"We do not endorse or condone the use of any third party applications or other software that modifies the client or otherwise confers an unfair benefit to players. We may, in our discretion, tolerate the use of applications or other software that simply enhance player enjoyment in a way that maintains fair gameplay. For instance, the use of programs that provide in-game overlays (Mumble, Teamspeak) and the multiboxing application is not something we plan to actively police at this time. However, if any third party application or other software is used to gain any unfair advantage, or for purposes beyond its intended use, or if the application or other software violates other parts of the EULA, we may fully enforce our rights to prohibit such use, including player bans. Please use such third party applications or other software at your own risk." [emphasis mine]CCP also has a clear statement about botting software, "This is NOT allowed under any circumstances." So clearly, CCP does not consider ISBoxer botting software. Neither do I. But I continue to hear ISBoxer referred to as botting software from voices as diverse as EVE Radio's DJ Big Country to one of the dean's of EVE blogging, Kirith Kodachi.
Regular readers know I'm weary of reading the same, tired arguments that CCP has already rejected. Instead of reading how ISBoxer is botting, I'd like to hear the answers to questions about how ISBoxer has the same effects on EVE as botting.
I'm beginning to think I need to come up with a different type of post. One with just answers to questions I see popping up. That way, if the subject comes up on Twitter, I can just copy and paste the link into a tweet and just answer questions that way. Maybe even come up with a catchy name for a tag. But I was writing about the ISBoxer issue 18 months ago and the uproar in the community then led to the language in the Third Pary Policies page that exists today.
UPDATE: CCP Masterplan has stated that the bug was not ISBoxer specific.
@noizygamer BTW it wasn't an "ISBoxer-specific bug", it was just something that made it more common. A single client user could also get it
— CCP_Masterplan (@CCP_Masterplan) September 25, 2014