Best Server Community Sin--Wait, Nevermind

[Phragmar]

I take it all back.

I take it all back, and I regret I didn't have to go to the Rants and Flames forum to find it. I want to tell you about an experience I had today, not so much to complain--well, to complain a little; it can't be avoided--since I really don't have any involvement in it, but rather to get some insight and make the story available to anybody interested.

I've been leveling in SRo lately, with varying amounts of success--the usual routine for a low level non-twink getting started. I met a high-level Ench there (Rilen, you're awesome) who was kind enough to keep me loaded on crack and generally just be a really terrific presence in the zone. He was camping AC--I didn't even realize that AC spawned in SRo too, but hey, you're never too old to learn something--and kept a hill occupied today from 6ish this morning until even now. It's been great having him there.

I gated back at one point to sell and turn in, and then I came back (this is about a half hour ago I suppose) to get a refresh on the crack.

When I got there, Rilen was surrounded by members (Jomama, Freckie, Snump) of Vesica Dei--which I understand is a pretty reputable guild. I gave Rilen a hail and he told me that he had died, and they had jacked his camp and were sitting there trying to take the AC (which still hadn't spawned).

I told them that I'd seen him all day, since I've been on and off, trying to explain to them that it's pretty discourteous to take someone's camp after he dies, and they responded by telling us that the rules said they had the camp--which, assuming the spot is exactly where AC would spawn, is technically correct--and they threatened that they would screenshot the conversation and petition if anybody interfered.


Really? I'll confess that at that point I lost my temper, since I remember grinding a lot of unpleasantness on live, and to his credit, Rilen took it a lot better than I did. He had other people in the zone volunteering to get involved, but he took it in stride, even though I could tell he was very upset.

... Really? I just can't help but be really disheartened to see this behavior, especially from high-level members of a well-respected (or so I thought) guild. It honestly turned my stomach, but I'm trying to keep this from turning into a rant (I know there's a forum for that). I really had gotten the feeling ever since I've been playing on this server that the whole server community had a kind of kinship, and understood that our toleration of each other is what makes the server successful--you can't have an MMORPG without the MMO.

I guess I just expected... courtesy. Humanity? Understanding? Now I could understand if they had walked into an empty zone and someone suddenly showed up and claimed a camp, but when there's a high level corpse there and the other people in the zone say its owner has been there all day, I'd have a hard time denying it. I'm not the nicest guy in the world, but I can't help but feel like jacking somebody's camp because he died and the rules technically permit it (if they do) isn't very different from charging a poor person 0.1% under the usury rate in interest just because he's in a bind. Sure, it's legal, but it's still ... evil.

Don't get me wrong--I'm not so naive as to think people are naturally good and will innately cooperate and get along, but I have to say I'm disappointed. The whole thing has made me reevaluate the server, honestly, and it wasn't even my camp. Classic is a difficult enough experience on its own, but if you add to that a strong likelihood of having to deal with. well, this--or worse, having to be friendly with people who would do this in order to participate in end-game content--in that case, I'm having a hard time justifying to myself that it's worth it.

So I guess that's my question, abstract though it may be. Is it really all the same? All the same camp-stealing, kill-stealing, loot-ninjaing, hate-filled animosity from live? Am I going to make it to level 40 just to have someone single-handedly turn 24-hours of hard work into a waste? It's a different perspective for me, I'll confess, since I think it accounts for a lot of why games like Everquest can't be made anymore, but maybe I was more optimistic over a few good experiences than I should have been.

That's all.


[If a mod decides this is the wrong place for this, feel free to do whatever you feel is best, but I want to say up front that this is where I feel it belongs, on the basis that most of the new player threads go in this forum, and that's a consideration.]

EDIT 2-24-11: It looks to me like this thread has outlived its ability to generate meaningful conversation or rational debate, and instead descended perhaps irretrievably to the point at which the bulk of the responses are flames or insults--yes, by Vesica Dei members, among others. As much as I think the discussion itself is meaningful and timely, I fear moderating this thread in the future would demand more work than someone is willing to dedicate, so I have to recommend at this point that it be closed or moved, possibly both.

[gnomishfirework]

Not having been there, and not knowing how long the enchanter was absent, it's hard to say.

Since it's a weird spawn, if they killed the ph at the right time to get the mist possible spawns of AC before the enc got back, I could see why they would refuse to give up the camp.

This should have probably gone in RnF. It's unlikely that a civil conversation can happen concerning things like this.

[Shaniq]

Phragmar is in for a big surprise...

[Phragmar]

Phragmar is in for a big surprise...

I don't like surprises (I also don't like cryptic suggestions of them >P ). But this is what I'm asking. Is this the norm?

[karsten]

rilen is good peeps, OP is wtfemo, vesica dei runs hot/cool in terms of coolness of members, /thread

[maegi]

It was a shitty thing to do , but considering it was VD, I'm not at all surprised that it happened. Had it been almost anyone else, myself included, Rilen would have gotten his camp back. Unfortunately, even though I can't say all of VD is like those particular members, I can say that is not the first time I have heard of them being self centered, self entitled greedy narcissist pigs on this server.

[Humerox]

Technically speaking, the AC in SRo isn't a static spawn and isn't "campable".

It's not really a triggered spawn either, although you'll have "you kill a puma at 6:04am and then yada yada" theorists. Wasting everything in sight works just as well, imo.

They could have petitioned all they wanted to, but AC is FFA. The proper thing to do - however - was to let the man who'd been there all day have it...but that's just an opinion that can be easily argued against.

All in all...it's just pixels. He probably could have farmed the PP for the MQ in the same amount of time. Just sayin~

[karsten]

you guys just said essentially the exact same thing that i said

[Humerox]

you guys just said essentially the exact same thing that i said

You keep things too simple, bro.

[mitic]

P99, We Know Drama.

besides that, first spell/arrow/melehit landed on non static mobs wins.

ps: lol @ wall of text

[Omnimorph]

Con the corpse next time to see how long he'd been dead.

Also why did he die? afk? I mean i have limited sympathy for this story, he died, fair enough, but if you wander into a zone and a camp is free, you're gonna claim it right, if some guy comes up later and says he was there and died.

How long are we talking? If i showed up and then 10-15 minutes later someone shows up and says they were there and died. Then it's unfortunate, but you lost the camp, you can't expect it to still be vacant when you get back (nice if it is... but if it isn't you have to move on)

Yes it's a terrible thing when someone moves in on your camp, but at some point you have to say, "ok, i messed it up, next time i won't die etc." and just move on.

[Messianic]

I fail to see how one instance of pseudo-camp stealing is worth "taking it all back."

If all it takes is one bad event to ruin a good community, no good communities exist at all.

[Krimsin]

I'd have jacked his "camp" too.

Dead men can't claim a camp.

[karsten]

dead men tell no tales

[Dr4z3r]

He was camping AC ... and kept a hill occupied today from 6ish this morning until even now.

If I were in his place, I would have been glad for the excuse to give up.

[Spewys]

Not everyone is as nice as me:-) I would not have taken his camp or whatever it was. However......

[Phragmar]

I fail to see how one instance of pseudo-camp stealing is worth "taking it all back."

If all it takes is one bad event to ruin a good community, no good communities exist at all.

Ruin the whole community? no, but motivate me to withdraw my heaping praise? sure. My misunderstanding came because I made the mistake of believing this community was special because everyone here--so I thought--understood the fact that this server is unusually fragile, and everyone here had a common goal of preserving it. My bad.

I guess it just hit me so hard because it's classic EQ. If this were WOW, he'd have leveled to 40ish in a couple weeks and been camping for--well he wouldn't be camping at all, because most of the new games got rid of this stuff because of instances like this. Then I could shrug it off, just pixels, etc. After all, no real investment.

But EQ--well, old EQ--is grindy and punishing, and that's part of what makes it rewarding. At the same time, though, that's why it turns my stomach to see people treat each other this way in this environment. You're stealing the man's rations who is alive and hungry in the trench beside you. Frankly the whole thing has made me question if it's worth my time to level up a toon here. They replaced EQ with games like WOW--with all of the loathsome, miserable, world-limiting, vision-shattering restrictions--because they realized that people will innately be asshats to each other. And maybe they had a point.

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/3/19/

I guess it was easy for me, having been away from EQ for so long and idealizing the good memories, to forget that human nature doesn't make an exception just because the human in question is depending on only 600 other people at a given time to allow his recreation experience to be entertaining.

Finally, @ wall-of-text complaints, I promise I will not come to your house, climb in your window, and twist your arm to make you read my posts.

[Rhodes]

serious business.

[Klyre]

Phragmar

I am going to take a moment to answer your question, and to precursor it I am a member of Vesica Dei so take it for what its worth.

So I guess that's my question, abstract though it may be. Is it really all the same? All the same camp-stealing, kill-stealing, loot-ninjaing, hate-filled animosity from live? Am I going to make it to level 40 just to have someone single-handedly turn 24-hours of hard work into a waste? It's a different perspective for me, I'll confess, since I think it accounts for a lot of why games like Everquest can't be made anymore, but maybe I was more optimistic over a few good experiences than I should have been.


Is it the same, NO it isn't. Nothing is ever the same. But I do suggest you look at what rules have been established here on 99. Rules on camps are pretty straight forward and if you have a problem with them, then I guess your going to be disappointed. Many people will be considerate and do the right thing and honor a camp, but again many will not and will go by the letter of P99 law. I can't tell you how many times I have been at a camp and had it wipe and some knuckle head in your group will shout out that they want a 90% rez even when they have a Cleric in the party. Talk about an invitation to lose your camp.

There are many cool people out there (and yes believe it or not, some of them are Vesica Dei) and you will have great experiences with them like you had with Rilen. Thank you Rilen for showing the best of what P99 has to offer. You will also have some people who will be not so nice, and will be very devious when it comes to playing.

This whole server is like a family and you will have some good and some bad experiences.

The only real advice I have for you is to find good friends to play with and ignore those that would ruin your fun. This is a game after all.

My only disappointment is that you needed to point out the guild of Vesica Dei as being a problem. I will make sure that you concern is brought before the Officers of the guild, however from your post if Rilen really died on his own then I am not sure he would have a reason to complain. Vesica Dei takes its reputation very seriously, if there is an issue it will be addressed
.
Hating on guilds as a whole is one of my pet peeves for the actions of a few members and I preach that to my guild members at all times. There have been guilds that get a bad reputation and some for good reason, but never let that rule your thinking that they will always be that way or that it represents the entire membership.

[Phragmar]

serious business.

Thanks for your contribution to the discourse.

[karsten]

phragmar you need less QQ and more pew-pew

just a helpful tip because you seem new

[Rhodes]

Thanks for your contribution to the discourse.


No problem. I know that arguing about which pixels belong to which imaginary video game character is big time serious stuff.

[Versus]

Thanks for your contribution to the discourse.

Made me laugh.


I came across Rilen camping the AC late last night. Said he'd been there since 5:30a. Rethinking my decision to camp it now instead of just save up 5k ;/

[skipdog]

Phrag, unfortunately you will be dissappointed with every community. No community exists where 100% of the members are perfect.

You thought this server was special because EVERYBODY here is going to behave as nice as you can possibly imagine. I think you know this is unrealistic. I've been gaming for 15 years, and in all of the server communities I have been a part of, the p1999 community ranks among the best. There will always be a few bad apples, but all you can do is laugh about it and have a good time with the huge majority on this server who are friendly and courteous.

Regarding the situation... if the Enchanter died, then, he lost the camp. Poor enchanter I know...but that is the rules and how things work. The enchanter should be upset at himself for whatever led to his death. Being ALIVE, is part of holding a camp(even though AC in SRo isn't much of a traditional camp even...). I don't know what exactly happened in the situation you are referring to, but I also think you need to consider that bashing an entire guild based on the actions of 1 or 2 players doesn't make a lot of sense.

[Ele]

If it makes you feel any better they are killing the 30.6 min ph as soon as it spawns instead of waiting till 11am/9pm.

[mipstien]

can we move this to RnF this could be more fun there ^.^

[Versus]

BURN THE WITCH!!

[Messianic]

BURN THE WITCH!!

SHE TURNED ME INTO A NEWT

[Mcbard]

Rofl @ the "DA rubbing off on VD" tag. :)

Sorry to hear about your friends camp getting jacked dude. How the fuck do you die in sro anyway? The tarantulas are big and scary.. but they're pretty harmless.

[Messianic]

How do you die in sro anyway?

Dervs and zombies are srs bznss

[Nuggie]

Like someone else said, there's a lot of unknown variables.

But in the end:
Rules were followed. Check

If given situation is accurate:
Bad form on the side of my fellow VD members. Check

Me interested in hearing from the three listed characters. Check.

If someone was stringing my name through the mud I would answer it.

[Stickyfingers]

VD stands for Vaginal Disease.

[YendorLootmonkey]

I'm all for being nice and respectful of others, but:

Nice and respectful does not equate to being a doormat.

AC camp is one of the most sought after camps in the game. Just like GEBs. Just like FBSS. Too much demand, not enough supply. If you fail to hold these camps, they will get jacked from you.

There's far too much competition for the limited resources in the game to give someone the benefit of the doubt and wait to see if he comes back to reclaim his camp. Is it a super good guy thing to do? Yes. Do we have an obligation to roll over every time someone expects our guild to take the higher road because that's the sort of reputation we prefer to maintain for ourselves? No. We obligate ourselves to abide by the server rules and be good members of the community. That does not mean giving in to others because they think we should pass up legit opportunities because they want the camp back after they died or gated out. We are being held to an unrealistic and unfair standard that, unfortunately, comes with the reputation we try to maintain.

[Messianic]

...

low blow

[burkemi5]

Phragmar:

this exact same scenario happened to a group of mine while camping lord in lower guk. It happens every day and it will continue to happen. Whenever I arrive at a new camp, I make sure no one is there, if there is, I will ask if they are camping it. I look for corpses, do a /who all (x), message them, see what their deal is if they're online. In certain zones, you'll see people gravitating between camps and you might find the one you want with a full spawn, only to have someone swoop in moments later claiming that they've been there (in most cases, they have).

How you react in these aforementioned situations is up to. Technically, the rules state that the camp is "theirs" and no longer "yours." If you have spent any time reading these forums, you will quickly learn that reputation is paramount, and once you build a bad one, you may as well reroll. My advice to you in this situation is to treat people the way you would like to be treated and hope that the "pay it forward" attitude makes it way back to you.

[Teensy Weensy]

Technically speaking, the AC in SRo isn't a static spawn and isn't "campable".

It's not really a triggered spawn either, although you'll have "you kill a puma at 6:04am and then yada yada" theorists. Wasting everything in sight works just as well, imo.

They could have petitioned all they wanted to, but AC is FFA. The proper thing to do - however - was to let the man who'd been there all day have it...but that's just an opinion that can be easily argued against.

All in all...it's just pixels. He probably could have farmed the PP for the MQ in the same amount of time. Just sayin~

Lol you obviously don't know what you are talking about. The AC on P99 is a camp and it is a static spawn with a very specific PH. Dead men can't hold camps. Maybe learn a little bit first, then comment

[philbertpk]

SHE TURNED ME INTO A NEWT

I GOT BETTA ;)

[Humerox]

Lol you obviously don't know what you are talking about. The AC on P99 is a camp and it is a static spawn with a very specific PH. Dead men can't hold camps. Maybe learn a little bit first, then comment

Maybe you should find out which AC we're talking about, bro. If you're spouting off about SRo having a specific pattern for spawning the AC, you're already too deep to be pulled out.

If you're talking about this:

There is only 1 mob you have to keep under lockdown. It requires a little work because there are 3 mobs you kill for the first rotation, THEN you lock the AC cycle down to 1 mob every 30 minutes. You essentially have *not kill* the PH if he spawns at 7am in order to kill at 11am so it respawns at 9pm (nite time). It requires a little more work, but the spawn chance is significantly higher in Sro, AND the mob itself is easier.

I know about it and think it's BS. I've spawned it much faster using my "kill everything in sight" method on many occasions. I never had to sit around more than 3 hours.

So u wanna school me?

[soup]

The amount of people who say stuff like "RULES IS RULES he lost the camp!" makes me sick. Rules don't determine what is and isn't a douche bag thing to do. Those people from VD were grade A douche bags, there's no way around it. Within the rules? Perhaps, but absolute douche bags nonetheless.

It's kind of sad how often people on this server will degrade into complete douchebaggery if it means citing the rules will give them a shot at some loot. There's a lot of good people in this community, but the community isn't anywhere near what we would like to think it is.

[Teensy Weensy]

Maybe you should find out which AC we're talking about, bro. If you're spouting off about SRo having a specific pattern for spawning the AC, you're already too deep to be pulled out.

If you're talking about this:

There is only 1 mob you have to keep under lockdown. It requires a little work because there are 3 mobs you kill for the first rotation, THEN you lock the AC cycle down to 1 mob every 30 minutes. You essentially have *not kill* the PH if he spawns at 7am in order to kill at 11am so it respawns at 9pm (nite time). It requires a little more work, but the spawn chance is significantly higher in Sro, AND the mob itself is easier.

I know about it and think it's BS.

So u wanna school me?

Well you can "think" whatever you want but that doesn't make it true. If you wish really hard to be right...you're still gonna be wrong. Just like now. Like I said, do some research then talk. Please don't comment anymore about what you "think" you know. You're only digging the hole deeper. Maybe YOU should find otu which AC you are talkign about. Not that it would matter because they are both static spawns. Sounds like your head is buried somewhere "too deep to be pulled out". They just gave you the how to on the AC in SRo, but since you "think" you know better, you won't listen. That post is exactly right and that is how to spawn the AC in SRo. It only has that one 30 minute PH and he will only spawn at night. That is 9pm to 7am game time. If you kill the PH at 9pm he will repsawn at 7am and therefore you have maximized your opportunity by allowing for two night spawns. If the PH pops at 7am you have to wait till 11am to kill him so he will respawn at 9pm again. Believe it or not, doesn't matter, but it's right

[Humerox]

Believe it or not, doesn't matter, but it's right

Then why have I never waited for more than 3 hours using my shotgun method?

Won't argue witya tho...been through this dozens of times, lol.

[maegi]

The fact that the AC in SRO requires that much precise work and timing to me makes much more of a camp than the one in OOT that is simply kill the PH every 6 mins till you see "an ancient cyclops " then loot a ring. A monkey can do that if trained through Pavlov's react to a certain stimulus training. Kill the thing that appears, get a fucking banana, good job bro. So to say AC in SRO isn't a camp just says you are pretty fucking misinformed.

[Humerox]

The fact that the AC in SRO requires that much precise work...

This is the fallacy, and it's why people claim it's a "camp".

However...like I said before...if someone is there trying to spawn it, I'm not stepping on their toes. No matter what method they're using.

[YendorLootmonkey]

The amount of people who say stuff like "RULES IS RULES he lost the camp!" makes me sick. Rules don't determine what is and isn't a douche bag thing to do. Those people from VD were grade A douche bags, there's no way around it. Within the rules? Perhaps, but absolute douche bags nonetheless.

It's kind of sad how often people on this server will degrade into complete douchebaggery if it means citing the rules will give them a shot at some loot. There's a lot of good people in this community, but the community isn't anywhere near what we would like to think it is.

Cool. Let us know what camp you're at so we can come by and make up some sob story about how we had to leave for a few minutes to go pull a baby out of a burning house, but we were totally just camping that so you are a douchebag if you don't relinquish it back to us ;)

[soup]

Cool. Let us know what camp you're at so we can come by and make up some sob story about how we had to leave for a few minutes to go pull a baby out of a burning house, but we were totally just camping that so you are a douchebag if you don't relinquish it back to us ;)

There's a difference between the story being true or made up. If I have been at the camp for an hour, obviously you're full of shit. If I just got there, then you tell me that, and random people in the zone who aren't in your guild confirm that, then I wil lgive you the benefit of the doubt and go elsewhere, as I have done countless times before. (the corpse sitting on the ground with 5 minutes missing from the timer could be a pretty clear sign you aren't full of shit also...)

See, unlike many of you, when an issue comes up, I don't ask myself "What do the rules say?" I ask myself "What would be the non-douchebag thing to do?"

So, like I said, you care about the chance of loot more than anything else. That's fine, but that generally makes you a douche bag. If you're okay with that, so be it, but don't lie to yourself and act like it isn't a douche bag thing to do.

[Mady]

Would seem if your corpse is still lying there with the rez timer not too far gone....

Whatever.

[Teensy Weensy]

Then why have I never waited for more than 3 hours using my shotgun method?

Won't argue witya tho...been through this dozens of times, lol.

Yes, it will magically work different for you because you want it to.

[Humerox]

Yes, it will magically work different for you because you want it to.

I'm just magical like that.

Back on point. I wouldn't be a dickhead to someone that's been there all day no matter what method they use, magical or otherwise.

[maegi]

Humerox, while I disagree with a lot you said in this post, I will give you props for not being a selfish camp stealing douche bag all about the loot kind of guy. In fact, I've read a lot of your posts on other threads and agreed with most and laughed at a few. So you're good people despite our differences of opinion at times.

[Rynada]

He probably could have farmed the PP for the MQ in the same amount of time. Just sayin~

Not disagreeing with you, and yes he could have farmed the PP for an MQ.

However, there are some people who like to obtain items themselves. Whether it is a sense of accomplishment at having done the camp, no matter how long it takes or just simply the pride of having done it.

There are many times I have camped something and it has taken way more time than I would have liked, and I sit there thinking... damn I coulda farmed enough PP to buy this already, then I think damn I have already been here this long, now it is a matter of principle.

Some people would rather MQ than camp, and that's fine. Camping things yourself is part of the experience of the game. Most of the people playing on this server have played before, but there are some of us who have never played this game before coming here. This is my first EQ experience, and I want to experience it and all the camps (or relevant camps) on my own.

I am not surprised by the people who do "douche bag" things like this, because unfortunately it is human nature. Thankfully I have met several good people on here that make it worth staying.

To the OP, there are a lot of good people on this server so try to overlook the few who are greedy, loot mongering a**holes.

[YendorLootmonkey]

There's a difference between the story being true or made up. If I have been at the camp for an hour, obviously you're full of shit. If I just got there, then you tell me that, and random people in the zone who aren't in your guild confirm that, then I wil lgive you the benefit of the doubt and go elsewhere, as I have done countless times before. (the corpse sitting on the ground with 5 minutes missing from the timer could be a pretty clear sign you aren't full of shit also...)

See, unlike many of you, when an issue comes up, I don't ask myself "What do the rules say?" I ask myself "What would be the non-douchebag thing to do?"

So, like I said, you care about the chance of loot more than anything else. That's fine, but that generally makes you a douche bag. If you're okay with that, so be it, but don't lie to yourself and act like it isn't a douche bag thing to do.

No, I care about doing what's right. The problem is what my definition of right, your definition of right, and every individual's definition of right is all subjective. So then we turn to the established camping rules of the server which are the most objective set of standards available to all of us.

By your definition of doing what is right, you should be willing to give up whatever loot camp you're at no matter how long you've been there the moment someone comes along who wants it. Because hey, it's the nice thing to do, and you shouldn't care about a chance at loot, right? ;)

[Humerox]

Humerox, while I disagree with a lot you said in this post, I will give you props for not being a selfish camp stealing douche bag all about the loot kind of guy. In fact, I've read a lot of your posts on other threads and agreed with most and laughed at a few. So you're good people despite our differences of opinion at times.

Thanks!

I'm gonna go a bit further on OP's issue. When I started playing, I thought P99 was something to be cherished too (*still do*)...and when I saw what was happening to the server a few months back, I went ballistic. Overboard. I had to step back and realize that this game means different things to different people, and no matter how much I wanted it to be a certain way, it wasn't going to be a bastion of love and happiness in a jaded MMO world.

I advise the OP to do what I did. Step back and realize that once your only concern is loot, you're lost. All issues between people here revolve around gear. It's not about competitiveness, because the guild dynamics here don't allow nor prefer true competition, nor do they allow for a shared structure.

Now that Kunark is coming up, I think a lot will change. There will be enough content to go around. ATM, you have a bajillion 50's with nowhere to go, competing with the newer playerbase for content.

The devs have gotten rid of most of the trash players, and they work hard to keep the game A$$hole free...and do a pretty good job of it, imho. Although we have lost some good devs because of player attitude, it's only because they took it to heart, and forgot that MOST of the player population doesn't play forum-wars.


Wait it through. The community here is fundamentally solid, and will get a whole lot better when new content opens up.

Hopefully, you'll stay.

Peace.

[soup]

No, I care about doing what's right. The problem is what my definition of right, your definition of right, and every individual's definition of right is all subjective. So then we turn to the established camping rules of the server which are the most objective set of standards available to all of us.

By your definition of doing what is right, you should be willing to give up whatever Kooy camp you're at no matter how long you've been there the moment someone comes along who wants it. Because hey, it's the nice thing to do, and you shouldn't care about a chance at loot, right? ;)
Like I said before, what is or isn't against the rules doesn't determine what is or isn't a douchebag thing to do. If you disagree then I question your ability to form your own opinions.

As for the second bit, you may want to take a look at this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

[Badmartigan]

-dead men cant hold camps /cry
-the sro AC is on a 31 min timer with a 10% chance to spawn maximum 2 times per day.. ON LIVE IT WAS DIFFERENT...but here.. it is NOT.. it's a static camp...

DA and VD work very well together.. haters gone hate.

[YendorLootmonkey]

I just find it interesting that it's only a douchebag move when someone takes over a camp if someone dies. Why isn't it an equally douchebag move to expect someone to relinquish a camp to you after you failed to maintain it? To me, that is equally loot-centric.

The only difference, of course, is what side of the situation you're on, now, isn't it?

While you're busy slapping down links to strawman arguments, go look up slippery slope. How long is someone expected to wait for someone to get back to a camp after dying before it becomes unclaimed? 5 mins? 30 mins? 3 hours? Now you're just making up arbitrary rules because the ones in place don't benefit you in a particular situation and anyone who disagrees is clearly a loot-centric douchebag? Convenient.

And utterly ridiculous and contrived.

[Badmartigan]

I just find it interesting that it's only a douchebag move when someone takes over a camp if someone dies. Why isn't it an equally douchebag move to expect someone to relinquish a camp to you after you failed to maintain it? To me, that is equally loot-centric.

The only difference, of course, is what side of the situation you're on, now, isn't it?

While you're busy slapping down links to strawman arguments, go look up slippery slope. How long is someone expected to wait for someone to get back to a camp after dying before it becomes unclaimed? 5 mins? 30 mins? 3 hours? Now you're just making up arbitrary rules because the ones in place don't benefit you in a particular situation and anyone who disagrees is clearly a loot-centric douchebag? Convenient.

And utterly ridiculous and contrived.

Yeah.. look at it like this.. dude been sitting at that camp for 8-9 hours.. maybe he is unlucky.. maybe he is doing it wrong.. but its NOT greedy or douchebaggy to take a camp that is open..... 10mins or an hour or not...

For me to DIE at a camp.. and run back is my mistake.. and i OWN that mistake.. i dont blame others for moving in and taking over.. thats just the nature of the game... I'm not going to go calling people douchebags for playing EQ to the letter of this servers law.

In OOT theres been times i fell asleep and died and i came back and someone else had the camp.. i /bowed and said.. thank you sir for picking up my slack.. please allow me to get the camp back next ? And also, i have been there to take a camp when someone died... while they were sad they died they were humble and realized THEY makde the mistake and that a highly desired camp is going to get taken.. not by force.. but by the natural way of things.

[Teeroyoyort]

I'm curious how the enchanter died. He had to be lvl 29+ to cast clairty. So let's assume he was lvl 29. I'd imagine he'd summon a pet, and has root in his arsenal. Can a lvl 29 enchanter kill a sand giant with his pet? I'm sure he could with enough patience. So why did he die in the 1st place?

Answer: The entire guild of VD trained him! and left 3 to hold to camp.

[Zereh]

If I died and someone douchebagged my camp I'd be ticked; as you all would be were the roles reversed. Pretending otherwise is just plain BS.

[skipdog]

If I died and someone douchebagged my camp I'd be ticked; as you all would be were the roles reversed. Pretending otherwise is just plain BS.

I guess I don't understand why you think that a camp is yours if you can't stay alive. Isn't that one of the only things required for you to say that the camp is yours in the first place? You have to be there, not be afk, and be able to stay alive. That's all that it takes to hold a camp.

I'm being honest with you in saying yes that I would be ticked. I would be ticked at myself for dying, not some other guy playing by the rules. I would expect somebody to take my camp the instant I die while trying to hold said camp.

If you die while on a camp, you lose that camp. I thought this was understood and it amazes me how many people here don't agree with those rules. I agree with Yendor/Badmartigan's views on the situation. I mean, how long do you wait after somebody dies until you claim their camp? It is a slippery slope and if people are camping something they should understand that if they DIE, that camp is lost if somebody else claims it before returning.

[Randy]

For me to DIE at a camp.. and run back is my mistake.. and i OWN that mistake.. i dont blame others for moving in and taking over.. thats just the nature of the game... I'm not going to go calling people douchebags for playing EQ to the letter of this servers law.

I agree, losing a camp is just an added penalty if you/your group fails to maintain it. But if i get trained and die, should I still lose my camp? If my groups only healer goes LD during a pull and we die, should I still lose the camp? Its those type of situations where the "rules are the rules" thing doesn't work for me and i'd think you're a douche for taking the camp.

Most of the time, depending on the location, I think you should give someone 15-25mins to recover. That's just being nice.

Though in this case being the Sro/AC camp, I wouldn't fault them for taking over like they did cause you either had to be AFK, LD during combat, too weak to hold the camp, or have no clue what you're doing to you actually die there.

[YendorLootmonkey]

I've lost camps due to death before. I'm a ranger, after all. And just like skipdog said above... yes, I'd be ticked. I was ticked that I spent all day at the dhampyre camp in Mistmoore, didn't get a shot at a HBC all day, then the Cloaked Dhampyre spawns and subsequently pwns me. And because I'm a melee, I have to run all the way back from the Gfay zoneline only to find someone took the camp on me. I'd be super ticked. AT MYSELF. Because I am the only one to blame. If I couldn't hold the camp solo, MY FAULT. If I didn't have a few people come in and help back me up if I didn't think I could keep the camp, MY FAULT. Stop blaming everyone but the guy who couldn't hold the camp.

This isn't even about loot. This is about people holding other people accountable for some sort of meta rules that only exist in their heads and nowhere in reality for anyone to review, and then calling people douchebags because they didn't follow them.

The way some of you want it, before I do anything in game, I have to check the server rules to make sure I won't get petitioned for it, then check over the OP's idea of what is right and wrong, then soup's version of what would be douchetastic or not, then send Badmartigan and skipdog and Zereh some tells to ask what they think of it to make sure I'm following their subjective code of honor, blah blah blah. That is completely ridiculous and unrealistic.

If you want to call some members of my guild douchebags for not adhering to your individual subjective codes of honor that you hold everyone accountable for, fine... I can't stop that. All I can do is try to point out that it's an unrealistic expectation that we are all responsible for knowing everyone else's version of what is acceptable and unacceptable.

I expect everyone in my guild to treat everyone on the server with respect by following the server rules that are all available to us for review. Yes, acts of courtesy above and beyond that are great and welcomed... but why are we being obligated and held accountable otherwise? Yes, IB/DW didn't have to let VD have three attempts at the Spiroc Lord the first time we tried it on our own. But they did, and it was great. Bravo to them!

But if they had swooped in and nabbed him without even so much as rezzing one of our clerics after we wiped? Completely legit. Our fault for not having our crap together on the first attempt and succeeding.

Just like the still warm enchanter corpse at the AC camp. Sorry bro. For every time someone lets you take back the camp, there are 5 other times where that person isn't shown the same courtesy when they wipe out.

How many times should that happen before it's okay for that person to stop being a doormat?

[captainspauldin]

lol half the people on this server are trash, much like ez server. if you want decent people despite somewhat of a douche gm try forrest, 90% of the people are amazing if u can put up with a baby for a gm.

[Klyre]

Listen to yourselves....I mean really listen. You are all willing to hate so easily and toss crap around. Are you all just looking for a place to rant?

It still comes down to who you are and what you are willing to follow.

Could the defendants of this rant handled it better? Yeah maybe. Are they in the wrong? Not really as by Phragmar's own words I gave Rilen a hail and he told me that he had died

This is still within the confines of the server rules. Does this mean that you have to follow them, no the defendants could have talked it over and given Rilen the camp. Honorable. Or they could keep the camp. Sorry I guess I don't see what’s wrong with that.

Some rules in P99 are ambiguous, but this one is not, if you die you no longer have rights to the camp.

The only person who really has anything to bitch about is Rilen. But instead it’s become fair game to complain about how horrible everyone else is to you, and what a nasty guild they have over there.

[mitic]

why keep ppl sayin AC in sro is a "camp"?

its clearly not. different story in oot but not in sro.

[Randy]

why keep ppl sayin AC in sro is a "camp"?

its clearly not. different story in oot but not in sro.

Because its generally accepted by pretty much everyone to be a camp. I mean, there's one spawn for him. everyone knows where his spawn is. you kill his PH to get him to spawn. what makes it not a camp?

[mitic]

Because its generally accepted by pretty much everyone to be a camp. I mean, there's one spawn for him. everyone knows where his spawn is. you kill his PH to get him to spawn. what makes it not a camp?

i see!

ok then, going to report those 30ish people "stealing" all those quillmanes over the last 2 months after i triggered her

oh wait, i got a better idea. ill just write some emo post on the forum. yes, thats what i will do!

[Darian]

So I guess that's my question, abstract though it may be. Is it really all the same? All the same camp-stealing, kill-stealing, loot-ninjaing, hate-filled animosity from live?

Based on everything you've said, none of those things happened in this story. That's not to say those things don't happen from time to time, but it doesn't happen as often as you seem to be afraid of- reputation does matter here.

Am I going to make it to level 40 just to have someone single-handedly turn 24-hours of hard work into a waste? It's a different perspective for me, I'll confess, since I think it accounts for a lot of why games like Everquest can't be made anymore, but maybe I was more optimistic over a few good experiences than I should have been.

That's all.

First things first- I spent a total of about 12 hours at the AC camps in Sro and OoT. I wouldn't call it "hard work" so much as "a timesink I prepared myself for."

It sucks, but at the end of the day, if you hold a camp for x hours and then die, the only "someone" who's turned your work into a waste is yourself. To use a similar example, if I'm the second person in a 3-man line for the Arch Magus camp (personal experience), and the person holding the camp dies with AM at 10% life, am I honor-bound to wait the ~20 minutes for the camp holder to get back to the camp so he can have another shot? What if he wipes again? What if it becomes clear he just can't hold the camp by himself?

It just seems the crux of your argument is that the camp holder's time was wasted. I don't know the guy in question but dying at AC camp means you either got careless, got unlucky with fizzles, or bit off more than you could chew, and the VD members just weren't responsible for any of those things. It seems unfair to everyone else who wants that camp to let him have unlimited shots and deaths at it, and I think that's a big part of why the server rules are what they are.

I don't mean to sound negative to the OP or anyone else in the thread, but if this one incident is enough to make someone upset about the state of the server, then I would recommend stopping at level 45. This game can be very competitive-- but if you're prepared to drop 20+ hours at AC camp, you probably already understand that.

[Badmartigan]

i see!

ok then, going to report those 30ish people "stealing" all those quillmanes over the last 2 months after i triggered her

oh wait, i got a better idea. ill just write some emo post on the forum. yes, thats what i will do!

quill can spawn in multiple places.. ac in sro can only spawn from 1 static 31 min ph.

[Darian]

So, like I said, you care about the chance of loot more than anything else. That's fine, but that generally makes you a douche bag. If you're okay with that, so be it, but don't lie to yourself and act like it isn't a douche bag thing to do.

So the guys in the right place at the right time were selfish douchebags, but the guy who wanted an item so bad he was willing to wait on one mob for 24 hours is the unselfish, non-loot-greedy victim here?

Seriously, stop and think about what "camping" means. Rilen (presumably) answered "AC" to every camp check. What does that mean? For an ENTIRE DAY, Rilen told everyone who wanted Jboots, "No. You cannot kill this mob. Only I can." That's not selfish to you?

Everyone who has ever camped anything, ever, is technically selfish. They are monopolizing a spawn/item at everyone else's expense. Some people are worse about it than others, but it's a part of this game.

DISCLAIMER: I have no problem with Rilen, or his camping, or anyone else choosing to camp anything. I do not use the word "selfish" to describe this behavior. People do not play this game solely to help other people get lewt or levels. There is an inherent selfishness to Everquest. It happens. I'm okay with it.

[Zereh]

Guess I'm on the "extend a helping hand" team and not "kick 'em when they're down". But to each their own. I just know what I'd like to happen if I were the one that died and act accordingly. :cool: <--imagine some rose-colored shades there

[Jomama]

Hi Phragmar,

I just wanted to say that I'm sorry you're upset that your friend lost the AC camp. Also Snump was not really a part of our group so please don't hold a grudge against him. Anyways I hope you guys do not hate us or VD, dieing always sucks and the AC camp tends to be very competitive as well as full of drama. We finally got the ring after 12 long hours! Take care and good luck everyone.

~Jomama Sonice

[Rhodes]

Part of claiming and holding a camp means being able to do so without dying, is this incorrect?

[Rais]

I wouldn't say anything if I lost a camp or kill area if I died and someone else moved in. It's happened at Lord/King/Frenzy/Sage while I played Truegem, and I dragged my body away like a dumbass enchanter and moved on.

I've seen it happen to Kaushi in mistmoore, I've seen it happen to myself, and other guild members. It happens, if you can't keep a camp because you died, it's on you. It sucks.

If my guild members didn't train him, dispell root/snare, or some other dick move. I really can't come down on them. From reading what happened, dude was dead. It's fair game.

I'm pretty sure any guild on this server that raids has dealt with me in fear/hate,know I'm pretty fair. I've helped make raiding zones a lot better between guilds and less of the bullshit that use to go down. So if there is other issues at hand about my guild members, just let me know.I'll take care of it.

[shuklak]

that's unfortuante...

in a game like this, everyones fun and good times will live and die according to the strength of the community. make no mistake about it.

[Nocte]

If the enchanter was high-level, and he died in SRo (and the AC didn't spawn), what killed him? How does a high-level character (a chanter, no less) die in South Ro to anything that spawns in the zone (other than AC)?

[girth]

It's not really a triggered spawn either, although you'll have "you kill a puma at 6:04am and then yada yada" theorists. Wasting everything in sight works just as well, imo.


I'm sorry that is just plain wrong. You know it. I know it. Anybody who isn't an idiot and has camped SRO AC knows it.

He has 1...count em...1 PH. This PH can be a number of different mobs. The problem is that 3 different PH's spawn on the same spot and walk the same path at the same time basically(not step in step). You can determine which it is by respawn times. It's the long one...

[girth]

I also find it kind of 'humerous' that humerox went from being one of the jerks who kept frenzy to themselves by handing it off to each other for like weeks using the corpse bank exploit to the guy who isn't selfish and doesn't care about loot.

[Hoggen]

If the enchanter was high-level, and he died in SRo (and the AC didn't spawn), what killed him? How does a high-level character (a chanter, no less) die in South Ro to anything that spawns in the zone (other than AC)?

The AC in so ro is a joke. It's nowhere near as strong as OOT. It's much weaker than an SG. You can camp it around 35 solo as a caster of any class, but you will have a hell of a time surviving a triple SG pop if you get unlucky ( people can kill your PHs at bad times and have everything spawn at once on top of you while you are trying to kill one mob).

The mob spawns in exactly one spot. To claim it and have best chance of being first agro, you really have to sit ON the spot. I've had people try to sit there invisibly and get the agro before me. Most people, however, sit up the dune face.

[Bubbles]

I also find it amusing that the reason this thread came to be was some lowbie was pissed no one in Sro was handing out clarity anymore, and decided to rage in the name of honor, valor, and camp rules.

I mean, really?

[Phragmar]

EDIT: TLDR; if this post is too long for you, don't bother reading it and don't bother responding.

This is going to be my last substantive post on this thread, barring a direct question or attack, since I think it has gone as far as it can (or should), and even if my original intention wasn't to go in an RnF direction, some of the replies have definitely gone farther that way than I would have anticipated without more experience with the forum community (which I have learned today is not at all to be confused with the actual in-game community, probably fortunately).

EDIT: Apparently there's no way to gracefully bow out of this thread, even though I don't think it can do much more in the way of being productive, but I'd rather not sit idly by while people speculate and slander, either.

First of all, to clear up a few things:
1. I've played EQ before--classic--a lot. Druid by the name of Demoree on Innoruuk had most of my time--ended up I think just inside of level 52 before I quit right after PoP was released. I'm new to the server, not the game.
2. I realize (or believe, if you prefer) people are naturally evil. Read Hobbes, got the t-shirt, etc. I contend, however, that that innate human tendency toward selfishness can be overcome.

Jomama, I told you when you took the camp that your behavior disgusted me, and it still does. I said all I wish to say to you then.

maegi, Humerox, soup, thanks for your responses; you have given me the best possible reassurance that reason and decency is not lost on everyone, and your presence in the community has been the strongest motivation I've had to stick around since the incident happened.

Most importantly, I want to spell out something clearly, since I've been pretty subtle about it before, and that's why I had the mistaken hope that the server population would understand why they should be kind to each other. Yes, I'm new here; I don't expect to have the weight of someone who has been playing on this server since it came up, but I can still appeal to common sense, and this is the crux of why the incident got to me. I also don't want to sound too patronizing if I can help it; I'm sure that everybody here who cares about the server's sustainability already knows all this and has spent enough time thinking about it for it to have already sunk in--but if you claim to care about the server and still treat people badly, maybe it hasn't:

This server has 738 clients connected right now--9:54 PM Eastern time (US) on a Wednesday night. I don't think I would be out of line to say that at least five or ten of them are bots that the devs haven't caught up to yet, and that's assuming staff is doing a stand-up job of controlling that, but maybe it's being optimistic. If you're playing EQ on P1999, you have, let's say for sake of argument, 700 people available to play with you. That's people to group with, guild with, raid with, talk to, compete with, and otherwise populate the server so you're not playing EQ by yourself. I'd like to think we can all agree that playing EQ solo all the time is a horrifying prospect and boring as hell. Even if you solo to level or farm or whatever, having other people around is what makes the game what it is. So 700. That's all. And they're not all your level. Some of them are your class, some of them are classes you don't want in your group/raid/guild/whatever, some of them are noobs who you're afraid would get you killed, and yes, alas, some of them are total asshats who you want to ignore as best you can.

If one of them leaves because you were a dick to him, you have 699. If twenty of them leave because you and four friends made the game unenjoyable for them, you have 680. If a few small guilds leave because they're overwhelmed and denied access to content because your guild has a policy of being inconsiderate, you have 600 (I'm not alleging any of this; it's hypothetical). Do you see where I'm going here? If your policy is to serve yourself at the expense of courtesy or consideration to the other gamers on the server, they will leave, and eventually the only thing left will be people who are also self-serving and loot-centric. At that point the server is dead. EQ is a wonderful game and a fantastic experience even despite the presence of douchebags on any given server, but every person's tolerance for bullshit has a limit. Why would I want to play a game, even a great game like EQ, if the only people left to play it with are pricks who would jack a camp I've held for 12 hours if I die and it takes me 60 seconds to get back to it?

That's why I expected the community as a whole to be special: because I thought that everyone understood the consequences of being cruel to other people on a server with a small population, and the fact that there aren't many other people on the server to go around. You can't afford to run them off.

Bubbles: Rilen would have still given me clarity, because he's cool like that. Thought you should know.

Also, for karsten and Rhodes and their ilk: Haters gonna hate. Maybe this thread came off a little more rantish than I originally intended, but I know a troll when I see one.

What happened between the members of VD and Rilen was wrong. That's the long and short of it. It was legal (legal, at least if the camp meets the definition of a camp under the server rules, and since I haven't seen any staff interpretation on the definition or application to this particular area of the game world, I'm not prepared to take a position on that), but what happened was fundamentally unjust. That means something to me.

If it doesn't mean anything to you, or you think I'm taking it too personally, or you'd rather make snide jokes, flame, add insulting tags or responses to me or the other side, or any other excuse you have to not actually consider the principle of what I'm saying, then I'm willing to venture at this point that you're exactly the person who needs to take a step back and actually think about it, regardless of which side you think was in the right. The way we feel about the people we play games with (whether we think they're jerks or they're just obstacles in the way of our advancement) matters, and if you think a video game isn't an appropriate forum for issues of justice versus law or human nature, you're already behind.

Peace and safety.

[Pico]

If it doesn't mean anything to you, or you think I'm taking it too personally, or you'd rather make snide jokes, flame, add insulting tags or responses to me or the other side, or any other excuse you have to not actually consider the principle of what I'm saying, then I'm willing to venture at this point that you're exactly the person who needs to take a step back and actually think about it, regardless of which side you think was in the right. The way we feel about the people we play games with (whether we think they're jerks or they're just obstacles in the way of our advancement) matters, and if you think a video game isn't an appropriate forum for issues of justice versus law or human nature, you're already behind.


This is the most white-knightiest thing I've ever read on any internet forum ever. I really think (for your own mental health) you need to take an emotional step or two back from this game, or you're going to have a complete nervous breakdown before you hit level 20.

[Rhodes]

What happened between the members of VD and Rilen was wrong.

[Acillatem]

So if 15 DA sit in Sol B and poopsock the fuk outta Naggy for 72 hours....and he pops...and they wipe...according to some people in this thread it is a pretty douchebag move for anyone else to take their guild in and take a stab at him..

Cuz after all....DA was there for 3 fuking days...camping a mob....and then died..

Ya - I think it's safe to say 99% of the time - the norm is "sux you died, it's our turn now".

And yer a bunch of hypocrites if you argue otherwise.

[Bubbles]

This is the most white-knightiest thing I've ever read on any internet forum ever. I really think (for your own mental health) you need to take an emotional step or two back from this game, or you're going to have a complete nervous breakdown before you hit level 20.
^^
If this thread was to be locked, it would be a shame that this would not be the final post, cuz it sums up everything perfectly well.

[shuklak]

So if 15 DA sit in Sol B and poopsock the fuk outta Naggy for 72 hours....and he pops...and they wipe...according to some people in this thread it is a pretty douchebag move for anyone else to take their guild in and take a stab at him..

Cuz after all....DA was there for 3 fuking days...camping a mob....and then died..

Ya - I think it's safe to say 99% of the time - the norm is "sux you died, it's our turn now".

And yer a bunch of hypocrites if you argue otherwise.
I'm too new to understand the terminology (DA, poopsock?) but I was a guildleader of a successful raiding guild before. And my take would be of course if someone brought their guild to kill a raid mob and wiped that I would let them try again. Assuming they have a shot, and everyone knows who has a legitimate shot.

It costs me nothing to ask them how many more shots are they going to take. If they don't kill it I can try tomorrow in most cases. But if I go in there and steal it, now I've got a lot of people with headaches and an e-reputation because I didn't want to find something else to do.

[soup]

I just find it interesting that it's only a douchebag move when someone takes over a camp if someone dies. Why isn't it an equally douchebag move to expect someone to relinquish a camp to you after you failed to maintain it? To me, that is equally loot-centric.

The only difference, of course, is what side of the situation you're on, now, isn't it?

While you're busy slapping down links to strawman arguments, go look up slippery slope. How long is someone expected to wait for someone to get back to a camp after dying before it becomes unclaimed? 5 mins? 30 mins? 3 hours? Now you're just making up arbitrary rules because the ones in place don't benefit you in a particular situation and anyone who disagrees is clearly a loot-centric douchebag? Convenient.

And utterly ridiculous and contrived.
Bahahaha. You know that slippery slope is also a fallacy, right? Basically what you just did was get called out on a logical fallacy, so you use another logical fallacy to defend yourself, WHILE CITING WHAT THAT FALLACY IS. I mean, I've seen enough of your posts to think you probably aren't a complete moron or anything, but that wasn't a very well thought out response to my post, lol.

[soup]

So if 15 DA sit in Sol B and poopsock the fuk outta Naggy for 72 hours....and he pops...and they wipe...according to some people in this thread it is a pretty douchebag move for anyone else to take their guild in and take a stab at him..

Cuz after all....DA was there for 3 fuking days...camping a mob....and then died..

Ya - I think it's safe to say 99% of the time - the norm is "sux you died, it's our turn now".

And yer a bunch of hypocrites if you argue otherwise.

If you can't see the major glaring differences between the two scenarios then I seriously worry about your mental capacities.

I've always thought of Vesica Dei as being good people and wanted to write of this incident as being misrepresented or bad apples or whatever, but seeing plenty of Vesica members defending it with faulty logic is kind of disheartening.

[soup]

EDIT: TLDR; if this post is too long for you, don't bother reading it and don't bother responding.

This is going to be my last post on this thread, barring a direct question or attack, since I think it has gone as far as it can (or should), and even if my original intention wasn't to go in an RnF direction, some of the replies have definitely gone farther that way than I would have anticipated without more experience with the forum community (which I have learned today is not at all to be confused with the actual in-game community, probably fortunately).

First of all, to clear up a few things:
1. I've played EQ before--classic--a lot. Druid by the name of Demoree on Innoruuk had most of my time--ended up I think just inside of level 52 before I quit right after PoP was released. I'm new to the server, not the game.
2. I realize (or believe, if you prefer) people are naturally evil. Read Hobbes, got the t-shirt, etc. I contend, however, that that innate human tendency toward selfishness can be overcome.

Jomama, I told you when you took the camp that your behavior disgusted me, and it still does. I said all I wish to say to you then.

maegi, Humerox, soup, thanks for your responses; you have given me the best possible reassurance that reason and decency is not lost on everyone, and your presence in the community has been the strongest motivation I've had to stick around since the incident happened.

Most importantly, I want to spell out something clearly, since I've been pretty subtle about it before, and that's why I had the mistaken hope that the server population would understand why they should be kind to each other. Yes, I'm new here; I don't expect to have the weight of someone who has been playing on this server since it came up, but I can still appeal to common sense, and this is the crux of why the incident got to me. I also don't want to sound too patronizing if I can help it; I'm sure that everybody here who cares about the server's sustainability already knows all this and has spent enough time thinking about it for it to have already sunk in--but if you claim to care about the server and still treat people badly, maybe it hasn't:

This server has 738 clients connected right now--9:54 PM Eastern time (US) on a Wednesday night. I don't think I would be out of line to say that at least five or ten of them are bots that the devs haven't caught up to yet, and that's assuming staff is doing a stand-up job of controlling that, but maybe it's being optimistic. If you're playing EQ on P1999, you have, let's say for sake of argument, 700 people available to play with you. That's people to group with, guild with, raid with, talk to, compete with, and otherwise populate the server so you're not playing EQ by yourself. I'd like to think we can all agree that playing EQ solo all the time is a horrifying prospect and boring as hell. Even if you solo to level or farm or whatever, having other people around is what makes the game what it is. So 700. That's all. And they're not all your level. Some of them are your class, some of them are classes you don't want in your group/raid/guild/whatever, some of them are noobs who you're afraid would get you killed, and yes, alas, some of them are total asshats who you want to ignore as best you can.

If one of them leaves because you were a dick to him, you have 699. If twenty of them leave because you and four friends made the game unenjoyable for them, you have 680. If a few small guilds leave because they're overwhelmed and denied access to content because your guild has a policy of being inconsiderate, you have 600 (I'm not alleging any of this; it's hypothetical). Do you see where I'm going here? If your policy is to serve yourself at the expense of courtesy or consideration to the other gamers on the server, they will leave, and eventually the only thing left will be people who are also self-serving and loot-centric. At that point the server is dead. EQ is a wonderful game and a fantastic experience even despite the presence of douchebags on any given server, but every person's tolerance for bullshit has a limit. Why would I want to play a game, even a great game like EQ, if the only people left to play it with are pricks who would jack a camp I've held for 12 hours if I die and it takes me 60 seconds to get back to it?

That's why I expected the community as a whole to be special: because I thought that everyone understood the consequences of being cruel to other people on a server with a small population, and the fact that there aren't many other people on the server to go around. You can't afford to run them off.

Bubbles: Rilen would have still given me clarity, because he's cool like that. Thought you should know.

Also, for karsten and Rhodes and their ilk: Haters gonna hate. Maybe this thread came off a little more rantish than I originally intended, but I know a troll when I see one.

What happened between the members of VD and Rilen was wrong. That's the long and short of it. It was legal (legal, at least if the camp meets the definition of a camp under the server rules, and since I haven't seen any staff interpretation on the definition or application to this particular area of the game world, I'm not prepared to take a position on that), but what happened was fundamentally unjust. That means something to me.

If it doesn't mean anything to you, or you think I'm taking it too personally, or you'd rather make snide jokes, flame, add insulting tags or responses to me or the other side, or any other excuse you have to not actually consider the principle of what I'm saying, then I'm willing to venture at this point that you're exactly the person who needs to take a step back and actually think about it, regardless of which side you think was in the right. The way we feel about the people we play games with (whether we think they're jerks or they're just obstacles in the way of our advancement) matters, and if you think a video game isn't an appropriate forum for issues of justice versus law or human nature, you're already behind.

Peace and safety.

Don't get discouraged. It's easier for people to make a lasting negative impression than a lasting good one. I can go buff 20 noobs and leave a lasting good impression with a couple of them, or go KS one person and leave a horribly sour taste in their mouth for a long time. Despite anything else I've said, I do believe the good people here vastly outnumber the more questionable ones.

If you're out leveling and need a SoW or crappy 9 pt DS, feel free to message me on my druid Yarghh and I'll hook you up =P (my other chars don't have much of use, lol)

[Odeseus]

Phrag, your intentions are well placed, but your logic is faulty. I think mainly because you simply care too much and have too high of standards for yourself. As Pico mention, step back from the game or else you're going to have a major meltdown sooner rather than later.

For one, you seem to be somewhat intelligent. So you must know that anonymity that the internet creates makes it MUCH MUCH MUCH more likely for a normally well-adjusted person to act like a total dick. I tend to view my character as a version of myself, and try to act like I would in RL (aka normal, repsectful, etc.). But you must know that this view is a minority in the world of video games. Many people here (and elsewhere) have no emotional connection to their characters. They buy and sell them, or use them as an outlet for things they wouldn't do in RL (ie, being mean).

Also, you have got to understand that not everyone follows your understanding of what is right. There is not, nor will there ever be, a complete and total consensus about what is right and wrong. Even if it is because some people will always be deranged enough to bend or break the rules of what is accepted and what isn't. And much of what you have a problem with is simply your opinion. And you cannot force your opinions on the rest of the people. You can try, but on the internet it simply won't work. You have to be smart enough to realize this.

Now for your actual post.

1. I've played EQ before--classic--a lot. Druid by the name of Demoree on Innoruuk had most of my time--ended up I think just inside of level 52 before I quit right after PoP was released. I'm new to the server, not the game.

How does this matter at all? Almost everyone here has played EQ in the past in some aspect. I personally played for 10 years. But let's be honest, how does this matter in the least? You know how to play the game.....so what?

but I can still appeal to common sense

Common sense is not common. You should know this by now. Don't rely on it because people will let you down.

I'm sure that everybody here who cares about the server's sustainability already knows all this and has spent enough time thinking about it for it to have already sunk in--but if you claim to care about the server and still treat people badly, maybe it hasn't

You put too much faith in people. The VAST majority of the population doesn't think about the relationship between the sustainability of the server and their actions. We are playing to have fun playing a game that we enjoy. That is about as far as it goes, to be honest. We simply do not make that connection that you want to make. Instead, most players have to goals: 1) have fun 2) get gear. That's as complex as it gets.

If one of them leaves because you were a dick to him, you have 699. If twenty of them leave because you and four friends made the game unenjoyable for them, you have 680. If a few small guilds leave because they're overwhelmed and denied access to content because your guild has a policy of being inconsiderate, you have 600 (I'm not alleging any of this; it's hypothetical). Do you see where I'm going here?

Slippery slope. What is the connection between acting like a dick and people quitting? Honestly, there is no stats or information to back this up. It is all your opinion yet again. The only way to get this stat is to have a survey about former p99 players to find out why they left. And it is my opinion that the difficulty of leveling and/or getting money/gear, and lack of content at 50 if you don't feel like poopsocking would be MUCH MUCH MUCH higher than "people were mean to me."

if the only people left to play it with are pricks who would jack a camp I've held for 12 hours if I die and it takes me 60 seconds to get back to it?

No where in your original telling of the story did you mention about where the chanter was bound. I try to bind near where I'm camping so I can go back to it if I die. Most people will let you go back to a camp, but there are many factors that go into this that you willfully ignore. Such as: desirability of the camp, difficulty of the camp, location of the camp, etc. Each of these changes for each camp. Such as camps in the Paw that I like to frequent. Often I can go back if I have to gate and/or die, simply because not many people are in the zone to notice I'm gone, nor are the camps super desirable. AC is about THE most desirable camp, it is easy to get to (at least in SRo), it is VERY easy (just boring) among other things. You simply can't demand everyone be super nice for these kind of camps, because it won't happen.

What happened between the members of VD and Rilen was wrong. That's the long and short of it. It was legal (legal, at least if the camp meets the definition of a camp under the server rules, and since I haven't seen any staff interpretation on the definition or application to this particular area of the game world, I'm not prepared to take a position on that), but what happened was fundamentally unjust. That means something to me.

It was wrong IN YOUR OPINION. How many times do I have to repeat that? Just because you see something is wrong, doesn't mean that it is. You are not the ultimate arbiter of what is wrong and what is right. Some people that democracy is evil as hell. Most Americans would think just the opposite. Some people like to eat rats, squirrels and bugs. I think that is disgusting but who the hell am I to make some grand judgment?

I have read everything that you have posted, and have responded to the best of my ability. Your move.

[YendorLootmonkey]

...a bunch of idealistic, utopian stuff...

I apologize... I didn't realize we were all playing "Phragmar's View of What Everquest Should Be Like".

Do not hold my guild or others accountable for your vision of the way things are supposed to be. Who are you to decide what is right and wrong? These things are spelled out objectively in the server ruleset precisely so people aren't held accountable to every Tom, Dick, and Harry's subjective view of right and wrong. The only reason you think something is a douchebag move is because you want to pick and choose which parts of the rule set you want to play by, and which parts you don't, and then paint some evil picture of whoever doesn't pick and choose in the same fashion.

No one's going to leave the server because they were "treated like a dick." They are going to leave the server because they didn't agree with the rule set, or were too oversensitive to handle the rule set being applied in a situation that was not in their favor (i.e. retaining a camp for X number of minutes after you die/wipe.)

Rilen died, for whatever reason, and lost the camp. At the time he was sent to his bind point by whatever killed him, the camp no longer belonged to him. I don't care which way you want to twist it... if you for one second suppose that the camp still belonged to him after he died, then you're saying camps can be reserved for an unspecified amount of time while the player is on CR. Which, if you played Live as you have claimed, you know is totally ridiculous.

Now you come here with your own made-up rules in your head that people should wait X number of minutes for someone to come back to a camp after they failed to keep it and died. Who are you to make up this rule? How am I supposed to know I am being held accountable for it? What is this magical number X number of minutes I must wait before the camp is no longer theirs? And when you see members of my guild not abide by this artificial ruleset, they're the douchebags? They're evil? They're loot-centric?

What about the person making up rules magically protecting someone's claim to a camp while they aren't even in the zone? Because they died. Which are completely different than the established rules set forth by the server admins so that there would be no question about this situation?

I know this is a carebear server, but what you're looking for is a server powered by rainbows and unicorn farts. Sorry the population of P1999 didn't live up to your divine standards. I hope you don't plan to do any raiding any time soon, because you're in for a rude awakening. No, if you wipe on Naggy, the guild breathing down your necks behind you is not going to give you as many attempts as you want until you give up and graciously let them take a turn. This was no different on Live, so it shouldn't be a shocker to you here.

Again, sorry we all disappointed you. I guess that's really all I have to say. And if you need a SoW in EC Tunnel while I'm standing there, I'll still give one to you if you'd like.

[Humerox]

... I do believe the good people here vastly outnumber the more questionable ones.

This. Period.

huge thanks to the devs for this too...most don't realize how many idiots they've blasted off the server.

hopefully kunark will balance things out a bit.

[YendorLootmonkey]

Bahahaha. You know that slippery slope is also a fallacy, right? Basically what you just did was get called out on a logical fallacy, so you use another logical fallacy to defend yourself, WHILE CITING WHAT THAT FALLACY IS. I mean, I've seen enough of your posts to think you probably aren't a complete moron or anything, but that wasn't a very well thought out response to my post, lol.

Then you won't mind me calling you out on dodging the question.

How many minutes are you saying someone should wait for a person to do a CR and come back to the camp before they can claim it from that person? Is it 5? 10? 60 minutes? 300 minutes? 4500 minutes?

Just asking a simple question. I'm sure you'll reply with some witty response like "SLIPPERY SLOPE IS A FALLACY HEHE" or "STRAWMAN!" but you'd still not be answering my simple question. And if you do answer it, I would like you to follow up with who decides the number of minutes we must wait, and where is this written?

[soup]

I apologize... I didn't realize we were all playing "Phragmar's View of What Everquest Should Be Like".

Do not hold my guild or others accountable for your vision of the way things are supposed to be. Who are you to decide what is right and wrong? These things are spelled out objectively in the server ruleset precisely so people aren't held accountable to every Tom, Dick, and Harry's subjective view of right and wrong. The only reason you think something is a douchebag move is because you want to pick and choose which parts of the rule set you want to play by, and which parts you don't, and then paint some evil picture of whoever doesn't pick and choose in the same fashion.

No one's going to leave the server because they were "treated like a dick." They are going to leave the server because they didn't agree with the rule set, or were too oversensitive to handle the rule set being applied in a situation that was not in their favor (i.e. retaining a camp for X number of minutes after you die/wipe.)

Rilen died, for whatever reason, and lost the camp. At the time he was sent to his bind point by whatever killed him, the camp no longer belonged to him. I don't care which way you want to twist it... if you for one second suppose that the camp still belonged to him after he died, then you're saying camps can be reserved for an unspecified amount of time while the player is on CR. Which, if you played Live as you have claimed, you know is totally ridiculous.

Now you come here with your own made-up rules in your head that people should wait X number of minutes for someone to come back to a camp after they failed to keep it and died. Who are you to make up this rule? How am I supposed to know I am being held accountable for it? What is this magical number X number of minutes I must wait before the camp is no longer theirs? And when you see members of my guild not abide by this artificial ruleset, they're the douchebags? They're evil? They're loot-centric?

What about the person making up rules magically protecting someone's claim to a camp while they aren't even in the zone? Because they died. Which are completely different than the established rules set forth by the server admins so that there would be no question about this situation?

I know this is a carebear server, but what you're looking for is a server powered by rainbows and unicorn farts. Sorry the population of P1999 didn't live up to your divine standards. I hope you don't plan to do any raiding any time soon, because you're in for a rude awakening. No, if you wipe on Naggy, the guild breathing down your necks behind you is not going to give you as many attempts as you want until you give up and graciously let them take a turn. This was no different on Live, so it shouldn't be a shocker to you here.

Again, sorry we all disappointed you. I guess that's really all I have to say. And if you need a SoW in EC Tunnel while I'm standing there, I'll still give one to you if you'd like.

You keep citing the rules as what decides what is or isn't a douche bag thing to do. "These are the rules we agree on and outside of that it's fair game." but that's a pretty crappy way to look at things. There is PLENTY that should NOT be a rule but still makes you a douche bag for doing it. I can make a hypothetical scenario in 20 seconds to show this.

Say you're a class that can cast SoW. A naked lowbie runs up to you and asks if he can have a SoW for his corpse run. You tell him you will SoW him for 10 plat, no less. He informs you that he is naked and on CR and has no plat, furthermore he informs you he just spent all his plat on a piece of banded armor. You're sitting there with GEBs and BS jewelry and encumbered because of the 20k you're carrying as well as having a full mana bar and are doing nothing, but you still refuse to SoW him without receiving 10plat in exchange for it. Is this a douche bag thing to do?

Please, anyone who does not think that's a douche bag thing to do, tell me now so I can stick you on ignore. With that said, there absolutely should NOT be any kind of rule AT ALL against that.

[soup]

Then you won't mind me calling you out on dodging the question.

How many minutes are you saying someone should wait for a person to do a CR and come back to the camp before they can claim it from that person? Is it 5? 10? 60 minutes? 300 minutes? 4500 minutes?

Just asking a simple question. I'm sure you'll reply with some witty response like "SLIPPERY SLOPE IS A FALLACY HEHE" or "STRAWMAN!" but you'd still not be answering my simple question. And if you do answer it, I would like you to follow up with who decides the number of minutes we must wait, and where is this written?
See, you're doing exactly what I'm talking about, making it all about some technical rule definition. The entire point I'm trying to make here is that it SHOULD NOT be about some exacting amount of time that differentiates what is or isn't this or that. If the poor guy died and is immediately running back, fuck man, just let him have the camp back. Hell, you could even be a really nice guy and hold it for him til he gets back. Or, you can choose to tell him to fuck off and and take it.

Like I said, it isn't about what the rules should or shouldn't be, it's about what is or isn't decent and respectable behavior. You saying "SO WHAT'S THE EXACT AMOUNT OF TIME THAT SHOULD PASS???//" is EXACTLY what I'm saying shouldn't happen. You can tell the noob on a CR you wont SoW him for less than 10 plat, and no rules should tell you otherwise, but absolutely refusing despite sitting there FM doing nothing is a pretty douchey thing to do.

[soup]

Here, I'll just go ahead and sum up my position as simply as possible:

if the rules are all you use to determine what you should or shouldn't do, you're probably an asshole

[Humerox]

I also find it kind of 'humerous' that humerox went from being one of the jerks who kept frenzy to themselves by handing it off to each other for like weeks using the corpse bank exploit to the guy who isn't selfish and doesn't care about loot.

Um...I think you got me confused, bro.

I have never camped Frenzy here. Ever. I hate LGuk with a passion, lol.

and I was once the biggest "white knight" on the server. not that it did much good, lol...

[Darian]

What happened between the members of VD and Rilen was wrong. That's the long and short of it. It was legal (legal, at least if the camp meets the definition of a camp under the server rules, and since I haven't seen any staff interpretation on the definition or application to this particular area of the game world, I'm not prepared to take a position on that), but what happened was fundamentally unjust. That means something to me.

K. I'm parking my necro at Lord camp until I get a pair of yaks. When people ask if Lord camp is open, I will respond that I alone am camping the mob and no one else is allowed to have a shot at it. If there is a group of 3 people behind me wanting a shot, I will tell them to wait their turn. If I die, I expect them to wait until I have finished running back without a port from Kerra Isle where I bound myself-- because after all, they saw me die and they know it's my camp. If they try to take the camp, I will call them loot-greedy douchebags and label the situation fundamentally unjust.

This is a league game. This determines who enters the next round-robin. Am I wrong?

Say you're a class that can cast SoW. A naked lowbie runs up to you and asks if he can have a SoW for his corpse run. You tell him you will SoW him for 10 plat, no less. He informs you that he is naked and on CR and has no plat, furthermore he informs you he just spent all his plat on a piece of banded armor. You're sitting there with GEBs and BS jewelry and encumbered because of the 20k you're carrying as well as having a full mana bar and are doing nothing, but you still refuse to SoW him without receiving 10plat in exchange for it. Is this a douche bag thing to do?

Please, anyone who does not think that's a douche bag thing to do, tell me now so I can stick you on ignore. With that said, there absolutely should NOT be any kind of rule AT ALL against that.

So you don't want to punish people who don't believe in forced charity, you just want to publicly shame them. Got it.

[Spewys]

Wow!!! Can of worms has been opened !!

[soup]

K. I'm parking my necro at Lord camp until I get a pair of yaks. When people ask if Lord camp is open, I will respond that I alone am camping the mob and no one else is allowed to have a shot at it. If there is a group of 3 people behind me wanting a shot, I will tell them to wait their turn. If I die, I expect them to wait until I have finished running back without a port from Kerra Isle where I bound myself-- because after all, they saw me die and they know it's my camp. If they try to take the camp, I will call them loot-greedy douchebags and label the situation fundamentally unjust.

This is a league game. This determines who enters the next round-robin. Am I wrong?



So you don't want to punish people who don't believe in forced charity, you just want to publicly shame them. Got it.

Usually when people resort to using excessively exaggerated extremes to defend their position, it's the same thing as saying "I know things look and sound really bad, but I don't want to admit it."


@ your ninja edit
I'm not sure where you read that in what I posted. All I said is that the rules don't dictate what is or isn't a dick thing to do. Anyone who thinks the rules DO dictate what is or isn't a dick thing to do is either an asshole or a simpleton. Often a combination of both.

[soup]

I've seriously seen a much stronger sense of community from many WoW players than I see being exhibited by a lot of people in this thread, and I know how most people on this server look at WoW players...

[Darian]

Usually when people resort to using excessively exaggerated extremes to defend their position, it's the same thing as saying "I know things look and sound really bad, but I don't want to admit it."

Excessively exaggerated? The only things I changed from the OP's story were the mob in question and the bind point, the latter of which (as you've just told us) shouldn't matter.

@ your ninja edit
I'm not sure where you read that in what I posted. All I said is that the rules don't dictate what is or isn't a dick thing to do. Anyone who thinks the rules DO dictate what is or isn't a dick thing to do is either an asshole or a simpleton. Often a combination of both.

I agree with you there. Where we disagree is that I happen to think when a camper dies, comes back, finds camp taken, then argues he should be given unlimited chances and deaths to kill the mob without anyone else having a chance (even if he's in over his head)... well, I think that guy is the bigger dick than the folks who took the camp in his absence. The fact that my position lines up better with server rules doesn't mean the rules dictate my morality.

If it had been me camping and I'd died, I wouldn't begrudge people for taking the camp. I expect the best from my guildmates (there's that community thing you're talking about), but I just don't think they're in the wrong here.

oh and inb4 RnF switch

[DetroitVelvetSmooth]

When a person is camping a spawn alone and dies, it is proof that they don't deserve tha spawn. Unless they were trained, take that shit. No mercy for farmers.

[Acillatem]

It sux - we've all been there. But I don't consider it a douchebag thing to do. I would never be pissed off at someone that took a camp from me while I was on a corpse run. I'd be more pissed at myself for LOSING the camp in the first place.

The AC is a heavily disputed camp....I know people who spend weeks trying to get on a list for it. It's unfortunate the person died - but hey - if I'd been trying to find an open AC for almost a month....and I happen upon the SRo AC being open.....I'm sorry to say if you WERE there and died - it's mine now. I'll be damned if I'm going to spend another month till I can find it open again.

My time is more important than your happiness. That doesn't make me a douchebag. That makes me someone who works 60-70 hours a week, only plays on weekends, and wants to maximize my playtime.

I don't charge for ports. I'm alwayz unanon so if someone needs a lift all they hafta do is ask. I spend a lot of time helping other wizards in the community out.

I volunteer enough of my time helping others that when a gem like an Ancient Cyclops falls in my lap - I'm taking advantage of a lucky break.

And honestly - I think anyone who EXPECTS me to do something detrimental to my character's advancement becuz they fuking died is a douchebag.

[soup]

Excessively exaggerated? The only things I changed from the OP's story were the mob in question and the bind point, the latter of which (as you've just told us) shouldn't matter.



I agree with you there. Where we disagree is that I happen to think when a camper dies, comes back, finds camp taken, then argues he should be given unlimited chances and deaths to kill the mob without anyone else having a chance (even if he's in over his head)... well, I think that guy is the bigger dick than the folks who took the camp in his absence. The fact that my position lines up better with server rules doesn't mean the rules dictate my morality.

If it had been me camping and I'd died, I wouldn't begrudge people for taking the camp. I expect the best from my guildmates (there's that community thing you're talking about), but I just don't think they're in the wrong here.

oh and inb4 RnF switch
It just really irks me how often people are happy to tell each other to "fuck off, look at the rules". I mean, honestly, the gameplay in this game isn't exactly the most exciting thing ever. What is great though is how much of an influence players can have on each other, both good and bad. I know that going out and buffing noobs on my druid can make SOOOO much more impact than it can in basically any other game, and that's actually why I'm leveling a druid right now (again actually, since my previous account got compromised due to not being cautious enough.) Strictly because I want to go out and offer those useful buffs. Do I expect other people to do the same? Not at all, but it sure does irk me when people are soooo much more than happy to tell someone else to fuck off, look at the rules.

A good example of something I saw recently that I found quite disheartening was when I was in Lguk (on my 50 necro) going around looking for nameds to kill and shit, I took a peek at Lord and saw he was up with a Yak and saw a necro with crappy gear nearby. I asked the necro if they were killing the Lord to which they said yes. I had very little experience with Lord so I decided to sit by and see how they went about killing the Lord as well as to lend a hand if they got in a bad spot. After sitting there for about 5-10 minutes, they asked me "Are you going to just sit there and hope I fail, or....?" and at first I found it somewhat offensive, shit, I'm just wanting to watch and maybe lend a hand, and you're going to ask if I'm trying to jack you? But I realized I can't really blame them since if they did die the rules would allow me to take the mob and Yak and I'm sure they've probably ran into plenty of people who would love nothing other to do that (and hell, had probably ran into people who had done exactly that.)

The necro example is a pretty good one in this example since after talking to them for awhile I found they had been trying to kill him a couple times now and kept getting close and died a couple times, so according to what some people say "He's in over his head, he doesn't deserve the mob!" but on the attempt where I was watching they managed to kill the Lord with absolutely no problem whatsoever. Had they died and I killed the mob and took the Yak, the rules certainly would have allowed that, AND I do not think the rules should state otherwise, but, with that said, I do think I would have been a 100% grade A douche bag to take it.

[Mini14]

I was there that day, and what happened sucks- but I've learned over the years you can't change the way people act... The best you can do is try to watch out for these kinds of people. Regardless of who was right and who was wrong, I got my shit-list and i'm checking it twice :p

[Phragmar]

I said that was my last post barring replies to attacks or questions, and I meant it, so I'll hit the broad strokes and be as brief as I can.

1. I clarified that I played before to distinguish between the fact that I'm new to the server, not the game, since some of the earlier responses seemed ambiguous on the point.

2. I have an opinion. Sorry if this comes as a surprise. Sometimes I talk about it on the internet and elsewhere. My condolences for you if you don't have an opinion or don't talk about it. You might be sad to discover that I have opinions on other things too, and as it turns out, at least one person agrees with my opinion on this issue. Go figure.

3. Speaking passionately about ethics /= mental instability. I'm not entertained by ad hominems. Also, if you're looking to troll or insult, I'd try for something other than "white knight." I'm sorry, but I just can't bring myself to find it pejorative.

4. Being nice to people is not a huge revolution in thought, even on the internet. A lot of these arguments can be distilled to. "It is okay to be cruel to someone if the rule/law supports it," or perhaps implicitly (and bleakly), "It is okay to be cruel to someone if there are no real world consequences for it." If the former is your view of the world, that's fine (although I would defy you to articulate a rational basis for it, and I think it's patently immoral--yes, my opinion strikes again), and if you hold to the latter, I would suggest that I think it's time for gamers as a subculture to arrive at the place where everyone understands that there is no acceptable justification for having a separate standard for treating people in a game as compared to the real world. Maybe that makes me idealistic, but I'm willing to be idealistic.

5. I'm sorry if this comes as a disappointment--after all, I realize that apparently I come across a little high-handed--but just like everyone's parents, teachers, religious or political authority figures, gurus, pundits, or talking heads, I am not able to articulate for you a uniform, absolute standard for ethics that you can apply in every situation. You have to work that out for yourself. There are a million hypotheticals anyone could posit that are factually similar to the incident I witnessed where either side could be in the wrong for a host of different reasons. There is no hard and fast rule when it comes to human decency. There is a rule for camping on this server, but I don't have to have been here for years to know that one can observe the letter of it while utterly subverting the spirit of it, in more ways than one. EDIT (preemptively): I would also remind you that the rules for server interaction serve more purposes than one, some of which are articulated, and some of which aren't. One of them, however, is to create a line of staff fiat that prevents these disputes from being litigated in whatever dispute-resolution process the server might waste its time implementing, in an effort to cut down on the need for superfluous manpower.

[Rilen]

Yay.

I don't care to read this shit storm so I'm just going to post details.

I camped AC from 5:20ish am, to whenever I died somewhere around 1:30am maybe?

Died to a white SG that was the 30 minute PH for AC. I shouldn't have died but after over 15 hours at the camp I was getting a bit lazy. The druid that nearly saved me said that I killed it, so my DoT must've magically taken him down.

After this I paid said Druid 150pp to pick me up from LFay, and was back in less than 10 minutes to find the VD members rolled into my camp and try to inform me that they had killed the PH's so it's their camp now. Whatever, I tried to ask them to be nice, be decent, and got rules cited on me.

Quite frankly, I didn't expect anything different, I don't expect anyone to care. In fact, I don't really care.

Douchebags will continue to be douchebags. It should come as no surprise that a congregation of them forms in a mass invite guild.

[Odeseus]

So you are familiar with the opinion concept. Everyone has one, whether they express it or not. What I wonder is why do you continue to express it as if yours was the only one that matters? There have been pros and cons posted here as to why you were upset about this particular event. You fall on one side, others fall on the other. Why get upset that many disagree with you?

And, sorry, but of course someone will agree with your opinion. Hitler had an opinion that Aryans were the superior race. Many people agreed with him. Doesn't make him right. Or as another example, I think LeBron James is a dick. Many people disagree with me. Doesn't make me right or wrong. Tis the nature of opinions.

As for being idealistic. You have every right to be idealistic and I encourage it. But just be aware that you will ALWAYS run into things that fall well short of your ideal. Tis the nature of the world unfortunately. Sorry to disappoint you. But be prepared for this, and don't freak out when we (as fallen creatures) cannot live up to your ideal. We're human, and as you mentioned before, we are evil by nature. So why does it surprise you when we act according to our nature?

As for being nice, you simply cannot be nice all the time to everyone. A good example is my first few jobs that I held in RL. I was always the first one to be called in if someone called in sick or just didn't show up simply because everyone knew I was nice enough to come in. So I spent WAY more time at work than I should have, and eventually figured out that I was being used.

Or as another example, a couple of ex-girlfriends who used my generosity to string me along and buy shit for them. It is simply my nature to be nice, but they abused that. The same logic applies here. If I am nice 100% of the time, I will be used. I have been scammed a few times here because I was too trusting of random people. There are advantages to being nice but there are also some disadvantages as well that you ignore.

And finally, YES, we all have to figure out for ourselves what is right and wrong. Not everything is spelled out. So why is your version of what is right and wrong the only one that matters? How are you somehow the perfect moral being while the rest of us scum down below are not?

Just some thoughts, hope you can find the time to address them.

[soup]

So you are familiar with the opinion concept. Everyone has one, whether they express it or not. What I wonder is why do you continue to express it as if yours was the only one that matters? There have been pros and cons posted here as to why you were upset about this particular event. You fall on one side, others fall on the other. Why get upset that many disagree with you?

And, sorry, but of course someone will agree with your opinion. Hitler had an opinion that Aryans were the superior race. Many people agreed with him. Doesn't make him right. Or as another example, I think LeBron James is a dick. Many people disagree with me. Doesn't make me right or wrong. Tis the nature of opinions.

As for being idealistic. You have every right to be idealistic and I encourage it. But just be aware that you will ALWAYS run into things that fall well short of your ideal. Tis the nature of the world unfortunately. Sorry to disappoint you. But be prepared for this, and don't freak out when we (as fallen creatures) cannot live up to your ideal. We're human, and as you mentioned before, we are evil by nature. So why does it surprise you when we act according to our nature?

As for being nice, you simply cannot be nice all the time to everyone. A good example is my first few jobs that I held in RL. I was always the first one to be called in if someone called in sick or just didn't show up simply because everyone knew I was nice enough to come in. So I spent WAY more time at work than I should have, and eventually figured out that I was being used.

Or as another example, a couple of ex-girlfriends who used my generosity to string me along and buy shit for them. It is simply my nature to be nice, but they abused that. The same logic applies here. If I am nice 100% of the time, I will be used. I have been scammed a few times here because I was too trusting of random people. There are advantages to being nice but there are also some disadvantages as well that you ignore.

And finally, YES, we all have to figure out for ourselves what is right and wrong. Not everything is spelled out. So why is your version of what is right and wrong the only one that matters? How are you somehow the perfect moral being while the rest of us scum down below are not?

Just some thoughts, hope you can find the time to address them.

A lot of this is basically summarized as "I used to let people walk all over me, therefore I now have no problem with people just taking anything the rules allow them to take."

Hey, maybe a lot of people think that since the rules allow it then it's an okay and not dick thing to do. That's their right, but there's also a lot of us who think it's a complete asshole thing to do, and will make sure to not have anything to do with people who are like that.

[Phragmar]

... Hitler ...


Just some thoughts, hope you can find the time to address them.

Nope.

[soup]

Yay.

I don't care to read this shit storm so I'm just going to post details.

I camped AC from 5:20ish am, to whenever I died somewhere around 1:30am maybe?

Died to a white SG that was the 30 minute PH for AC. I shouldn't have died but after over 15 hours at the camp I was getting a bit lazy. The druid that nearly saved me said that I killed it, so my DoT must've magically taken him down.

After this I paid said Druid 150pp to pick me up from LFay, and was back in less than 10 minutes to find the VD members rolled into my camp and try to inform me that they had killed the PH's so it's their camp now. Whatever, I tried to ask them to be nice, be decent, and got rules cited on me.

Quite frankly, I didn't expect anything different, I don't expect anyone to care. In fact, I don't really care.

Douchebags will continue to be douchebags. It should come as no surprise that a congregation of them forms in a mass invite guild.
Hey, if you go to camp it again, feel free to message me if I'm on (Hanz, Yarghh, or Youre) and I'll park my necro there with ya. Can't promise my complete undivided attention, but I can offer some help as well as maintaining the camp if something goes wrong.

[h0tr0d (shaere)]

I fail to see how one instance of pseudo-camp stealing is worth "taking it all back."

If all it takes is one bad event to ruin a good community, no good communities exist at all.

Character is made by many acts, it can be ruined by a single one.

Good points in this thread. From all sides.

Charity is not a bone shared with the dog, charity is the bone shared with the dog when you are just as hungry as the dog.

Have fun in game guys, loot comes, and loot goes. If you play this game long enough,you realize this. One day your bronze is no longer 'uber'. Then your crafted. Then your oracle robe, planar armor, sky loot...loot comes and loot goes. When you look back on this game, it will be of experiences. Shared experiences being the best. Not of loot, or plat. What seems so important one moment isn't really, the things that are the most enjoyable aren't tangible. Just enjoy the game. And help others to enjoy it.

[Nocte]

I camped AC
I died
[I] was back in less than 10 minutes
[someone else] rolled into [the] camp
Quite frankly, I didn't expect anything different.

Enough said. You lost the camp. Someone else came to the camp while you were gone. It's a highly sought-after camp. It shouldn't have come as a surprise to anyone that this happened to.

It really is that cut and dry, whether you (or anyone else *cough* OP *cough*) like(s) it or not. It has nothing to do with people "being nice," and everything to do with a collection of people following a set of rules that are in place to deal with these types of situations. For all intensive purposes, you can't even know that the folks at your camp spot even knew you had just died or if you had just killed an AC - they just saw an empty AC camp.

[h0tr0d (shaere)]

Intents and purposes. /wink

[karsten]

for all intensive purposes this thread should have ended before it started

;)

[soup]

for all intensive purposes this thread should have ended before it started

;)

minus whale just close it now, things are getting a little too in tents

[maegi]

beats a dead horse some more

[Bubbles]

Wait, someone who died in a camp, who was bound on a seperate *continent* and lost said camp, is now officially calling my guild every name in the book?

/facepalm.

I mean, i've garnered enough goodwill over the last year and a half to weather just about any $#!tstorm, but this is just getting more blatently trollish as the facts continue to come out.

Gratz on everyone blowing through 3 pages arguing semantics and utopian dream scenarios.

You don't want to camp the AC?

1. ) Bind on the same continent.

2. ) Try not to die.

You want to believe Vesica Dei is some angry milita zerg force of camp stealers and griefers? More power to you. You'd honestly have to come to these message boards, slam an eightball, and pound out about 4 hours worth of 'search' magic to even begin to assemble a paper trail to support that conclusion.

Godspeed.

[senna]

Wait, someone who died in a camp, who was bound on a seperate *continent* and lost said camp, is now officially calling my guild every name in the book?

/facepalm.

I mean, i've garnered enough goodwill over the last year and a half to weather just about any $#!tstorm, but this is just getting more blatently trollish as the facts continue to come out.

Gratz on everyone blowing through 3 pages arguing semantics and utopian dream scenarios.

You don't want to camp the AC?

1. ) Bind on the same continent.

2. ) Try not to die.

You want to believe Vesica Dei is some angry milita zerg force of camp stealers and griefers? More power to you. You'd honestly have to come to these message boards, slam an eightball, and pound out about 4 hours worth of 'search' magic to even begin to assemble a paper trail to support that conclusion.

Godspeed.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_uuCqsyqQObY/S9ZmqLeIlAI/AAAAAAAABEA/mHFRVjYAa2Q/s320/YouMad.jpg

[soup]

Wait, someone who died in a camp, who was bound on a seperate *continent* and lost said camp, is now officially calling my guild every name in the book?

/facepalm.

I mean, i've garnered enough goodwill over the last year and a half to weather just about any $#!tstorm, but this is just getting more blatently trollish as the facts continue to come out.

Gratz on everyone blowing through 3 pages arguing semantics and utopian dream scenarios.

You don't want to camp the AC?

1. ) Bind on the same continent.

2. ) Try not to die.

You want to believe Vesica Dei is some angry milita zerg force of camp stealers and griefers? More power to you. You'd honestly have to come to these message boards, slam an eightball, and pound out about 4 hours worth of 'search' magic to even begin to assemble a paper trail to support that conclusion.

Godspeed.
Different mindsets I guess.

If I come up to an open camp and then 10 minutes later find out it's open because someone had been camping it for numerous hours and then died to whatever bullshit and had forgot to bind nearby, my first thought isn't "Sweet, that means it's my camp now!", it would be more along the lines of "Oh shit that's pretty rough. Do you want the camp back / need help getting here / want me to hold it til you get here? etc."

Although despite what I've said earlier in the thread, doing something like that doesn't necessarily mean you are in fact a douche bag, but it is a somewhat douche bag thing to do. Like someone earlier pointed out, you can help a thousand people, but be a douche bag to just one person and then forever be remembered as a douche bag.

[maegi]

Wait, someone who died in a camp, who was bound on a seperate *continent* and lost said camp, is now officially calling my guild every name in the book?

/facepalm.

I mean, i've garnered enough goodwill over the last year and a half to weather just about any $#!tstorm, but this is just getting more blatently trollish as the facts continue to come out.

Gratz on everyone blowing through 3 pages arguing semantics and utopian dream scenarios.

You don't want to camp the AC?

1. ) Bind on the same continent.

2. ) Try not to die.

You want to believe Vesica Dei is some angry milita zerg force of camp stealers and griefers? More power to you. You'd honestly have to come to these message boards, slam an eightball, and pound out about 4 hours worth of 'search' magic to even begin to assemble a paper trail to support that conclusion.

Godspeed.

The person this actually happened to is not the OP here and never called you or your guild even one name, much less every name in the book. This thread is like arguing religion or politics, if someone believes whatever they happen to believe, whether that is right or wrong, they won't change their belief no matter how much you argue your side. No matter how many valid points you might make, and no matter how many times you can discredit them or insult them.

[DevGrousis]

well guys, i guess we've shown him that this forum is full of a bunch of douche bags lol. way to start a fight on THIS of all threads lol

[YendorLootmonkey]

If the poor guy died and is immediately running back, fuck man, just let him have the camp back. Hell, you could even be a really nice guy and hold it for him til he gets back. Or, you can choose to tell him to fuck off and and take it.

You want to hear a story about how far "being nice" gets us? Last night, we rezzed a few members of one of two other guilds in Fear to help them get rolling. Not naming any names because it's pointless and nothing against the rules was done. Same guild decides to park their entire raid force on a spawn point of most of a certain kind of mob that drops gear, instead of just parking *one* of their pullers in there like we had to at least give us and maybe the other guild a *shot* at getting one of these mobs as they spawned one-by-one. But... nope. Awesome.

Against the rules? No.

Nice thing to do to the guild being nice to you and helping you with a CR? Maybe not?

The difference is we don't come here and start a shitstorm thread about it. Or flame them in /ooc or /shout. We get smart and do the same thing with another set of mobs with different gear. And maybe think twice next time about helping that guild out with some rezzes while we're trying to share a plane with them.

Not really a point here, other than to show that "being nice" really isn't a universal concept on this server because of the limited resources and huge demand for the content, especially upper level content. So you go with "what the rules are" to prevent anyone from crying foul.

[Jenni D]

everyone knows yendor is a trainer, ks'er and all round cheaty McCheatyperson (tm)

[Mead]

I learned real quick not to die or go ld. It's very sad, but that's the reality on this server. If people have an interest in your spot, you better believe they're going to start quoting the server rules. That is mild shit compared to what I see every day. The other day Qados charmed lord with a yak in his hand and brought him to the live side while some dude was camping it. Same asshattery with the same asshats as live. There are some good people around.

[gnomishfirework]

Man. I'm sure in any given circumstance a douche bag can be a nice person and a nice person can seem a douche bag.

[Madigan]

Opinions by their very nature are neither "right" nor "wrong".
It is my opinion that these types of threads are...

[Alderac]

I believe I died in SRO on a Sand giant last Feb at around level 21, took me about 8 months to get up to the point where I could solo the AC camp, but I submit that this camp was in fact mine from Feb 2010 to present and anybody who has gotten Jboots there since then is a campstealing douchbag. Please hand me all your 5kpps.

Sucks you died, very noob to not bind in SRO. You were not even in zone, let alone at camp, therefor not your camp anymore. Also your very decision to post this in a R&F forum, rather than a) seek resolution via /petition if you genuinely felt you were entitled to the camp or b) make any attempt to mediate the situation with an officer of the guild involved, brings into question in my mind your entire "sad bumbling enchanter" act.

Everyone else on their high horses is just bored and looking to stir shit, I certainly am paying no attention to it!

Eldar Oftenlost
Wizard of < Vesica Dei >

Formerly
Alderac of Erollisi Marr

[Methesa]

http://www.funnyforumpics.com/forums/This-Thread-Delivers/1/thread-delivers.jpg

[Dio]

We'll know for the first time
If we're evil or divine
We're the last in line.
We're the last in line.

[h0tr0d (shaere)]

Dio, is that a...gasp...double rainbow?

[skipdog]

It looks like this all comes down to how people interpret what holding a camp means.

To many of us, it means that you have to HOLD that spawn. You die, you lose it. It has nothing to do with being a DICK to that person. It just has to do with what holding a camp MEANS. If you die, you aren't holding the camp. You shouldn't be at that camp. Being tired after hours and hours of camping and then dying, means that you LOST the battle for the camp. That is part of holding a camp... can you stay awake/functional long enough to be victorious? The only reason you are going to lose a camp that you HAVE, is by losing your own battle with that camp.

To some people, holding a camp means that you can die and expect that camp to not be taken simply by others being nice and believing your sob story. How long do you let somebody have the camp while they make a CR? When exactly does somebody become a dick? After 10 minutes? 15 minutes? 30 minutes? The problem is you are creating this imaginary line that nobody knows except you... and if people don't conform to what YOU believe is the appropriate time, they become a dick. See the problem? Most of us understand this, and thus, when we die while holding a camp, we say to ourselves "damn I suck...why did I have to die and lose that camp". The example somebody mentioned about camping Lord in lguk and believing that it would be a dick move to watch the pull and take it if the people died to the lord... honestly makes no sense to me. If they die to the Lord, they shouldn't of been trying to camp him. They lost their personal battle with the camp.

So yeah, it just comes down to opinion. Those that follow the rules and believe a camp is lost when you die, are seen as greedy loot whores from those who expect to be able to die at their camp and come back sometime later and expect it to be handed back to them.

It has nothing to do with being greedy or only caring about loot. It has to do with your opinion of what holding a camp means. It is unfortunate that those who believe camps should be held for them for an undetermined amount of time while making a CR, are seeing the others as douchebags and trying to pain them all as such.

[Doubleplus]

Lawful Evil is adhering to the rules but using them to twist events in your favor. "Rules lawyering" is using regulations to shield yourself from retribution as well as an excuse to not have to do the right thing. In reality these people not only want to do the wrong thing, they want to not be accused and blamed as well instead being portrayed as honorable individuals.

Did any of you play D&D?

Finally claiming that "A mention of X guild was unnecessary you could have reported it to an officer." Is a PR move that is utilized by businesses since forever. It's also censorship and mud slinging to claim that the person should have reported it to "your" authorities instead of letting the public know.

It's very easy to know what type of person someone is by examining their actions. Everything else is an illusion.

[Dio]

Dio, is that a...gasp...double rainbow?

It could be... it could be.... It also could be... A Double Rainbow..... A Double...... Rainbow In the Dark....

[azeth]

Did any of you play D&D?

I'm happy I can answer "no" to this question. Though, if i were in high school 5-10 years earlier I *clearly would have.

[Odeseus]

Nope.

Man, I wanted an intelligent argument. Thought you would be nice enough to put some time and energy into a response that would refute some of the points I made. I am disappointed. :(

[Methesa]

It looks like this all comes down to how people interpret what holding a camp means.

Don't bother. These guys are getting a self righteous high with their holier than thou attitude. Logic does not seem to be getting through here.

[Lelroni]

http://images2.memegenerator.net/ImageMacro/5023333/MY-MIND-IS-FULL-OF-FUCK.jpg

[Doubleplus]

Don't bother. These guys are getting a self righteous high with their holier than thou attitude. Logic does not seem to be getting through here.
http://neo3555.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/baatezu.jpg

[Molitoth]

All of this over a 5k MQ item.

[YendorLootmonkey]

Lawful Evil is adhering to the rules but using them to twist events in your favor. "Rules lawyering" is using regulations to shield yourself from retribution as well as an excuse to not have to do the right thing.

The problem is your "right thing" is completely subjective. To you, the right thing is being a doormat when it comes to camp possession. To other people in this thread, they understand that dead men can't hold camps. Other people in this thread consider it equally douchey to expect a highly coveted loot camp handed back over to you after you wipe and someone else moves in to claim it.

So, pray tell, how do we decide what to do where we don't get perceived as a dick? Why is one subset of peoples' opinions more correct than the other? Who decides this?

Making Up Arbitrary Rules is just as assholish as Rules Lawyering. Who gives you the right to pick and choose what rules (I.e. the ones about camp possession) you decide everyone should ignore? Why is someone who plays by the rules a dick, and the person who decides that they have a different idea of how camp possession should be defined and calls players out for not adhering to it somehow not a dick?

I play nice and try to help others out, but not to the point i'm a doormat and get taken advantage of. I don't think that mindset is douchey. It's fair. Everyone in my guild understands that if they wipe trying to hold a camp, they lose their claim to the camp. There's nothing douchey or non-douchey about it.

The only thing douchey would be an expectation that one could monopolize a popular loot camp that they've wiped to and are due unlimited attempts to hold the camp, regardless of how long their CR takes while everyone waits patiently for that person to be done.

[Rhodes]

The problem is your "right thing" is completely subjective.

That is pretty much /thread right there. Everyone must follow the rules put forth by the devs, but beyond that it's subjective as to what is and what isn't douchebaggery. In my opinion the real douchebags here are those who talk down to everyone about camp etiquette as if we are all supposed to fall in line with their view of the game. No thanks. Some of us are highly competitive. Screwed up while camping a highly contested spawn? That sucks, but your turn is now over. There's a lesson to be learned, and it starts with not dying. And if you can't handle that, then the next lesson is to bind 50 yards away instead of on another continent. Bleeding all over the forums about it accomplishes nothing.

[FearsEdge]

*Wanders into south ro*
Dum dee dum dee........ oh look. No one is sitting on AC! This is quite lucky!
/shout CC?
*wait*
*look around*
I guess it's mine! No one responded, there is no one here! Yay! I get this awesome camp that may in fact result in nothing but frustration and disappointment when I am done!
*ten minutes later*
*some douchebag* "hey, this is my camp! I died here like ten minutes ago after camping it all day, but needed a port from another continent! you should definitely have know that this is both my camp and that I was coming back within some random arbitrary and yet to be stated time frame! You are a douchebag since you will not give this camp up even though I just said that I died!"
So who is the douchebag in this scenario? Hmm?

"Burr", 50 Dwarf Pally of Vesica Dei

[Ongbak]

VD is evil because we took "Highly sought after AC camp" after someone die to the SG?

My solution, "Don't be lazy" like you stated, this is what happened. This is my personal opinion and had nothing to do with VD, if I die at frenzy or Lord or any other camps, its my own damn fault.

Move on, try something else or next day.

For me to DIE at a camp.. and run back is my mistake.. and i OWN that mistake.. i dont blame others for moving in and taking over.. thats just the nature of the game... I'm not going to go calling people douchebags for playing EQ to the letter of this servers law.

BULLSEYE!

[Kassel]

So last night I was camping Raster for my last required item for my hot hot robe. I was soloing the camp and doing well until i noticed I had run out of bandages. For me at my level I did not feel i could hold the camp with out bandages so i decided i would run to oasis to stock up. Someone had just called out a CC and i did respond so it was know in zone that i was at raster. I jbooted (lol) to Oasis and was back in under 10 min. I floped back to raster and low and behold a monk and bard where sitting at the Raster PH. They saw me and asked me how it was going. I advised them i had been here for a while but had to leave to go get bandages or i would have died. I then wished them the best of luck on the camp. I knew i had lost it, i knew it was no fault but my own.

I could have just died and ran back and stocked up on bandages then started a huge emo thread about how they were jerks for taking an empty camp, but i did not want to be a douche and thus i accepted responsibility for my own actions and found something else to do.

The bottom line is, if your not at the camp for what ever reason, it is no longer your camp.

[azeth]

also, DA isn't rubbing off on VD like the tag says. I think VD is rubbing off on DA and making us more pleasant :P

[vinx]

Guys, this thread is all from the OP beliefs not Rilens post. he has 1 post lol
and im sure Rilen is already past what happened in zone, his post was basically he was tired, mistakes were made and the camp won.
im sure he is also aware that it was prolly a mistake that he bound in Lfay while camping a mob in Sro LOL

but hes not the one bitchin about losin the camp. he may have at the time when he got back to zone and who wouldnt?
eh he mighta got lucky and found someone that said "ok here you go all yours again"
but im guessin hes alrdy chalked this up as a learning experience.

theres really only 2 people here everyone is trying to convince and thats Phrag and Soup
and trying to change blind beliefs is outside the skope of any forum thread
im not going to go on about how nice VD is or even start trying to defend any actions here because to be honest.. its a ridiculous thread
subjective to views > server rules that are in place when agreements or views dont coincide as in this situation

which in this case 90% of the server would agree with VD on this camp.. your not at camp or cant hold camp. you lose it
per server rules, which we fall back on when there is a dispute

/thread

[Teensy Weensy]

I brought some vagasil for all the hurt vajayjays today! Line up to get the sand out! I'm lookin at you Soup

[h0tr0d (shaere)]

Just because someone disagrees with you, or takes a different stance then you doesn't make them a 'douchebag'. I hate that term. Some middle schooler finds out what it is and starts using it, and here we are. Actions speak louder then words, including actions here.

The bottom line is, if your not at the camp for what ever reason, it is no longer your camp.

I agree with this, but say someone is camping say Raster for an extended period, their router burps or whatever, and they go linkdead. They log back in within minutes, as soon as their character is no longer active on their server and allows them to log in. They log back in, and you are now at the camp. Different ways different people handle it, as we see here. I would also point out there are people playing who would take advantage. They claim to 'have been there', or they gate to bank, or transfer a lore item, and come back to farm. As to the point of helping people cr in fear, and they turn around and stick it to you. One reason the rules do exist. Losing your camp can be unfortunate, but the people that arrive in the 30 seconds you are gone legitimately, are not 'douchebags'. Just as the people who lose a camp and are frustrated are not as well. There are people who use the rules to hide behind poor actions, but these rules also protect against people who act poorly. You cannot blame the OP for being disheartened, or frustrated, or the original camper. Just as you cannot blame the camp-taker(s) in their taking of the camp, when no one was present. The real key is how you handle yourself. I didn't read in the OP that the camp-takers were the scum of the earth, my take was more he would have been the good samaritan, and wishes others would be as well. While I agree with that sentiment, he has a right to his opinion, and doesn't deserve venom for feeling this way. And the people who argue what the rules state do not deserve it either, because it wasn't as if he merely moved 10 feet, or they caused his death.

Would be an interesting poll, "What would you do?"

The bottom line is, if your not at the camp for what ever reason, it is no longer your camp.

Player X trains Player Y. Player Y dies, and is no longer at the camp. Tough luck Player Y?

Player X has the camp. Player Z asks for help in the next room, to avoid death, or they ask for res, or cure, or something. Player X goes to help, is gone a mere matter of seconds. They arrive back at camp and Player Y claims it is now theirs. Tough luck Player X?

It isn't always so cut and dry. The best rule is the golden rule. Do unto others as you would have done unto you. Treat others as you would like to be treated. I would like to think we would be encouraged to help others, to help with that cr in fear, or hand the camp back to the poor soul. Instead we wish misfortune or ill upon others, so that we can benefit. Sad. The overriding rule is "Play nice." People often quote 'rules' which are mostly part of the F.A.Q. here, or clarifications posted on the forums.

And folks, trust me on this. If you ever lose your camp to an unfortunate incident, such as network issues, use your corpse. If you arrive at a camp, and a player claims they have been there and just died to X reason, use the corpse. Example: You are camping Dino, and suddenly you find yourself with a spell bug. Or you go Linkdead for no reason. You log back in 30 seconds later, bound there or nearby. Someone else tries to claim your camp. If your corpse says res timer is 2 hours, 58 minutes to expire, your chances of getting the camp back increase. Just because you die at a camp doesn't mean you lack the capability of holding it. Personally? if I see a corpse with 2 hours 5x minutes on it, they get the benefit of the doubt. I may watch to see if they can in fact kill it the next try, and will inform them. If I see no corpse, eh well they may be trying to pull a fast one and take the camp.

Have fun in game folks.

[Messianic]

lol tags:

"u poopin bro?"

As a matter of fact, yes. Yes I am.

Yeah, I squat n surf.

[Doubleplus]

The problem is your "right thing" is completely subjective. To you, the right thing is being a doormat when it comes to camp possession.
I never once in my post said anything about being a doormat. Thank you for inserting weak argument points into other people's posts to make it easier for you to debate "their" points, though.

To other people in this thread, they understand that dead men can't hold camps. Other people in this thread consider it equally douchey to expect a highly coveted loot camp handed back over to you after you wipe and someone else moves in to claim it.
I agree. Though I don't think you will find anyone who thinks the jboots are a highly coveted camp. The jboots are a "whenever you feel like it" camp. So for someone to be clearing the whole day and then you show up at the end of the day to profit from their work is contemptuous. If you wish to argue that coming in swiftly at the end to steal or gain from a anther's hard work is practical or ingenious, agreed. If you wish to argue that it is either ethical or moral as it relates to the kind treatment of another, you can't.


So, pray tell, how do we decide what to do where we don't get perceived as a dick? Why is one subset of peoples' opinions more correct than the other? Who decides this?
Ah but that wasn't your point. You were arguing the difference between the "right thing" and practicality. No one is going to scorn you for doing the right thing except yourself as you curse yourself for not taking advantage of the situation in your favor. Your dilemma is which to put first, a stranger or, practically favorable, yourself. If you wish to befriend this person in the long term maybe you could get some use out of them in the future if that is your concern. That is what we call planning for the future.

Thinking of the immediate gain and weighing them against possibly future benefits could appeal to you if doing the "right thing" seems like a waste of time.


Making Up Arbitrary Rules is just as assholish as Rules Lawyering. Who gives you the right to pick and choose what rules (I.e. the ones about camp possession) you decide everyone should ignore? Why is someone who plays by the rules a dick, and the person who decides that they have a different idea of how camp possession should be defined and calls players out for not adhering to it somehow not a dick?
Now you are veering down off into moral relativity. A mode of thought evolved from Pragmitism and what this whole discussion is really about. "What gives you the right to judge me about my actions?"

But I will clear things up for you very easily. Your actions are taken selfishly as I discussed above, with benefit towards yourself and your allies. "Are selfish actions wrong?" No. "Are they wrong if taken at the expense of others?" No, surprisingly. However, they are pointless when taken at the expense of another for no good reason. The AC can be camped whenever you feel like it, there was no reason to "reestablish" the camp for oneself at that time other then to avoid the work of clearing mobs from scratch.

This itself is a problem of education because the AC can spawn quite rapidly from SRO desert clearing or a lengthy amount of time. Erecting your camp onto of another's work when it provides no benefit even to yourself truly, but that person or party believes it will reveals the intent motivated by greed.

I play nice and try to help others out, but not to the point i'm a doormat and get taken advantage of. I don't think that mindset is douchey. It's fair. Everyone in my guild understands that if they wipe trying to hold a camp, they lose their claim to the camp. There's nothing douchey or non-douchey about it.
There are all kinds of circumstances like this in real life, to act on them would evoke repercussions, but since you can do so without fear of punishment from any party or person, you can argue their validity. Much like politicians and leaders can do when they have an army backing them.

The only thing douchey would be an expectation that one could monopolize a popular loot camp that they've wiped to and are due unlimited attempts to hold the camp, regardless of how long their CR takes while everyone waits patiently for that person to be done.
Like attempting Trakanon 10 times in a row or something? This situation is clearly not an example of that.

In closing I am not arguing in anyone's favor. Understand this. I am arguing against your (not just you, people's) justification for their actions. Anything can be justified. It is not worth carrying about grudges in video games unless it is repeat offense material. I am merely saying that your viewpoints affect the community and a large majority oriented with personal gain prioritized above user environment is headed down the same path as every other free shard and live server of every mmo ever made.

I am not angry at anyone, I enjoy these debates with philosophical roots, which is the only reason I joined in. I have no stake in the matter.

[Phragmar]

Just because someone disagrees with you, or takes a different stance then you doesn't make them a 'douchebag'. I hate that term. Some middle schooler finds out what it is and starts using it, and here we are. Actions speak louder then words, including actions here.



I agree with this, but say someone is camping say Raster for an extended period, their router burps or whatever, and they go linkdead. They log back in within minutes, as soon as their character is no longer active on their server and allows them to log in. They log back in, and you are now at the camp. Different ways different people handle it, as we see here. I would also point out there are people playing who would take advantage. They claim to 'have been there', or they gate to bank, or transfer a lore item, and come back to farm. As to the point of helping people cr in fear, and they turn around and stick it to you. One reason the rules do exist. Losing your camp can be unfortunate, but the people that arrive in the 30 seconds you are gone legitimately, are not 'douchebags'. Just as the people who lose a camp and are frustrated are not as well. there are people who use the rules to hide behind poor actions, but these rules also protect against people who act poorly. You cannot blame the OP for being disheartened, or frustrated, or the original camper. Just as you cannot blame the camp-taker(s), when no one was present. The real key is how you handle yourself after it. I didn't read in the OP that the camp-takers were the scum of the earth, my take was more he would have been the good samaritan, and wishes others would be as well. While I agree with that sentiment, he has a right to his opinion, and doesn't deserve venom for feeling this way. And the people who argue what the rules state do not deserve it either.

Would be an interesting poll, what would you do?



Player X trains Player Y. Player Y dies, and is no longer at the camp. Tough luck Player Y?

Player X has the camp. Player Z asks for help in the next room, to avoid death, or they ask for res, or cure, or something. Player X goes to help, is gone a mere matter of seconds. They arrive back at camp and Player Y claims it is now theirs.

It isn't always so cut and dry. The best rule is the golden rule. Do unto others as you would have done unto you. Treat others as you would like to be treated. That is my opinion, and all I have to say on this.

/sermon off

This is generally accurate on enough levels that I feel like chiming in to confirm. I'm not advocating that the rules should be changed or that all VD members should have ropes placed about their necks and be hanged until dead, and I don't expect any great cultural upheaval among this server community over this incident. Moreover, I certainly don't have any delusions of stirring moral conviction in those of you who have made it abundantly clear that you prefer moral bankruptcy. But for everybody else, I believe that striving toward a higher good is a worthwhile undertaking, and that means talking about it.

I've avoided using religion or a religious basis for a number of reasons, one of which is, frankly, that it's just another thing to be flamed for. Anyone who has studied Jewish or Christian theology (and probably others) doesn't need me to tell him where the analogies are in this discussion. Having said that, however, and acknowledging the impediments it brings with respect to those who for whatever reasons legitimate or otherwise will not consider any reasoning that has even the least hint of religious influence, I'll readily admit that the golden rule is powerful.

To speak more broadly, however, especially if you're someone who has some reason for disliking Jesus Christ, what ever happened to virtue? [This is a rhetorical question.] Angry as I was over the incident, and as vehemently as I would advocate that good people must contend against these kinds of things, I may have taken it for granted that everyone else had an understanding about what it is to be virtuous. I've certainly done my share of stupid, evil things. I can't pretend I've never stolen a kill in the whole time I played EQ, or trained anyone, or worked all manner of nefarious deeds in guild politics, not to mention a litany of cruelty to people in different arenas, so I don't want anyone to think that I believe I have some kind of moral high ground just because I've taken the position I have or because I feel strongly about it. I'm just another guy on the internet.

But there's a difference between right--I mean right, as in righteous, not correct--and wrong, and it's not the same difference as between legal and illegal. The whole crux of my argument is that where those distinctions overlap, as here, right must be preferred to wrong, and good preferred to evil, before any consideration of legal or illegal.

[Versus]

lol tags:

"u poopin bro?"

As a matter of fact, yes. Yes I am.

Yeah, I squat n surf.

Best thing in this thread.

[Klyre]

But there's a difference between right--I mean right, as in righteous, not correct--and wrong, and it's not the same difference as between legal and illegal. The whole crux of my argument is that where those distinctions overlap, as here, right must be preferred to wrong, and good preferred to evil, before any consideration of legal or illegal.

That was very nicely said, but when we are talking right and wrong or righteous or leagal, I wonder why you had to mention people by name in your OP as well as the guild they belong to. Could it not be considered wrong to have put these people through this ordeal when all you originally wanted was to know if leveling up would result in similar events? could you not have found out what you needed to know by not bringing the whole comunity down on the people who were involved?

Its done, and I don't say that you have done wrong, right or any other. Consider next time what you are really after.

[karsten]

I am baffled at the amount of text some of you people spew

[Doubleplus]

I am baffled at the amount of text some of you people spew

but you play eq

[fantom]

I have never had a good experience with anyone from VD

[Jenithia]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v92/Jenny1979/roflbot-1jA9.jpg

[Humerox]

But there's a difference between right--I mean right, as in righteous, not correct--and wrong, and it's not the same difference as between legal and illegal. The whole crux of my argument is that where those distinctions overlap, as here, right must be preferred to wrong, and good preferred to evil, before any consideration of legal or illegal.

another thing to consider is that is "whoosh" material for the "art thou mad, brosef?" crowd.

also there is a large population here that played classic EQ nuzzling a teat, and they - in particular - are the ones that don't have the slightest clue about what classic EQ community really was.

[azeth]

there is a large population here that played classic EQ nuzzling a teat

i still play classic eq while teat nuzzling, can i getta hell yea

[Humerox]

hell yeah, lol...

[maegi]

http://i855.photobucket.com/albums/ab115/maegi47/offtopic.jpg

[apocalypsesmeep]

Lawful Evil is adhering to the rules but using them to twist events in your favor. "Rules lawyering" is using regulations to shield yourself from retribution as well as an excuse to not have to do the right thing. In reality these people not only want to do the wrong thing, they want to not be accused and blamed as well instead being portrayed as honorable individuals.

Did any of you play D&D?

Finally claiming that "A mention of X guild was unnecessary you could have reported it to an officer." Is a PR move that is utilized by businesses since forever. It's also censorship and mud slinging to claim that the person should have reported it to "your" authorities instead of letting the public know.

It's very easy to know what type of person someone is by examining their actions. Everything else is an illusion.

I think this is the first thread I have actually really read on the forums. It gets at least 4 stars.

I can't believe the above quote was ignored though. This is the gem of the entire thread. VD's actions got called lawful evil, an alignment from a tabletop roleplaying game!

Today I gave some money to a homeless guy on the street, I think that is a neutral good act, could someone verify? If I add this to the times I have "stolen" camps from dead people, does this make me chaotic neutral?

Incidentally, I die an unusual amount of times at dhampyre to my own recklessness, and I have never blamed anyone for snatching the camp from me. I just politely ask if I can get in line behind them.

I've had this happen to me at dino when my partner was -there- and looting his corpse. Guy swooped in and took the camp. We thought we were in the right, and defended it and he eventually left. This made Hobby pretty mad when he showed up. Very few people are going to cut you a break on things like that, and the rules definitely maintain that the camp is not yours unless you are there and not afk when the mob spawns. (dino is a bit different since it falls under outdoor pathing mobs.)

It's not a right or wrong act, it's just how the game is played. If you want to take that extra step and allow someone to retake the camp, more power to you, but don't expect that to be the norm.

-Kaushi

[Odeseus]

The OP returns! Basically, instead of writing a wall of text, I simply have a question (or series of questions, if you will).

How did you come to the decision that the actions taken at that point in time were reprehensible? I would like to know if you thought about it at any great length or if the situation just felt wrong to you. And based on this, how did you come to the decision to post the situation on the forums? And a side question, how did you form your own moral view from the situation? And do you think that your moral judgments in this situation may have been wrong?

You basically came into this spitting hellfire and 100% secure in your judgment of what was just and unjust in the situation. I am just curious how you came to this conclusion, and how you are so steadfast in your opinion on the matter.

[Rhodes]

The OP returns! Basically, instead of writing a wall of text, I simply have a question (or series of questions, if you will).

How did you come to the decision that the actions taken at that point in time were reprehensible? I would like to know if you thought about it at any great length or if the situation just felt wrong to you. And based on this, how did you come to the decision to post the situation on the forums? And a side question, how did you form your own moral view from the situation? And do you think that your moral judgments in this situation may have been wrong?

You basically came into this spitting hellfire and 100% secure in your judgment of what was just and unjust in the situation. I am just curious how you came to this conclusion, and how you are so steadfast in your opinion on the matter.


inb4 overly grandiose reply from OP about the fading morality in the MMO culture of today.

[Doubleplus]

i think we should shit all over everyone, everywhere till everything degrades into complete state of madness

the people who care will be nerds
the people who don't will be cool

: D

[maegi]

I"m not getting any life readings on the tricorder Jim

[YendorLootmonkey]

Moreover, I certainly don't have any delusions of stirring moral conviction in those of you who have made it abundantly clear that you prefer moral bankruptcy.

Wait, am I considered morally bankrupt because I choose to play by the rules, or because I don't choose to play by your made-up rules?

Because that's all this really boils down to.

You come in here with your holier-than-thou, self-righteous attitude and then call those of us out who don't play by your style of idealistic play? Because we are not doing what YOU think is morally right?

This is a game. We play to have fun. We all have our various ideas of what is fun for ourselves, but one thing remains consistent: it is NO ONE's place to tell me how I should have fun playing a game, so long as I am following the established rules. Not "hiding behind the rules" or "rules lawyers" as those who would rather pick and choose which rules to abide by might say. Following the objective rules set forth by the server administration team so that there would clear and concise rules of engagement regarding the majority of potential conflicts in a game designed with high demand, low supply, and as a huge time sink.

Perhaps you have fun playing Everquest stuffing your moral high ground down everyone's throat. Fine, I accept that. But don't come here all butthurt and call us out by guild and names when a bunch of us don't find that "fun". The rules are fairly simple... you have the camp until you can demonstrate you can no longer hold the camp. Then it's someone else's turn.

Sure, I would love to be able to die at a camp, come back, and have it handed back over to me when I get back with a friendly "Sorry, bro... here's some buffs... have at it again!". If you could magically guarantee me everyone would do that, then that would certainly be what I'd like to do for the victim when I encounter the same situation from the other side of the table. But if I relinquish the camp to the person who died to try to be a Good Samaritan, there is no guarantee that when I get the camp and if I am not able to hold it for whatever reason, that the next person who comes along will extend me the same courtesy.

So, over time, if I'm always the one giving up the camp, yet the same courtesy is not guaranteed to me, I'm going to get burnt. So I instead choose to look to the rule set that governs the server so that I can behave in the same consistent manner that I am expected to behave.

How does that make me morally bankrupt? It just makes me someone who chooses not to be a doormat and leave myself open to being taken advantage of by people who would not show me the same courtesy if I gave something up when I was not obligated to do so.

[Doubleplus]

Ah yendor has chosen someone else instead of replying to me. Interesting.

[Darian]

Losing your camp can be unfortunate, but the people that arrive in the 30 seconds you are gone legitimately, are not 'douchebags'.

/thread

[Humerox]

Vesica Dei doesn't need defending here, we've all been philosophizing.

and as much as he hates to admit it, yendor's a nice guy...grouped with him on occasion on alts while he was up and coming.

silly ranga

[feste]

One day your bronze is no longer 'uber'. Then your crafted.


my crafted will aways be uber!!!

[Darian]

EDIT 2-24-11: It looks to me like this thread has outlived its ability to generate meaningful conversation or rational debate, and instead descended perhaps irretrievably to the point at which the bulk of the responses are flames or insults--yes, by Vesica Dei members, among others. As much as I think the discussion itself is meaningful and timely, I fear moderating this thread in the future would demand more work than someone is willing to dedicate, so I have to recommend at this point that it be closed or moved, possibly both.

If you call a guild out for misconduct and/or your own personal opinion of what's right/wrong/unjust, that guild will respond if they know their members haven't done anything wrong.

This thread = you either understand why people aren't allowed to hold camps when they die while camping a mob, or you don't.

[Phragmar]

Wait, am I considered morally bankrupt because I choose to play by the rules, or because I don't choose to play by your made-up rules?

...

You ... call those of us out who don't play by your style of idealistic play?

...

But don't ... call us out by guild and names ...

...

How does that make me morally bankrupt?

...



(Edited to bypass flames, personal attacks, insults, etc., and to condense)

Here is an example of me saying you're morally bankrupt:

"YendorLootmonkey is morally bankrupt." Please direct me to where that appears in any of my previous posts. I think you're in a much better position to answer your questions about your own morality than I am. I don't really know you.

Secondly, I mentioned the guild by name and the members by name. If I understand it correctly, many of the arguments being raised by you and others are that the people who took the camp were within their rights and did nothing wrong. If this is so, they shouldn't be in jeopardy of suffering any community opprobrium from anyone. I told the story as best I recalled it. If you feel like I misstated something, the other people who were there can certainly feel free to clarify. But if the VD members were in the right, what consequence is it to them or the guild to be mentioned by name? I don't think anyone has a basis to accuse me of slander--I haven't said anything that was untrue (and if someone can point out to me that I have, let me know so I can correct it), so what exactly am I calling people out for?

But alright, I guess that's a little evasive. From my perspective, even if everyone were to immediately concede the point and we all agreed that the behavior of the VD members was wrong, I frankly don't think they can expect any meaningful retribution, and that was never the point. VD's reputation is what it is, and I'm the last person able to tell anyone conclusively whether it's good or bad. Even if my entire intent was to cause problems for the guild (and it's not--I don't know any of the members and have never had contact with any of them before this incident), I expect nothing would come of it; whether the guild as a whole are bastions of uprightness or the scum of the earth, I at least expect it to have a respectable level of solidarity. Give me a little credit here.

Darian - I expect VD members to be involved in the discussion just like anyone else; I certainly wouldn't want to deny them an opportunity to respond.

Odeseus asked me explicitly about my thought process and rationale when it comes to deciding to start this thread in the first place, and with apologies, I'm declining to go into details about every ticking gear in my head because it just doesn't matter. I think I explained my reasoning pretty thoroughly in the opening post, and I don't expect anyone else to get any benefit out of knowing every graphic detail of my thought process. Also, I can recommend some churches in the deep south if you need a background in spitting hellfire, since my anger at its worst is a far cry from that. Finally, sorry if this comes across as rude, but the questions smelled a little of trollbait.

[maegi]

Don't sweat it Phrag, most of us have seen enough to know that your original point was made, in your first post. You might not want to use words with more than three syllables though for future reference, consider the source of whom you are addressing here for fuck's sake. They all googled or assumed they knew what you meant. I know it and you know it too, so let's just laugh and concede that some good people play here and agreed with your point. Other's have the right to live their lives according to server rules without letting human compassion or caring about another person ever enter into the scenario. What is Everquest after all? A time sink to obtain cool loot and advance your experience bar. Never mind the real people that are on the other side of every toon you encounter in said MMORPG. they don't count man, it's all about YOU. You know who you are too, so stfu and go get more loot by any means necessary.

[Phragmar]

Don't sweat it Phrag, most of us have seen enough to know that your original point was made, in your first post. You might not want to use words with more than three syllables though for future reference, consider the source of whom you are addressing here for fuck's sake. They all googled or assumed they knew what you meant. I know it and you know it too, so let's just laugh and concede that some good people play here and agreed with your point. Other's have the right to live their lives according to server rules without letting human compassion or caring about another person ever enter into the scenario. What is Everquest after all? A time sink to obtain cool loot and advance your experience bar. Never mind the real people that are on the other side of every toon you encounter in said MMORPG. they don't count man, it's all about YOU. You know who you are too, so stfu and go get more loot by any means necessary.

... Couldn't have said it better.

/thread

[Pico]

That's some pretty smug shit right there.

heh i'm going to teach these plebs a thing or two about mmo morals
*drags an entire guild's name through the mud over an incident that i wasn't involved in*

[Odeseus]

I want to know because as Humor has said, many of us are philosophizing. I want to know how you came to your conclusions because your entire position (and the VAST majority of this thread) is based on what you believe to be just or unjust. Many people have read the situation and have agreed with your position, others have disagreed. I find it easier to ask one specific person (whom I know has an opinion) instead of asking everyone. When I ask everyone, I rarely get an actual response.

Along those same lines, I tend to use extremes and/or colorful language that may or may not aid in my argument. But I have found that using cold, hard logic almost never results in a response. I have to liven it up a bit so someone will actually bite.

I personally would side with Yendor on this particular topic. Mainly because I believe that a wipe removes your claim to a camp. But I am not all that confident in this position, because I can see how annoying it would be from the chanters perspective. Been there all day, got back to the zone at great expense and in a relatively timely manner only to find the camp taken. But the fact remains that no one forced him to die and give up his claim to the camp, he did that himself.

I come to this because I know that AC is a competitive camp at times, so I cannot expect others NOT to take the camp while I am gone. I was also raised to own up to your mistakes and not run from them. Since the mistake would have been mine (if I had wiped), I must own that and not blame the people who by no fault of their own profited by my mistake. However, I also try to treat people as I would like to be treated, which makes my confidence in my position a bit on the shaky side.

But then again, I know that I cannot be too nice or else everyone would begin to tell me a sob story to take whatever camp I am at, simply because they know I would believe them. And finally, since I am not at all confident in my position, I would refer to the rules as a last resort to give myself some sort of guidance. The rules side with Yendor's position, but they are not the be-all-end-all. But since I was already leaning in that direction, it gives me a bit more confidence in my position.

That is how I worked through the situation (it is not hard to do). I had the advantage of time and space, which gives me a vastly different perspective. So I would like to know how you worked through it at that moment. There may be something in your explanation that will convince me of the error of my ways. Or I could see the flaw in it and point it out to you, hoping that you can see the error and change your mind. Or I could see that we will never see eye-to-eye, for whatever reason, and we can agree to disagree. In any respect, this will put the issue to bed (at least for me) and I can leave you alone, my curiosity being sated.

[Pico]

Phragmar, with each post it seems you care more about lording your supposed moral and philosophical superiority over us than you do the community's health.

[Bubbles]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_CNgDcKqGR10/TIUPmkxzHKI/AAAAAAAACII/VtVJa1LorVI/s1600/brick_wall11254935255.jpg

I mean honestly, if you were interested in the philisophical debate you'd

a. ) listen and consider differing viewpoints for the sake of discussion.

or

b. ) present the situation as a hypothetical to get unbiased answers.

Nah, you just tossed VD's name into the mud, and sit there and brick wall any point of view that isn't your own. It's not constructive, and if you'd spent 5 minutes on the board you'd know that no one really cares, these disputes happen all the time, and the server rules are clear on the matter.

This is a 100% troll thread and it's pretty blatently obvious.

[Phragmar]

Phragmar, with each post it seems you care more about lording your supposed moral and philosophical superiority over us than you do the community's health.

Your earlier post suggested that I had or would develop mental issues because of my position, so I'm sure it seems a lot of things. Let me spell it out though. With each subsequent post, I don't care about lording anything--what exactly do I have to lord? What is moral superiority? What is happening, however, is that I'm losing my patience, and as much as I believe in treating people with dignity, I do not believe in being a doormat.

That said, it looks like aside from a handful, the only people left in this thread are people who want to make personal attacks, flame, or call names because they feel like their guild membership obliges them, if for any reason at all.

Bubbles, I've articulated my position, several times and in several different ways. People who genuinely disagree and have a basis for it have articulated theirs; just because none of us immediately change our minds doesn't mean we don't appreciate constructive contributions to the discourse, and just because I don't respond to every criticism doesn't mean I didn't read it. I'm not defending my dissertation here; I'm having a conversation with strangers on the internet. Your previous posts have been hyperbole, mis-attribution, and editorializing meta-discussion; I'm sure you understand why I'm not taking your criticism seriously.

[Rhodes]

That's some pretty smug shit right there.

That's pretty much all I see when I read certain posts in this thread.

"Look at me guys, I use semicolons and uncommon words for effect!"

I can't wait for the next time someone steals an orc pawn kill and ninjas a rusty battle axe so we can have round two of this thread.

[Kassel]

Phrag, on your ride to 50 take it slow and enjoy the game. Based on what you have stated in this thread you would hate this server as a raider. Take it slow and enjoy the fantastic gift the devs have given us.

[Bubbles]

Bubbles, I've articulated my position, several times and in several different ways. People who genuinely disagree and have a basis for it have articulated theirs; just because none of us immediately change our minds doesn't mean we don't appreciate constructive contributions to the discourse, and just because I don't respond to every criticism doesn't mean I didn't read it. I'm not defending my dissertation here; I'm having a conversation with strangers on the internet. Your previous posts have been hyperbole, mis-attribution, and editorializing meta-discussion; I'm sure you understand why I'm not taking your criticism seriously.

You've backtracked and jumped ahead rather eloquently.

Bottom line is this:

If you wanted a legit discussion on the matter, you would have presented the situation as a hypothetical.. Gotten a couple links to server camp rules... Gotten a couple cute ancedotes about personal experiences. And the thread would have died quickly and you would have been quickly forgotten.

Instead, you plasted a guild name to it, put the blood into the water, and lit off an inevitable shitstorm that got a zillion times bigger than whatever (lost) point you were trying to make, or answer you were searching for. Your method of bringing the topic to light damned the conversation before it even began.

Solid troll, though, i do give you props.

[Heebee]

*drags an entire guild's name through the mud over an incident that i wasn't involved in*

This is standard practice here on the P99 forums!

[Klyre]

(Edited to bypass flames, personal attacks, insults, etc., and to condense)

I mentioned the guild by name and the members by name. If I understand it correctly, many of the arguments being raised by you and others are that the people who took the camp were within their rights and did nothing wrong. If this is so, they shouldn't be in jeopardy of suffering any community opprobrium from anyone. I told the story as best I recalled it. If you feel like I misstated something, the other people who were there can certainly feel free to clarify. But if the VD members were in the right, what consequence is it to them or the guild to be mentioned by name? I don't think anyone has a basis to accuse me of slander--I haven't said anything that was untrue (and if someone can point out to me that I have, let me know so I can correct it), so what exactly am I calling people out for?

I accept,

From the very beginning in you OP, from the very title in fact you question the nicety of the P99 Community.


Best Server Community Sin--Wait, Nevermind


So I see that you have tossed aspersions on the entire community and the Devs in particular.

To support this you then say


When I got there, Rilen was surrounded by members (Jomama, Freckie, Snump) of Vesica Dei--which I understand is a pretty reputable guild. I gave Rilen a hail and he told me that he had died, and they had jacked his camp and were sitting there trying to take the AC (which still hadn't spawned).


or....


... Really? I just can't help but be really disheartened to see this behavior, especially from high-level members of a well-respected (or so I thought) guild.


Here you clearly Name people and attach "Jacked" to their names (words have meaning and this says these people are thieves) and put into question the validity of the "reputable" nature of Vesica Dei. When all you really were asking was this....


Don't get me wrong--I'm not so naive as to think people are naturally good and will innately cooperate and get along, but I have to say I'm disappointed. The whole thing has made me reevaluate the server, honestly, and it wasn't even my camp. Classic is a difficult enough experience on its own, but if you add to that a strong likelihood of having to deal with. well, this--or worse, having to be friendly with people who would do this in order to participate in end-game content--in that case, I'm having a hard time justifying to myself that it's worth it.

So I guess that's my question, abstract though it may be. Is it really all the same? All the same camp-stealing, kill-stealing, loot-ninjaing, hate-filled animosity from live? Am I going to make it to level 40 just to have someone single-handedly turn 24-hours of hard work into a waste? It's a different perspective for me, I'll confess, since I think it accounts for a lot of why games like Everquest can't be made anymore, but maybe I was more optimistic over a few good experiences than I should have been.


To answer this question, if this really was your intent, did not require you to Name Names.

Furthermore you decide after agreement and both sides of the argument that it was not an offense against the rules of the game that you get up on your pulpit and preach to us all about what is righteous in a religious context.


What happened between the members of VD and Rilen was wrong. That's the long and short of it. It was legal (legal, at least if the camp meets the definition of a camp under the server rules, and since I haven't seen any staff interpretation on the definition or application to this particular area of the game world, I'm not prepared to take a position on that), but what happened was fundamentally unjust. That means something to me.


Once again you cast aspersions on VD as if we are something evil.

And again.....


EDIT 2-24-11: It looks to me like this thread has outlived its ability to generate meaningful conversation or rational debate, and instead descended perhaps irretrievably to the point at which the bulk of the responses are flames or insults--yes, by Vesica Dei members, among others. As much as I think the discussion itself is meaningful and timely, I fear moderating this thread in the future would demand more work than someone is willing to dedicate, so I have to recommend at this point that it be closed or moved, possibly both

Again you cast blame directly at Vesica Dei and only as an afterthought do you say "and others".

It was you who brought morality and self righteous vitriol to this conversation



But there's a difference between right--I mean right, as in righteous, not correct--and wrong, and it's not the same difference as between legal and illegal. The whole crux of my argument is that where those distinctions overlap, as here, right must be preferred to wrong, and good preferred to evil, before any consideration of legal or illegal.


You speak of Right versus Wrong only as it pertains to others.


To speak more broadly, however, especially if you're someone who has some reason for disliking Jesus Christ, what ever happened to virtue?
Very well, I ask you have you ever heard about the story of "Let he who has never done wrong cast the first stone"

I have from the very beginning been neutral about your concerns, but every time your arguments seem to shift so that you don’t have to consider that you may not be entirely correct.

As a very concerned person about your soul and if cannot come clean here on this thread because I think you owe an apology for trying to ruin peoples reputation, I implore you to do some soul searching, and ask for forgiveness.

'You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.'

Are you still willing to say that you are so moral, that the people you name are so wrong. I don’t know where you hale from, but where I come from we call that person a Hypocrite.

[Methesa]

Are you still willing to say that you are so moral, that the people you name are so wrong. I don’t know where you hale from, but where I come from we call that person a Hypocrite.

http://www.overclock.net/attachments/software-news/117607d1248648910-cnet-palm-re-enables-itunes-syncing-oh_snap.gif

[Teensy Weensy]

lol why do you keep trying to talk sense into the guy? A very wise man once said "You can't fix stupid". He was right you know

[YendorLootmonkey]

Eh... he's not stupid. He just has somewhat unrealistic expectations for the community of a MMORPG that is based on risk/reward and progress being proportional to time invested. There's nothing really more to say because no one is going to change their minds here. Just wish our guild hadn't been drug through the mud for playing by the rules.

[Messianic]

Eh... he's not stupid. He just has somewhat unrealistic expectations for the community of a MMORPG that is based on risk/reward and progress being proportional to time invested. There's nothing really more to say because no one is going to change their minds here. Just wish our guild hadn't been drug through the mud for playing by the rules.

I'm gonna go play WoW, where the community is mature!

Wait...

[Phragmar]

...

As a very concerned person about your soul and if cannot come clean here on this thread because I think you owe an apology for trying to ruin peoples reputation, I implore you to do some soul searching, and ask for forgiveness.

...

Are you still willing to say that you are so moral, that the people you name are so wrong. I don’t know where you hale from, but where I come from we call that person a Hypocrite.

The trouble with calling people hypocrites...

Here's something you might not realize: I've actually read the bible. I know what it says, so please don't embarrass yourself by attempting to apply to only me principles that apply to everyone. I can't recall claiming to be perfect or better than anyone else, and I also don't recall calling for blood for anything that happened. But in any event, I don't have the patience or interest in teaching textual interpretation or theology.

I'm willing to concede that the discussion could still have been had as a hypothetical, but that doesn't mean it necessarily should have. In any event, you and I aren't discussing anything, because your entire post, while couched in defense of VD and scripture, is nothing but an ad hominem attack.

But aside from that, being "concerned for my soul" is about the same as being concerned for my mental health. Forgive me for being flippant, but I'm not going to get involved in a philosophical discussion with someone who wants to preface it on my hypocritical soul being in jeopardy; I don't need your satisfaction that all is well between me and God, and I have trouble believing your "concern" is genuine in the first place. So in short, the only thing I can suggest is this: Grow up.


EDIT: One more thing. Nothing personal against you Klyre, but I'm not responding to any more posts about me in this thread. If you want to talk about how [insert negative quality of choice] I am, feel free. I'm not going to put anymore time into refuting those posts; I have better things to do, and you should too.

[Versus]

Fuck. This. Thread.

[soup]

I brought some vagasil for all the hurt vajayjays today! Line up to get the sand out! I'm lookin at you Soup

Errr... what?

I think you vastly overestimate the amount of care I have.

[soup]

You want to hear a story about how far "being nice" gets us? Last night, we rezzed a few members of one of two other guilds in Fear to help them get rolling. Not naming any names because it's pointless and nothing against the rules was done. Same guild decides to park their entire raid force on a spawn point of most of a certain kind of mob that drops gear, instead of just parking *one* of their pullers in there like we had to at least give us and maybe the other guild a *shot* at getting one of these mobs as they spawned one-by-one. But... nope. Awesome.

Against the rules? No.

Nice thing to do to the guild being nice to you and helping you with a CR? Maybe not?

The difference is we don't come here and start a shitstorm thread about it. Or flame them in /ooc or /shout. We get smart and do the same thing with another set of mobs with different gear. And maybe think twice next time about helping that guild out with some rezzes while we're trying to share a plane with them.

Not really a point here, other than to show that "being nice" really isn't a universal concept on this server because of the limited resources and huge demand for the content, especially upper level content. So you go with "what the rules are" to prevent anyone from crying foul.

This is really sad since it basically sounds like you're saying "We helped out some people and they turned around and acted like dicks to us, so I have no qualms with spreading dickish behavior myself."

[Odeseus]

*sighs* I thought that I could get at least someone into a philosophical discussion about how different people determine what is just or unjust in different situations. Guess this is nothing but your standard forum troll :(

Edit: if it is because you don't want to post philosophical opinions, send me a PM or find me in game. I'm actually really curious as to how different people came to their conclusions on this topic.

[Mcbard]

Lol an entire thread of VD* trolling somebody because he called a group of you douchebags for jacking some other players (not even his) camp when he died, which is laughable, and acting offended because he "uses semi-colons" and "big words"? Fucking eh, you all sure proved him wrong, rofl.

Enjoy the game and server phrag, I've enjoyed it so far! There's good and bad people in every guild on all games and all servers. Don't sweat the small stuff! :)

*yes I'm aware you're not all VD but the vast majority of posts that can be summarized as "Wall-of-text-leave-vd-alone!" are.

[soup]

*sighs* I thought that I could get at least someone into a philosophical discussion about how different people determine what is just or unjust in different situations. Guess this is nothing but your standard forum troll :(

Trying to turn a camp dispute on a EQ emulator's forum into a deep philosophical discussion on the subjective nature of morality might be asking a bit much. Just sayin'

[Kassel]

This threads tags are fantastic

[YendorLootmonkey]

This is really sad since it basically sounds like you're saying "We helped out some people and they turned around and acted like dicks to us, so I have no qualms with spreading dickish behavior myself."

Nope... just explaining what it means to me to be nice and respectful without being a doormat in this game. Refusing to be rolled over on equates to being dickish? News to me.

[Rhodes]

acting offended

lol

[Messianic]

This threads tags are fantastic

Truly they are

[atropine]

People who go through life expecting others to do nice things for them because they did something nice first will be disappointed. Doing something nice for someone else shouldn't be about "what will this person now do for me?" Either you give your kindness freely or it's just a weak bribe.


~ Kerrilea

[Bubbles]

The most impressive thing about this thread is the fact it never got moved to RnF.

[Kraftwerk]

For the fact that the majority of posts in this thread discuss the definition of choices as right/wrong based upon subjective morality, I am surprised that only traditional morality is being discussed. Nobody has explicitly mentioned or gone into greater detail regarding rational morality. Since Yendor has been the largest proponent of subjectivity when it comes to the individual's actions, let me posit this to you:

For use of the term morality in describing actions as right(moral) or wrong (immoral) that ensure evolutionary survival; our species and most species that exhibit group tendencies also exhibit actions which are defined as moral based upon the fact that the individual makes sacrifices and/or acts in a selfless manner in order to become a proponent of group life and thus improve odds of survival.

Let me provide an example - Some groups of vampire bats have exhibited actions as eating a surplus of food while others eat none, the bats that enjoyed an excess amount have been seen regurgitating their food to prevent the starvation of others. This behavior and selfless act is accepted because the bats accept a morality that survival is essential, and sharing one night will guarantee the returned favor another night.

If one accepts this train of thought for defining morality through rationality and survival it becomes much easier to remove the subjectivity from the situations presented earlier throughout the thread. For these situations view the continued existence of a server where there is a large playerbase as the evolutionary goal for survival, and the slow abandonment due to recurring unejoyable situations as the threats to the group's existence. There are two points that seem to be unanimous in this thread and that makes the previous assumptions valid - a) Having a camp stolen under similar circumstances is not enjoyable and b) playing Everquest with many other people on this server is fun.

Example 1 - Rilen dies, returns 10 minutes later and explains that he has been camping AC for the entirety of the day. Several un-related players in the same zone support this claim. The choice then falls upon the VD members to make a decision with the information presented to either act in the right (morally) - return the camp and make Rilen's time on the server enjoyable, with that expectation that at a future date Rilen would reciprocate and thus ensuring the survival (continued enjoyment of the server) for both parties - or act in the wrong (immorally) - deny Rilen the camp and cause a dissatisfaction with group life thus strengthening the threat to evolutionary survival.

Example 2 - Yendor's group in Fearplane rez's several members of a guild to assist them, thus exhibiting the right (moral) action due to it strengthening the value of group life for the people who were rezzed. The guild of the rezzed players proceeds to camp upon the entirety of Mob_Type_A in order to gain all of the loot possible for themselves. In this scenario the guilds can be seen as individuals for the discussion. The Guild monopolizing Mob_Type_A is acting selfishly, preventing the enjoyment of the server and group life for the other members in Fearplane. The guild's selfless actions are thus threatening the survival of the server by preventing the desire for other members on the server to continue existing on the server. The guild's actions are thus wrong (immoral).

It is entirely up to the individual to choose an action. Judgement does not have to play a role in deciding the morality of someone's actions, which then removes the subjectivity that has been championed throughout this thread. If you view the morality of actions more rationally and in terms of each individual's expectations for group life (Which have been widely agreed upon in this thread as a) Losing a camp within a 5-10 min period due to unforseeable circumstances is not enjoyable and b) The continuted existence of this server with a large playerbase is fun) as they relate to the server's evolutionary survival, then objectivity is much easier to determine. And through this the actions of many players can be seen as immoral or wrong.


Even while typing this I realize that I have also only brought up another question of subjectivity that I am sure will get jumped upon - who decides what is or is not enjoyable for the individual and thus perpetuates the survival of the server by each member's continuted existence on the server. What one may see as no fun, having a camp "acquired" by new parties within 5-10 minutes of "losing" said camp, another may enjoy wholeheartedly. But any argument in this thread is only going to raise more questions. This was more or less something for Yendor to ponder since he has been firm behind the idea that morality is subjective, and I wanted to show him that this is not entirely true.

[Acillatem]

Example 1 - Rilen dies, returns 10 minutes later and explains that he has been camping AC for the entirety of the day. Several un-related players in the same zone support this claim. The choice then falls upon the VD members to make a decision with the information presented to either act in the right (morally) - return the camp and make Rilen's time on the server enjoyable, with that expectation that at a future date Rilen would reciprocate and thus ensuring the survival (continued enjoyment of the server) for both parties - or act in the wrong (immorally) - deny Rilen the camp and cause a dissatisfaction with group life thus strengthening the threat to evolutionary survival.


Another way to look at it would be like this:

Example 1A - Rilen dies after monopolizing one of the most highly contested spawns on the server for almost an entire day. He returns 10 minutes later to see that someone has besieged his open camp. The choice then falls upon Rilen to either act in the right - realize he has had more than his fair share of time at the camp and see this as a sign to wrap it up and try it another time (allowing both parties the opportunity for enjoyment on the server) - or act in the wrong - make a huge deal out of a situation that was brought upon himself by his own doing (dying, not being bound anywhere near the camp, etc) and thus cause a dissatisfaction with the group life of the others involved.

Now....if they had stood by and watched him die and THEN took the camp? Ya - that's fuked up.

If they were camping the AC solely to MQ the ring for greed when Rilen needed the ring himself? Ya - that goes against the NBG principle and I'd consider that fuked up as well.

But this particular situation just reeks of someone who's pissed off they lost a camp and nothing else.

This group walked into Sro, saw an empty camp, and set up shop becuz one of them needed their JBoots. They offered to /tell him when they were done. They continued to buff n00bs in Sro while they camped the Jboots themselves. They didn't do anything wrong.

I don't play EQ to please everyone else. I enjoy seeing my friends and guildmates succeed etc - but when it comes to perfect strangers? Sorry but my game satisfaction/time is more important than yours.

I'm a WIZ and I spend SOME of my down time porting helpless n00bs becuz I do enjoy helping others. But when it's time to raid? Sorry but my time > your time.

[Humerox]

rational morality breaks down on a fundamental level. i could give you scenarios that would sicken you, but they would be rationally moral. Or not.

:)

[Icaro]

Reading the post from Acillatem scared me a bit.

I shiver to think what kind of person MIGHT be IRL someone who has this beliefs for a game.

I am prolly so naive...

[YendorLootmonkey]

I shiver to think what kind of person MIGHT be IRL someone who has this beliefs for a game.

Why, though? It's... just a game.

And mostly in response to Kraftwerk and others that I haven't directly responded to yet, because now this thread has moved moreso to a philosophical discussion of "how one derives enjoyment and why is it subjective to the individual, and how that relates to morality":

I guess it all depends on where on the following spectrum you fall: On one extreme, Everquest is a game. On the other extreme, Everquest is a virtual world/community. Some might veer towards one extreme or the other, or fall somewhere in the middle.

On one hand, Everquest is a game. Of course, there's no "winning Everquest", but there are certain goals you have for yourself, whether it be leveling X number of toons to max level, being the person in your guild everyone can count on for help, gearing up your own toon with best in slot equipment, being known on the server for having the most skill at your class or most knowledgeable about the game, for playing vigilante and training the big bad guilds until you're banned repeatedly, being the most popular person on the server, having the most unique name, wtfever. And whatever goal you have, there is a set of means to an end. There is a way to get from point A to point B. Unfortunately, for some "ways to play the game", this takes investment of your time. And since loot just doesn't get handed out when you hail a NPC, there is a certain degree of competition for that loot. And that loot isn't always for show... a lot of it, especially in the case of melee classes, helps make your toon more effective in its role.

So the question becomes, how much of my personal time do I want to invest in reaching my goals in this game? For some, that means tying themselves to a pager or batphone and being able to log in for a raid at all times of the day. For others, that means a few hours a night, casually. Most fall somewhere in between.

Games have rules. The rules for this game are posted here on the forum. This helps players objectively decide which actions in the game are "legal" or "illegal". Just as you wouldn't move a particular chess piece in a way not set forth by the rules of chess, lest the other player accuse you of "not playing fair" or "cheating", you wouldn't train the shit out of a particular camp to get the loot that you want so you can reach one of your personal goals, lest the other players cry foul, petition you, and you get banned for not following the rules.

And, as in any game, you don't make up rules to suit your particular situation when your back is against the wall, and expect other players to follow them. When you are in a position of checkmate in chess, you don't magically move your queen in some weird jacked up route that places you out of checkmate. Because you can't just make up rules to benefit you after you've been placed at a disadvantage. You don't suddenly decide "well, the rules say I lost my camp because I died, and I don't like those rules, so here guys... here's my new 'rules' that I should get my camp back, and if you don't let me have the camp back, you're all douchebags."

Imagine if you were playing chess and just put your opponent in a position of checkmate, and he's like "Well, I'm going to move my queen way over here so you can't win the game, because I don't like the particular rule that states I can only move my queen in a certain way. And if you don't accept that, you're a douchebag." Granted, it's not very parallel to the situation the OP is talking about, except the similarity is: games have rules, and all players are expected to follow them out of respect for playing the game fairly and consistently, so all other players know what to expect, and you don't just make up rules to benefit yourself in certain situations. There's no moral code when you are playing a game and just plainly following the rules. Is it immoral to not let your opponent move his queen in a weird squiggly pattern in chess to get out of checkmate? Of course not.

Then, on the other hand, there are those who view this as a virtual world/community and treat this as a microcosm of life. I get that, because I kind of straddle the fence between both extremes. I like to buff out some newbs or give them some plat once in a while. I like it when my guild helps CR another guild in a plane. I like being the good guys. I like having a good reputation on the server.

But, when I read what Kraftwerk said, I couldn't help but say to myself "Well, if the morally right thing to do is to ensure the enjoyment of everyone on this server, then wouldn't it be immoral to do anything but spend all of your time buffing newbies and give them plat?" Where do you draw the line between helping others, and doing things for yourself? What about the person who spends 99% of the time helping others, but that 1% of the time they do something for personal gain, they're suddenly immoral or selfish?

And if people are THAT concerned about always doing good towards others and helping out other people in a game/virtual world, then I would challenge them to take that one huge step forward... if you think doing what is morally right in a game community is THAT important, and we should all strive to make it a better place with no exceptions, then put your money (well, time... but time = money so I did an algebraic substitution) where your mouth is... and take the time you're spending playing Everquest in an idealistic fashion, and go volunteer your time helping others in REAL LIFE who truly need help. Wouldn't THAT make more sense from a morality point of view?

But no, we're all sitting here in this game/virtual world, judging other people for our own subjective versions of enjoyment of the game.

It's all subjective opinion. Just like Ace said above... if you want to call the people who claimed the camp after the enchanter died as greedy for not surrendering the camp back to the enchanter, you can just as easily call the enchanter who monopolized the camp all day and then died greedy for expecting he should get it back after he lost is claim. Neither opinion is "right", except for in the eyes of the person who holds that opinion.

If the enchanter loses the camp and then leaves the server and that you are worried that somehow weakens the community, why are you not concerned that the people coming to claim the camp get frustrated that they felt compelled to surrender the camp back, and then leave the server because they felt that person was being selfish? Wouldn't that also weaken the community? Or is one reason to leave the server valid, and the other is not?

Only one of those scenarios is backed up by the game's rules.

It all depends on how you play and what you play for. Just don't expect everyone else to play the same way, or derive enjoyment the same way. It's all subjective. And if you're gonna be that altruistic in a game, spend that time being altruistic in real life where people derive real, life-changing benefit from it. Don't waste that time looking down on a bunch of strangers in an internet game, please.

[Rais]

Jesus stop typing and log in yendor

[Klyre]

I really wish you had started a new thread as this is a good topic and fascinating discussion point. I fear though that this thread has gone on far longer than necessary and will be hard for most people to put aside their personal bias.

Kraftwerk

For the fact that the majority of posts in this thread discuss the definition of choices as right/wrong based upon subjective morality, I am surprised that only traditional morality is being discussed. Nobody has explicitly mentioned or gone into greater detail regarding rational morality. Since Yendor has been the largest proponent of subjectivity when it comes to the individual's actions, let me posit this to you:

For use of the term morality in describing actions as right(moral) or wrong (immoral) that ensure evolutionary survival; our species and most species that exhibit group tendencies also exhibit actions which are defined as moral based upon the fact that the individual makes sacrifices and/or acts in a selfless manner in order to become a proponent of group life and thus improve odds of survival.

You are defining the terms of Rational Morality as opposed to Religious Morality, Lawful Morality or Subjective Morality. Even though each has a different standard of determining what is Moral, they all can be quantified by the term Harm.

Religious Morality – Harm against Belief
Lawful Morality – Harm against Rules
Subjective Morality – Harm against Majority opinion
Rational Morality – Harm against Community Survival

Good or Bad morality or behavior is then defined by what you are going to do when the Harm is Perceived, whether to act and try to remove or alleviate the Harm or to turn your head and ignore it.

The perception comes from what view you take. If we look at this from Rational Morality we have to consider which group or community we want to look at each case be it Sever wide, Guild community, friendship community, or as individuals and each of its continued survival.

Let me provide an example - Some groups of vampire bats have exhibited actions as eating a surplus of food while others eat none, the bats that enjoyed an excess amount have been seen regurgitating their food to prevent the starvation of others. This behavior and selfless act is accepted because the bats accept a morality that survival is essential, and sharing one night will guarantee the returned favor another night.

If one accepts this train of thought for defining morality through rationality and survival it becomes much easier to remove the subjectivity from the situations presented earlier throughout the thread. For these situations view the continued existence of a server where there is a large playerbase as the evolutionary goal for survival, and the slow abandonment due to recurring unejoyable situations as the threats to the group's existence. There are two points that seem to be unanimous in this thread and that makes the previous assumptions valid - a) Having a camp stolen under similar circumstances is not enjoyable and b) playing Everquest with many other people on this server is fun.

I am having a hard time with argument A – Using the word Stolen here implies a Lawful term of Harm. I haven’t seen unanimous agreement on that point. (I have no objections to including this as any community that wishes to prosper must have a set of Rules of conduct, to do otherwise invites anarchy) However the loss of said camp under similar circumstance is indeed un-enjoyable and I agree with that. Part B is to me self evident.

Example 1 - Rilen dies, returns 10 minutes later and explains that he has been camping AC for the entirety of the day. Several un-related players in the same zone support this claim. The choice then falls upon the VD members to make a decision with the information presented to either act in the right (morally) - return the camp and make Rilen's time on the server enjoyable, with that expectation that at a future date Rilen would reciprocate and thus ensuring the survival (continued enjoyment of the server) for both parties - or act in the wrong (immorally) - deny Rilen the camp and cause a dissatisfaction with group life thus strengthening the threat to evolutionary survival.

You provided an example of Vampire Bats earlier so I will answer this with one of my own. If you are waiting in line for tickets to the Superbowl for 12 hours and all of a sudden you have to go to the bathroom and leave your spot in line, no one really notices you leave, when you come back you explain to the person who was behind you that you are coming back for your place in line. I think most people would say you lost your chance you now need to go to the end of the line. If you argue then you involve everyone else in line wether they support that you were there or not. This has very little influence on the global society but does impact local society..

But back to your Example 1 Why is it incumbent on the VD members to make this morality choice. Did not Rilen have any responsibility for making the sound choice of not putting anyone in this position in the first place? How about the Druid who ported Rilen back to reclaim his camp? He was paid 125 PP to make this happen. I bet he enjoyed that. Would it not have been wiser to have said Druid hold the camp for you?

But this part is pointless really because you wish to talk about the evolutionary survival of the community as it pertains to loss of interest due to a lack of the ability to enjoy the game, or my definition of Harm. Top that of with the limited scope of this one incident. There are too many other instances of goodwill and sacrifice to make this matter. Take a look at the post for Players you would like to thank. 390 Posts which is nice, now look at views – almost 38,000 at this posting. A lot of people are doing great things. By the views number I surmise that the number of people who do favors is astronomically higher than that. (I am assuming people look to see if their name has been mentioned.)

If we use the enjoyment as a factor as to Community evolution then this event has soared beyond measure and all parties have done Good. To prove this point I point to this thread – 210 posts, 21 pages and almost 7,000 views. People have been enjoying themselves immensely. I know people in this thread who have made personal attacks on friends of theirs just for the fun of it.

If we use Harm then, Harm was done by the server for killing Rilen. That is all. All of the rest of it is perceived unless you apply another morality standard of Religious, Lawful or otherwise.

Example 2 - Yendor's group in Fearplane rez's several members of a guild to assist them, thus exhibiting the right (moral) action due to it strengthening the value of group life for the people who were rezzed. The guild of the rezzed players proceeds to camp upon the entirety of Mob_Type_A in order to gain all of the loot possible for themselves. In this scenario the guilds can be seen as individuals for the discussion. The Guild monopolizing Mob_Type_A is acting selfishly, preventing the enjoyment of the server and group life for the other members in Fearplane. The guild's selfless actions are thus threatening the survival of the server by preventing the desire for other members on the server to continue existing on the server. The guild's actions are thus wrong (immoral).

This is by far a greater argument for community progression only in the fact that you are involving a greater number of people. However from a global perspective there is no threat to the at large Community only the Guild Community. If they can’t come to an agreement then one guild will probably lose out after a period of time. But others will replace it or absorb it or the members will move to a guild that will be more accommodating. By applying this reasoning Guild A while at the time may seem to be a threat to the community is actually Right (moral) as the perpetrators of said action (Raid leader) will be taken to task and will leave the Community thereby removing the influence that Harms the Global Community.
So guild A is immoral to the guild community and moral to the global Community.
If you really want to talk about Community progression, why are not all the guilds coming together and organizing a rotating Raid schedule? Would this not provide more enjoyment for everyone? (I doubt you will ever get this to work)

It is entirely up to the individual to choose an action. Judgement does not have to play a role in deciding the morality of someone's actions, which then removes the subjectivity that has been championed throughout this thread. If you view the morality of actions more rationally and in terms of each individual's expectations for group life (Which have been widely agreed upon in this thread as a) Losing a camp within a 5-10 min period due to unforseeable circumstances is not enjoyable and b) The continuted existence of this server with a large playerbase is fun) as they relate to the server's evolutionary survival, then objectivity is much easier to determine. And through this the actions of many players can be seen as immoral or wrong.

“Judgment does not have to play a role in deciding the morality of someone's actions”. Of course it does, you make Judgments all the time even when trying to analyze with a neutral objective. What is community? How does that relate to X? How to define the scale on which to make determinations. A good scientist will tell you that there is no way to remove all influence of the researcher no matter how much you isolate the study.

Even while typing this I realize that I have also only brought up another question of subjectivity that I am sure will get jumped upon - who decides what is or is not enjoyable for the individual and thus perpetuates the survival of the server by each member's continuted existence on the server. What one may see as no fun, having a camp "acquired" by new parties within 5-10 minutes of "losing" said camp, another may enjoy wholeheartedly. But any argument in this thread is only going to raise more questions. This was more or less something for Yendor to ponder since he has been firm behind the idea that morality is subjective, and I wanted to show him that this is not entirely true.
__________________
Kraftwerk Computerwelt Dark Elf Magician
Leading Neriak into a new era of prosperity

I still see this as an exercise in Harm no matter what brand of morality you wish to apply. Maybe I am Naïve in thinking that taking responsibility for my contributions to the Community start with taking responsibility for my own actions. In applying that brush I have to ask myself. Where is the Harm?

[DetroitVelvetSmooth]

Officially worse than the god thread.

[Humerox]

and almost as alluring.

[maegi]

Why would you people spend this much time defending their beliefs and arguing against the other person beliefs if they truly felt this thread means nothing. People that keep posting book length posts on opinions and morality and right and wrong, please ask yourselves this question.

[Kraftwerk]

(Everything in this post precludes the server rules, I concede that the VD members were *right* under the letter of the law, opinions hereafter regard if they were *right* under my personal code of ethics)

Yendor - You're right, there is a line. One can't be 100% altruistic the entire time. It comes down to where one straddles that fence between selfishness and selflessness. Myself, I spent probably 80% of my time on the server farming. Probably during May-June I think, I found myself either in A) SolA camping 70% of spawns or B) CT camping pyramid, every spawn on lockdown. I concede that I was acting immorally and greedily with my monopolization of the items I was camping, mostly Raven/the SK armor I already forget the name of. I reached a point where I had enough platinum, I decided I wanted to make others enjoy the game/server. One night I put on a Roleplaying Event, bought ~4-5kp in items to give away and organized a grandiose 1-1.5 hour event involving three friends for a random group of 6 lvl 8-14's. Another night I offered 100p to lowbies who whispered me in certain time-frame. Another night I healed a group on my druid while waiting to get in, even though I could've been leveling elsewhere. Pretty much any night I'd offer DS's to anyone wanting them, mod rods, etc. The list goes on, and (against what some may believe) this was not meant to show how much better I am than you,it was only meant to illustrate that some people do draw that line of selflessness at a different place.
You're trying so adamantly to prove that your VD members were in the right, they're decisions were fine, but you're not letting yourself view this from another's standpoint and see the immorality in their acquisition of the camp. I also concede that some of us from the opposing viewpoint aren't allowing ourselves to see how they were in the right and undeserving of the accusations and labels. I think the VD members were both right and wrong in this situation, I think that despite your firm stance in every post you too believe a little bit that the actions weren't bulletproof or you wouldn't be defending them so vigorously. Or, you're a great guildie to have who will defend his colleagues to the death. But more or less my posts are a desire for you to look beyond the blacks/whites of server law or your own previous beliefs and view this scenario from the opposing viewpoint since you seemed to be digging your trenches even deeper over there.

Klyre - I knew when typing my response there were a lot of holes to be poked in my interpretation of rational morality as it relates to this scenario. We could use the term "re-acquired" rather than stolen if it removes the implication of law and better suits the argument. The football scenario could have larger global implications, that fan could now be so discouraged with football that he no longer invests in the NFL through purchasing clothing, tickets to games, other various fan items. The NFL has now lost out on a small investment over the life of the fan. Also, that fan could be vocal about how he dis-regards the NFL and a few others might take heed, etc. It could become something much larger/more of loss to NFL. The fan also becomes more discouraged the perceived immorality of other's actions. He becomes more cynical and in different scenarios in his life he behaves immorally, contrarily had he been able to return to line and had his faith in the group as a whole renewed and acts equally morally in other situations in his life going forward. I can see what could be considered a small event as impacting many people depending on how that one scenario resolves itself.
As far as why it is incumbent upon the VD group to make the moral choice is exactly because of Rilen's misfortunes. It's easy to make the right choice when things are clear-cut, black and white. Rilen had left himself somewhat helpless, his negligence (possibly as a result of one lengthy session) resulted in a situation where the VD members could have made a moral choice to give him back the camp, but their line is drawn between selfishness and selflessness at a different spot than mine. As Yendor stated, not everyone agrees on where to begin being selfless and end being selfish. As far as your reference to the Thank You Post, you're right there is a lot of good taking place. Consider this though, the VD members could now be on that post rather than this one had they chosen to concede the camp back upon Rilen after hearing his circumstances. What if the other 390 member's who were referenced in posts on the Thank you thread had not made the moral choice? Just something to ponder is all.
You are right, it does come down to harm. It comes down to where one determines if they are doing harm to another, and if they choose to prevent said harm or invoke said harm.

Acillatem - I'm not going to deeply respond to you since, opposed to Yendor who has addressed arguments head-on, you've chosen to create a different scenario with which we have 0 facts. You're scenario involves an assumption that Rilen was depriving this camp from individuals, we have no way of knowing who or how many people came to SRo during the day and were dissuaded upon finding the camp taken. Since we don't have enough evidence your argument is moot before the discussion even begins. At the risk of being flamed, I also find your attitude as it pertains to others a bit frightening. You've drawn the line between selfishness and selflessness entirely too close to selfishness, and made personal rules for yourself regarding when you will exhibit selflessness (Friends, guildmates). If you alienated all strangers, you're alienating potential friends/guildmates. You have the right to play however you want, I find your attitude detrimental to the server as a whole and if it is reflective of your behavior in real life than I am glad I don't know you.

Why would you people spend this much time defending their beliefs and arguing against the other person beliefs if they truly felt this thread means nothing. People that keep posting book length posts on opinions and morality and right and wrong, please ask yourselves this question.

I don't feel this thread means nothing. Who stated the thread means nothing? I feel there was some interesting discourse in this thread. I enjoy bringing up counter-points and I felt that Yendor was digging his trenches even deeper and I wanted to maybe shed light on how things aren't so black and white. Maybe he'll change his opinions a little bit, maybe someone reading this thread will decide to help rather than harm in the future based upon the opinions presented here. But what it does all come down to, is how a person chooses to play this game. It's hard to define the morality of actions in these gray scenarios, the people responding should see that they shouldn't champion the black and white conclusions they've come to so steadfast. The VD actions were both moral and immoral. People will continue to enjoy this server in their own personal ways, and draw the line between selfish and selfless in different places. Everyone has the right to behave how they see fit. My personal opinion is that one will garner more enjoyment and fulfillment (yes it is possible to be fulfilled while playing a video game) through selfless acts and making decisions that do more to help than harm.

[Messianic]

I would like to the most relevant and insightful tag on this post:

"My poop > your philosophy"

Sorry, carry on philosophizing. I just felt this was worth pointing out.

[Icaro]

Some quite famous guy said: "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them"

Shouldn't be enough?

[YendorLootmonkey]

You're trying so adamantly to prove that your VD members were in the right, they're decisions were fine, but you're not letting yourself view this from another's standpoint and see the immorality in their acquisition of the camp.

Actually, to sum up most of my posts, I have been adamantly stating that the members of my guild acted in accordance with the server rules, and that it is ridiculous to hold them (or any player on this server for that matter) to everyone else's standards of what is morally right and wrong since, in fact, those standards are subjective.

People trying to make a moral judgment on the scenario can do so all they want... its their opinion. But I am trying to show that it is unrealistic, when all opinions of what the "right" thing to do are so individualized and usually kept to oneself, to hold any one person or group of people on this server to what amounts to some stranger's own individual personal convictions.

Here is where I think you guys are going with this, and I completely understand this from an "Everquest is a virtual world/community" standpoint: Even though we have laws in real life (i.e. similar to "server rules"), we still conform to societal standards just so we don't become outcasts (i.e. "get called douchebags on the P99 forums"). I totally get that, don't get me wrong. But that is only true for those who hold the "Everquest is a virtual world/community" viewpoint. For those of us who hold the "Everquest is a game" viewpoint to a greater degree, we're just playing the game by the rules set forth by the administrators of the game, dude.

I think that despite your firm stance in every post you too believe a little bit that the actions weren't bulletproof or you wouldn't be defending them so vigorously.

I believe 100% that the actions were bulletproof, only because I'm not drawing emotion or morality into the equation. That is something people from the "EQ is a virtual world" viewpoint do. I am strictly reviewing the rules of the game and pointing out that the person who lost the highly-coveted AC camp, who was bound on another continent, by the way, lost claim to that camp when he died. This is a game. There are goals. There is competition because there is not enough loot to go around, and because you sacrifice personal time to farm or earn that loot.

Let me throw one more scenario out there for people to discuss, and I'm just gonna throw generic Player and Guild names in there to continue this discussion in a more generic/hypothetical manner so no one else is getting drug through the mud:

If this were a PVP server, and the members of Guild B ganked Player A at the AC camp because he was a member of an opposing guild, and then took over the AC camp that way... would we be having this same debate on whether that was morally right or wrong? Of course not... it's part of the game. And the enchanter has a chance to call upon his guild to do the same back. There would be no philosophical debate on whether Guild B did the morally right thing or not, because there is inherently more competition on a PVP server and this sort of situation is commonplace. It's a way of life. Might makes right. That is why you organize into guilds and compete for equipment.

So what's the difference? Because the server rules ALLOW for the PK'ing of Player A in that situation, and the server rules ALLOW for retribution, why are there suddenly no moral implications? Or are there?

Is it morally wrong on a PVP server to PK someone at the AC camp? Isn't it part of the game? Are those with stronger moral convictions at a disadvantage playing on a PVP server because they limit their own actions, whereas others do not and thus have more of an advantage?

I don't know, I've never played on a PVP server. Certainly there's some consequences to those actions (i.e. those Guild B members would stand a higher risk of getting ganked themselves at a camp, or simply on sight), but I don't think there's a "right or wrong" aspect to it. It's just how PVP is played.

Take the PVP rule set away and look back to our PVE server. Now suddenly some of us want to enforce a moral code on what is right and wrong, because we are unable to play judge, jury, and executioner in game to dispense with those whose actions we have judged immoral. All we can do is call each other out on this forum, and blacklist each other. So where did the aspect of morality now come from? Furthermore, Player A in the PVE situation has the same opportunity to take back the AC camp from the Guild B members if they die. Granted, there is less of a chance of this happening because a) there is just more than 1 person there for AFK support, and b) they were much higher level. But that is not the fault of Guild B's members, so why should they be judged on that level?

Interesting debate...

[YendorLootmonkey]

Jesus stop typing and log in yendor

I typed all of that from my Droid X while I was on the shitter.

[h0tr0d (shaere)]

Why, though? It's... just a game.

Because it is still real people behind the toons.

That aside, great debating going here, glad it never went to RnF mode. Perhaps the trolls don't understand some of the words used, or the depth is too much.

[Odeseus]

Refer to one of my previous posts about how I came to my conclusion on the situation and how I was (and still am) somewhat shaky in my position. And being responsible, I readily acknowledge that my position is not, as some say, "bullet-proof." Indeed, I find it hilarious that anyone claims to have 100% confidence in any opinion that they hold. Since, they are opinions, which cannot be held to the same scrutiny of being right or wrong, simply because of what they are. They are not facts, which can be checked and determined if they are true or false. Opinions may be true or false, but most often they fall into the gray area and can never really be proven one way or the other.

For example, I believe that Bud Lite is the worst beer ever made. It is an opinion I can back up with a few facts, but the truth remains that it is a mere opinion. I know in the back of my mind that I could be wrong, so (again, being responsible) I should not hold this opinion too ferociously. I could be wrong.

As a different example, I (could) believe that Elvis never died. That his death was just staged and it is just one big conspiracy. This opinion could be right or wrong because we can go find Elvis' body and prove (as much as anyone can prove anything) that the King is indeed dead. Or I could believe that Americans never made it to the moon. But again, I could (conceivably) send a camera to the moon and see evidence of people having been up there.

Morals tend to fall into the former category of pure opinions. So morals should not be professed with absolute certainty, because you should know, in the back of you mind, that you could be wrong. You can be confident that you have acted correctly, but it is hard (if not impossible) to be 100% sure. And as such, you may profess your opinion as loudly as you wish. What I have a problem with is simple arrogance that refuses to listen to anyone else, because you are so sure that your opinion is correct (and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong).

If it isn't clear by now, I am a fan of ambiguities. to me nothing in life is EVER clear cut. No decision is ever 100% "just" or "right" from every angle. It is all a matter of degrees of what I personally view to be just or unjust, moral or immoral. I may be disappointed in how others see situations and the choices they make, and I can even vehemently disagree with them. However, I must always listen to their arguments and be ready and willing to defend my opinions. Because the doubt is always there, "You may be wrong." All I wish is that others would be equally as willing to listen, and based on the strength of the arguments presented, be willing to change their minds if the situation calls for it.

My opinions do not define me. They are not so important that I cannot change them. In fact, if my opinions are mistaken, or if there are better options than the one I currently hold, I look forward to the time when I can correct myself. That is how I believe people grow.

On another subject, I wonder how many people in P99 actively see their characters as an extension of themselves in a real social community vs. just a bunch of pixels with "people" who you will never, ever meet or talk to in RL. I personally view my toon as an virtual representation of myself, so I care deeply about making moral decisions. However, those who see this as "just a game" and their toon as "just pixels" will not make the same emotional connections. Therefore, it is much easier for them to make decisions that would (for me) tend to be more on the "selfish" or "immoral" side of the scale.

Anyway, that's enough from me for now. Let's see what other people think.

[Icaro]

Morals tend to fall into the former category of pure opinions.


I recommend you reading something off Zenone (it is in Latin, don't know in English) and Stoycism.

[Acillatem]

Acillatem - I'm not going to deeply respond to you since, opposed to Yendor who has addressed arguments head-on, you've chosen to create a different scenario with which we have 0 facts. You're scenario involves an assumption that Rilen was depriving this camp from individuals, we have no way of knowing who or how many people came to SRo during the day and were dissuaded upon finding the camp taken. Since we don't have enough evidence your argument is moot before the discussion even begins. At the risk of being flamed, I also find your attitude as it pertains to others a bit frightening. You've drawn the line between selfishness and selflessness entirely too close to selfishness, and made personal rules for yourself regarding when you will exhibit selflessness (Friends, guildmates). If you alienated all strangers, you're alienating potential friends/guildmates. You have the right to play however you want, I find your attitude detrimental to the server as a whole and if it is reflective of your behavior in real life than I am glad I don't know you.

You don't know me - so that's fair that you have your opinion based on what you see here. However the scenario I presented is the exact same scenario as seen from another perspective. Anyone who has camped the AC for any length of time will support the fact that numerous people do a "drive by" or ask to be put on a list etc. It's no secret - especially if the guy was there 18 hours - there was probably at LEAST 10 people who were dissuaded from camping the AC.

As far as my attitude as it pertains to others? You are taking that statement I made as an end all be all attitude towards EVERY situation I come across and that's not the case. In the context of this argument and this situation, that statement about my time > your time holds true. In fact - there are many other situations I would feel the same way about. And honestly over the past few months this "attitude" has probably come forward more often than before simply becuz my playtime went from 7 days a week to once, MAYBE twice a week if I'm lucky. If I want to accomplish anything in game - I need to maximize my time in game. (I love getting a new job where u work 12-15 hours a day, 5 days a week lol).

However, I played on Tallon Zek as an officer of the most honorable guild on the server (Knights of the White Rose) and here as an officer of one of the most honorable guilds on the server. That doesn't happen by chance.

When I powerlevel guildies, I fill up a group - usually consisting of 1 or 2 guildmates and 3-4 strangers. I hand out free gear and port people for free all the time.

When I used to PvP, I would kill someone and sometimes port them back to shorten their corpse run. When I used to octi-kite raptors in TD I would kill the person on it, take the island, and then let them know if they wanted the other island - they could hunt there and I wouldn't bother them - our fight was done. For a PvP server - that shit was RARE. Most people would enforce "Loot & Scoot" (if you were killed you were expected to leave the zone for an hour) - but really I didn't care so long as they didn't bother me anymore.

I had ported into SRo a few months ago and did a camp check for the AC and 2 minutes later some NEC sent me a tell saying he had died and asked me to hold it for him till he got back - which I did. (heh hows that for irony?). I already had my JBoots and was just gunna kill some time hoping for a MQ.

I spent a good 6 hours on a Wizard 101 post for the P1999 community. The info was stuff I already knew - but I want to see the Wizard community thrive so selfish me decided to dig up an old guide and spend time editing it for P99 the best I could.

I could go on and on and on with a myriad list of "selfless" acts I've done for strangers (and on TZ for the enemy) in the name of "being a good person".

In this particular situation - if it was me - honestly I woulda let them have it back becuz I already have my Jboots. If I DIDN'T have my Jboots tho - I woulda kept the camp - which is exactly what happened here. I don't think that makes someone selfish and immoral.

This is a game based on 2 aspects - social and pixel. I didn't like WoW becuz there was no social aspect to it. You solo yer ass up to 80 and then raid....I enjoy grouping - I like making friends and meeting new people.

But sometimes, you gotta give the pixels some loving too. And if that choice happens to upset someone else? Well it's bound to happen. And yer right - sometimes that line gets drawn a little too close one way or the other. But yer never going to please 100% of the people 100% of the time.

[Odeseus]

Hrm, there is another factor here that I had not thought about before. Does amount of playtime affect how "nice" you are in game or not?

On the surface, Ace's logic appears to be sound. When you have more playtime, you are not forced to "get yours NOW" because you will always have more time later. And if you don't have much play time, you need to "get yours" sort to speak because you may not have time to do so later.

However, I think this breaks down a bit in actuality since some of the nicest people I know play very little. And some of the worst people play all the time. But I wonder if they are anomalies and the correlation between "niceness" and playtime holds up, or if the logic simply breaks down when put into actual practice.