Project 1999

Go Back   Project 1999 > General Community > Rants and Flames

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-13-2014, 11:29 AM
Tuffpuppy Tuffpuppy is offline
Kobold


Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 174
Default

I just don't see the harm in assisting people on a case by case basis. Even if it takes a month or three, people have spent a long time on their characters just to get it stolen from them it just doesn't seem fair. But all accounts need to be suspended until it is resolved at least.
  #2  
Old 08-13-2014, 11:39 AM
Glenzig Glenzig is offline
Planar Protector

Glenzig's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,557
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuffpuppy [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I just don't see the harm in assisting people on a case by case basis. Even if it takes a month or three, people have spent a long time on their characters just to get it stolen from them it just doesn't seem fair. But all accounts need to be suspended until it is resolved at least.
They already knew they weren't going to get any assistance for account sales or trades. If the account is that precious to you, don't give out your account info.
  #3  
Old 08-13-2014, 01:06 PM
Glenzig Glenzig is offline
Planar Protector

Glenzig's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,557
Default

Seriously man. Read Nilbog's post from 2012 again real carefully. The warning was given that they would most likely be changing the way account info was handled. The warning was given that if you didn't have your account secure at the time that the changes went into effect, you would just have to eat it. What are you still going on about GM responsibility for? If people can't listen to warnings, how is anyone else responsible?
  #4  
Old 08-13-2014, 08:11 PM
Kika Maslyaka Kika Maslyaka is offline
Planar Protector

Kika Maslyaka's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,055
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenzig [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Seriously man. Read Nilbog's post from 2012 again real carefully. The warning was given that they would most likely be changing the way account info was handled. The warning was given that if you didn't have your account secure at the time that the changes went into effect, you would just have to eat it. What are you still going on about GM responsibility for? If people can't listen to warnings, how is anyone else responsible?
This actually supports my point even more. GMs KNEW that system will change so radically that all old expectations will be broken. Yet, they shown their indifference to account trading, essentially condoning it. What they have in fact told you is "We do not support account trading, but we do not forbid it neither. Do what you like". This is exactly why I claim they are responsible. They are the only ones with power to manage the server. They set the rules. They are responsible for what the rules are. Their 4 year long indifference to account trading only proves that they acted irresponsibly. The rule for account trading should have said "not allowed" from day 1, but instead it said "do what you like - we don't care". GMs are responsible for that. Not having a proper rule-set and ignorance of obviously troublesome situation just as bad as creating this situation themselves. GMs allowed account trading to run rampart because they didn't want to get involved, yet they did not had the will to ban them outright.
I judge others by the same criteria I judge myself. I would have ban account trading from the start. So would many people. But I would also take responsibility for what happened on my watch due to negligence of setting up proper rule-set.
__________________
Quote:
[Rogean;750468]
Aren't you suppose to be banned?

[Zuranthium;1453395]
The people who invented the first space ships were brilliant. That doesn't mean anybody should actually want to use them 200 years later. Ideas are limited by means of execution. Everquest has amazing ideas that need to be completely reworked in their execution, in order for classic Everquest as it was envisioned to actually exist and continue to be relevant as things have evolved.
  #5  
Old 08-13-2014, 08:27 PM
Glenzig Glenzig is offline
Planar Protector

Glenzig's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,557
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kika Maslyaka [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
This actually supports my point even more. GMs KNEW that system will change so radically that all old expectations will be broken. Yet, they shown their indifference to account trading, essentially condoning it. What they have in fact told you is "We do not support account trading, but we do not forbid it neither. Do what you like". This is exactly why I claim they are responsible. They are the only ones with power to manage the server. They set the rules. They are responsible for what the rules are. Their 4 year long indifference to account trading only proves that they acted irresponsibly. The rule for account trading should have said "not allowed" from day 1, but instead it said "do what you like - we don't care". GMs are responsible for that. Not having a proper rule-set and ignorance of obviously troublesome situation just as bad as creating this situation themselves. GMs allowed account trading to run rampart because they didn't want to get involved, yet they did not had the will to ban them outright.
I judge others by the same criteria I judge myself. I would have ban account trading from the start. So would many people. But I would also take responsibility for what happened on my watch due to negligence of setting up proper rule-set.
We get it. You think that the staff is totally responsible for the players poor decisions. The problem is that nothing you say actually makes any sense, or even matters. Its just your opinion. The fact is that they haven't gotten involved in these disputes in the past, and they aren't going to start now. And its also their server so....
  #6  
Old 08-13-2014, 09:07 PM
Kika Maslyaka Kika Maslyaka is offline
Planar Protector

Kika Maslyaka's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,055
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenzig [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
We get it. You think that the staff is totally responsible for the players poor decisions. The problem is that nothing you say actually makes any sense, or even matters. Its just your opinion. The fact is that they haven't gotten involved in these disputes in the past, and they aren't going to start now. And its also their server so....
Which is exactly my point - they do not want to take responsibility for situation they set up and allowed to deteriorate over years. By their negligence, they encouraged the detrimental behavior of the players. Once again - this is not a democracy - they set the rules - they bare full responsibility of those rules or the lack of them.
My ultimate point is - is there is blame to assign - all 3 sides are responsible, each in their own way.
And yeah, everything said here is just an opinion [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
__________________
Quote:
[Rogean;750468]
Aren't you suppose to be banned?

[Zuranthium;1453395]
The people who invented the first space ships were brilliant. That doesn't mean anybody should actually want to use them 200 years later. Ideas are limited by means of execution. Everquest has amazing ideas that need to be completely reworked in their execution, in order for classic Everquest as it was envisioned to actually exist and continue to be relevant as things have evolved.
  #7  
Old 08-13-2014, 10:12 PM
Bardalicious Bardalicious is offline
Planar Protector

Bardalicious's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,684
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenzig [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
We get it. You think that the staff is totally responsible for the players poor decisions. The problem is that nothing you say actually makes any sense, or even matters. Its just your opinion.
Your statement could be easily mirrored and applied back to you. You realize that, right?

And "the fact is" that there weren't disputes like these in the past because this dispute is a product of their making by recently changing the system.
  #8  
Old 08-13-2014, 10:20 PM
Bardalicious Bardalicious is offline
Planar Protector

Bardalicious's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,684
Default

As for the car analogy, I may have left my windows down on my two porches in a crime-riddled neighborhood, but the robber didn't even need to break in or come through the windows because the dealership called him up and ended up handing him an extra set of keys to drive away in them clean and clear.

May have been an unwise initial decision to play two accounts on that eqemu, but it's a direct result of Rogean's change that resulted in my losses.
  #9  
Old 08-13-2014, 10:21 PM
Gaffin 7.0 Gaffin 7.0 is offline
Banned


Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,147
Default

i petitioned about my account when this SMS shit came out, i lost my email pw and recovery doesnt work so im screwed on it
  #10  
Old 08-13-2014, 10:32 PM
Glenzig Glenzig is offline
Planar Protector

Glenzig's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,557
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bardalicious [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Your statement could be easily mirrored and applied back to you. You realize that, right?

And "the fact is" that there weren't disputes like these in the past because this dispute is a product of their making by recently changing the system.
Nope. Read Nilbog's post. It isn't just my opinion, its the actual stance of the staff.
Closed Thread


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:25 PM.


Everquest is a registered trademark of Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Project 1999 is not associated or affiliated in any way with Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.