Banned :(

[Eliseus]

Not classic.

Being banned for boxing that is.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Eliseus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Not classic.

Being banned for boxing that is.

Well ...

A) there were never free accounts on live, so comparing that to P99 is really apples and oranges
B) boxing two accounts on the same computer was a ban-worthy offense in the classic era

Using two separate accounts, with two separate computers, with two separate internet connections (which meant two separate phone lines for most people), was extremely rare back in '99 ... but that was allowed. But if someone to wanted to play two accounts on the same machine/connection, that was impossible with the native EQ client. There was a 3rd-party program (EQW) that let you do it ... but 3rd-party programs were banned.

So yes, if you paid $20 a month, plus you bought two computers at $1000+ each, paid $40 a month for two internet connections, another $40 a month for two lines ... then you could box legally. But that's not even remotely comparable to the free accounts on P99, which you can play ten of on the same computer/internet connection. So really, boxing bans were classic.

[August]

Oh, what sad times are these when passing ruffians can say Ni at will to old men.

Guy had a lapse in judgment / comprehension and that sucks. You people need to get a life.

[Thulack]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Well ...

A) there were never free accounts on live, so comparing that to P99 is really apples and oranges
B) boxing two accounts on the same computer was a ban-worthy offense in the classic era

Using two separate accounts, with two separate computers, with two separate internet connections (which meant two separate phone lines for most people), was extremely rare back in '99 ... but that was allowed. But if someone to wanted to play two accounts on the same machine/connection, that was impossible with the native EQ client. There was a 3rd-party program (EQW) that let you do it ... but 3rd-party programs were banned.

So yes, if you paid $20 a month, plus you bought two computers at $1000+ each, paid $40 a month for two internet connections, another $40 a month for two lines ... then you could box legally. But that's not even remotely comparable to the free accounts on P99, which you can play ten of on the same computer/internet connection. So really, boxing bans were classic.

You didnt need 2 internet connections. Both my parents, myself and my younger brother all played EQ in 99. We had 2 computers setup on a huge ass desk. We had 3 accounts between the 4 of us and boxed whenever someone wasnt around to duo with. It wasnt as efficient as it could have been but was easily done.

[Eliseus]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Well ...

A) there were never free accounts on live, so comparing that to P99 is really apples and oranges
B) boxing two accounts on the same computer was a ban-worthy offense in the classic era

Using two separate accounts, with two separate computers, with two separate internet connections (which meant two separate phone lines for most people), was extremely rare back in '99 ... but that was allowed. But if someone to wanted to play two accounts on the same machine/connection, that was impossible with the native EQ client. There was a 3rd-party program (EQW) that let you do it ... but 3rd-party programs were banned.

So yes, if you paid $20 a month, plus you bought two computers at $1000+ each, paid $40 a month for two internet connections, another $40 a month for two lines ... then you could box legally. But that's not even remotely comparable to the free accounts on P99, which you can play ten of on the same computer/internet connection. So really, boxing bans were classic.

Wut? Ignoring that almost all your info is wrong, you gave an example of not being banned while boxing, then ended with boxing bans were classic.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Eliseus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Wut? Ignoring that almost all your info is wrong, you gave an example of not being banned while boxing, then ended with boxing bans were classic.

You must be slow, so I'll try using less words:

Boxing on a single box was banned. Boxing on multiple boxes not banned. 00's technology made both harder than they are today.

Better?

[Eliseus]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You must be slow, so I'll try using less words:

Boxing on a single box was banned. Boxing on multiple boxes not banned. 00's technology made both harder than they are today.

Better?

Grasping at straws now. I applaud the effort though.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Eliseus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Grasping at straws now. I applaud the effort though.

That's cute coming from a guy with no arguments, no evidence, and really nothing at all except snide remarks, who's trying to argue against historical facts.

[Eliseus]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That's cute coming from a guy with no arguments, no evidence, and really nothing at all except snide remarks, who's trying to argue against historical facts.