Crossed_Body

I will take that into consideratino, thank you.

How long does the zeal for 1 take, and how should I get it?

How much for one?

Basically "we're doing the only thing we can do, sorry we can't stop the bots guys :("

I used Bandos and ddef, kited the 360's, tanked him without taking a hit, killed him with rapier, ovl and turm, no spec. Took me about 40min. Didn't even kill the minions.

I disagree, there are some parts of the game which require some skill (I'm not able to do many things Woox16 does, for example). Doing things efficiently and understanding the game mechanics is also a skill unto itself. But we'll have to agree to disagree I guess.

So, you admit to using strawman fallacies? That's cool. By the way, you used another one when you said "You support botting (confirmed by you). Here, I'll provide you with an example of a classic strawman fallacy: The similarities are uncanny. If I didn't know any better, I'd say you were doing it on purpouse just to troll me. And I guess I can add ad hominem to that list. Calling me a little boy or a stroppy teenager does not strenghten your argument or make you look quirky. I'm not avoiding the question. I'm not answering it because there is only one possible answer anybody can give in this forum, and the only reason you're asking it is for the reasons Kimberly stated. Also, calling or insinuating I am a bot (which is laughable in itself), does not strenghten your argument nor does it relate to this discussion at hand. I guess deflecting the issue, making snarky insinuations and using fallacies as a method of argument make you the superior man. You have won this discussion, I quit.

I haven't read through all six pages -- but has anyone else mentioned yet, that this looks, strangely, like some kind of "anti-bot" random event thingy for agility bots? :rolleyes: Nothing they won't solve in a week.

One of your arguments is that you don't find them to be worth revering because you don't deem them to be "better players" than average, or so it seems. So, please answer my question for me to fully understand your argument.

At one point or another? Please tell me the average time in which reports are read and punishment is inflicted. I did report people, a few months ago. The months passed and nothing was being done about my reports, so I simply stopped reporting people. Like me, there are many others who don't see results from their reporting, and until proven otherwise, reports are effectively useless. Even if Jagex did punish all bots reported withing one day, the problem would still be there, as the bots reported do not care about their accounts, and would just create more bots to replace the old ones. Until Jagex cuts down the source of the problem, reports (assuming 100% efficiency), are useless still. When I said "assuming none of us bot", I mean "us" here on the forum, not that nobody botted ingame.

So again, I ask the question. How do you judge players, if not by their ranks?

As I've said, ll0rt already did that. You keep not reading things and arguing just for the sake of arguing. I will not answer questions that are not relevant to the argument at hand, as that will only serve to sidetrack the discussion. You can't hammer nails with a broken hammer. You cannot give me broken tools and expect me to abide by them. Also, reporting others is not a rule of the game. Botting is, but assuming none of us bot, the decision of whether reporting people is moral or not falls under your own personal moral code.

Here's another definition, not from the "wiki book of lies". Copy and paste is irrelevant, it merely allows me to convey a more structured definition to you. And ll0rt had already quoted you on your straw man. I assume you can't and don't read people who argue against you, or point out flaws in your arguments, else you'd have seen it. Which is of no matter to the argument at hand. Side tracking arguments is not a form of arguing.

No, you just say that time played does not make you a better or a worse player. You don't actually say what does make you a better player.

If I had to be a noob, and forget everything I know about the game, I'd accept in an instant. Too many neurons dedicated to keeping game info.

Excuse me? You expect me to discuss things with him when he clearly has a different notion of player worth than me? How am I supposed to contribute to the discussion on even terms with him if I don't know what he is refering to when he says "good" or "bad"? Because as far as I know, those things fall on the realm of subjectivity. The most objective evaluation of a player would be his global rank when compared to other players, but he clearly doesn't use that definition.

"A straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[1][2]" You're smart, I'm sure that if you look back on your posts you'll find it on your own. I don't see how that is relevant.

How do you define a player's worth? You'll have to give out your definition, because not everybody has the same definition of what makes a player "good" or "bad".

Actually, using strawmen is a childish element of the tipit community, not calling out on it.

Good thing I'm not blind, might have gotten trampled by an elephant if I grabbed the wrong parts. Well, there's a reason why they call it a fallacy.

You need to update that to include the new boots!

This. Inb4 herp derp my code > ur code

There is no evidence or indication that the big bang was created something inteligent, you're just shoehorning God in when there's no need to, and that's not how reason and logic works.

Which is why I think there should be low-mid tier bosses that are instanced for low-mid tier players.