Articultural

Any chance of him actually posting the proof to back up his claims then? :P

He might have changed his mind and be quitting after all, I haven't spoken to him in quite a while. :P

He's not quitting permanently, just going on a three week holiday and then has no specific goals when he gets back. :P How did you find that out? He told me. Fletching can still be done without losing time.

Isn't that exactly the type of spam that you're campaigning so hard to get rid of?

Any proof of that, or is it just random hearsay?

He's not quitting permanently, just going on a three week holiday and then has no specific goals when he gets back. :P

To be frank, on w117 it really doesn't matter what you do at your level. If you only want 80 then you're not going to be Dungeoneering for very long, regardless of your current level.

Isn't asking what was wrong with the binds suggested by Fire_R_A_G_E is a Dungeoneering question?

I guess that rules out whoever created the application form. i hope you also complain about stating your age and work experience on job applications irl Requiring an applicant to state their age on a job application in the UK has been unlawful since the introduction of the Equality Act 2010, so yes, I would complain if an employer asked me for my age or date of birth on an application form. good thing we're not in the uk then isn't it... You asked a question, I answered it. I don't have a problem with Tip.it requiring you to provide your age or Runescape name, it's their site, they're free to choose their moderators however they wish. I don't agree with it, but they have every right to do so (provided you ignore various declarations of human rights). What I have a problem with is Tip.it claiming that their system is unbiased and fair, when it's neither of the two, and then merely shrugging off any accusations regarding their biased approach. If Tip.it want to have a corrupt system in place, that's their choice, just don't try to claim that it's not one.

I guess that rules out whoever created the application form. i hope you also complain about stating your age and work experience on job applications irl Requiring an applicant to state their age on a job application in the UK has been unlawful since the introduction of the Equality Act 2010, so yes, I would complain if an employer asked me for my age or date of birth on an application form.

How the hell did you calculate how much an ovl saves? I'm a little confused with the 47 is 2.5% better exp. If you keep doing fl 47 - don't keep getting the exp for 47 ticked off. You get a different floor with its base exp accounted for no? Reposting this as no one seems to have replied. :P Read the guidelines listed on the first post of this page. There's a whole section on binds, there. The guidelines on the first page don't mention anything about second binds, maybe you should read them. :P I'd keep the Gorg Plate till you get a Shadow Silk Hood. Swap the cosmics for laws too until you get 70 rc for Surgebox. Firerage, please stop giving advice on behalf of DGS. There is neither a particular need to do so, nor are you particularly qualified to do so. We have plenty of ranked keyers perfectly capable of giving good advice. And if they are not available, there is always the guidelines. You have the time to complain about Fire_R_A_G_E's advice (which he didn't state was on behalf of DGS, despite your claims), but you don't have the time to give mlskid feedback on what binds he should have? And don't even try to mention the guidelines, they don't say anything about second binds, which is what he's asking about. Ammo bind-wise, Fire_R_A_G_E effectively quoted word-for-word what your guidelines say, so maybe you should reread (or rewrite) them if you have a problem with the advice he was giving.

Macroing is cheating, how you can you indifferent about something and find it a 'bad problem'?

I guess that rules out whoever created the application form.

Are you sure about losing the greegree, or does it just drop to the floor on the spot you teled from/to?

Onyx (i) is useful at solo Armadyl, as the Defence speeds up kills faster than an extra +2 Ranged attack. There's the answer to your question, it's better almost anywhere that you're maging or ranging and taking enough damage that Defence is needed. If you're meleeing, berserker (i) or vigour will almost always outstrip it as there aren't any monsters in RS where Attack bonus is more useful than Strength bonus when meleeing. For example, if you were to DK without a cannon, not killing Supreme, it'd be better to use an onyx (i) for Prime/Rex. Once you kill Supreme though, it'd be better to use berserker (i)/vigour, and if you were to cannon prime, you'd be better off with a seers (i).

You can trade over 53B at once with Spirit Shards. I still don't see why you have a problem with rares existing, what's wrong with them?

I can't see any benefits for removing or re-releasing rares, it wouldn't stabilise the economy, it'd make it worse.

What monster hasn't been soloed?

Or they could stop using a quest cape as an excuse not to release high level content in quests. Jagex shouldn't have to limit endgame content (which the quest cape should be, even its examine says the most experienced of adventurers) because low levels don't have high enough stats. Quests should be like tasks, where Jagex aren't afraid to put requirements in the 90s in multiple skills. If the rewards are worth it, people will be incetivised to train, and if not, it's the fault of no one but them. You can't honestly think that Jagex should reward you for your laziness by giving you an easier boss fight than a player who put in the effort and maxed combat.

You didn't reply to the point I made though. It's all very well saying "Things are situational, we can't have a blanket requirement," but that doesn't work if you then proceed to state that you'd definitely rule out someone if they were a certain age. You still haven't told me why you think it's okay for Tip.it admins to effectively discriminate, and if you don't think it's okay, why you provide them with the information to do so, which is completely useless if they want to take an unbiased approach. It's not a complex concept, there is no reason that you should require them to provide information about something unless that is going to play a factor in deciding whether they become a Moderator or not; and if is going to, there should be a certain requirement that they have to meet, and they should be informed of it. You haven't provided a single reason for applicants to provide their age or runescape stats that couldn't just as easily be used to justify asking them to provide their ethnic background, gender, sexuality, irl financial status, etc. If it's not required, it shouldn't play a factor in the decision, and if it is required, it should have a blanket requirement for everyone, rather than providing the opportunity for discrimination and favouritism as there are no set guidelines that everyone has to follow. Having one rule for someone and a different rule for someone else doesn't work, and if that's how you want to run Tip.it, I'd be very concerned about the future of the community on these forums.

Reposting this as it seems to have got lost in the skittle-talk. :P

The problem is, it shouldn't be based on it at all. If you can see the person is responsibe and mature and think they would be a good moderator, why do you need to know their age? All providing their age does is give the current mods/admins the ability to discriminate based upon it. Unless you have a required age, their age should be entirely irrelevant. Stats are the same, if you want to know if they're active, ask them when they last logged in, or how often they play. If they wish to elaborate by telling you their stats and/or experiences ingame, they can do so, but it shouldn't be mandatory. The point I'm trying to make is that if there is no requirement for a certain area, you shouldn't need to know about it at all. The arguments you're using could easily be used to justify asking them what gender they are, or where they were born, etc. All it does is gives people the ability to discriminate based on that information.

It's because of circumstances exactly like that, Racheya. You assume blindly that if you need Help & Advice moderators, it's better to pick someone with higher stats, when often higher level (and even maxed) players have very little knowledge about non-skilling aspects. I have a friend who is maxed total and hasn't completed all the quests (although he's rushing through them at the moment for a Completionist's cape), has very little experience in almost every minigame/activity and can't even name all the D&Ds, let alone having tried them. If you were to use the hiscores alone, he would seem like a perfect candidate for a moderator for the Help & Advice section, yet I am certain he has no idea what the GP/hour is nowadays for anything but the highest level training methods and could barely give advice on doing quests and killing bosses, let alone moderate it. Also, by him having maxed a while ago, many of the skills he disliked have been updated so the training methods he used are out of date, yet he doesn't know any better. The point I'm trying to make is that stats don't show everything. I have friends with barely 1500 total who would be of more use in the Help & Advice forum than a friend of mine with 2496, however they would be less likely to be given the position because of prejudices held by those appointing them. Everyone has prejudices, the only way around them is to give as little irrelevant information, or information that could bias their decision unfairly, as possible in an attempt to remove their bias; why do you think examiners aren't told whose paper they are marking? It's the same concept. Age is a slightly different issue, as you can argue that certain aspects are unsuitable for younger audiences (although, you could equally argue that saying it's unsuitable to expect a ten year old to be reponsible enough to remove pornography is effectively prejudice, as there are almost certainly some ten year olds who would be mature enough to do so), but if someone of a certain age is going to definitely be denied because of their age, then you should at least let them know beforehand. Enabling people to apply, regardless of their age, and then refusing their application based solely on their age is not only a waste of both people's time (which could easily be avoided), it's also rather mean. :P