TMO resort to hacking in VP

[Ele]

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

he's exploiting an ip exemption. you can argue semantics all you want, but let's call a spade a spade.

Who are you talking about? I believe we're having two different conversations and you are applying my discussion with someone else to the discussion you want to have with me.

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.

[47shadesofgay]

Originally Posted by Funkutron5000 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I was on campus for 2 years and then down south of Stadium on Packard. God I miss the Heidleberg's happy hour. Free wings on Friday? Fucking sign me up.

Also God Bless Ypsi's water tower.

There's an awesome restaurant right under the penis.. I think it's actually called "The tower". Awesome food and atmo.

There were some pretty awesome places to eat on state street near campus too.

I used to spend so much fucking time at Pinball Pete's back in the day.. but I digress.

[kenzar]

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

There's an awesome restaurant right under the penis.. I think it's actually called "The tower". Awesome food and atmo.

There were some pretty awesome places to eat on state street near campus too.

I used to spend so much fucking time at Pinball Pete's back in the day.. but I digress.

Circle jerk elsewhere, this area is reserved for a specific type of circle jerk.

[maverixdamighty]

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

It is my sincere hope that I have demonstrated with my actions and contributions that when I make a statement I mean it. No, if the situation were reversed I would not feel otherwise.

based on your assessment of this situation, no you have not demonstrated you are without bias.

[maverixdamighty]

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

Who are you talking about? I believe we're having two different conversations and you are applying my discussion with someone else to the discussion you want to have with me.

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.

Thought you were talking about the fraps video. I agree with what you are saying.

[Ele]

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

/facepalm.

How many more times do u need it spelled out for you before you understand? Please just quantify it for me so I can know if this is a exercise in futility or not.

Really?

I certainly hope you aren't this intellectually dishonest. This quote from you is certainly apt to your position, "People rarely enjoy their own cognitive dissonance being pulled into the light."

Please show me where Zereh said that one person with one account asked for an ip exemption for the purposes of plugging.

She said to execute the discussed scenario, you just need a single account with an exemption. She made no statement of how such an exemption was acquired.

You are projecting the argument you want to make upon the statements of myself and Zereh. Please revisit your initial argument.

If you would like to rephrase your argument, to the question of "can a person with one account that only ever plays alone and will always play alone and never need an ip exemption for the purposes of plugging?", then yes that is an inappropriate request and use of an exemption.

[getsome]

who cares about fancy coding , or more rules to prevent someone from committing an infraction

until p99 enforces its existing rule set with the punishments already laid out all that coding is a waste of time.

[bizzum]

Originally Posted by Funkutron5000 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I like you, Shades. You clearly respect the rules/ honest playing and also have respect for UM Ann Arbor. An upstanding poster, this one!

Yay Ann Arbor!!

[Ele]

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

who cares about fancy coding , or more rules to prevent someone from committing an infraction

until p99 enforces its existing rule set with the punishments already laid out all that coding is a waste of time.

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

[Frieza_Prexus]

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

based on your assessment of this situation, no you have not demonstrated you are without bias.

I am curious, to what extent do you feel my analysis has been impacted? I have clearly called for a similar regime to what Elethia put forward regarding the strictness with which exemptions are handed out. A number of people here have called for Aiaus to be banned. I am not certain the situation warrants such an extreme measure, especially in light of a demonstrable history of similar instances on the server. Should such abusers lose their exemption? Absolutely. Should we impose harsher measures? Again, of that I am unsure.

If you take issue with such a stance, I would be curious to know your exact complaint.