why did i not see this? you are a giant ball of wisdom, my apologies for asking a stupid question so early in the morning.
If the game do allow ppl to buy and sell rp for mesos, it will just raise bit of concern whether this will just re-defines the game to be in a "pay2win". Rich people irl will just own the game with the amount of them money they spent to whack to have more mesos to own the game.
It's like selling cocaine on the streets and then suggesting you shouldn't be jailed because ''you didn't actually sell it''. Come on guys, why is this even a thread. Use some common sense, you guys are smarter than this.
No, it's more like saying "I'm gonna buy cocaine" to your friends and then getting the same sentence as someone who was actually selling drugs lmao. That's not common sense.
Except for the part where this wasn't directed to just ''friends'' as you suggested, this was an Alliance case, whereas there was a chance she didn't know everyone located in there.. The server has to take precaution for every illegal matter. Else we could just use it as an excuse. How are they going to proof it? That's why every piece of evidence is so important and simply justifies the ban. Don't get me wrong, I respect your opinion. But in this case, she took the risk and got what was coming. Its close to impossible for the server to find out if she did any purchases in the past. Therefore (I believe) the Staff is taking no exceptions.
Obviously u are getting this whole issue wrong. It was NEVER about selling cocaine on the streets (which would have been an indisputable break of rules), but instead about saying I wanna sell cocaine in a company event or smth. While its true that u may not know everyone in the company, u dont just get jailed/fined for SAYING that (although u would prob get investigated), but with no other proof that u actually followed up with the action, u wont be proven guilty! Which was why there was an actual point of the thread (which actually makes sense). To make T&Cs clearer, so as to state that any believable claim that u have done RWT or intended to do so would result in punishment. Of course, Aaron has kindly provided the actual definition of certain key points in the T&Cs that even the INTENTION of RWT has always been included, therefore closing the case for Doochi. HOWEVER: 1) Aaron also mentioned that it was a point that was missed by most ppl (and prob even by some of the staff too). Therefore, an amendment and clarification of the rule still does make sense! 2) This thread was NEVER about Doochi's case. It was just an example used to point out the inconsistency of the rules being implemented. However, YOU are the one who seemed to have gotten the wrong topic for this thread (and if John is going to be consistent with his filtering of the posts in the forums, your post should also be deleted off in this thread) Now to the main topic of this thread: This is exactly why this thread was started. There are certain rules that are not enforced as strictly (which should be, such as in Doochi's case). Which can also be interpreted into your words that: precaution is NOT take for EVERY illegal matter. (illegal because it did go against a very clearly written rule in the T&C)
I'm pretty sure I clarified that it was an exaggerated example. And I actually believe you can get jailed. Try buying cocaine from someone next to a cop waving the money in your hand, and when he cuffs you say ''I was just kidding''. I promise you, he wont take it as a joke and you know it. You're misinterpreting my claim. My point is that some rules are just so obvious that it's common sense not to do it. Be a little acumen. It's like publicly asking if anyone knows any good hacking websites. And if they do, ask for a link. That's just stupid. Why does the staff even have to warn us about that? As an individual I don't need any more explanation to understand that going around asking people if they sell Genesis for $10 is a stupid idea. If others do (Which you're clearly suggesting) then okay fine, hands down. I won't argue. \ I'm only using the example to make my point clear. I don't see how that is going off-topic as you're implying or in your words ''wrong topic for this thread'' which leads to the same thing. All I did was using an example to make my point clear which again in a nutshell is ''Certain rules don't need explanation''. Don't need to rude dude. Okay, if people really need thorough explanation on such an obvious thing already, I'm not going to argue. I personally just didn't feel like it was necessity..
Let me just start off with the micro (and less important) topics, before I conclude with the main point on why the need for the thread (and thus the need to clarify the T&Cs). I wasn't pointing out that your example was exaggerated, it was just not an accurate analogy for Doochi's case. If u have actually read through the case, it was never about her doing the actual RWT, nor was it about her saying she wanted to in front of a staff. The case was brought up few months AFTER she said that. Therefore, it was more of the cops picking up a piece of paper that had her writings stating she wanted to buy cocaine. She might prob be cuffed and interrogated (therefore her acc might be suspended for investigation). But she will not be jailed as a punishment for the crime should no other evidence surface (hence her perma ban shouldn't have been effect IF the T&Cs did not include intentions). My main point is: u didn't understand Doochi's case based on the analogy u came up for it. (I nvr stated that whether her actions were right or wrong) I agree that the staff shouldn't need to remind us about obvious points like this (which repeats my point that I nvr stated that Doochi's actions were right or wrong). What I wanted to point out (which also is the main point of the thread) was that clearly defined rules is beneficial to both staff and players. Its takes lesser effort to phrase out clearly defined rules such that any bans or appeals are straight-forward for the staff to make decisions, and for the players to accept their decisions. I was not stating that the rules should be changed to allow RWT. In fact, I was pointing out that the rules be amended such that they have a tighter rein over issues on RWT. Your posts were all centred around Doochi's case. The closest it came to your "nutshell" was this sentence: " Therefore (I believe) the Staff is taking no exceptions." Which is also on that specific case of Doochi's. However, the staff has deemed that posts only focusing on Doochi's case was out of topic and hence deleted by the staff. Therefore, I am not the one who actually deems your post as off-topic for this thread. And finally, to the case about being rude. Its actually very laughable that its coming from you. I rarely dedicate a post specifically to reply someone. The reason I did it was because u didnt understand the main issue in this thread, and the fact that u implied that we were not smart and lacked common sense. And thats just your first post in this thread. The reason I refrained from pointing that out in my reply was to avoid an argument and conflict. However, u continued to take the argument personal by stating I had to be a little acumen and stated I was obviously stupid for suggesting certain ideas (which in fact I do not). On the other hand, my posts has nvr used derogatory terms on anyone, although i sometimes do attack certain arguments and viewpoints. Now, who is rude? All in all, I strongly agree that the rules should be strictly followed, and anyone who breaks them should not be pardoned. The main aim of all these rules is such that ppl are unable to gain benefits out of other people's enjoyment of the game. Obviously, there are certain issues that may be obviously wrong and disallowed in the game (without the need to specify them in black and white). However, it nvr hurts to keep the rules clarified so that nobody is able to search for loopholes. <-- And this will help to reduce some workload from that mountain on the staff's shoulders. Players would also have a very clear idea of what is not allowed, which would also help ensure a better game experience for other players (from the lessened breaking of rules). The other point was that rules stated should be implemented, esp if it is a straight-forward case. If the issue is deemed to minor, the rule can always be removed or amended with less severe consequences, such that the T&Cs would tally with the actions of the staff. This will also minimise complaints (thus again lesser worries for staff), and also reassure the players that every issue will be treated fairly. Finally, I agree that everyone have many different opinions. Not everyone agree on the same thing. Therefore, there is discussion in a feedback thread so players and staff can voice out their concerns and viewpoints. It is very disrespectful to just come into a thread and say: there's no point to this thread. It is a direct insult to the person who started the thread, and everyone else who commented on it, be it players or staff. For they must have felt that there was sufficient concern and had opinions to voice before posting a reply. The fact that the staff did not close this thread immediately and that they did mention that they were actually considering to clarify the rules even before the start of this thread, showed that there was indeed some addressing that needs to be done.
Joking or not, I think the T&C are pretty clear and it has been brought to attention many times that RWT is NOT allowed and it will result in a ban. Also most games do not allow RWT and give very harsh punishments for it, so its not like it comes as a surprise. RWT isn't a very safe thing to do and by joking about or mentioning it, you are actively promoting it. About the T&C, I feel like they are more like guidelines and anyone with a half decent brain can interpret them correctly. It's not like MR is so massively different in terms of rules compared to any other (online) game out there.
@eugenekhor Which in that case I already stated "Okay, if people really need thorough explanation on such an obvious thing already, I'm not going to argue. I personally just didn't feel like it was necessity.." Already showed my sympathy for your and other peoples opinion. Not sure why im being quoted after suggesting I understand peoples point of view.
So Mr. with half a decent brain, according to that logic I would get banned in this scenario: Alliance mate: Hey you leveled so fast! How?! StrickBan: Hacking *StrickBan gets permmanently banned* If you saw that on your alliance chat (and that goes to Celiu too) wouldn't you think it's a joke? Oh no, of course it's bannable because: - The T&C are pretty clear and it has been brought to attention many times that hacking is NOT allowed and it will result in a ban - Most games do not allow hacking and give very harsh punishments for it, so it's not like it comes as a surprise - Hacking isn't a very safe thing to do and by joking about or mentioning it, you are actively promoting it Like you said, right... Also, we should take the T&C as "guidelines"? As far as I know, guidelines are not mandatory and why should the T&C be left to interpretation? They should be clear in my opinion
The difference being a one off joking comment is different than repeatedly saying the same thing to multiple people multiple different times. If you tell 10 different people you were hacking 5 different times, then it's more believable than a one off comment.
I get your point, but on doochi's appeal Tim provided chat logs within a 1 minute time frame, so it's a different scenario. There was no evidence shown that she asked multiple different times.
Said multiple times within a 1 minute time frame, but no evidence that she asked multiple times... Anyway, I'm not going to go down the rabbit hole. You may disagree or agree with a ban on a particular player and that's fine, but at the end of the day, it's the staff's responsibility to protect the community from those who either violate the rules or attempt to put themselves at an unfair advantage. I would appreciate it if you don't resort to name calling, as it really doesn't help articulate your point. No issue with disagreeing with someone's idea, but the insult is unnecessary.
I liked it because I agreed with it. And where exactly do you see an insult? I must be missing something but I didn't miss you saying he had half a brain. If you would rather PM me, please feel free.
Isn't saying "anyone with a half decent brain" an insult? o_o Basically he's saying if you don't understand the T&C, you have half a brain lol
I interpret that as him saying "it's common sense that..." and what he said wasn't directed at anyone or insulting anyone whereas the subsequent post directly called one person out and called them Mr. with half a decent brain. Anyhow, I'm derailing the topic and I apologize. Point is, let's not insult each other when trying to have a discussion just because there exists a disagreement on how things are interpreted.
I've had to delete some posts again because people keep bringing up Doochi's ban rather than discussing the actual topic of this thread. I'd like to give everyone a friendly reminder, and this will be the last one I'll be giving, that this thread's topic is discussing the revision of rule 19 and rule 30 of the T&C and nothing else.
