stonewall337

Ya except doing legal things can have negative effects sometimes too. I see your point, but your point is illogical, and as such void. I guess you could hold an opinion believing that, but again an opinion not based in logic is flawed. It is illogical to claim a correlation. Just like it's illogical to claim a correlation between video games and mass murder. Correlation does not imply causation. Your point that "sometimes illegal actions can have negative repercussions" may have some basis in reality because it is such a broad statement, far too broad in fact. I use the counter example "sometimes legal actions can have negative repercussions". It's also a sweeping generalization fallacy. I'm willing to accept either side of an argument, but only when both are presented logically and with minimal (if any) fallacies. Even if I agree with your stance, if you try and defend it with faulty reasoning, I will attack the flaws. Please note this is nothing personal. However, good discussion can not exist in the presence of flawed argumentation. People are often unable to differentiate an attack on a stance with a personal attack- hence why people say not to discuss religion and politics with family members. Yes, I understand that he probably would never have had a bb gun pointed at him if he hadn't met this guy. However, the arguments used to say "he shouldn't have done that" were flawed, and thus were challenged. If you don't like me challenging fallacies, they'll have to stop being used. Likewise, if I use a logical fallacy, please point it out so I can address, correct, or redact my statement. http://imgur.com/a/BgADo This is a cool picture I use to look up various technical name

Why would that be smart on Jagex's part? They'd make more money enabling people to buy spins. Doesn't mean they should, but smart is the wrong word to use lol. and lose a lot of players again? getting quick cash and losing a lot of paying people is not smart imo. Can you prove, or even give me 1 iota of evidence to support that position?

That logic doesn't follow. That's like saying one is speeding and gets pulled over for having an expired license, and blaming it on the speeding. It's a logical fallacy known (among other things) as false causality. (Or correlation does not equal causation, etc)

Wasn't a click, my hand wasn't even on the mouse at the time. And I used a script to clear RAM often, so it wasn't that either.

Of course you couldn't ban them solely based on a highly unbalanced trade, but it's a first indicator. If you investigate further, you might see that that account is running a lot of goldfarming bots, or maybe that he abused a bug like the Crucible dupe, which then would be reason enough to ban him. You seem to think Jagex has the staff to investiage anyone who trips the meter personally. Even if it only took a minute per case including time between cases, that's only 60 an hour or ~500 a day assuming they do nothing else. That's assuming ONLY a minute per, for it to be any way accurate it'd have to be several orders bigger. It's just not practical, or effective, or even a good design to begin with. And let's not forget trading or giving away gold with no logical in game explanation that Jagex could tell. People give gold to IRL friends, in game friends, for contests, quitting, returning, loans, borrows, to invest, to test, etc etc etc. Heck, maybe someone pays 1b to get into a clan or something. Unless any mention is in the chat log, and even assuming Jagex can check for logs hours/days back, there are going to be times where trades just happen. Any detection system would be too inherently flawed to be effective, compared to other methods of prevention.

K so twice today the minimap RANDOMLY opened and right after the game is laggy as shit. I have to close out the client to fix it. WTF is going on?

Why would that be smart on Jagex's part? They'd make more money enabling people to buy spins. Doesn't mean they should, but smart is the wrong word to use lol.

Regulating the theft of virtual goods. http://www.law.emory.../57.5/Arias.pdf [hide=Article] "Despite the daily occurrence of theft within MMORPGs, this type of theft remains unregulated in the United States.This Comment takes the position that not only should the United States prosecute the theft of virtual goods under current theft penal statutes but also that such an approach is desperately needed, given the economic prominence of virtual goods and the increasing rise of virtual good thefts" "Property is defined in the MPC (Model Penal Code) as “anything of value, including . . . tangible or intangible personal property.” The MPC Commentary, clarifying this definition, characterizes property as “anything that is part of one person’s wealth and that another person can appropriate.”Under this definition, virtual goods in online video games are protectable property because they possess value (as determined by external markets such as eBay), are intangible personal property, and can be appropriated by another person. Originally, only tangible property was subject to criminal theft under the common law. But recent state criminal statutes, modeled after the MPC, define property as “anything of value,” including both tangible and intangible property" In interpreting these statues, courts, for the most part, have found that computer code, although intangible, is of value and thus subject to theft statutes. In Hancock v. State, for example, a Texas appellate court held that codes of computer programs were subject to theft because, under the Texas theft statute, “‘property,’ as used in relation to the crime of theft, includes . . . all writings of every description, provided such property possesses any ascertainable value.” Intangible virtual goods fit nicely within the Hancock classification of property because they consist of computer code. Thus, under that premise, intangible virtual goods should be protected Most scholars assume that virtual goods are the subject of intellectual property, rather than personal property. Yet, as this Comment demonstrates: (1) virtual goods more closely resemble chattels than intellectual property; and (2) only rights inherent to chattels can properly protect virtual goods from theft. ALSO http://scholarship.l...06&context=dltr These EULAs all state that the virtual items created by the game are exclusively the property of the game operators, and that the game operators can take away the virtual items without any explanation or reason. A more definitive property regime to regulate the trade of virtual items and protect the rights of players and game operators would solve these emerging problems. This iBrief will discuss what regime is best suited for virtual items by analyzing the different property-regime models that might apply to virtual items in Part I. Then, in Part II, this iBrief will present some policy arguments for granting property rights. In looking at these arguments, this iBrief makes the implicit assumption that society would want virtual markets to exist, and that the production of virtual items adds value to society. The EULAs seem to clearly suggest that the game operators have exclusive control over the game itself. These form contracts, however, have never been unbreakable, and there is a great policy argument that the virtual items would have never existed without the players either. The game operators cannot generate a thriving marketplace for virtual items without players to populate the game and create the demand that gives the virtual items a monetary value. A more definitive property regime to regulate the trade of virtual items and protect the rights of players and game operators would solve these emerging problems. This iBrief will discuss what regime is best suited for virtual items by analyzing the different property-regime models that might apply to virtual items in Part I Under a labor theory, even if the game operators created the original virtual world where the coveted item is created, it would be strange not to grant the player who spent a year finding the virtual item any rights in the virtual item. The player’s amount of effort and labor is certainly not negligible. Many question whether the gamer contributes any “labor” as they are, after all, playing a game. However, professional athletes are also paid to “play” a game, and no one questions whether their efforts constitute labor. Furthermore, recognizing a succinct virtual property rights for the players would benefit the game operators. If virtual items had no real-life monetary value to me, presumably many gamers would choose to do something else with their time since people are always incurring an opportunity cost by choosing one thing over another. If the players are never able to recognize the monetary value of the virtual items they farm, this creates an incentive to stop producing the virtual items, which is to say that this produces an incentive for players to stop playing the game.If gamers are not allowed to claim that time spent to produce items worth real money simply because they take pleasure in playing their games, then anyone who enjoys what they do for a living should relinquish their paychecks. Scholarly sources to present a case. As I am friends with the author of the first article, she expressly stated her opinion that virtual goods SHOULD both be viewed as property, and that neither is any EULA 100% binding, nor does everything virtual in a game belong only to the creator of that game, however, there is a lack of firm common law to set this precedent. Oh and here: http://www.abc.net.a...12/s3466221.htm JAS PUREWAL: One individual had taken without authorisation some poker chips from a Zynga poker game and had attempted to sell that for profit to third parties. TIMOTHY MCDONALD: Jas Purewal is an interactive entertainment lawyer with the firm Osborne Clarke in London. JAS PUREWAL: The criminal judge effectively found that those poker chips were property and therefore they were capable of being stolen. Even though the terms and conditions said they are not property, the judge found that because people put value in them they must have some sort of legal status. [/hide] So in light of a lack of clear legal precedent, I will continue to view all my accounts, and all my virtual items, as my property, to do with as I please.

The idea of a tracker is flawed simply because of the problems that lie with verifying what is RWT and what is a gift. Just because I take/give 500m to someone who isn't on my friends list doesn't mean its RWT, but how would Jagex verify? What if its 200m say from a duo FFA corp (to get things that don't drop on LS/CS). There are just too many issues to make it work. AT ALL.

That is an excellent point. Steve Jobs said something along the lines of "It's really hard to design products by focus groups. A lot of times, people don't know what they want until you show it to them." Oh and let us not forget this "“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.” That being said, I prefer free trade over the system we had before. People being scammed is normally a result of their own stupidity. Same for being hacked. That and the fact that Jagex doesn't have a system to restore stolen items (like other games have) and their report system is a joke, coupled with the fact that their CS is shit are the real roots of the problem. Scamming is far less common in WOW for that reason. If I trade someone 50 herbs to make me flasks, they'll give them back, because they know I can report them, and get them back anyway. I've NEVER ONCE had a "trust" transaction go bad in WOW, when paying for goods or services. The one time there was a dispute about a "grey" part, a GM moderated and fixed it. So really, the problem is more on Jagex than anyone else IMO.

Well it was about this time I noticed that this "Zezima" was about 8 stories tall and was a crustacean from the protozoic era!

Sigh. Stop construing a false point and arguing against it, its a logical fallacy. Stop saying stupid shit like "I doubt gold sellers have x amount of money" because you have no data to back up that stance. Also, saying "chinese gold farmers" is flat out wrong, as proven. You are calling all gold farmers Chinese, or else the only ones this would apply to. Another flaw. And ya pulli, I'm calling you a liar. You said that "its never even occurred to you people would do it" which is flat out BULL SHIT. For that to be true, you'd have to do at least some of the following: 1.) Not understand what many bots are used for (farming gold to sell) 2.) Not understand that like probably every other MMO game out there, there is a black market for goods 3.) Never have had your chat set to public in the past few years 4.) Never seen any chat in the GE/sometimes edge over the past few years 5.) Never read any of the threads about botting/scamming/people selling gold on any forum ever 6.) Never seen a gold selling website ad. 7.) Never had someone mention it to you. And the list goes on. So ya, I'm calling you a liar. When I'm done with RS, I'll probably sell my account to pay school bills. Same for Wow. I have legal reasons (as well as recent developments) that back up my belief that, no matter what the TOS say, Jagex/Blizzard can not actually claim full or partial ownership of your account. I also refuse to accept the argument that hacking/scamming are bad without a good moral standpoint for these statements, for by accepting that argument I also accept that any account/character has some tangible worth. Thus I'm stuck in a double bind. Either hacking is bad because for the tangible harm it causes, or it isn't because none of that which was taken was in any ways your to begin with. Heck, you can't even compare the later to taking something someone else has borrowed, because that item, even though it didn't belong to the person who you took it from, still has tangible value. I'm trying to think of something else that has no tangible value that could be used TBH. Can anyone think of something? I'd be interested if anyone has any LOGICAL and not stupid answers or arguments for/against this stance.

Are you kidding? No one uses direct to bank. People use Paypal or Liberty (which can't be refunded). Also, a lot of golf buyers aren't Chinese. They are australians, americans, brits, etc. lol, actually thinking with myself: nope I wouldn't do it... Maybe I'd start with something like this, but after a minute or 5 I would grew tired and "say screw it, I'm going back to dg".. You wouldn't do something that makes ~16k an hour? Liar. And again @ mercifull. Just stop. You obviously have no clue what you are talking about. "Chinese" gold sellers and all... Hell, within 2 minutes of looking, I found someone on a 3rd party website with a VERIFIED $1,000,000 TRADED. Granted, that's obviously no where near all profit (Its closer to 8-12% by the prices listed) but still it's not hard to believe. That thread alone has been there for over 2 years with over 2500 POSTS in his one thread alone. I'll be honest, when I'm 100% done with RS, I'd consider selling my RS account. As I grow older, I have more and more expenses to pay off, including massive student loans+ eventually law school. Same for WOW. Sorry, but real life trumps game. As well, as I wrote in the TIF times (And as seen by certain legal precedent) I don't believe Jagex actually CAN own the accounts and the items on them. But that is a different story.

I've always contested the term "gaming addiction". I contest there being such a condition in the way that the word is often used. I think obsessed would be a much better term. But for the sake of this post, gaming addiction simply means an unwillingness to quit. (Inability to quit is another discussion). This is from an article on CNN about ProGamer MarineKingPrime, of SCII fame. It is, however, applicable to all games with some competitive nature to them. But there's one difference, he said. Pro gamers usually aren't addicts. Addicts can't succeed on a higher competitive level, he said. The game takes complete control. Pros, however, find a magical balance. They're obsessed with the game, maybe, but their playing of it isn't depressive, meandering and hopeless. They're chasing after a goal. http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2012/08/tech/gaming.series/korea.html?hpt=hp_c1 We've had this discussion before, about time/money spent on a game. But I thought this take on gaming obsession/addiction and the pro/high end scene was very very interesting.

That's patently false. For one the number of people who stay playing at high levels is higher than the same number of people percentage wise who stay playing as lower levels. Statistics directly falsify what you said.

You're missing the point. Earning a divine at average income is at least 50 hours. Earning a whip at low level income is like 5 MAX (probably less, probably more like 1). There is a difference, on the economy, etc, whether you like it or not.

ISN'T IT OBVIOUS, HE WINS FREE SPINS BY PROMOTING SOF! Capz on purpose :P

My bet is on engineering.

Oh no! Some kid that I never met and never will meet (and who I don't even know exists) can do something that took me 7 years to do in 1 year only! Except some people actually care about high scores, and getting better compared to the rest of the game. I enjoy getting higher ranks compared to others.Being able to do so with no in game effort is what pisses people off. @pulli, you're laughably wrong. Having disposable income in no way makes you rich. Anyone who thinks that is just....misinformed. Hell, I have student loans, college and living expenses, and still have SOME small amount of disposable income. I mean, according to what you say you have no money for fast food, movies, internet, cable, or any entertainment. I don't believe you.

Alright I suppose theres use, but does anyone important - save the HLF use it. I scroll on and its a bunch of trolls, and obviously very young posters and internet memes being thrown around on there all the time. It doesn't really seem productive. I dont support additional censorship especially blocking out the company owners (over 50% of the stock share iirc) seems very shady but at the same time I dont blame them for doing it. Ah you need to have high stats to be important? What a bunch of elitism you show... again. Everyone is important in an MMO. Only to a point. Everyone is important, but some people are WAY more important. I don't think anyone would argue when I say that the level 45 has far less of any noticeable impact on any aspect of the game than a level 138 who plays at least the same amount of time. Just the difference in the amount of raw materials a higher level consumes has a far larger impact. I mean when I was level 100 I used what, monks and super sets to train slayer, costing maybe 100k every few weeks? Now I use p pots/overloads/steel titan/spec restores etc where a single task might cost 100k.

That actually makes more sense. I disagree, since it most obviously does impact the decisions those higher up make as to what direction the game takes, but it makes more sense than defending censorship.

Are people honestly DEFENDING censorship? Wow.

I'll be honest, I resubbed just for those 2 months. I don't play ATM, since I have no goals I want to meet, but extra spins=more thieving/hunter xp (lowest skills) and if I can use the whole 1m xp on hunter or thieve at sub level 80, I'd be happy. Also, the 1shot darts seem nice. Might get 3 of those and 1 instarevive and do kiln, or just kill nex x4. This is much better than free items/weps that are already in game IMO. I still wish that the SOF/bonuses didn't have any impact on game progression tho. If RS had anything endgame it'd be different.

I have a 17 inch samsung syncmaster 2nd monitor plugged into my Asus RoJ laptop. I know its not a graphics card on the laptop issue. Even when I unplugged the VGA cable from my laptop, and the screen on the 2nd monitor went black it was still experiencing the same issue, where black=green. Not sure how to fix it. None of the auto adjust or reset options on the monitor itself seemed to help. Any clues what to do? http://imgur.com/Whq6g,iZrBt#0 is a picture of how it looks http://imgur.com/Whq6g,iZrBt#1 is a picture of how it should look

I played more than that but not without hopping worlds.