout incoming a massing force that they otherwise didn't see, an expand starting that they otherwise wouldn't know about) that's also a concrete bust.

No, not all maphacks operate the same way. Infact, most maphacks will operate on the client side rather than sending packets to the server side as that is 100% more likely to get caught, stopped, and cause random issues. You will see most 'hacks' these days will actually use DLL injectors into the client in memory and not send any packets, in fact if it sent any packets they are more likely to be sending your logged keys to the bot-master.

It still saddens me the term 'hacker' is being use so negatively and associating with simple cheaters.

The chance of blizzard replying to this thread rather than just locking it is low, as it is a very touchy subject that most forum moderators would not post about as they do not have (most likely) the specialization nor the right wording that would not be viewed wrong and cause an uproar within the community.