Sly_Wizard

Very, very, very few people remember the first person to achieve a milestone. For example, how many people know who the first person to 99 hits was? Or 99 magic? Not many, because it's not really all that important. Oh, and I've never heard of Slayerbelle. Didn't even know someone had an untrimmed slayer cape (Not that I really care anyway).

...And you also don't analyze economics in English classes, either :roll:. The fact that you can only respond in a patronizing way to my posts while using really, really bad ad hominems sees to it that you're the only thing ignorant around here is you. But I digress. My post conveyed what I was trying to say perfectly fine, as evidenced by the fact that you understood what my post meant. Yet, for some odd reason, you took the time to try to correct me. *Shrugs* It would only be hypocritial of me to complain about you deconstructing my posts in search of grammatical errors if I were going to take the time to point out some of your obvious grammatical errors. But I don't, because it's a waste of time. No one, aside from you, really cares. However, since you seem to like perusing my posts in search of some error in diction/detail/syntax/structure, go ahead and knock yourself out : No. Even with inflation the price of raw materials trend downward, not upward. This is because, as time goes on, more and more people take up a skill, meaning more competition between sellers and lower prices. Yes, prices tend to fluctuate-- That is, they have periodic [bleep]es and dips due to changes made my Jagex in-game-- But, in the long run, prices decrease. Out of curiosity, just how long have you been playing? I paraphrased you correctly. You simply misinterpreted my post to mean what you wanted it to mean :) Ahem... You so obviously love me because you'll respond to every single one of my posts (Just about) even if they're not directed at you, typically resorting so some kind of ad hominem in the process. It's amazing how you accuse me of twisting your arguments around when you so blatantly ignore any type of argument I make instead choosing to focus on some completely irrelevant topic. How can I? Fairly easily. Anyone with a set of working eyes and grade-level reading skills would be able to see that much. Here's how the sequence of events usually work out. I respond to someone else's posts. You then enter and proceed to insult/patronize me. I respond. You continue to patronize me. I respond. You question my reading skills. I respond then leave. You respond. Time passes. I respond to someone else's posts. You show up again... And well, you get the point. *Shrugs* Oh, and for the record, I don't have a problem with anyone. If you have a problem with me well... That's your problem :P

There's a more pressing problem: The fact that you're being anal retentive. Seriously. You wrote four sentences whose sole purpose were to try to point out each and every grammatical error I made. Newsflash! This isn't English class. Don't treat it as such :) Prices fluctuate, yes. However, as has been the trend since RSC, the price of consumables go down as more and more people engage in activities which produce those materials. Prices would have been higher than they currently are, yes, but prices wouldn't have increased from year-x to year-y in the absence of bots. Why would they? That would make little sense, as well as violate basic principles of supply and demand. :-k Prices have steadily been decreasing on raw goods since the beginning of RS2 (Before most of the auto'ers begun playing). Therefore I want to know how you came to your conclusion, especially considering your admission above regarding price drops. Do you want a real response or would you rather a smart-[wagon] reply, 'cuz it seems to me you're aiming for the latter. There's no point in debating with you if you're content to *try* to patronize me. My mistake. I meant price ceiling.

What's all this talk of economic bubbles? :-k The price of rares always decrease periodically when new items/skills are introduced due to speculations/expectations. Off the top of my head, I can't think of a single non-discontinued item who's prices have raised from year-x to year-y to account for the increase in gold floating around Runescape. As is the norm for all non-discontinued items, the further away from their introduction date we get, the lower their prices become. Coupled with the fact that the wealth of the general population is ever increasing (High alch ftw!), it's no surprise that why the price of rares have been what they have. Using the God Wars items as an example, as the price of, say, a Bandos Godsword goes downward and more people are able to afford one/already have one, then I'd expect the price of rares to go back up as rares are, in essence, an economic sponge which serve to soak up a lot of excess gold floating around the economy (Granted, one could argue that gold simply sitting in the bank isn't actually affecting prices). The only way to drive the price of rares down indefinitely would be to: 1.) Set a ridiculous price floor on rares or 2.) Remove a large portion of gold from Runescape or 3.) Re-drop them. None of which are likely to happen anyway.

Webcam fun =D And a more conventional pic (Yeah. Excuse the crappy quality. The pictures been through a lot).

Get real, Qeltar. When I started typing out my response, your response wasn't there. You just happened to finish typing before I did. Even so, I don't know why this comes as a total shock to you. There hasn't been a single thread in which you haven't called me amoral, immoral, sadistic, psychopathic etc. etc. etc. It's to the point where I fully expect it at one time or another :thumbsup:

I can't be bothered trying to quote Flammacor's entire post :lol: 1.) Amazing how you woefully misinterpret my post while accusing me of misinterpreting someone else's post :lol: Anyway, I'd like to point out how irrelevent these talks about 'morality' that you so frequently bring up are, as they're completely subjective and often times have no basis in fact other than "It's not the way I play, therefore it's wrong". Plus they're usually used to try to make me seen as immoral and therefore inherently wrong, also known as an ad hominem. Just saying, since you're sooo big on Latin terms and logical fallacies. The irony here is that you call my arguments non-sequitur while ignoring the arguments you so blindly defend. Generally I try to avoid arguments such as these but, since you started, most-- Scratch that-- All of Qeltar's arguments are post hoc. That is, they suffer from a faulty cause and effect relationship. He commonly assumes that because A occurs that B must logically follow A (Or, put another way, if A then B) which is fine so long as: 1.) Both A and B are true (Sound). 2.) A is false and B is true (Unsound). 3.) Both A and B are false (Unsound). Typically one only needs to point out why either A, B or both A and B are untrue to prove these types of arguments wrong, but it's pretty hard to argue against Qeltar when all you get in response is something like "Nuh-uh!" or "You're wrong" or "Everyone knows it" in response :wall:. *Shrugs* Oh well... Just one of those things you've gotta' live with :) ...But I digress. Here is Qeltar's argument taken from a few posts above---> *Some* merchants made money this way. Others made it through deception, dishonesty, taking advantage of others' ignorance, price manipulation and worse. I pointed out two things wrong with this argument: 1.) The misappropriation of blame which I explained and 2.) The concept of price manipulation within Runescape, which I also explained. You then turned that rebuttal around into this: A: people naturally screw each other D: people should do what they naturally do (This is never stated, so I list it as an implied premise) E: people should try to screw each other. You then proceeded to refute your own constructed argument and then claimed to have refuted my initial argument even though you never quite touched on the things I initially stated. Ugh... Yeah. Since you're big on logical fallacies, I'll let you figure out which one you just committed there. 2.) Oi vey. It seems to be as if you're a bit confused, so lemme' help you out. Price manipulation, as defined by Jagex, is collaberating with other players in order to raise the market price of a good or goods. Within the confines on Runescape, it's impossible to do this for the reasons I've thus pointed out (No group of people are able to effectively 'corner' the market because any and all players are capable of getting a particular resource by themselves and thusly are able to undercut players who try to sell for higher than market equilibrium). Selling your item for higher than market value is not price manipulation, as A.) It occurs in the absence of collaberation and B.) Has no overall effect on market prices. That's what we call effective merchanting (Buy low/sell high) and is the premise upon which all mercantile practices are based. Understand? Probably not, so let me give you a real life example of price manipulation. Look up Archer Daniels Midland in regards to lysine oil-- That would be a textbook definition of price fixing. Collaberation between producers followed by a simulataneous rise in prices. Or, to summarize: No collaberation = No rise in market prices = No price manipulation. Hence why price manipulation doesn't happen in Runescape. It's simple! :D Oh, and the sky isn't blue. It's violet. Just pointing that out to you ;) Anywho, congratulations on being able to cite the textbook definition of economics. As you once said to me, everyone knows that and is therefore an irrelevency. You know... Didn't Qeltar write an article based solely on economic principles applied to the Runescape? What happened to your "You can't apply economics to Runescape" speak? Despite your best efforts to prove otherwise, economics can be applied to different venues, whether they be a game or a real life. Unless, of course, you're operating under the assumption that Runescape's economy-- Which Jagex has alluded to as being conscious of multiple times-- Doesn't exist. ...But I'm just saying. (Sorry for the delayed response. Had to take care of something.)

Ah. Right on time. Can I call them or what? :mrgreen: Backwards logic. You called for the changes. I did. Therefore I fail to see how it's "My fault" :lol:

I'm not sure where you got scamming from. There's nothing innately wrong with charging exorbitant prices for any item you own, as you're not forcing anyone to buy. And, I'd be willing to bet that Qeltar will show up with his "Because his is!" patented speech :lol:

Thank you for repeating what I already said. People can sell for whatever they want to sell for. You're not forced to pay those prices. You do so because you want to. Sellers aren't obligated to tell you what the going price for an item is. That's the buyers job. You think the price they're charging is too high? Don't buy what they're selling. You think you can find the items cheaper elsewhere? Don't buy what they're selling and go elsewhere. You think you're getting a great deal? Then you buy, buy, buy. Welcome to what's known as a capitalistic market. A couple of hundred of years behind, but glad you finally caught on :thumbsup: Boy... I wonder how some of you people get through every day life. You act as if you're forced to purchase anything.

Sellers sell for at the prices buyers buy for. Don't like the prices merchants charge? Then don't buy from them. However, as much as I said that in the past, people continued to ignore that piece of advice. Merchants weren't required to sell their items for fair market value, just like you weren't required to buy from merchants. See how simple that is? Apparently not, as people continued to complain about prices they willingly paid.

100% true. People never had to buy from merchants; They did so because it was easier and much faster than the alternatives. If someone was unhappy with the prices merchants charged, then they could have either gone and gotten the item themselves or tried to find it for cheaper. *Shrugs*

*Bangs his head against the wall* 1.) It's not the sellers job to inform the buyer of "Fair market value". That's the job of the buyer. People should be allowed to sell at any price they choose. Buyers don't have to pay those prices if they believe they're unfair or if they believe they can find the same item for cheaper elsewhere. The same principles govern every day transactions. Sometimes I wonder what kind of world you live in because it's most assuredly not a capitalistic one. 2.) There's no such thing as price manipulation within Runescape, as it's impossible to corner any given market (Minus, maybe, the rare market). Infinite supply sees as much. Infinite supply means no single group is able to corner a market, and if no single group is able to corner a market than price manipulation cannot occur, as another group will willingly undercut your prices. It's simple economic theory, which I'm sure will be ignored (As per usual). Anywho, no one ever has to rely on merchants. As their is an infinite supply of materials within Runescape, excluding rares, you could very easily go out and get whatever you needed/wanted for free. However, this involved a serious investment of time. All merchants did was provide you those items, minus the time needed to harvest them yourself plus mark-up (Merchants have to make money, after all). *Shrugs*

You. Have. Apparently. Never. Tried. To. Merchant. Whereas skilling requires... Well... No real skill (Click and watch your character do 99% of the work), merchanting requires interaction between players and the ability to adequately gauge market prices. It seems to me, Qeltar, that you're working under the assumption that the market only moved in one direction (Up) and, as such, merchanting was a 100%, sure fire way to earn profits on your investments when this simply isn't true. Markets fluctuate. The introduction of one item causes the price of another item to change. The introduction of a new skill causes items associated with another skill to change. New quests and areas causes the price change of items which are forseen to be included in the update. And so on and so forth. I ask everyone this who makes the claim that merchanting was 'an easy way to make money'. If it were so easy, then why didn't you do it? It seems to me that your entire argument is that you shouldn't be able to make X-amount of money in X-amount of time. Well, why not? Who says? You've already let it be known that you don't play for money, so why should such a restriction be imposed on other players? By the way, you don't gain or lose money on stocks until you decide to sell them. Prior to that, they're investments. Just saying ;)

^There's no point. Regardless of how many people hate the wilderness update, Jagex simply won't take it back. They're stubborn to a fault. On one hand Jagex claims to care what the players want, but on the other hand they only care what the players want so long as it's what Jagex wants.

Rumors and anticipation of summoning. There's your explanation for the recent decrease in the price of rares.

I don't exactly "Play" the game. Whenever I log in, it's to say a couple of words to friends. Basically, I'm waiting to see what some of these PVP updates Jagex promised us are before I decide to totally quit or not.

I fear for your reading skills... I'll make this easy on you and just quote where I made the 'everyone' statement. Pay close attention to the part in the bold. It's a conditional. Do you know what a conditional is? Apparently not. That's okay. It's you I'm speaking to, after all. No. No, it's not. Refer to my previous posts if you need an explanation. Indeed I have, which is why you didn't bother responding to the point I made about net gains and losses (Or social benefit, for that matter. Of course, the latter point was made in jest, but it's still economics nevertheless). Anyway, I'm still waiting for an answer to my question: What's the difference between an auto'er driving the price of raw goods down and a player driving the price of raw goods down?

It's called net gains and net losses. As I said earlier (In the little portion you ignored), unless no one ever bought anything from anyone, then they were the beneficiaries of lower prices caused by macro'ers. You can't scream "Oh, this group couldn't sell for as high as they'd like!" while ignoring how that same group was able to purchase other goods at a substantially decreased price because of those same macro'ers. Yes, it would have been bad for fishers and woodcutters if the price of other goods stayed the same while the profits they made fell, but it didn't work out that way. The price of everything fell (In other words, their utility stayed just about the same). Of course, looking at this from another angle, lower prices = Greater consumer surplus = Greater social benefit :thumbsup: Hooray for economics! And, for the record, I've already let it be known time and time again that I didn't care a lick about macro'ers. They lowered the price of raw goods and that helped me out by letting me get more out of my money. Edit: All right. Humor me. Tell me the difference between auto'ers driving the price of raw goods down versus humans driving the price of raw goods down.

Macro'ers often flooded the market with thousands upon thousands of raw goods, thus driving their prices down substantially. While you might not want to admit it, everyone benefited from cheaper goods (Cheaper to cook, cheaper to fletch, cheaper to runecraft etc.)-- That is, unless you never bought a single item in your life. Macro'ers were like the illegal immigrants of Runescape; Everyone complained about them, but they provided the materials that most people didn't want to go out and get themselves. People complained about the prices merchants charged, but in the absence of macro'ers prices will increase as the current demand outstrips the current supply.

I hate posts like these, because they ultimately boil down to this argument: "You don't have to PK, as you can do !" Such responses are purely evasive as they don't address the fact that the recent updates took away a big part of Runescape and replaced it with a sub-par, half-assed "alternative". If Jagex removed questing or even skilling, would you accept the argument: "You can just go PK'ing!" as a valid response to your worries?

When I said "Good and evil are subjective" I merely meant that there's no strict outline as to what constitutes 'good' and what constitutes 'evil', as those definitions commonly change. Wasn't arguing anything else (Though it seems as if you took it to mean something it wasn't).

Oi vey! You keep bringing this up and I keep responding only to have you ignore it. Anyway, one last time can't hurt (Even though this is off-topic): History is written according to what side of the battle you happen to be on. A classic example of this: Most of the West views Stalin as a genocidal dictator. However, if you live in Russia and have taken part in the recent youth movements, you'd believe he was a great leader who did whatever was necessary to strengthen the country in the face of her enemies. ...But I digress >_> Edit: By the way, I seem to be able to tell right and wrong apart to the point of not being permmed ;) (Okay. Seriously. That's enough off-topicness for me.)

*Points to the word subjective*

...And let the church say "Red Herring". Yeah, I know I say this a lot, but what's the point in introducing completely irrelevant points into a discussion about RWT not being dead? All it does is detract from the real issue at hand. Hence why it's considered a logical fallacy. And, by the way, the concept of good and evil is completely subjective. ...But I digress. Anyway, I've always wondered why people hate RWT's so much. They don't impose on your gameplay in any way, shape or form nor do they impose on Jagex as real money isn't going through Jagex; Just the parties involved.