Best Server Community Sin--Wait, Nevermind

[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]

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

[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.

[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.

[azeth]

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

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.

[YendorLootmonkey]

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

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]

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

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.

[Doubleplus]

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

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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

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.

[apocalypsesmeep]

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

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