PDA

View Full Version : got banned by probiller retarded system



Ladies lover
04-06-2016, 11:22 PM
I have granted some of my friends access to my nutaku account and of course they have different IP locations and different credit cards , paypal or whatever method they use to pay .

so 2 of them decided to get gold for the account . surprisingly I lost access to my account because it was suspected as fraud and got banned!

I contacted web support and they said they won't reactivate my account .

well I got something to say :

1)If nutaku bans user for such behavior they should at least tell them about it and warn them and not just let them do this then ban their accounts suddenly as if it is a trap . in short either eliminate the consequences or warn them that you do not support multi payment to one account

2)it is not just about refunding " that did not happen till now so the money payed is lost till now " it is about gaming achievements and history so any ideas about starting another account is ridiculous and unfair unless you transfer every gaming data from my old account to the new one in every single game along with the gold points of course .

I hope this issue is solved fast I really hate to see events going on and can not participate in them :mad:

no single game is touched by any one but me they only got access to get gold so I thought you should know that

JSensei
04-06-2016, 11:44 PM
That's super lame. I'm sorry to hear that. You clearly put a lot of work into your account, so to have it banned is a pretty big hit. Best of luck getting it resolved.

chillinfar
04-07-2016, 12:26 AM
Epoch is even worse. It doesn't let change payment methods, specially if someone USE CASH instead of a card for some cases (like SafetyPay).

I talked in the past about how shitty are Nutaku's payment processors, because these billing issues matters a lot on a pay to win focused scheme.

- - - Updated - - -


I have granted some of my friends access to my nutaku account and of course they have different IP locations and different credit cards , paypal or whatever method they use to pay .

so 2 of them decided to get gold for the account . surprisingly I lost access to my account because it was suspected as fraud and got banned!

I contacted web support and they said they won't reactivate my account .

well I got something to say :

1)If nutaku bans user for such behavior they should at least tell them about it and warn them and not just let them do this then ban their accounts suddenly as if it is a trap . in short either eliminate the consequences or warn them that you do not support multi payment to one account

2)it is not just about refunding " that did not happen till now so the money payed is lost till now " it is about gaming achievements and history so any ideas about starting another account is ridiculous and unfair unless you transfer every gaming data from my old account to the new one in every single game along with the gold points of course .

I hope this issue is solved fast I really hate to see events going on and can not participate in them :mad:

DING! It explains all, ToS changed.

In the past, Nutaku left an implicit tolerance about sharing accounts (find old macro threads), current ToS no longer has this text (http://www.nutaku.net/terms/).

At user conduct terms that was shown in the past

You agree that you (nor others using your account) shall not:

Now is

You acknowledge and agree that you shall not:

Is a great difference, because on later terms this was forbidden.


use the Website in any way that exposes us to criminal or civil liability or use our Website for fraudulent or abusive purposes (including, without limitation, by using our Website to impersonate any person or entity, or otherwise misrepresent your affiliation with a person, entity or our Website);


And Nutaku or it's processors guess you cheated this term. What i can guess about this case is one payment failed or was blocked, then probiller dropped the alarm signal. Yes, you can get banned with just ONE failure.

They has no need to response your claims on these cases, but exist an email to try on ToS, report@nutaku.net. But i suggest to ask on their facebook first.

ChibiKika
04-07-2016, 06:37 AM
That honestly seems loosely interpreted, since in this particular case it's not the impersonation or misrepresentation of an individual, but simply the shared use of multiple individuals, in which all involved parties have consented. While it could very well be considered a ToS violation, I doubt it was the trigger, even if it could be spun both ways.

If I had to guess, it's probably a case of the payment system's pre-programmed fraud detection giving a red flag due to multiple payment methods that don't correlate to the same individual and choosing to lock your account down in terms of future payments and subsequently alerting Nutaku in the process, which Nutaku is probably also programmed to follow suit. From then on, Nutaku's approach (from a dick-wad business perspective) would be that they could re-activate your account but there's no particular benefit in doing so since you still won't be able to make any more future purchases anyways so long as that payment portal's locked down.

And I know what you're gonna say, something along the lines of "just make it so that I can buy gold again, that simple". Yeah, it probably would be that simple if it weren't a separate-party system that deals with the payment side, and while Nutaku may be willing to re-activate the account, it's difficult to say if the payment site would do the same, more so if they have a list of confusing terms that your little multi-user stunt potentially violated.

And finally regarding your gri-...suggestions:

-General Note: Under the terms of use, Nutaku technically reserves the right to revoke your account access or even outright shut down the site for no reason whatsoever, even if you were a "law-abiding citizen" of sorts. While game sites almost never exercise that right, it's there to say "we can do what we want", so your "should"s don't exactly apply. That being said, I get that you mean "should" as in "this would be a much more hospitable approach to users" but even so...

1. Eliminating the consequences (in other words, not banning the account) is out of the question. Allowing suspicious activity to run free, especially in the perspective of fraud, is incredibly dangerous and runs the risk of stirring up further problems down the road if not stopped early. I'm pretty sure the payment portal would prefer that they stopped payments to an account early and had to deal with a customer wanting to make more payments instead of having to deal with a non-customer who got his/her credit card(s) stolen and wants a massive refund in the time the payment site did nothing. The multi-payment warning sounds nice but ultimately you won't be able to see it since the site would automatically deny you access thereafter.

2. From a business perspective, importing existing account data into a new account is wasteful on time and available resource. Plus, other than bypassing it for that one instance, it fails to solve the underlying issue as your account will get locked down yet again if it senses the same suspicious activity from before. From a moral perspective, it teaches you, the user, absolutely nothing and gives you the impression that you got away with it scot-free and can just do it again expecting to get bailed out down the road.

On my own personal take, you seem to be talking in a way (or just lacking the tone that would suggest otherwise) that seems like you think (and will continue to think) having several users run your account is perfectly acceptable (I honestly don't know whether or not it is but I'd suggest you find that out one way or another). By inference, I'm thinking there's a possibility that during your time contacting customer service you came off to them as unapologetic and likely to create the same issues again, in which case naturally they'd refuse.

There are frankly quite a few things that I don't quite understand. Was it Nutaku or the billing portal that chose to lock the account down? If it was Nutaku, was it due to a specific ToS violation and are they expecting you to prove you won't do it again before they reconsider your access rights? On the other hand, if it was the billing portal, what would it take for the portal to reinstate you and subsequently allow account access?

Ladies lover
04-07-2016, 07:28 AM
That honestly seems loosely interpreted, since in this particular case it's not the impersonation or misrepresentation of an individual, but simply the shared use of multiple individuals, in which all involved parties have consented. While it could very well be considered a ToS violation, I doubt it was the trigger, even if it could be spun both ways.

If I had to guess, it's probably a case of the payment system's pre-programmed fraud detection giving a red flag due to multiple payment methods that don't correlate to the same individual and choosing to lock your account down in terms of future payments and subsequently alerting Nutaku in the process, which Nutaku is probably also programmed to follow suit. From then on, Nutaku's approach (from a dick-wad business perspective) would be that they could re-activate your account but there's no particular benefit in doing so since you still won't be able to make any more future purchases anyways so long as that payment portal's locked down.

And I know what you're gonna say, something along the lines of "just make it so that I can buy gold again, that simple". Yeah, it probably would be that simple if it weren't a separate-party system that deals with the payment side, and while Nutaku may be willing to re-activate the account, it's difficult to say if the payment site would do the same, more so if they have a list of confusing terms that your little multi-user stunt potentially violated.

And finally regarding your gri-...suggestions:

-General Note: Under the terms of use, Nutaku technically reserves the right to revoke your account access or even outright shut down the site for no reason whatsoever, even if you were a "law-abiding citizen" of sorts. While game sites almost never exercise that right, it's there to say "we can do what we want", so your "should"s don't exactly apply. That being said, I get that you mean "should" as in "this would be a much more hospitable approach to users" but even so...

1. Eliminating the consequences (in other words, not banning the account) is out of the question. Allowing suspicious activity to run free, especially in the perspective of fraud, is incredibly dangerous and runs the risk of stirring up further problems down the road if not stopped early. I'm pretty sure the payment portal would prefer that they stopped payments to an account early and had to deal with a customer wanting to make more payments instead of having to deal with a non-customer who got his/her credit card(s) stolen and wants a massive refund in the time the payment site did nothing. The multi-payment warning sounds nice but ultimately you won't be able to see it since the site would automatically deny you access thereafter.

2. From a business perspective, importing existing account data into a new account is wasteful on time and available resource. Plus, other than bypassing it for that one instance, it fails to solve the underlying issue as your account will get locked down yet again if it senses the same suspicious activity from before. From a moral perspective, it teaches you, the user, absolutely nothing and gives you the impression that you got away with it scot-free and can just do it again expecting to get bailed out down the road.

On my own personal take, you seem to be talking in a way (or just lacking the tone that would suggest otherwise) that seems like you think (and will continue to think) having several users run your account is perfectly acceptable (I honestly don't know whether or not it is but I'd suggest you find that out one way or another). By inference, I'm thinking there's a possibility that during your time contacting customer service you came off to them as unapologetic and likely to create the same issues again, in which case naturally they'd refuse.

There are frankly quite a few things that I don't quite understand. Was it Nutaku or the billing portal that chose to lock the account down? If it was Nutaku, was it due to a specific ToS violation and are they expecting you to prove you won't do it again before they reconsider your access rights? On the other hand, if it was the billing portal, what would it take for the portal to reinstate you and subsequently allow account access?

1020 check this


multi management is nothing wrong . I am currently managing another friend account and it is not banned .

chillinfar
04-07-2016, 10:19 AM
That honestly seems loosely interpreted, since in this particular case it's not the impersonation or misrepresentation of an individual, but simply the shared use of multiple individuals, in which all involved parties have consented. While it could very well be considered a ToS violation, I doubt it was the trigger, even if it could be spun both ways.



The problem starts when someone did it wrong with payments doesn't made by original owner (hijacking suspects or even worse, carding (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carding_(fraud)), from a business side). Probiller report Nutaku, Nutaku ban the suspicious account.

That's why i quoted that term, but isn't the only which now could ban accounts with this kind of management.

- - - Updated - - -

The fact is Nutaku changed the way how they manage their accounts and ToS has since last gambit a lot of changes. Things tolerated in the past are now suspicious.

P.S: Other change is about hiding IP, a VPN ban? I should ask Nutaku about this, because VPN is a bad cure for many diseases from peruvian ISP (i.e traffic shaping against Flash content)

JSensei
04-07-2016, 01:06 PM
I do not know how they interpret the ToS but this jumps out at me as possible things that could have gotten you flagged:

create more than one account per platform to access our Website;

use another person or entity’s email address in order to sign up to use our Website;

sell, transfer or try to sell or transfer an account with us or any part of an account including any virtual currency or virtual goods;

If you are using more than one account (or sharing several accounts among friends) then it's possible that they interpret that action as a ToS violation. They could spin it as transferring the account (even though you aren't selling it, you ARE transferring it to another person for free to use) or say that by managing your account (and at least one of your friends' accounts) that you effectively have two accounts. That's a very strict reading and interpretation of the rules, but it's not out of bounds for them.

Personally, I don't really see any harm in sharing accounts between people, but as the ToS is written, it does not appear to be permitted. The fact that you have never been previously flagged doesn't mean that it's not illegal. It just means that you've never been caught. Assuming you've ever driven a car, I'm willing to bet that you have exceeded the speed limit. Strictly speaking, every time you exceed the speed limit, you can potentially be flagged and given a fine. In the example of speeding, cops are usually OK with you driving too fast.... until they decide they are no longer okay with it. Driving 10 over? Ehhh.... no ticket. 15 over? That's a ticket. 10 over again? Ummm.... yeah.. ticket.

Many rules are loosely enforced, which makes enforcement seem arbitrary. I can fully understand you feeling frustrated. While they are completely within their rights to ban you, I would hope they would reverse the decision. It doesn't help them to turn away a paying customer, so they may decide to reinstate your account, provided you promise to no longer share accounts. The rule may be stupid, but sadly, they get to make the rules. And they get to enforce the rules, whether it's strictly or loosely or something in between.

chillinfar
04-07-2016, 01:19 PM
I do not know how they interpret the ToS but this jumps out at me as possible things that could have gotten you flagged:

create more than one account per platform to access our Website;

use another person or entity’s email address in order to sign up to use our Website;

sell, transfer or try to sell or transfer an account with us or any part of an account including any virtual currency or virtual goods;

If you are using more than one account (or sharing several accounts among friends) then it's possible that they interpret that action as a ToS violation. They could spin it as transferring the account (even though you aren't selling it, you ARE transferring it to another person for free to use) or say that by managing your account (and at least one of your friends' accounts) that you effectively have two accounts. That's a very strict reading and interpretation of the rules, but it's not out of bounds for them.

As i said before, ToS changed a lot. Those terms wasn't present at original state.

The lesson is, read ToS often, most services change them without any notice (and they state it clearly).

- - - Updated - - -


1020 check this


this
THIS
T H I S

1021

What i said. Go back to Steam m8

Ladies lover
04-07-2016, 02:50 PM
you guys are really making things too deep it is not about ToS violation or anything like that because I know a lot friends from long time who are sharing accounts no single one is banned .

it simple matter : wrong detection of fraud caused by retarded fraud-phobic probiller system .

see the picture and you will know what I mean .

. and it is their mistake not mine they did not say they fail to support multi source payment.

they claim that a payment was done with no balance ( fake) and they said the payment was refunded and check your bank!??!!?

how can I be refunded if it is fake in the first place ?!

the payment was true I am sure of it and not refunded yet I talked to my friends and they got nothing back .

so now it is clear I was wrongfully detected as fraud because of things they were shy to say as ( dear customer we currently are fucked up and fail to handle multi source payment from different IPs because it will be detected as fraud you can wait for us to develop a little ) 1022

JSensei
04-07-2016, 04:24 PM
you guys are really making things too deep it is not about ToS violation or anything like that because I know a lot friends from long time who are sharing accounts no single one is banned .

it simple matter : wrong detection of fraud caused by retarded fraud-phobic probiller system .

see the picture and you will know what I mean .

. and it is their mistake not mine they did not say they fail to support multi source payment.

they claim that a payment was done with no balance ( fake) and they said the payment was refunded and check your bank!??!!?

how can I be refunded if it is fake in the first place ?!

the payment was true I am sure of it and not refunded yet I talked to my friends and they got nothing back .

so now it is clear I was wrongfully detected as fraud because of things they were shy to say as ( dear customer we currently are fucked up and fail to handle multi source payment from different IPs because it will be detected as fraud you can wait for us to develop a little ) 1022

I think they can and did make an argument that it IS a ToS violation. I think it's a stupid rule, but it looks like they changed their policy regarding sharing of accounts. I agree that the payment is what got you flagged, but once they looked at you, they saw the ToS thing. Again, I personally see nothing wrong with sharing accounts if that's your thing, but I can see them interpreting the rules to say that sharing accounts is a ToS violation. It just depends on if you want to be really strict and use a "letter of the law" reading.

The bigger issue is if they want to say that you can't share accounts, then the enforcement is not evenhanded at all. They seem to loosely enforce the rules until they don't. When they DO enforce them, they crucify you.

I think you certainly got a raw deal. They are ENTIRELY justified in screwing you, but that doesn't really make it a good decision. But then again, according to the ToS, they can ban anyone for any reason. They don't have to tell you why.

ChibiKika
04-07-2016, 05:18 PM
(In case it hasn't been brought up, there are multiple payment portals for different methods of payment. Probiller is for credit cards, Epoch manages Paypal, and I'm not sure of the other payment...

Unregistered
04-07-2016, 06:01 PM
I don't know what people are thinking now, but I have never shared accounts with anyone on any game I was playing. The only time I ever gave anyone access to any of my gaming accounts was when I was completely done with ALL accounts for that particular game and was never going to come back. If those accounts and all accounts associated with them get banned for account sharing, why would I care?

If I care about a gaming account, I don't want anyone else to do things in the game that reflect poorly on me or make bad decisions with my account's items. Though there aren't too many ways this can happen in PPS, it's certainly possible in some of the other Nutaku games and the only way I can be sure is to be the only one to use my account.

Tenhou
04-07-2016, 06:28 PM
I don't know what people are thinking now, but I have never shared accounts with anyone on any game I was playing.

If I care about a gaming account, I don't want anyone else to do things in the game that reflect poorly on me or make bad decisions with my account's items. Though there aren't too many ways this can happen in PPS, it's certainly possible in some of the other Nutaku games and the only way I can be sure is to be the only one to use my account.

I guess that depends on how well you can trust people. Going on vacation becomes a lot more fun if someone who doesn't mess up takes care of your account while you're away. Especially with the constant events of most games. Of course, this requires someone who knows what to do as well as clear instructions on how to handle different situations.

chillinfar
04-07-2016, 07:04 PM
Oh, and those payment processors belongs to Mindgeek, owner of RK, Brazzers, Pornhub. This means you are blacklisted for those sides too.

Go torrent!

Tenhou
04-07-2016, 07:26 PM
Who needs pornhub when there's tsumino anyways? 0.o

And who the hell pays for pornhub prem---

I guess i'd be a hypocrite if i continued that sentence considering i have put a fair deal of money into some nutaku games.

JSensei
04-07-2016, 11:18 PM
Tsumino? This sounds like something I need to know about. <br />
<br />
- - - Updated - - - <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
I'm not so sure that Nutaku is okay with sharing. As Chillin pointed out, they recently changed the wording...

ChibiKika
04-08-2016, 12:13 AM
Ah...something I forgot to mention when looking through Probiller's T&C:

It's vague but in the same area they more or less say that you shouldn't have more than one person using a subscriber account, it also says you are "liable for unauthorized use of service until MG Billing or the site is notified of the security breach by e-mail or telephone", pretty much...if it's fraud, you won't get a refund until you say it's fraud and they agree.

Back to the original issue...

I'll agree that Nutaku may have the concern that sharing an account with others may pose the risk of a minor accessing their age-inappropriate material, and that their seemingly minor edits to the ToS reflect a safety net they can use in the event that particular instance is brought to light but ultimately I find in most game companies that have that clause, they only use that right when something serious occurs like a user blatantly (publicly) goes about boasting something that was most certainly a direct violation or the gaming community that individual was in already wanted him/her gone for bad conduct of a different sort and the company happened to find out the violation was going on as well. They often don't drop the ban hammer if you're at the very least on the surface being a "model citizen" with a loosely interpreted violation hidden in the closet and they'd only take it that far if your skeletons are out on the street dancing about.

As a result I'm still leaning towards the likeliness that this is an incident mostly in regards to Probiller as their system of conduct in the terms matches what happened in this particular instance. The system flagged the use of different payment methods linked to very different individuals in different regions, a fraud alert was set off and subsequently the subscriber account locked down. Nutaku, being the site connected to this account, was notified and probably in the chain reaction chose to lock down their side of the account as well.

Frankly at this point I'm not even sure if there's a resolution to this problem. If I were in this situation. I'd contact Probiller to state that this was an honest mistake between me and some friends and that it won't happen again (have to realize at this point that you are quite literally not allowed to have more than one person making purchases on the account) and from that point, try to convince Nutaku that the Probiller side has been resolved and that I'd like my account reactivated and what steps would be necessary for me to do so.

I'm remembering from your posted picture earlier though that the Probiller customer service representative was unable to find your account, meaning there's a chance the account number and primary credit card holder was set to one of your friends for whatever reason. On that front I think you have the option of either trying to get your friend(s) to help you resolve it or contacting nutaku again to ask them for the account number as it should be linked to your presently-deactivated Nutaku account. If they're unwilling or unable to do that, well...not sure then. Probiller's been pretty confusing on my end to be honest so I've always used Epoch/Paypal.

I'm not gonna go and say "You're fucked" just yet, but frankly Probiller has already identified you as fradulent and Nutaku is likely now aware that more than one person has accessed your account. You're pretty much now in a state where they can officially cut you loose if they so desire.

JSensei
04-08-2016, 03:02 AM
Ah...something I forgot to mention when looking through Probiller's T&C:

It's vague but in the same area they more or less say that you shouldn't have more than one person using a subscriber account, it also says you are "liable for unauthorized use of service until MG Billing or the site is notified of the security breach by e-mail or telephone", pretty much...if it's fraud, you won't get a refund until you say it's fraud and they agree.

Back to the original issue...

I'll agree that Nutaku may have the concern that sharing an account with others may pose the risk of a minor accessing their age-inappropriate material, and that their seemingly minor edits to the ToS reflect a safety net they can use in the event that particular instance is brought to light but ultimately I find in most game companies that have that clause, they only use that right when something serious occurs like a user blatantly (publicly) goes about boasting something that was most certainly a direct violation or the gaming community that individual was in already wanted him/her gone for bad conduct of a different sort and the company happened to find out the violation was going on as well. They often don't drop the ban hammer if you're at the very least on the surface being a "model citizen" with a loosely interpreted violation hidden in the closet and they'd only take it that far if your skeletons are out on the street dancing about.

As a result I'm still leaning towards the likeliness that this is an incident mostly in regards to Probiller as their system of conduct in the terms matches what happened in this particular instance. The system flagged the use of different payment methods linked to very different individuals in different regions, a fraud alert was set off and subsequently the subscriber account locked down. Nutaku, being the site connected to this account, was notified and probably in the chain reaction chose to lock down their side of the account as well.

Frankly at this point I'm not even sure if there's a resolution to this problem. If I were in this situation. I'd contact Probiller to state that this was an honest mistake between me and some friends and that it won't happen again (have to realize at this point that you are quite literally not allowed to have more than one person making purchases on the account) and from that point, try to convince Nutaku that the Probiller side has been resolved and that I'd like my account reactivated and what steps would be necessary for me to do so.

I'm remembering from your posted picture earlier though that the Probiller customer service representative was unable to find your account, meaning there's a chance the account number and primary credit card holder was set to one of your friends for whatever reason. On that front I think you have the option of either trying to get your friend(s) to help you resolve it or contacting nutaku again to ask them for the account number as it should be linked to your presently-deactivated Nutaku account. If they're unwilling or unable to do that, well...not sure then. Probiller's been pretty confusing on my end to be honest so I've always used Epoch/Paypal.

I'm not gonna go and say "You're fucked" just yet, but frankly Probiller has already identified you as fradulent and Nutaku is likely now aware that more than one person has accessed your account. You're pretty much now in a state where they can officially cut you loose if they so desire.

I agree that the second scenario is the more likely one. I'm merely trying to explain the change in ToS. It doesn't necessarily have to be a minor, but the whole idea of signing up for Nutaku means that you agree to certain things. This agreement gives them some coverage should they ever need it for any reason. If you share your account, you can share it with people that have not explicitly agreed to the things in the ToS. In an environment that is increasingly litigious, I think they might be changing things to be extra careful.

Then you take the second scenario. That is almost assuredly either THE cause or the primary cause. But regardless, I think the ToS might be changing in such a way that sharing is not allowed. Much like my example of speeding, I think 99% of the people that share accounts will never be caught, but the ones that are will likely be punished severely to make an example.

Is it dumb? Maybe. Do they care? Clearly not. We are all at Nutaku's mercy. The best any of us can hope is to not do anything that attracts unwanted attention, especially if you are a paid player. If they ban me, they don't lose a dime of income. If they ban a casher, they potentially lose out on money. I'd probably support Nutaku, but I can't bring myself to support a company that I think is relatively oppressive to its user base. I'll play the game, but only because it's oddly addicting. But they won't get a dime, mostly on principle unless they change a LOT.