Tact

Even if that's true, it's not as if almost all other armor is designed for men. :rolleyes:

I'm not surprised about how this ended up. When 2 opposing camps form you'll see a us-versus-them mentality take over. People of the mindset will just reinforce each other's convictions without stopping to consider the other side or even what the disagreement was about in the first place. Add in the internet and you get a mishmash of ill will that explodes in everyone's face. Personally I thought the ending was badly handled by the efficiency camp (for lack of a better term), but I wasn't there for most of it and apparently there's plenty of blame to go around.

Got these 2 messages from a clanmate in IRC. Been trying to verify them:

It's not a crash. Jagex is carefully monitoring the amount of posts and "Users reading" threads on TIF and other fansites. They will then use this data to extrapolate the number of actual RS players, factoring things like time of day and week among other variables using a secret formula reminiscent of the ROW. After reaching a final number, they assume that the remaining accounts are all "bots" and then arbitrarily pick a corresponding amount of accounts to ban. ;)

Nope. OP is using examples like cheating on a test = cheating on a game. One is reality, the other is fiction. He says who you are in reality influences your morals in a fictional world and an encounter with botting can influence your personal morals, thereby influencing your reality with likely negative results. I.e. you end up botting because you don't see it as bad anymore. He concludes from that if you are exposed for too long to an evil in a game, there is a higher chance, just a chance, that you will do something evil in reality. I don't think so. It's like blaming murders on violent video games. OP also cannot seem to grasp that you in reality != you in a videogame. Like I said before, there's an RPG in that MMORPG. I don't agree with his ideas unless you're deluded and mixing up reality with fiction and as a result thinking it's serious business. It's not. It's just a game. Cheating on a test is one thing. Cheating in a game is another. One is a horrible life-ruining decision, the other is for entertainment. The first is serious with devastating consequences. The second is irrelevant and insignificant. They are not the same. This is my perspective. And you, ma'am, cannot seem to grasp my actual point, so I'll put make sure to spell it out clearly this time. I never stated that botting in a game and cheating on a test are the same thing. When I said is that they are justified using the same set of arguments. Yes, there are differing consequences for both actions. I recognize this. However, there is a loosening of ethical standards in the real world that can also be seen in why people bot on Runescape.

I made no such claim. I clearly explained why your whole rape analogy is misleading and just an attempt to change my position into one which is ridiculous. You can't simply claim that botting is akin to cheating on a test and being morally bankrupt because you want to, it has to be relevant to the discussion at hand. It has neither the same moral weight or situational weight, nor have you made a persuasive case as to why it can be a logical extension to my argument. I've switched out my example for yours. It's pretty amusing to me that your argument works for both my rape analogy and your cheating on tests analogy. Could it be because you're still attempting to set moral parameters for your analogies to support your original assertion? Yeah, I think so. You don't seem to understand my point at all. Instead you keep trying to force words into my mouth to make it seem that your point is valid, which it isn't, instead of trying to actually address my argument. What I actually said is that people use the same justifications for both botting and cheating on a test: When I bot, I'm not hurting anyone, so why does it matter? When I cheat on a test, I'm not hurting anyone, so why does it matter? Try to get that into your head. I did not nor have I ever suggested that cheating on a test makes you morally bankrupt. In fact, I understand that there are various levels of "immorality" in ethics, namely, that you can't equate botting with rape: When I rape, I'm not hurting anyone, so why does it matter? That's just a silly argument to make. Wait, did you just say that cheating on a test doesn't hurt anyone so it's okay? No wonder you're having such a hard time proving your point - your point is flawed! Botting doesn't hurt anyone (well, unless you count pride [whiners gonna whine]) while cheating on a test does. So you're comparing something that hurts no-one to something that not only hurts others, but has real world implications, consequences, and effects that could potentially be felt for years and years to come (whether through getting caught and losing your chances at a degree or someone putting you in a position of authority when you lack the ability to perform in that position, etc). You know what else has real world implications, consequences, and effects that could potentially be felt for years to come? Rape. Please stop saying that botters are morally bankrupt and comparing them to cheaters and rapists. It's getting old. 1. You're using "hurting someone" and consequences interchangeably when they don't mean the same thing. What I said is that these are the arguments that both botters and cheaters use to justify their cheating. Whether there is a consequence is irrelevant to this discussion (it has, after all, been discussed many many times in other botting threads); I'm making the point here that these two situations are connected. The same attitude of looser ethics gives rise to people who think that both cheating and botting are justified on that count. 2. Your rape analogy is getting old and doesn't become any more true no matter how many times you repeat it. It's like flogging a dead horse. People are going to notice that it simply can't rise up and be ridden again, no matter how many times you hit it.

The first part of your post was just one big facepalm. It's full of logical fallacies; basically you take my example and stretch it to the ridiculous extremes while adding in arguments which I did not discuss and trying to construe it as mine. The flaw in your second point is that you assume being moral online is mutually exclusive to being moral offline, and vice versa. My point is simply that they're not. You can't be the "online" you without have some influence from the "offline" you. These things carry over, including your morals. (I don't even know how you think I suggested that cooking with a microwave is immoral...) Runescape may be a virtual place, but it's inhabited by the same kind of people you see walking down the street. Of course, the idea of it being a game necessitates that certain "laws" of nature are bent, for example, you can cast magic in RS but not in RL. However, morals are something which transcends all this, because it has to do with the human element that also crosses the virtual boundary between game and life. In this case, you're still treating Runescape as if it's completely separate from reality, like 2 spheres which never meet. It's quite the opposite in fact, especially with botting as it requires people's RL time to make and use a bot.

I heard about the BYU honor code. Apparently a student on the basketball team confessed that he'd had premarital sex, and was subsequently barred from playing that season. It's admirable, but more and more rare in American society. I just don't think that based on the evidence out there that many people take their morals as seriously as they perhaps should. The internet and online games have created a refuge to bend and perhaps break rules we would not consider doing offline. But there's a danger in this train of thought, seen in how more and more students believe that cheating is OK, or even necessary in some cases. I don't think some people realize how close their two spheres of thought, the one online and the other offline, are to colliding.

I made no such claim. I clearly explained why your whole rape analogy is misleading and just an attempt to change my position into one which is ridiculous. You can't simply claim that botting is akin to cheating on a test and being morally bankrupt because you want to, it has to be relevant to the discussion at hand. It has neither the same moral weight or situational weight, nor have you made a persuasive case as to why it can be a logical extension to my argument. I've switched out my example for yours. It's pretty amusing to me that your argument works for both my rape analogy and your cheating on tests analogy. Could it be because you're still attempting to set moral parameters for your analogies to support your original assertion? Yeah, I think so. You don't seem to understand my point at all. Instead you keep trying to force words into my mouth to make it seem that your point is valid, which it isn't, instead of trying to actually address my argument. What I actually said is that people use the same justifications for both botting and cheating on a test: When I bot, I'm not hurting anyone, so why does it matter? When I cheat on a test, I'm not hurting anyone, so why does it matter? Try to get that into your head. I did not nor have I ever suggested that cheating on a test makes you morally bankrupt. In fact, I understand that there are various levels of "immorality" in ethics, namely, that you can't equate botting with rape: When I rape, I'm not hurting anyone, so why does it matter? That's just a silly argument to make.

i lolled irl It's inevitable that people are going to post memes without reading through my entire argument, or adding anything useful to the discussion. I don't mind as long as this thread doesn't become a spamfest of these things. And for all the posters who are saying that Runescape =/= real life. I know this. But I'm saying that who you are in real life has an effect on how you play Runescape, specifically with how you morally reconcile your attitude toward botting.

I bolded the 2 parts of your post that I'm going to address. First of all, there's a branch of biology that deals with the study of the biological basis of morals and ethics. You can find a nice summary here: http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/notabene/ethics-biology.html There is evidence as to why there are many rules in a "code of ethnics" which is shared by almost all human cultures around the world. Among them are things like, thou shall not steal or cheat. These morals lubricate the contact that we have with other people; it helps everyone when there are basic rules governing how we lead our lives. Second, you argue that the internet is it's own society, but you ignore the influence that other societies have on it. The internet isn't just some isolated group entity where what applies in the real world just flies out the window. What people think, what people believe, and what morals they adhere to don't change when they log on. People somehow think that all the rules change just because the internet grants anonymity. Some things do change, but morals should not.

Those articles say nothing about bots being symptoms of a society that has become more accepting of cheating. I found the "more accepting of cheating" part, but there was nothing as to how that is related to botting in RuneScape. I'm sorry, but I can't produce a study that specifically linking botting in Runescape to cheating in general (if one even exists). However, because society is more accepting of cheating in general, whether in academics or in other areas, a logical extension of that line of reasoning would say that is also why people are more likely to defend botting as justified. Exactly. No proof. And a "logical extension" is your opinion of said extension. Likely as not, there's never going to be a study as specific as the one you're asking for. In fact, it'd be impossible to have arguments at all if you'd requested proof like this, as you can always request proof which is more specific than that is available. For example, does parental involvement affect the child's performance in school? There's many studies that say it does. What about in the United States? Yes, but less than the previous level. How about in the State of Oregon? A few. Hm... How does parental involvement affect nine-graders at Jefferson High School in their performance on the State Reading Assessment? Can you bring me proof that it does? You can see where I'm going with this. In these cases it doesn't require much of a stretch of the logic to associate two similar things. I don't see a problem with presenting articles that say society is more accepting of cheating in school and in life, and applying that to evidence of botting in a game. I might be able to find a study that talks about games in general; if I do I'll post it here. Edit: I found a study discussing cheating in games, and even specifically in MMORGs. Unfortunately it's just a summary (relevant part starts on page 10), but you can find the whole thing here: http://oak.cats.ohiou.edu/~consalvo/Consalvo.pdf

Those articles say nothing about bots being symptoms of a society that has become more accepting of cheating. I found the "more accepting of cheating" part, but there was nothing as to how that is related to botting in RuneScape. I'm sorry, but I can't produce a study that specifically linking botting in Runescape to cheating in general (if one even exists). However, because society is more accepting of cheating in general, whether in academics or in other areas, a logical extension of that line of reasoning would say that is also why people are more likely to defend botting as justified.

I made no such claim. I clearly explained why your whole rape analogy is misleading and just an attempt to change my position into one which is ridiculous. You can't simply claim that botting is akin to rape because you want to, it has to be relevant to the discussion at hand. It has neither the same moral weight or situational weight, nor have you made a persuasive case as to why it can be a logical extension to my argument. Basically half of your position consists of fabricated claims that I'm somehow trying to "restrict" your ground in this argument. The other half is continuing to try belittle my arguments by inserting snide little :rolleyes: emoticons into every post, or posting such gems: Yes. And a rapist. Edit: Here's the fallacy you're using. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum

What wrong with me stating my opinion? A quick Google search yields a multitude of articles. "The Josephson Institute, a Los Angeles-based ethics institute, surveyed students and promised them anonymity. The large-scale survey suggested Americans are too apathetic about ethical standards. The survey reported cheating in school is rampant and getting worse. Sixty-four percent of students cheated on a test in the past year and 38 percent did so two or more times, up from 60 percent and 35 percent in a 2006 survey. In addition, 36 percent of students admitted to using the Internet to plagiarize an assignment compared to 33 percent in 2004. Despite such responses, 93 percent of the students said they were satisfied with their personal ethics and character, and 77 percent affirmed that "when it comes to doing what is right, I am better than most people I know."" http://www.gainesvilletimes.com/archives/12012/ "Today’s teenagers say they are confident in their ability to make ethical business decisions. And if it takes lying and cheating to get to the top … oh, well. Nearly half of students polled in a Junior Achievement survey said they think it’s OK to lie to their parents, and more than a third of them think they need to break the rules at school to succeed. "I think a lot of times, teens see examples of people in the media taking shortcuts to get ahead in life,” said Stephanie Bell, a spokeswoman for Junior Achievement Worldwide, a volunteer organization dedicated to preparing young people for productive careers. “Teens look up to people who are cutting corners and think it’s OK, when it really isn’t."" http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/12/some-teens-see-lies-cheating-ok-to-get-ahead/ It's not a straw man argument. How are these similar examples not equivalent? They all represent common day-to-day situations that you might encounter, which people could argue that choosing to do doesn't hurt anyone. In this case, I never said that people who do the bare minimum were "bad" in that sense of the word. But if you could choose, would you work with someone who cut corners if they could? Of course not. If someone does the bare minimum on a group assignment, then that leftover slack has be born by someone else on the team. Selfishness? When did I say that? I did say that people who are willing to tell lies are more unreliable. I don't quite know what this "So?" is supposed to mean. I wouldn't be alone in saying that having elected public officials behave in the manner that I stated would be harmful in that they present poor examples for the rest of us. In most case, they are? Nonsense. Even if you don't take RS "seriously" by whatever measure, you are still willing to devote some part of your time to playing it. Did I say this my post or are you purposely trying to misrepresent my position? I never said that botters or people who defend them are necessarily law-breaking, immoral citizens. Both botting and the examples I gave of people justifying their cheating are symptoms of society that has loosened its definitions of what is acceptable and what is not. You are making a fallacy of your own here. Just because I believe botting to be immoral does not automatically mean I think the inverse is true. Is that your opinion? Or do you have facts to back up that claim? Yes, see the two articles above. If you want I have more.

Oh, so what you're saying is that your analogies are totally okay because they fall into the parameters that you set for this discussion. So as long as I compare botters to people cheating on exams rather than rapists, you'll take me seriously. :rolleyes: Sorry, but you don't get to set the bar; if you claim that botting is a reflection of deeper inherent immorality, you're going to have to accept that your argument includes comparing rape to botting. But this is all trivial considering you have yet to prove that there's a correlation between botting and morality. Really? I enjoy killing stuff in Runescape. I must be a sociopathic killer in the real world! I mean, you've gone as far as to call botters rapists, so I guess it's okay to accuse slayers and monster hunters of killing people/animals IRL, right? But in all seriousness, I'll reiterate that you really need to step back and re-evaluate your reasons for playing this game. You're clearly not just playing it for fun if you place so much value on it that you'd accuse people of being morally bankrupt for . . . having a computer program . . . run laps for you . . . on a pixel agility course . . . ($*#QY%*Y$HUOQTH%JTJHYHRTyy45^^????????????????????????????????????). What? No, I expect people to have some [bleep]ing fun when playing a game. Is that such a difficult concept? Fun? Game? No, there's a reason why my analogies are appropriate to this debate while yours aren't. You're committing your own fallacy here, reductio ad ridiculum, in trying to distort my argument into an extreme form that makes it hard to accept by the audience. Obviously no one thinks that just because you enjoy combat on Runescape that you must be sociopathic killer in real life, yet that's precisely what you suggest I believe. In the same vein, saying that if cheating on the test is allowed as an example, then so must the example of comparing botting to rape is false, because the two acts have completely different weights. So far, I haven't seen you directly respond to my point, which is that botting is a symptom of a society that has become more accepting of different forms of cheating as long as you can get away with it. Instead, I've seen you try to misrepresent me and say that I believe botting is akin to raping a person, to distort the argument so that my arguments appear ludicrous to the point of dismissal. Let me make it clear. I enjoy playing Runescape as a game. You think that just because I post a thread on how botting is immoral that I'm not having fun in this game?

To your first point, I see it as just the opposite. Botting and the defense of botting is just a symptom of how our morals are loosening across the board. As for your second point, I don't really know how to answer that. I suppose that you could say stupidity begets stupidity, but does that mean we should sit back and let people wallow in it? Or will you try and change them for the better? You can only try and help people if they are willing to except it. You can't force your help on someone, because that has been the driving factor in some many cases of tyranny. I know that has nothing to do with Runescape, but I am a poli sci major and have become acute to those kinda of statements. I usually feel obligated to critique when i see them. I'm not using "change" in the sense of forcing people to change. But you can help them change. Regardless, that's not my main point.

Two things: 1) Proof? 2) How can you compare hurting people in the real world to having a computer program run laps around a pixel agility course in a game? And why do your examples of poor morality end there? Surely those twisted, degenerate souls who bot must also be rapists and child molesters! I once saw a green dragon bot, and I have no doubt that he also sells speed to 14-year-old kids and cheats on his wife! Like it or not, there are most definitely aspects of this game that are so mind-numbingly boring that I would honestly say that bots are completely justified in some cases. I would probably bot agility and mining if I was guaranteed to get away with it without any repercussions. And before you say something like "BUT OBATRION, OFFIC WERK IS ALSO B0RING SO WHY NOT U B LAZY THERE 2 AND CUT CORNERS BECUZ IT IS BORING AMIRITE?!2?@@," keep in mind that, once again, you are comparing the real world to a GAME. I play Runescape to have fun, and though I wouldn't compromise my account for any reason, I do not blame people for doing it. Of course, I don't have any respect for botted skills, but that's another matter altogether. Now that I've admitted to being a sympathizer to botters, feel free to call me a moral nihilist. :rolleyes: Perhaps I should have been more clear with my analogy. It may not be the exact same people who defend botting and cheating on a test, but you understand what my point is. The arguments used to defend both are similar in basis. And honestly Obtaurian, I expected better from you than to try and misrepresent me. I am not directly comparing botters and what you quaintly call "rapists and child molesters." What I am saying is that the attitude of people who accept botting as OK is the same attitude that attempts to justify cheating on other things. I don't know why people attempt to inflate the reasons I'm giving into something that sounds like a terrible sound bite: Yes Runescape is a game, but my main point still stands. That is, because you value playing Runescape enough to spend some time on the computer playing it, you are presented with certain choices to make. How you choose to play the game reflects the types of values that you have. Or do you seriously believe that people completely detach themselves and assume a new online persona while playing RS? Edit: I'll be replying to the other posts when I have more time.

I really dislike how some people will try and attack the person before ever addressing their arguments. I think you're missing my point. True morals aren't something that you give up even when you're indulging in an online game. The fact that people defend botting as a legitimate response to how the game is structured speaks to the degeneration of our society's values as a whole.

To your first point, I see it as just the opposite. Botting and the defense of botting is just a symptom of how our morals are loosening across the board. As for your second point, I don't really know how to answer that. I suppose that you could say stupidity begets stupidity, but does that mean we should sit back and let people wallow in it? Or will you try and change them for the better?

I've been reading threads on Tip.it and other fansites regarding botting. Beyond the well-worn arguments on why people bot and why you shouldn't, I think there is a bigger reason that's lost underneath all that noise. I believe there's an important moral reason why botting, like other forms of dishonesty and cheating, shouldn't be done. Players trying to justify botting by saying it doesn't harm anyone or that it's because botters have a better sense of priorities are just deluding themselves. I laugh at people who say that botters take real life more seriously than Runescape, so they're saving themselves time to focus on other, more "important" things. What you don't seem to realize is that this laissez-faire attitude also carries over to the other parts of your life as well. People who justify botters are the same people who say that cheating on tests is acceptable. Hey, if you don't get caught, is anyone really hurt by your cheating? If you don't want to look after your sister because there's that movie you want to go to, what's the harm in lying to your parents and saying that you're heading over to a friend's house to study? Nothing of course, except that these people grow up to be irresponsible adults, who expect to get what they want with minimal effort. Would you want to work with these people? I wouldn't. Who, after all, wants to collaborate with someone who does the bare minimum, cuts corners when they can get away with it, and avoids as much honest work as they can? Would you want to be friends with these people? I wouldn't. As a friend, they'd probably be unreliable when you need a favor and it conflicts with their own interests. What would a world full of these people look like? You only need to look around to see what happens when our moral integrity is broken. In America, we have politicians that lie and cheat, government in Washington that can't seem to work out how to get work done without pandering to the far left and far right. Every election season, televisions are flooded with ads crammed full of cheap and misleading sound bites. Is it any surprise that Americans are "dumbing down?" Consider that more teenagers than ever consider it OK to cheat on tests when you can. People think it's fine to get away with as much as you can. It's probably what the good people at Enron told themselves when they inflated profit figures, or the folks at our nation's banks when they squeezed ever more money out of bundling together risky mortgages. Ladies and gentlemen, being honest and having integrity isn't something that you can reason away when it appears convenient to do so. The consequences of such actions are all around us. You may say that botting has no relevance to these weightier issues. After all, it's only a game, and an online game at that. But I would say it does. The conscience choices you make, no matter how small, reflect the kind of person that you are, and the kind of person you will become.

I agree that Jagex could introduce more variation to make it less of a grind. I'm guessing in this instance that simply randomizing the order of the tasks would be more annoying than anything; at least now you can get into a rhythm and comfortably maximize your points per round. What I dislike are the people posting figures of how Livid Farm costs too much to be efficient, or that x method is a more efficient method of training magic, farming, whatever. It's not meant to be the most efficient method of anything. The only draw are the rewards, and to the people who are willing to spend the time to get them, they obtain a small increase in their abilities ingame. It may not be enough of an incentive for you to personally do it, but then again, this game isn't all about you.

40 hours is a reasonable life span for this activity, considering that once you unlock all the spells there's no point in ever playing it again (no one's going to to play just for wishes). If you want the spells you'll play it. If you want them but don't value it as much as 40 hours, you won't. There's nothing wrong with this equation and Jagex should not nerf the time required.

You deserve to get shot for posting that piece of trash here. <_<

Elys were selling with some regularity for 538m this morning. Seems like there's been a rise since and they're now going for above 545m.