PSA: ATTN - If you are bound in raid zones, read this

[Agatha]

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

you cannot ban that which has no life.

if you don't think nizzar has like a whole gaggle of 60s untagged just sitting banked on unrelated emu accnts, hah.

[Andis]

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

till we got a poison on him by identifying his exact load in point.

prais guido, the savior

[Kraftwerk]

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

thats fine. im still gonna hold you responsible for them [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Heheh

[SamwiseRed]

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

Sweet chin music from the heart break kid

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

[Elderan]

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

thats fine. im still gonna hold you responsible for them [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Sirken,

You changed the rule just now. People now know they need to change their bind point when they log in next time to that char.

However does this mean we cannot talk about validity of this rule? The vast majority of people with high end raid experience on this server think that the no binding rule in solb and perma is out dated at this point and should be changed.

[p-niner]

Hey its bad math guy. Sorry just cus ur 60 now and not 50 doesnt invalidate rule.

[heartbrand]

I don't care about the concept of not being able to have your bind there anymore. I do care about it being incorrectly labeled an exploit, the refusal to have dialogue on whether or not the custom rule should continue to exist, be modified or expanded, and the threat of bans for those who would dare question the applicability of the rule going forward.

[Elderan]

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

I don't care about the concept of not being able to have your bind there anymore. I do care about it being incorrectly labeled an exploit, the refusal to have dialogue on whether or not the custom rule should continue to exist, be modified or expanded, and the threat of bans for those who would dare question the applicability of the rule going forward.

Exactly.....

[p-niner]

If u have been illegally bound there since the rule was implemented in classic and used it to gain an unfair advantage in perma pvp and against lvl 52 vox raids you are cheating. Thats what unfair advanatages are - exploits.

[heartbrand]

Except that prior to this post there had never been a rule or concern raised about retaining the bind, so much so that in fact Amelinda and others knew about it and specifically stated it wasn't an issue. Now we're told that anything she ever said doesn't matter and it's an exploit. It's fine and dandy you want to change binds going forward, and everyone should comply with the rule, but it doesn't make sense to call it an exploit given the history. It also seems inconsistent that when the CT cycle was triggered a month ago we used Amelinda's ruling per Sirken / Zade, but now with this issue Amelinda's ruling doesn't matter. Which is it?