I mean did anyone see this? Clearly a double standard, and you know it's not a proper rule when GMs are breaking the rules themselves!??!? Literally so many people break this rule for 'petty' and not harmful things, that it just doesn't become a rule anymore, till people start going lord of the flies of other people's asses, and get them banned for petty things, when they weren't even account sharing for harmful reasons. & Respare's ban can definitely be used as precedent, she was attempting to log into a "banned account" for his equipment. Just because she couldn't get in doesn't mean she didn't have the information, and it doesn't mean she hasn't done it before.
If there is a large suspicion, then I can see why you would keep him banned. But I just don't want people revenge reporting, and people actually getting banned for account sharing where there is no "suspicion" on harm actually getting done to the server. i.e. (hypothetical) 1. Kevin (Pact) asks me for INT equips in guild chat to bigfoot 2. I give it to him, but tell him i'm going to sleep 3. I'm going to grind tomorrow morning, and Kevin trusts me so, he gives me his information via Skype to get the equips back later. 4. I have a falling out with a guildie (let's say Laszlo), so Laszlo leaves the guild and reports me to the Admins 5. Logs get checked and Kevin and I both get banned. In this scenario there was no harm done, and is clearly just a revenge ban. I just want to know that the GMs will not straight up perma ban when they get a tip off, and actually look at the situation and the logs and try to work out what has happened via amount of logins/amount of time on the logs or anything like that. And give out a lighter punishment for a lighter offence. I understand that it's about getting caught, but in the future there will be newly appointed GMs (swell as ex-GMS and current GMs) that did break this rule at some point in time. And the rule clearly states a permanent ban, which is just pretty weird.
Since a blanket ban is easier and you cannot adjust the stance on account sharing, why not adjust the punishment accordingly? After all, the current ToS's section on account sharing leaves out the exact punishment, so I think that gives it room for adjusting the punishment to the severity of the offence, instead of blindly sticking to a perma ban for all cases.
lol... what does ADD have to do with it? I have ADHD (a form of ADD), and that hasn't prevented me doing my own AP resets and JQ's Sure, it means I hate levelling even more than most people do though as it is SO boring. But I just level when I can, and with other people as I enjoy partying and interacting with people
You are missing the whole point of my post and looking at one little bit of it. I know plenty of people that are unable to do zJQ, spent dozens of hours with no rewards. (i.e. GM Thom) ADD is just one example to explain why some people would have a hard time with this certain JQ. Also there are different severities of ADD. Also the minimum age for this server is 14, and I can see why several fourteen year old kids might not understand AP resetting (i.e. I have a 14 year old brother that plays Maplestory).
I have the same views as ty about the revenge reporting. Being the top few in rankings will definitely mean you get more attention from the community and there are always some people who will find fault in you. Whether or not you like someone, reports should not be personal and to take revenge. For all we know, a GM may decide to check on a char and try to get him/her banned because the GM doesnt like that character.
Also this ^ This is a major point I want to hear more about. Here's my two cents. In my mind, private servers exist for the sake of community; for like minded people to enjoy the game as they think it should be, yada yada yada. So shouldn't the first priority of administrators be to foster and maintain a hospitable environment? This should be more important than pounding the iron fist of the ToS and getting tied up in bureaucratic knots like this. For me this means looking out for your members when they haven't done anything to impede anyone else's gameplay or had any malicious intent (Especially when they're such a loyal and devoted member of the community. Yes I think this matters.) See: mens rea. Am I just straight up wrong? I don't think that a permanent ban is justified in cases where users haven't helped one another jq/quest/grind or otherwise gain exp, I think a new custom NPC for sharing items between accounts would be a great addition to the server, I am in favor of a revision of the Account Sharing provision of the ToS, and (based on what I have read so far) I am in favor of retroactively unbanning accounts that stirred this up (even if it is no longer desired).
OK, given that account sharing for any reason is going to remain a bannable offence (although we will be clarifying the rules and may be making a small adjustment to the punishment), what I would like to know is: Do you guys want us to try and work on some kind of shareable storage npc for guild banks/friends who share int gear (etc)?
The main issue of importance is whether this will be a permanently bannable offense. Preventing someone from playing the game ever again on any account ever just because they logged into to someone else's account is really not remotely okay.
Wait until an official staff decision has been made. I can't answer this until we have made an official decision. So - interested in shareable storeage, or not?
I am still yet to hear any logical reasons for needing to log onto another persons account. Having to log onto somebody else's account to allocate their points for them or help with AP resetting just does not seem like a substantial enough reason to allow it. It is easy enough to look at a guide on the forum, on another website or simply ask somebody in your buddy list on how to do those things.
My opinion of the staff and server community have always been positive; I see our GMs as individuals who are very responsible and hard working, ultimately striving to better everyones experience on this server. And this is a main point which I think needs to be considered. The point of the ToS and applicable server regulations are to prevent injustice, and consequently to keep the server fair and mutualistically maintaining a positive experience for the majority of its players. From the votes and posts on this thread and similar ones regarding this topic, it is clear that this is an issue about the ToS that is offending a majority of the players, with over 70% of them either disagreeing with this point or requesting a revision (lets keep in mind that the changes to a v.83 skill tree votes were also a 70% majority). My personal thoughts are not that there is something wrong with an account sharing rule, and I can understand both sides of the argument. HOWEVER, what really bothers me is the INCONSISTENCY of the rulings. Why is it that we cannot use similar cases with alternate rulings as precedence? This is something I would like to be addressed. I have always assumed the staff to be impartial, and similarly this notion of a rather strict "fairness" has been claimed by many members of the team. You cannot expect the community not to have an opinion when there are so many examples of unjust and "special" rulings. If the staff believes that any action of account sharing may be deemed as detrimental, worthy of a permanent ban, then ALL of the individuals who have EVER account shared, or at least all cases of known account sharing needs to be dealt with this similar punishment. Otherwise if this is not possible, NONE of these cases should be handed a punishment only certain individuals are to receive. More than the severity, it is this inconsistency that bothers me. Rather than having an overarching ruling whereby the staff has the only and final say regarding appeals, it would really further our respect for you guys if community input were to have some leverage. Because ultimately everyone here is here for a shared enjoyment of the game, and not for the recent bureaucratic drama of staff enforcement versus player boycotting.
I'm sure if what David says is true then the players in question can and should be permanently banned in accordance with the terms and conditions. It would either be that John was unaware of the rule when the incident took place, or that it never took place at all.
Or the third option, that I have no recollection of it happening. That is not to say it DIDN'T happen, I just honestly do not remember it. And if so, I should look into both of their accounts and if the evidence is there, permanently ban both accounts.
IMO: Account sharing is against the Term's and Conditions of MapleRoyals. If someones shares their account with anyone for any reason, its still account sharing. Thus anyone found account sharing is banned, plain and simple. Once again IMO, you break the rules you pay the consequences.
Well, I don't think you can look into now as it was before the wipe. I'm not saying Christine should be banned (not that it would really matter at this point as I haven't seen her in ages), I'm just asking why in that case both her and Jocke were given special passes.
