Originally Posted by Frieza_Prexus
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Because there's going to be a lot of misinformation and flat-out spin on both sides, I'm going to lay out the situation as it currently exists to the best of my ability. I do not speak for TMO with any authority, nor do I wish to do so. I am merely speaking as a member, and I hope that my posting history and general efforts have earned me the benefit of the doubt regarding what I have to say.
Froovy and Internode were two seasoned and well-respected members of the guild. Froovy was an extremely active player, and yes, he did have access to many, many accounts. Of these 86 accounts approximately 12 or so would be his. Another 15 would be trackers, porters, and various mules. This leaves 60ish accounts between the two of them to be hit. It stretches the imagination to consider that they'd have access to this many accounts between the two of them. However, Froovy was extremely well-liked and respected. If you knew him on a personal level you would know that he earned the trust of many guildmates, and that he frequently played their accounts and that others frequently played his.
For almost all of us this is incredibly disappointing. I will always value how kind and helpful Froovy always was for the guild, but these actions have hit all of us where we live. While I hate to see this happen, Froovy and Internode both deserved fully to have all of their accounts permanently banned. They broke the rules, and the GM staff should be commended for their response to these individuals. I understand, without condemning or condoning, why they banned all associated accounts. Duping cannot be tolerated, and it sends a loud message. It is unfortunate that so many people have suspended accounts when their only mistake was to trust another person. But the GMs want to send a warning about account sharing, and while I may not agree fully with these suspensions, I cannot fault them for taking heavy measures.
Additionally, another TMO member was recently caught running a large RMT operation. I will not name this member yet as I do not have permission to do so, however, this should come out within a short while. This person was not an officer, and what I find most disappointing is that we had already removed this person once. We let them back in with a second chance, and it burned us. While he is responsible for his own actions, we chose to allow him a second chance and the consequences of that decision are being borne by us. TMO is being held culpable for this individual because the leadership "should have known about it." I cannot comment on whether or not they should have or did know about it, but I can safely say that this individual did NOT have access to the overall guildbank. While some guild items have undoubtedly entered the RMT circuit, the bank as a whole has not been compromised and it is closely watched.
In short, we were burned by trusted people-people who should have known better and done better by those they call friend. For the average player of the server I can understand how they view these punishments as a very positive thing. It is perhaps a blank slate to reset the attitudes and views of the raid scene. While I don't enjoy eating a raid suspension, I think this could be an excellent opportunity to reevaluate how we treat each other. While I am pessimistic about the environment changing, I and a few others in TMO, view this as a chance to make the end game something a little bit more bearable in terms of how we treat each other. Fierce competition need not be full of hate. I know that many are here are squealing with excitement at the prospect of "fuck TMO" becoming a reality, and I don't blame many. We do lock down a lot of stuff, and many of our members do behave poorly in public settings. However, I would point out that respect is a two way street. If your goal is to change how we treat each other I submit that we are better served by speaking neutrally if not coordially.
We've all seen where "prove it" and "u mad" get you. Do we really want to go right back to where we just left? I, for one, do not.
|
12-19-2013, 10:35 PM
Linear Mode
