Yoko Kurama

I just logged onto RSC, apparently I still have access despite being away for 400+ days. It managed to keep my interest for a few minutes before I left. That aside, this server crash is simply annoying, that's all, I will survive(assuming there are no major roll-backs).

Most of those are not actually any meaningful updates. They merely reduce the grinding and make skills easier to train, they don't actually introduce any meaningful high level content. There are exceptions to this of course, such as herblore, which they did indeed do a great job at(Overloads, Extremes, Flasks etc.).

DarkDude98 wrote: As I suspected, this was too good to be true. Half a dozen server crashes in the past few days with plenty of people having lost valuable binds. No response from Jagex. Unless I am mistaken, or hopefully someone can provide new confirmation, I am afraid this isn't the case. :pray: Edit: This is now confirmed to be totally false. A J-Mod has confirmed that they will NOT return binds but they assure us that server crashes will be resolved. Pfft, as if it matters if people won't get their binds back. Simply pathetic. Way to go Jagex. Meanwhile, elsewhere, they are commemorating the 1 year anniversary of Dungeoneering by encouraging players to make guides. What better way to commemorate the release of a skill by neglecting long time and ke

The HHB is painstakingly rare to obtain, so I think it is more than fair to be able to buy something like that. That would also add a nice reward, something that is severely needed at high end levels and to add some value to tokens again. That says something about how ridiculously easy Chaotic equipment is to get. Not really, high levels do the higher floors for XP primarily. It may be initially exciting but after a while, it is pretty tedious . I think it is ridiculous that there are people that have gone through 10s of millions of experience without ever seeing a bow drop--I know more than one person in that situation. I don't use the phrase lightly, I actually know several people that are well above 120 dungeoneering that haven't gotten one yet. Edimmus are extremely rare too. Nice idea. Just like a lot of other things, there are plenty of things in the MMO subculture that are extreme, that I certainly wouldn't miss if they were amended or done away with. Inexplicably rare drops are one such thing. Before I get pounded, I am a boss hunter and I have made billions from boss hunting--so I know the rational behind rare drops and can even appreciate them, but they have to be reasonable. Hex, is not, at the moment reasonable. I understand if that happens, that for a lot of high levels that had to grind through hours to see one, it might not be a status symbol anymore, I am simply not sympathetic to this. Plenty of unreasonable things have been amended before, including 'rare' drops, so don't see why this can't be fixed.

I wasn't aware of this. In fact, I was told the opposite, that they weren't giving back Dungeoneering items. Can you confirm this(perhaps a link to some RSOF thread)? If this is indeed true, kudos to them, a much appreciated step. =D>

Well ideally this should work like the any customer support system works. The scenario is simple: players are damaged because of some faulty bug, they contact Jagex and issue their claim, Jagex reviews it and reaches a decision. I think in a lot of cases, Jagex can probably detect if a player brings their attention to it. However, there probably are *some* cases where Jagex can't handle with it, and in such situations, I don't think Jagex refusing to refund is a big problem. Like I mentioned, no one is expecting 100% refunds all the time, some common sense and some semblance of customer support is needed in the case of bugs. Firstly, Jagex should have a separate Customer Support team if they don't have it already. Just about every serious company of this scope does, so should Jagex. There is simply no excuse. Furthermore, once again, it is a matter of sensible resource allocation. For example one way to handle with a bug that affects a great deal of players is a roll back. Barring though, should a huge case arise where Jagex can't roll back, and a lot of time may be needed to uncover the facts--they can do it slowly. A lot of players would just appreciate that their grievances are addressed, in a week or month or two, rather than Jagex simply responding with their typical "Sorry folks, we don't give a [bleep]" attitude which is emblematic of apathy and laziness. Scamming/hacking is one thing, but bugs isn't another thing--the responsibility for that is solely Jagex's in most cases. Not every incident of hacking unfolds in this manner, hence, I find this to be unrepresentative of the problem. Not everyone hands over their items or passwords. There are plenty of other incidents that result in people losing their hard earned stuff. One incident is where people abuse bugs to inflict harm on innocent bystanders(Durial's incident comes to mind). This is not as simple as you put it. If you mean to say that Jagex should dismiss those who were blatantly ignorant--well, that is somewhat more agreeable(though I personally would take the more compassionate route considering a great deal of players are just young kids, but I can compromise and accept the fact that if you yourself are incredibly stupid, you shouldn't get your items back). Unlike the first analogy, I don't even find that this one remotely related. If someone is being boorish and rude, needless to say, they can be ignored. In a lot of cases, this might be the case--such as people simply handing over items, passwords, or not being too careful. What about key loggers? What about incidents where people abuse bugs to scam other players(like the recent incident where after Jagex explicitly mentioned that lent items would not be allowed in the Wilderness, and yet they were allowed none the less, and as a result plenty of people were scammed out of valuable items)? It is about letting some sort of order prevail--if Jagex is willing to punish perpetrators, why aren't they also willing to return the losses of victims? It seems somewhat contradictory to me. Is weakness unacceptable then? Is that what you are implying? Certainly there are some lessons to be had for everyone. I should, in the interest of full disclosure, admit that I am not yet personally in need of 'compensation' or 'redress' because I actually *am* careful with my information. I simply sympathize with others are who have suffered, on the principles of compassion and second chances. I think suffering certainly does have imprinting and lasting effects on people--often for the better, it teaches them to be more careful, yet at the same time, I think we should try to alleviate misfortune where we can. How about the same line as Blizzard(I have been told they often do refunds) or other companies. I find this final step to be not too overbearing, and not too difficult a demand. I hardly see how this is less justifiable than Jagex simply removing a dozen or so rares or whatever from the game rather than just returning them in instances where they have banned players already(thus admitting wrongdoing has occurred). People are often not as careful as they could(though this is not always the case), I don't see why that is reason enough for them lose out on years worth of investment. Yes, people make mistakes sometimes, all I am essentially asking for is a second chance for a lot of players. In other instances, Jagex makes mistakes, all I am asking for is that Jagex acknowledge responsibility and respond appropriately. I don't think this is too much to ask, nor does it cheapen to the way or overburden Jagex too much--I think this is the sensible thing to do and has much beneficial potential for the entire community.

:shock: Because no one is perfect. Is anyone really demanding that players be perfect in their security measures before some redress of grievances is issued? Are you claiming that this is the only reason(stupidity) or method with which people get scammed? I hope not. As I have mentioned before, I am not advocating in any sense that Jagex be obligated to simply treat every claim seriously or give refunds all the time. Like I mentioned before, I am flexible, and I certainly don't expect some sort of 100% hard and fast rules. On the matter of tracking scamming, it is true that people will inevitable try to play the system--there are plenty of solutions that can be adopted. Firstly, the process is similar to how Jagex tracks RWT(basically, I suspect whenever high transactions occur, it is probably recorded somewhere), that is probably enough to at least consider a claim of scamming, from then on they can simply spend a minute or two to consider the context(for instance, dialogue before the transaction and IPs), they already do this sort of stuff to detect when people are sharing their accounts or are RWTing, so nothing significantly more is asked of Jagex. Furthermore, similar to abusing the Report System, examples can be made in this instance too. All we are asking is Jagex actually have some sort of Customer Support--rather than what they have now--which is basically "Lets do silly events all the time". I am sure some people enjoy them but for the most part, cut backs could certainly be made there and invested into genuine Customer Support which is far more necessary.

There are several way to implement this. Once Jagex has confirmed that someone has suffered because of an oversight on their part, ie, a bug--as was the case with the MA bug, all they have to do is restore the items, which doesn't seem terribly difficult to me. No market implications, easy to trace and easy to spawn items. This was proven in the MA debacle--where initially the player claiming that his bank/inventory had been wiped was harshly criticized by J-Mods, until one J-Mod did some sort of check up, and confirmed his story--this indicates that Jagex can indeed trace this stuff down. So what use was there at all in *not* returning the items in that case? None. Aside from that though, if we are really going to get into the discussion of time spent wisely, how about Jagex lower back on pointless "PR" events(most of which aren't usually well received anyways) conducted by their "Community Involvement" or "Customer Support" Team and actually give us some semblance of customer support. I think most players would much rather prefer this. Really, this sort of stuff falls under Customer Support--just about every other company that shells out products does this, I don't see why Jagex should be exempt for this. On the point of bug/glitches, Jagex should own up to their mistakes and take the appropriate steps--there is no excuse whatsoever that can be deemed even remotely legitimate. In contrast to bugs/glitches--where Jagex assumes sole responsibility for a slip in their QA and thus there is no excuse/debate--I can actually see the issue of scamming/hacking being somewhat debatable--but largely in methodology, though I won't deny the 'responsibility of players' portion either. Your response is somewhat shocking--because it is essentially blaming the victim. People DO value their accounts and highly so, are you really going to tell players who invested years worth of time and emotion that they don't value their investment? Usually they do take steps to protect themselves but that doesn't mean they are perfect. This sort of victim-blaming, if applied to any other situation, would be laughable but I am going to try and avoid the RL/RS analogies since they usually don't end well. Really, though, all that is asked of them is some compassion. It really isn't that hard or inflexible.

@ Darkdude I disagree on certain points. First of all, I should like it to be known that my suggestion for a refund policy is two-fold. On one hand, we must consider bugs and on the other hand we must consider hacking/scamming and on the hand . Now, in the case of the former, I don't think I have should have to reiterate, that in the instance of say the MA bug, where Jagex is clearly at fault, items should be returned. I can't see any reason why not do it. Players should not be punished for Jagex's blunders. In fact, on this issue, I think just about every other decent company that I know of does this--if you get a defunct product, usually companies offer compensation. Furthermore, you mention “although for a lot of things it's hard to prove that the items are lost (through glitches etc.)", but clearly in a lot of instances Jagex *does* know. For instance, in the aforementioned story, Jagex was CLEARLY aware, they admitted as much--they should have undertaken the appropriate response after not only denying and harassing a long-time customer who was the victim of *their* ineptitude. Instead, after denying anything ever happened (without even putting in the effort), when some other Mod *did* put the effort and his case was proven, they showed him to the door. I am not asking Jagex for 100% guarantees on accounts or insurance, but some semblance of security is necessary I think--especially in cases where there is strong evidence. I personally find it cruel and inhumane the way Jagex has in the past treated customers who were clearly bearing the burden of Jagex's mistakes. So as far as bug abuse is concerned, if it can be proven there was some fault on Jagex's part and it is viable to do so--they should provide compensation. As far as the issue of scamming/hacking is concerned, rest assured, I do not broach this subject as an idealist--I am well aware of the complexities which is why I explicitly mentioned certain conditions. As for the economic question that you posed in this specific scenario—I am well aware of this, this is why I advocate compensation of some sort. I mean there are literally dozens of ways to approach this sensibly. It is a complex issue but if you handle it case by case it can be done, for instance, the accounts that were locked, Chessy should be awarded the stuff that was stolen from her, as for the stuff that was sold on the GE, there is no need for rollbacks. So yeah, Chessy might lose a couple billion gpies this way but at the least there is some compensation. I am *very* flexible with solutions, I simply ask that Jagex acknowledge that wrongdoing has occurred and act appropriately, I am not asking for 100% refunds or magic time traveling machines that make everything the way it was. So most of the time, the refund policy or policies I have in mind wouldn't have the economic effect of the magnitude you imagine. Like I said, plenty of steps can be taken. For example, if people want to give stuff to their friends, pretend they got scammed and demand compensation, a simple way to deal with this would be to ban the scamming party once it has been proven that they scammed and return the items to the owner. Let us see how many people try to abuse this system when they will potentially get banned in the process if they lie. Not everything has to be perfect, a little effort goes a along way. I personally don’t care what happens to Chessy in particular, I only used her as an example to broach this issue because we were talking about her. Things have to be handled on a case by case basis—it really isn’t that hard. You mentioned earlier that there are economic implications—there sure are, which is why I advocate compensation rather hard and fast rules. Think about it for a second though. Jagex KNOWS in this case that scamming has occurred and they know who *most* of the items belong to(some of the hackers got away according to the interview), so what sense does removing them make? Does that not have implications on the rare market too? So if you too are advocating case by case—then I agree with you. Nice try--now how about you actually try reading what I said? I explicitly used the words 'viable/feasible'--and I certainly have in mind of course certain restrictions that could be placed to prevent abuse. Clearly, some sorts of limits are needed to prevent abuse. If you stop and examine your statement just for a mere 30 seconds or so, it should be apparent to you this is not what I had and mind and how easily abuses can be prevented, instead of knee jerking. I don’t have much time at the moment, I have more to say so *maybe* I will get back to this when I have time.

I have always opposed this policy and will continue to do so. I was just as upset--if not more-- when it happened to the guy who lost his bank to the MA glitch, and I am similarly upset that this happened to a somewhat dubious character like Chessy018. I am of the opinion, that Jagex should refund items for *all* players whenever and wherever it can be proven some unintended mishap of this nature has occurred--and whenever and whereever it is viable/feasible to do so. Quite a few other companies do this, I hardly see why Jagex should be any different--especially considering this is relatively painless and inexpensive. I think if people have invested time and effort and emotion, and have subsequently suffered egregiously as in such cases, Jagex should honor that emotional investment and attachment--it seems the humane(I am aware of the irony of this term) thing to do. Now one could make the argument that isn't fair for Jagex to implement this policy change only in response to the misfortunes of an affluent and wealthy player--but I really don't see that as too much of a problem. Yes, it is somewhat unfair, but that is life for you, changes often come from the behests of elites--not from the plight of the helpless. I think the RS community should seize this opportunity to petition Jagex to implement the aforementioned policy change. It is in the best interests of everyone.

Chessy might have been a lot of things--but these apologists for scammimg "Uh, she got what she deserved", I find reprehensible and laced with jealousy. Grow up. Aside from that, this just a sad affair--and I find Jagex's complete apathy to the plight of victims of scamming to be completely disgusting--regardless of whatever their policy has been for however long. I have played since the semi-early days of classic, and I was never fond of it--certainly not during the MA affair and certainly not now. Few other companies get away with this nonsense and crap. This is a case of schadenfreude--nothing else, since they can clearly return items if they choose to do so and with about as much ease if not less than it took to ban the perpetrators.

Which is precisely why I mentioned Wooo as *one* of a few people who try such things(I was referring to MHing) with zeal. Just take the Corp issue--sure we have all seen Wooo'x 'epic' solo victories, but what we haven't seen is all the effort he put. How many times did he die and so fourth. The reason Woo was famous for that was other people--like me, decided, 'Nah, we can do it in teams, solo is a waste of supplies'. Same with SWH, most others thought it was wasteful. I am fond of a lot of the things people like Grimmy do. Like I mentioned before, I don't idolize Wooo, but I certainly do give credit where it is earned--this is certainly one such case. Wooo is not as normal and average a scaper as some people on this thread would have us believe. As far as Boss hunting is concerned, others do idolize him and put on a pedestal(which while I don't do personally--I can certainly see the rationale). This is coming from someone who didn't care much for most of Wooo's videos. I watched some of them, but I wasn't subscribed and nor did I personally come back running each time he soloed Corp with new limits--I just found most of those things impressive when I heard about them and when I saw them from the few videos I did watch.

this. i'm tired of people idolizing woox. he's good, but he's not godly. he even forgot to overload during a trio - a HUGE mistake. he also forgot to anti at the bank during his duo. all he's really good at is ss flash timing. stoke is arguably better. I admire Woo, just as many others do for obvious reasons, but of course, I don't think he is godly--though I don't have have a harsh view of him like you do either, as if one or two mistakes made during one trip really belittle his other accomplishments--just about everyone makes those minor mistakes. He isn't known as the guy who never made mistakes during Nex trips, he is known as the guy who really put quite a bit of effort into boss hunting and came with quite a few innovative methods(SWH for one thing) and impressive results. It is probably true that anyone with resources could have achieved those results but what makes Wooo notable is that he is one of the few people who actually bothered. Perhaps it is just me but I sense something personal/ulterior in your post :rolleyes: . Furthermore, I agree, he has certainly done a lot of things but he isn't an 'era-defining' guy--quite a few of those have passed on and without much mention(Zarfot, Zezima etc.).

While I haven`t used either, I have suspected this for a while. On any given trip there are probably a handful of times where my prayer reaches 0(because my prayer bonus is usually 8-10 with my armadyl setup), primarily due to the fact that Nex has prayer draining abilities during the Ice and Blood Phases. So I suspect Ely is probably better for this reason alone.

In response to some of the mind-numbing and boggling things posted here, I am plagued by a myriad of things I want to express yet I am speechless and without time at once, so I can't address most of what I want to here but I will focus on one thing in particular for now: Increase? And? Oh thats right. I forgot that the game can survive perfectly fine when X% of the players are bots. But when free trade comes back, the population will reach its critical ammount of X+5% of bots and an abyssal portal will open up and swallow the Runescape servers for all of eternity. I almost forgot about that. Did I ever say it would collapse? Please, don't put words in my mouth. Runescape is currently full of bots which for many players spoils the game. Why would anybody want to bring more into the game? I think it is a viable opinion to not want an update which will bring more bots and gold farmers into the game. So, you acknowledge that that it won't collapse but lets take away some of the most important priviledges and game mechanices(free-trade) away from the innocent majority to punish (ineffectively) a minority of people? Before, the pretense in 2007 was that it was necessary to implement these measures because the problem was too severe and on the premise that it would adequately stop what was needed to be stopped, but now it is rather revealing that people like you have such a pathological hatred of even a minimal(as compared to what existed before) increase in botting/RWT that you want to punish everyone? I am not one to resort Ad-Hominem but I can't help but say that you really should re-examine your core values if you are really bothered by other people breaking the rules, how do you ever bother living in the real world where crime is rampant? More importantly, it bothers you so much that you are willing to punish millions of innocent and rule abidding players just for the prospect that botting won't increase marginally? Your authorotarian, and possesive(in the sense that you simply can't tolerate the fact that other people are cheating, you want to possess them as far as possible so that they cana adhere to your morality instead of simply letting them make choices and suffer the consequences) mentality is frightening. Again, this is not meant to be an insult--considering your positions are a tepid confession of these tendencies . It essentially comes down to the time honored maxim of trading liberties for securities(though in this case it isn't even that because RWT/Botting does not hinder my in game security), which has proven time and again to be true. I will forget for a moment that that maxim doesn't apply completely, since securities aren't involved but we will throw that away for the sake of argument. I mean, why not just take the mentality of trading liberties for securities one step further--which will inevitably be its logical extreme--why not just turn this into a single player game(you have already taken one of the most important aspects of interaction in a multi-player game)? That way we can eliminate even some more forms of cheating? Again, this mentality does not bode well. You simply can't control people, you have to let them make choices and suffer their consequences, so why punish innocents for the mistakes of innocents--espacially when doing so will NOT result in an equivalent drop in cheating in porportion to the benefits surrendered? You have completely forsaken the cost benefit analysis. If you are going to take away such a fundemental aspect of the game, there better be some results(not that if taking free trade away resulted in a SIGNIFICANT decrease in botting, that the punishment of the majority of innocents for the minority is hardly a viable moral position), but we have already agreed that even that isn't attainable since your position is essentially: "There are a lot of bots already, so why would be want a little bit more?". Now, I added the "little bit" part but we have already demonstrated that botting/RWT are on similar levels in comparison to that of before, so we can only conclude that Free-trade will only result in a marginal increase(assuming we dismiss Jagex's claims of increased measures which you seem to have done somewhat inconsistenly). It isn't really a position that can be morally or even say 'rationally'(I am referring strictly to efficiency here) supported.

Actually, I share his concern and it was one of the first things that came to my mind when I signed into the game minutes after the update. I can tell you from experience(and I hardly one to play the "I am X therefore.." card but...), I am 105 Dungeoneering, having done my fair share of dungeon, his assessment is correct. A lot of Dungeoneering monsters DO hit high, higher than other monsters at their level anywhere else. In fact, most monsters(Brutes, Shades, Necros, Forgotten Mages, Warriors, Zombies, Skeletons etc.) at the high level end(assuming you a high level player, this is what you are going to encounter in plentiful ways CAN easily hit 200+). Though, the harm can be avoided in single enounters by praying, of couse due to Necros and Forgotten Mages, that is not often the case. Though, I will conceed that Jage WAS looking to fix PVP mostly, but regardless this does have *some* implications for PVM too(otherwise they could/should have restricted it to PVP Worlds only), so I don't think from that mind set it is too much to expect that they could extend these implications to Dungeoneering too. I am not enraged or demand this or anything but I do think there are plenty of things that undermine the diversity that is inherent in Dungeoneering and really make it generic and make a good portion of the combat options obsolete. I suppose, I don't even care too much for the soaking in dungeon but other fixes do need to be made, A great deal of suggestions have been made though it is unlikely Jagex is going to adopt them anytrime soon which is why I suppose some of us were placing their hopes here. Aside from that though, I think update was done well enough to have probably accomplished its stated objective in the PVP realm.

Stop being absurd, petty and intellectually dishonest. He stated he likes the skill, so he wears the accompanying cape or something along those lines. That doesn't mean he doesn't like other things, or loves slayer to death. You came up with [cabbage] arguments, and when other people rebutted them successfully, you attempted to throw in completely moronic non-sequitur. You basically stated, "If you love slayer so much, why don't you marry it[train it forever]?" otherwise, the person is clearly lying and only wears their cape for petty reasons right?. :rolleyes:

Discussion opinions is the very purpose of being part of a forum, so I don't see how that is useless. The thing about Ren was actually posted a bit later but point conceded on that, Ren is a pretty reliable source. I still DO think they scaled it down. According to some of the other people that attended the event, apparently some 50 people showed up or so(this figured was tossed around on the DG Elites forums but I am not sure.) I wasn't proposing that he cover travel costs(though that would be nice :shades:), I was simply saying that using that terminology when a lot of people have other commitments, to say it was to weed out those who more or less weren't willing to spend what was probably a costly ticket price, was offensive, to insinuate that players who couldn't do afford it were somehow less loyal or part of the immature, undesirables. It came off that way at least to a lot of people, I wasn't particularly irritated by it but others were and I kind of understand why. My mistake, I thought a lottery would be pretty self explanatory. By the way, please don't assume that I am trying to advertise Runescoop, I found something interesting so I linked to it, nothing more nothing less. Basically with a lottery, they would just have a lottery with everyone in, and they would draw names, that gives everyone somewhat of a fair chance, and if your name is drawn, you are invited to the event(no tickets or whatever). Simple as that. No need for this whole 'we were just testing you, we were going to refund the money from the start' sham. It would be setup like a P-Mod Invite thing(though it would be random), an invited player whom's name is drawn can reply with 'Yes' or 'No', 'yes' meaning they will attend and thus can bear the other expenses of travel, and no meaning they can't, hence there is another draw. A lot of players have given solid arguments. For one thing, at a time like this when Jagex should be trying to unify players, they were instead divisive. Putting out somewhat of a costly(depending on who you are) event(with all expenditures considered) and then rewarding those who payed with an in-game item, has somewhat of RWT feel to it doesn't it? Again, I don't think that is the path they should be going. Like any other holiday item, I think the Flagstaff should have been more widely available. It isn't old, considering plenty of people have given plenty of arguments against those 4 points, or some of them at least.

Some of us aren't as naive as to take everything told to us at face value. Is it possible that the plan from the start was to do refund the money? Sure. Is it probable or likely? Doubtful. Instead, the scenario that was described in that post that I quoted of JMB's is more plausible. I First of all, I would advise you NOT to avoid name calling, the only purpose that serves if any is to indite you as an idiot. Furthermore, think before you post. What he was saying is, that other people have other commitments, not everyone can afford the kind money of it takes for all the other aspects of this trip, including travel. For MMG to come out and say something like he did, can be considered, and was indeed considered offensive. To insinuate that because we can't make it to London and pay all the tickets and whatnot because some of us have bills and other expenditures, we aren't loyal CAN indeed be offensive and was taken as such by some players. Jagex by the looks of it, made a mistake in gauging and oraganizing this event and interest surrounding it and instead of owning up to that, they came up with a BS excuse. Qeltar of Runescoop ALREADY proposed a solution to this(and to even Jagex directly, though not sure of that) back when Runefest was originally announced: a lottery, keep it nice and simple. And I took issue to both of those because some people DO have legitimate counterpoints to those, to tell them to just 'shut the hell up', is childish and immature at best. He pretty much said that if you don't agree with any or all of those 4 points you paraphrased earlier, then one should 'shut the hell up' if they happen to opine differently on those 4 points. So that is precisely what he did.

I am inclined to agree with Das here but I will add somewhat of an addendum to that in response to one or two comments in particular: Here is something someone else posted elsewhere that is a pretty astute commentary on this subject, in my opinion: So, while I am glad you enjoyed the event and from the looks of it it was probably a nice little get together, lets try to be a little critical shall we, instead of just expending the benefit of the doubt upon Jagex recklessly(though, on Tip.it that has been long established as the norm by this point.) And here we were all thinking they were gauging the interest in the event(which would be a sensible approach) before booking a venue but it appears they were a step ahead. :rolleyes: :^o Here, by the way, is a P-Moderator who is typically quite on the 'Pro-Jagex side', his take on the matter, to give some perspective: Both of these were extracted from the Runescoop thread on the matter. Anyways, if you bought into the event, great, but don't tell the rest of us to "shut the hell up" because we happen to opine differently or because we happen to think about it critically rather than drooling over the event like a preppy little school girl. Aside from that, not a bad article about the event by any stretch of the imagination, quite a good recap.

On the contrary, this IS gamebreaking for a certain segment of the game and the population: boss hunting. The last weekend absolutely devasted and crowded bosses that were already crowded, this one will be no less generous to the monster hunting community. It will severely impact the viability of monster hunting as a money maker.

As a player who has never botted, nor even tried, I personally don't care. I have no vested stake in the outcome. I don't endorse it but if someone choses to engage in it for whatever reason, I simply don't care, it is their business and Jagex's. On forums I have visited, I have acquainted myself with people who have admitted to botting and have often boasted about illicitly obtained skills and it doesn't bother me. If there are plenty of bots, and they drive down the prices of goods I need significantly, great, I guess I saved some money, however if they ceased to exist or Jagex combats them appropriately, that is fine too, this won't be the first time I have bought expensive or inflated things, I will manage. Initially when reading this topic on botting, during my thought process I kind of treated it like drug use, say like Marijuanna, as in it isn't really anyone's business how you chose to play the game(even if the game is private property) so you should be allowed to do as you please but I quickly came to the conclusion that there would be consequences if such an attitude was applied especially officially, so I no longer hold that view and find it pretty hilarious that I even thought of something absurd like that. I take a similar stance towards RWT, I don't endorse it, and never have, nor have I ever tried to engage in it myself but if other players engaged in it, it didn't bother me. I guess I was one of those players who was engaged with my own gameplay not that of others even if said people were gaining unfair advantages. Some players simply don't care, that doesn't mean we support or partake in such activities ourselves.

Has this mosque or some Muslim authority made any such statements in favor of terrorism? Sorry but protecting criminals from the reach of the law is not justifiable. Clearly, if you protect them you don't think they should be punished. In the case of the Church, not only did they NOT turn them in BUT they let continue their jobs in different locations where they could just harm other children. That goes beyond just a cover up, the least they could have done is dish out some kind of internal punishment. If I or you owned a daycare center and several of my employees were caught molesting children, and I tried to protect them from the reach of the law, I would be in prison right now. For one thing we know for a FACT that the Catholic community REFUSED to alienate members of their community who were involved in wrong-doing, the Muslim community has made no such efforts as far I am concerned. You apparently have no problem with the Vatican who we know for a FACT refused to alienate such members yet when it comes to Muslims you are are applying a double standard. So I guess, by your logic my point remains, we better start removing Catholic buildings from areas where kids were molested by priests because it is an affront to their suffering! And heck, they probably won't alienate Priests(like they haven't done so far) who have been involved in the molestation of Children, which makes it an even more greater affront. As far as your last statement goes, it is total nonsense. How do you know the Muslim community is less likely to alienate such members? Are you implying the average Muslim has no problem with radicals or terrorism? In case you didn't notice, Al-Qaeda's terrorism is indiscriminate:Muslims did die on 9/11, they particularly also don't like Western Muslims/moderates, if I was the average Muslim, I would be pretty terrified by them too. Saying things like they won't alienate extremist members is basically saying in a round about way that it will be a safe haven for terrorism.

False. If the Church does't condone pedophilia and molestation then why is that the Vatican was involved in a massive cover up, in which even the current Pope, Mr. Ratzinger was involved in: where priests were simply shipped from one parish to another instead of being turned into the proper authorities. There is probably some denial on their part even now. Clearly the Vatican doesn't care much for the law, or justice or either it doesn't think any of those Preists engaged in anything questionable? Which is it? Does the Vatican not care about the law or justice OR does it condone such activities because it doesn't think they are morally vacuous. That still isn't a plausible argument really. So what if some of them are extremists? There are 'some' extremists everywhere. Still don't know what you are getting at. There isn't any plausible reason to suspect Muslims of extremism more so than any other group.

You still haven't answered what we should do with Catholic Churches then? What about the assault to innocent children? What about the affront to their memory? By the way, hating America does not equate to radical Islam or extremism. Tons of people, particularly in the Middle East have plenty of reasonable qualms with America. Anyone who knows even a tiny bit about American Foreign policy knows that America has hardly been kind to that region. Just because people hate America does not mean they are willing to cause it harm. Take Iraq for instance, not only have hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians died at the hands of American troops, in fact some Iraqis equate it to the the 13th Century Baghdad invasion. furthermore, if this recent occupation wasn't atrocious enough, it was the US that supported Saddam for many years, and equipped him with the means to carry out his brutality. So, you know what if people in Iraq want to burn flags, I think that is more than understandable thing to do. Any sane person might do the same. It is understandable that there might be frustration on their part. Anyone who says they hate us 'because we are free and rich' is ignorant and misinformed at best. America has a lengthy history in that region and not pleasant in the least . All that means is they are equating America to American foreign policy which is funded by American citizens, and persists because of their lack of interest in stopping it. All that means is they are opposed to and hate American foreign policy. That doesn't mean they are terrorists or radicals. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pfcW0_sSuw