Assume Nothing

I egosearch on Google a lot. It's amusing that half the images I see is RS related

I don't think you understand probabilities. Yep. A particular duel's outcome is not determined by the previous duel's outcomes. Every duel is just as likely to win as any other duel, given that all other factors remain equal. But losing 17 duels in a row has a probability of (.5)^17 = 7.62939453 × 10-6, or 1 in 131702. This is the probability of any particular string of wins and losses after 17 duels, but we tend to notice patterns, so losing 17 in a row can be considered rare. Although that's a terrible lottery to win, really. Albeit I'm not a master of statistics, I could tell you one thing: the probability you've presented is the probability of losing exactly 17 duels consecutively, not accounting for the fact that you could lose 17 or more duels consecutively. Even if the probability of losing big/all is considerably rare, it is less likely that you could earn enough staking that it could repay these unfortunate 'flukes'. The true winners have enough self control to log out and do something else.

Wow, the replies I'm seeing is ridiculous. If you know nothing about the situation, then you shouldn't judge the people in it. The users who supposedly broke the rules may have had their offending posts removed. The administration team's decisions are rarely publicly announced. Maybe, just maybe, they were both in the wrong. This has proven to be the case today. On the flip side, disagreeing is one thing, and flaming/ridiculing is another. Please, moderators, differentiate them properly. I've seen blunt posts labeled as trolling even though it's good advice with good intentions, posted in a less 'friendly' manner. I've seen flaming labeled as 'valid points'. Inconsistency is one of the biggest flaws of Tipit. This should be changed.

On what basis? Baseless arguments like these are good examples of what ignites flame wars, because you've simply not convinced/persuaded anyone to take your position, but may encourage some posters to argue against you. I'd say that some of the banned users have taken a step too far, and did nothing to help to resolve the situation. Some of the users were indeed unfairly banned, as rushed decisions were made swiftly which simply created this drama on Tipit. Name calling should never be tolerated. Too often it is, and instead of moderators dealing with the situation, it often lingers and builds up into a flamewar that we have witnessed in the past few days. I don't see the 'no naming names' rule as completely fair - Tipit should make an exception on naming players for illustrative purposes, given that the reasoning is plausible. Eg "John Doe keeps posting flamebait on H&A, someone sort it out please" should not have a punishment attached to it, because the purpose of naming names in that situation is not malicious. I'm not quite sure where I'm going in this little rant of mine. I'll leave this here

At the toeing the line response: Perhaps reserve the right to edit policies, so long as most administrators/moderators agree? EDIT - Many of the 'suggestions' that are claimed to be in place seems to be sometimes too low on enforcement. About the pointless threads: Flame and trolling existing in a thread doesn't make a pointless thread less pointless.

I'd just like to quickly propose a few 'quick-fix/solutions' (EDIT - Giant wall of text!): Put a rule that posts with irrelevant advice may be removed (or editted) with discretion of the moderators. Moderators who judge H&A should be somewhat knowledgeable of RS A rule that allows moderators to warn/action against users who consistently 'toe the line' of the rules (ie: Cause nuisance without breaking the rules. An old example would be when Screenies thread permitted a post as long as it contained a picture that's RS related. Users abused this and posted what was essentially spam in a RS chatwindow, and moderators were unable to issue bans due to fear of backlash) Moderators being moderated by other moderators. A post with ridiculous advice in H&A (eg: Train on cows for 99 strength) should be removed, if the malicious advice was intentional. As mentioned before, a 'degrading black marks' system, where a user can be given a chance to change before being issued with a ban. If a pointless thread is made, let it be locked. I've seen time and time again when previous posters like Undo made pointless threads in both OT and GD, which gained some traffic through lack of expected moderator action. Iron out contradictions. Everyone in the moderator team should be consistent in what to expect from users, and what to be expected of the moderators. If you don't like spam, don't post it! Sometimes players overreact. When they do, a moderator should post to inform the player of their wrongdoings, instead of letting a flamewar erupt. When players do overreact, I also see 'Oh my god it's a joke' as an attempt to justify their 'wrongdoings'. Joke or not, if it's perceived as flame, it should be treated as flame. Report system - When I've used it in the past, sometimes quote chains aren't removed and the quoted offending post remains. This helps nobody - Perhaps look through them, and take appropriate action? Name calling should never be allowed in H&A. It's too often tolerated that when a user posts legitimate advice, they get flamed by another user because their playstyles don't suit one another. Don't ban based on personal feelings - I've seen people (no names) that have been threatened to be banned for taking a position in an argument. Unless the argument presented were completely ridiculous, I don't think that's fair. I could keep going on, but I feel this list is already quite exhaustive without me doing so. Perhaps a moderator could shed some light with their opinion on my propositions?

There's this really cute chick at my College who had the Bieber fever. That was an epic turnoff (She'd even sing Friday on Friday's, ruining my weekend)

These arguments are flying all over the place. Could people please establish the difference between hacking and account sharing, and if policy proposed refers to items lost to 'hacking' compared to items lost to 'glitches/bugs' (depending on the nature of the bug)?

Heh, when I posted in the former 'Efficiency' thread, I was quoted and trolled for claiming that Efficiency was indeed subjective. I personally dislike it when legitimate players trying to help others are labeled 'efficiency clowns', if we're just giving a judgement on what's objectively best for someone. There is a slight difference between calling a user an idiot for using a Godsword, and calling someone inefficient for using a Godsword, instead of Whip/Chaotics, for example. Generalizing all people in favour of efficiency is fallacious in itself, thus weakening OP's argument. The problem with calling efficiency the 'best' way to do things is that 'best' is subjective and ambiguous. Best for me may be most suited to my timescale and attention span, whilst best for you may be the most fun and enjoyable. Not quite sure where I'm going with this argument now... As a sidenote: What kinds of efficiency are we talking about? Allocative efficiency? Productive efficiency? Pareto efficiency? Some of those might not be applicable to RuneScape though, I guess. Moreso related to real life markets

Wow, that's a good example of a stupid argument. You can't get much more fallacious than that. I just want to say 'Shut yo damn mouth when men are talking'

Whoa whoa whoa. If we're going to analyse breast size, and the 'attractiveness' of them, post some examples. I'd say that anything more than 42E is 'too big', and anything less than 30aa is 'too small'. What's your boundaries?

My neighbours think it's acceptable to play loud music in the morning. I think it's acceptable to kick their door in, in the morning. A vicious circle, I must admit

Are you saying even at current prayer potion prices, piety is not worth using? I think he finds it fun to be inefficient

Posts:2,491 Joined:05-November 07 - What's the account going to be anyway, naruto?

Well, an issue I've seen recently; Increasing amount of 'loopholes' are found in the rules, where ambiguous/too specific rules lead to rulebreaking, without technically breaking the rules. For example: Before the policy change on Screenies thread, people posted nonsensical/'spammy' RS related pictures, and the moderators basically said that they couldn't do anything about it because it's an RS related picture. Another more recent example: "* Pking related pictures should be posted here; http://forum.tip.it/...m/18-graveyard/ " <- That's stating that pking related pictures are to be posted in graveyard, neglecting pking/staking related videos. I think the rule about quote chains is a little difficult for some users (same reason as hide tagging profanities instead of going to paint and removing it). Couldn't the screenshots thread be tweaked so image tags are taken off automatically? Perhaps staff should look into solutions to the issues above. Additional thing: As I can't recall all the rules, and I'm assuming this isn't in the rules, perhaps put a line that says 'Moderators and Administrators reserve the right to edit/change the rules should they feel it's necessary' or something.

Crush them with your lovehandles. It's the only way. On topic: Really hot days. I seem to get headaches so much in the summer that it feels like migraines dammit ._.

Be careful of RuneScape links, guys.

Heh, had a weird day yesterday. Spent 2 hours trying to explain pyramid schemes to my mom, and how she shouldn't be a sucker for them. Even had to explain RWT on RuneScape too (ofcourse, I don't RWT though). Today I'm just chillin' outside the College library. Damn it's unseaonally sunny for April (was about 18 degrees celcius here, and the average should be about 7-10)

Unless you're using it as a pillow, there's just no need for too big breasts. Actually, 'too big' causes other problems too, such as neck strain/back strain, discomfort in general and chafing. I would agree that big breasts are not only dislikeable, but it's unnecessary and undesirable as well. Anywho, on topic: I don't quite like red hair. But I guess it depends on the shade, and the person it's on >_>

Damn, girl. That's so fine.

I FEEL THIS IS RELEVANT TO THE SUBJECT DISCUSSED EDIT - MODS! HIDE!!

YOU FORGOT YOUR CAPS DONT MISQUOTE ME BRO

IN OTHER NEWS, OBTAURIAN IS OFFICIALLY A BUFF ASS MOTHER-[bLEEP]ER. ON TOPIC: WHAT'S THE DUNGEONEERING REQUIREMENTS FOR YOUR CLAN OBT? I'M CONTEMPLATING MAKING A NEW ACCOUNT AND REBUILDING BACK TO THE STATS I HAD BEFORE I GOT BANNED.

Perhaps, change the timescales for different subsections of this site? Offtopic has some universal debates that don't outdate easily, but General Discussion topics generally outdate very quickly

I think it's highly circumstantial. I mean, when a user creates useless topics, yet not 'technically' breaking the rules, it's frustrating for users to see the threads having higher user traffic than legitimate threads that discuss the issues with today's RuneScape, and politics in Off-Topic for that matter. Sometimes the mods are a little too lax, such as when Undo made topics about Big N Tasty being taken off the menu (which isn't really a discussion), and nerfing the sling (which seemed quite nonsensical, as it's already a very weak weapon). The topics weren't locked for a good 4-5 pages, but it was eventually locked. The thread simply took up spaces where real discussions should actually be. On the other hand, modding is a little heavy handed. As far as I'm aware, I am only one ban off a permanent ban, and that's for offenses a year ago. I believe there should be a system like RuneScape, where you can view your 'black marks', and offenses expire after a certain time (with some exceptions that could be implemented). I don't think it's fair that I should be banned if I posted something that could be perceived as flame, if my last offense was at least a year old. I agree with Grimy - The appeals system is flawed. Users are sometimes left 'trapped', such as if the moderator dealing with the situation simply refuses to answer pm's, or taking a 'brick wall' stance, instead of trying to solve the issue. Question for Mods: So, how is the moderation run here? Do you assume guilty until proven innocent, or the opposite stance? And why? Uh - I'm running out of time. I'll edit this post a little later.