TMO resort to hacking in VP

[47shadesofgay]

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

Unfortunately for them, they only feel that it is superior. This problem is rampant around these parts; everyone 'feels' one way or the other, yet noone does shit about it.

People who are fooled by how they dress things up are not people that I would bother to argue with in the first place.

In the same way that they know FE has also used this tactic to their guilds benefit..

A little proof would go a long way to shutting me up and making them look like anything they say is based in the realm of fact and not TMO-spin-fantasy.

FE has proof of TMO training, TMO has the only thing TMO has ever had.. words.

Quido - hardly. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Ele]

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

Unfortunately for them, they only feel that it is superior. This problem is rampant around these parts; everyone 'feels' one way or the other, yet noone does shit about it.

People who are fooled by how they dress things up are not people that I would bother to argue with in the first place.

And you say I am nonsensical?

[47shadesofgay]

I love the truth Jeremy! [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[quido]

Originally Posted by 47shadesofgay [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I love the truth Jeremy! [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Lucky for you I always speak the truth (obvious kidding aside), even to the point of my own serious inconvenience! Confirmed.

[Frogie305]

WTB Hand of the Reaper PST..

[Ele]

Gotta get to a meeting ! See you guys in a bit.

[SamwiseRed]

Ele complains about non-classic features such as /shownames

defends not classic insta poof

interesting..

[Frieza_Prexus]

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

Ele complains about non-classic features such as /shownames

defends not classic insta poof

interesting..

He is discussing the mechanics, not defending him. I suggest you read the entire thread to fully understand his positions. Most notably these posts:

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...&postcount=246

Originally Posted by Elethia

All IP exemptions should be erased, and reapplied for with stricter proof.

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...&postcount=444

Originally Posted by Elethia

If you are wanting to talk about plugging (using /q and ip exemption and/or second account/computer) in general to remove yourself from an in-game situation in which you would otherwise die, then yes that should be an infraction. I don't think there is a disagreement between you and me on that point.

If you have seen my other posts in this thread, I said all ip exemptions should be wiped and reapplied for with much more stringent proof. Additionally, I would like to see /q leave you in game the full 30 seconds or 3 minutes if engaged/aggro even with an exemption. Another solution might be to hard code the server to not allow another account to log in within 30 seconds to 1 minute other another account coming from that ip address. This would still allow people to play together, but prevent quick disconnects and reconnects. However, transferring items between accounts gets negatively affected. But there should be some trade off to prevent abuse.

The transferability of ip exemptions (since it stays with the login account) also plays a role in account sales/trading being a bonus and advertised as such in the ECT forum. When it should be used for its intended purpose of allowing 2 or more people to play from the same location, which is otherwise blocked.

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...176#post894176

Originally Posted by Elethia

If the coding prevents the abuse in the first place, then it means less enforcement is needed. The enforcement is a finite resource.

[finalgrunt]

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

...

What we have so far is proof that one of your member clearly cheated and exploited IP exemption to the benefit of your guild. That person should be banned, period.

When I don't follow TMO, is all the support to that person since the beginning.

"Everybody does it. Or at least on red. So it's ok!".

By doing so, you're all adding up to the guild suspension case. Because it's not just a solitary act. It now looks sanctionned by your leaders. And the risk seems too big to be worth defending such blatant exploit, at least from my point of view.

[Frieza_Prexus]

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

What we have so far is proof that one of your member clearly cheated and exploited IP exemption to the benefit of your guild. That person should be banned, period.

When I don't follow TMO, is all the support to that person since the beginning.

"Everybody does it. Or at least on red. So it's ok!".

By doing so, you're all adding up to the guild suspension case. Because it's not just a solitary act. It now looks sanctionned by your leaders. And the risk seems too big to be worth defending such blatant exploit, at least from my point of view.

Aiaus should be clearly punished. I cannot account for the arguments made by my guildmates. I've said it before, but I clearly do not believe that two wrongs make a right here.

At no point have I justified the abuses in question. The point I made early on, which seems to be causing much contention, is that I said I am unsure if a permanent ban would be consistent with how similar cases have been handled. I never said a ban absolutely should be of the table, simply that I am unsure if it is warranted.