Ethics do exist in a MMO, but to a greatly lesser extent.

 

Your examples of macroing/RWT/others are ridiculous. RWT affects people in real-life.

 

Macroing gives players who abuse them a significant advantage over others, whereas the issue of crashing doesn't affect anyone significantly at all. If someone refuses to change worlds and chooses to compete with you, instead of wasting everyone's time with such threads, why not just change worlds yourself? You can't simply solve the issue of macroing without wasting incredible amounts of time, whereas switching a world doesn't take so much of your lifetime.

 

Your argument about letting others dictate what you should do is crap. Where did you get your morals in the first place? Was it not your parents' influence? Aren't your parents influenced by laws? Don't your parents dictate that you should do such and such? You can argue that you should exercise your own judgment within the restrictions your parents' set up for you, but can't you do that within the restrictions of law?

 

Your analogy is intentionally distorted to reflect your opinions. Let me distort the analogy so as to reflect mine. So you're in a store, crooning over a beautiful necklace. As you're admiring it, someone comes over and takes the necklace, pays for it and leaves the store. So what you're saying is it's ethically wrong for the person to do that? Realistically, how would he know you're not just window-shopping and can't really afford the necklace? Before you start arguing that "you" should have the necklace in your grasp, remember that there IS NO queue or first-come-first-serve-basis sign or indication of any sort reflecting that. So how can you depict the scene as "you" seeming to possess the necklace?

 

And I wish you'd stop being a 5-star hypocrite. Putting yourself on a pedestal as if you were so morally upright and then verbally (or at least textually) abusing people, calling them "asshats" and whatever crap you've invented. Practice the respect you preach so much, please.

This thread is Darwinism at its finest.

You go to a restaurant three days in a row, and sit at the same table. The fourth day, you arrive to find that somebody made a reservation and was given the table you had sat at the past three days. You go over and politely ask them to move using such valid arguments as "Crasher n00b gtfo" and "You're an asshat".

This analogy is so ridiculous that I scarcely even know what to do with it. You're trying to make fun of my position but apparently aren't capable of even understanding it. I don't support crashing, so I wouldn't be in that situation. The "three days in a row" thing is crap as well, but you knew that.

 

I'll try again using small words. My position is that if you come to a spot and someone is already there, that if possible you should try another spot or a different world. It has nothing to do with "rights" and "deserving" and everything to do with simple courtesy and treating others as you would like to be treated. I realize this is too complex a concept for some people.

I completely understand your opinion. The crashed person had no right to the boss. He/she simply believes that since he was there first, everyone else should stand aside. If I must spell it out for you, the "three days in a row" is like when somebody is at a boss for 30 minutes. Then somebody else shows up with more right to the boss (better stats), and the crashed person proceeds to complain and post whiny threads on Tip.it.

 

The owner of the restaurant walks over and tells you that you had no right to the table, and you say he's an "obnoxious jerk" with no morals.

And then he sprouts wings, and flaps around the restaurant humming the theme from "Monty Python and the Holy Grail". Gotcha.

Cool story bro. I was making a reference to the fact that when faced with logic, you fall back on your own personal opinions, usually resulting in some sort of insult.

Why should I care about other people because "they were there first"?

It's not your game; grow up.

In answer to the OP's question Yes. I can also try crashing at pretty much any other combat level, whether higher or lower.

 

I've been crashed as many times as I've crashed someone else and really, the only thing that makes it a big deal is your attitude about it. And believe me, if you jump up and down complaining and telling someone to hop, then it's just human nature that they'll decide to stay longer because people are stubborn and don't react well to being told what to do.

 

All these analogies about queues have clearly never seen the attempts at a concert to get served at the merch table or the chaos at the end of year sales.

Why should I care about other people because "they were there first"?

It's not your game; grow up.

 

What you dont understand is that theres a feeling of respect to the person who made preperations to go there before you did, and It is common curtsey to hop.

 

But some people just blow this feeling away like nothing, thinking they are the most important person in this game, which is absolute [cabbage]

Respect always steps out of utility's way. Respect only exists to make a person feel good. This is true in real life.

Respect always steps out of utility's way. Respect only exists to make a person feel good. This is true in real life.

 

Yes thats true. But who doesnt like feeling nice? except those [bleep]ing stupid emo people <_<

I play runescape to have fun. And if killing General Graardor is more fun than hopping around indefinitely (many hours) to be "nice", I'm gonna go ahead and crash them.

Yes. I can crash you if I want. I don't often, since I don't like doing it, but if i *have* to, I will. In case of whining, refer to omali's signature.

 

Honestly, I AM the most importan person when compared to some random person I don't know. Better they die then me, etc etc. If you don't like being crashed, train. Most of the time you aren't being crashed because people hate you, but because there aren't enough worlds for everyone. Example, my DKS solo rule is if I can't find a world within 3 hops, I crash.

 

LOL @ Queltar. I don't play, or claim to play, to benefit random strangers. If no one ever crashed me, I wouldn't crash others. I don't like doing it, but I'm not going to lose an iota of sleep over something I have no recourse to, outside of not bossing.

 

PS, I thought you rage quit TIF because people wouldn't accept your views as *the* truth? Why'd you come back?

I'm back because, as much as I wish I could quit Qeltar, the memory of his old Truthscape articles keeps bringing me back.

 

As soon as you use the word "unfair", you are effectively admitting that ethics *is* a consideration on the Internet, and in games. Because if it isn't, if anything goes, who cares about fairness?

 

Ethics is a factor when it comes to affecting people outside of the game. Macroing is against the rules because it is cheating, real world trading is against the rules because it favors those with access to cash, and causes mass inflation.

 

Crashing someone is fair because they always have the opportunity to go train, get better, and make themselves less vulnerable to crashing.

 

Jagex changes the rules all the time. Are you saying they are the sole arbiters of appropriate behavior towards others? A couple of years ago they legalized luring into the Wild for a month, did that make it right? If you decide what's right based on others' rules, you have my sympathies, as letting others dictate your ethics is a poor way to live.

 

But aren't you trying to dictate my ethics right now, while I explain my reasoning for my own ethical beliefs stemming from the fact that crashing is fine because it is competition in a video game that transcends a whole five minutes of time, consolidated to inside of the game world?

 

In cases where they are truly limited, then crashing is acceptable. But many examples exist where crashing occurs out of laziness or spite, and that's not acceptable. At least, if you don't want to be an asshat.

 

"Yea well if you crash you're a lazy asshat." This is pretty much what your argument comes down to.

 

Don't care.

 

Of course you wouldn't, as that would require adding consistency to your already unstable and inconsistent opinion.

 

That's a laughably poor analogy.

 

The person who takes the last item on the shelf is analagous to the one who is already in a spot. The person who comes up afterwards is the crasher. So you've got that rather backwards.

 

Actually it's a perfect analogy, and I'll put them side by side:

 

Person A is in the electronics department when she comes across the one and only Princess and the Frog DVD, sitting on the shelf, which is on sale. She decides to make a phone call to her daughter to make sure that she has not already purchased said DVD for her (Person A's) granddaughter. In her absentmindedness, Person A wanders into the other aisle during the phone call, during which Person B enters the scene, sees the DVD, and breaths a sigh of relief that they found the last one before Easter and more importantly, before the sale ends. Person A witnesses Person B walking away with the DVD and proceeds to flip [cabbage] on her, claiming ownership over the item she neither purchased, nor had even removed from the shelf. Person A claims that they "saw it first."

 

Player A is in the Godwars Dungeon looking to solo Graardor. After 30 minutes, player B swoops in with or without a clan and starts fighting the boss. Being of higher level, Player B gets the most hits in, and thus ends up getting the drop. Player B proceeds to flip [cabbage] that the spot is his because "he was there first."

 

The store story is a true story, and occurred just this past Saturday. When the guest eventually came up to complain, she was told quite calmly that the store could not do anything about it, and that if she was thinking about purchasing the item she should have held on to it in her cart, otherwise the policy was first come first serve.

 

My position is that the person who was there first and got the last item on the shelf gets to keep it; if I want it, I need to ask the guy for it, and if he says no, try another store. Your position is that if there's only one item on the shelf and the other guy got there first, it's perfectly fine for you to take it by force if you are strong enough to rip it out of his hands and fast enough to run away before the security guards show up.

 

Nope, my belief is a little more in-depth than that.

 

My store promises to do our best to keep items in stock, and order more when stock gets low, and do everything we can not to run out of stock, or at least offer rainchecks if the item was on sale. Some items we do not offer rain checks on, one of those being the pre-Easter DVD that Person A was seeking. That being said, we make it very clear that, despite our best efforts, when popular items hit the store there is no guarantee that we will have it in stock, and everything on the weekly ad list is on a first-come first-serve basis. People complain every week about how they came in on the last day of the sale and we didn't have any left, and their response is always the same: Come in earlier in the week.

 

I guess the store isn't that great of an analogy because, in Runescape, you never truly own something. The equivalent of what you said, coming up and ripping it out of the person's hands, would be if the person proceeded to hack your account and somehow transfer the loot you received over to their own account. If you are fighting a monster, using a resource node, or doing anything that is non-instanced, you are the person idling around the shelves. As long as the item is on the shelf, it is up for anyone to grab.

 

Of course you could never get away with this in real life, but you can in a game, where people can act like obnoxious jerks with no consequence. Doesn't change the fact that they are obnoxious jerks.

 

You've never gone shopping on Black Friday if you think you can't get away with your "ripping out of people's hands" theory.

 

I wonder if people like you realize just how much you reveal about your own character in discussions like these. I hope for your sake that you're anonymous, because I don't think for a minute that the attitude you express here wouldn't carry forward to real life situations.

 

I'm not anonymous. You can find my full name on my MMO blog, not to mention my general area and college major, apparently enough information to track me down because one avid reader of MMO Fallout managed to piece together where I work and actually approached me, all based on a combination of general statements as well as slightly more specific jokes I had made (being the only male worker in that section of the store), I'm working and I hear "OMALI!" and look up to .

 

As my discussion mainly pertains to politics in real life, I will agree: I do not act like I do on Tip.It in real life. I would say I'm pretty laid back compared to how I am when I discuss politics. I'm a lot more sarcastic, condescending, and always on the offense in real life, at each time's appropriate moments. I have much less tolerance for irrelevance, and I have zero tolerance for lies and misinformation. But that was partly how I was raised, you fight for what you believe in and you fight hard. I think it was my father who recently compared me as young Rahm Emmanuel, aside from the fact that I never lose my temper. Then again, I've been debating Senatorial and Gubernatorial candidates for years now, most recently a Senatorial candidate who I won't name.

Omali, I knew you were just being lazy when you didn't make a proper reply... :grin:

Omali, I knew you were just being lazy when you didn't make a proper reply... :grin:

 

I've been a little preoccupied recently with some doctor's appointments, CAT scans, tests, and various other medicalities that have been taking up much of my attention and time thanks to a couple polyps. I can happily say that aside from a deviated septum and some potential ongoing deterioration of my senses, that I am in excellent health.

I play runescape to have fun. And if killing General Graardor is more fun than hopping around indefinitely (many hours) to be "nice", I'm gonna go ahead and crash them.

Okay, so you're a selfish [puncture]. If you're happy with being a selfish [puncture], then be one.

 

I think it's better to be a decent person towards others, because I'd like them to be decent towards me.

 

Guess I'm just funny that way.

 

That's really all this boils down to, and I don't see any need to rehash long thread replies repeating the same thing. Either you are willing to sacrifice a few minutes of your own time to be respectful and considerate to others, or you're a self-absorbed person who contributes to the decline in the quality of the RS community. Your choice.

 

PS I cannot believe how strict the censor is on this board. :rolleyes:

I always get crashed at dks

But that doesn't stop me from killing them or giving them hell.

I always get crashed at bandos or crash at bandos.

 

It's part of the game.

 

 

 

You just need to be strong to survive.

I play runescape to have fun. And if killing General Graardor is more fun than hopping around indefinitely (many hours) to be "nice", I'm gonna go ahead and crash them.

Okay, so you're a selfish [puncture]. If you're happy with being a selfish [puncture], then be one.

 

I think it's better to be a decent person towards others, because I'd like them to be decent towards me.

 

Guess I'm just funny that way.

 

That's really all this boils down to, and I don't see any need to rehash long thread replies repeating the same thing. Either you are willing to sacrifice a few minutes of your own time to be respectful and considerate to others, or you're a self-absorbed person who contributes to the decline in the quality of the RS community. Your choice.

 

PS I cannot believe how strict the censor is on this board. :rolleyes:

 

 

Ahh, this is ironic, is it not. Queltar wants tolerance, but is unwilling to tolerate the intolerant. That is the way it almost always works. Claim you don't crash because you want to be "nice" but insult others who disagree with you. Fine, you are nice because you don't crash. You are an asshat because you insult others. Ironic intentionally.

Why would I tolerate intolerance?

 

Look, every decision involves trade-offs. If I decide to be considerate to players in game, I give up something: the time it takes me to find a different spot or world. If you decide to be selfish in game and refuse to make an effort to be considerate, you also give up something: people think you're a jerk.

 

Shoot the messenger if you want, but someone who proudly declares that they do what's good for them without considering others because all they care about is themselves is a selfish jerk. If you believe other players *don't* think that, you know nothing about people.

 

So, as before, make your choice, live with the consequences.

You ever tried finding an open Bandos world? I don't mind hopping once or twice, but when it would take hours of hopping to kill Graardor, I'm gonna go ahead and crash.

 

I said earlier I would never dream of crashing the Giant Mole. But I won't lose any sleep over crashing (or being crashed) at Bandos or Armadyl.

 

@Stonewall: not tolerating the intolerant is hardly something to complain about. It doesn't justify intolerance. But how was I being intolerant?

 

@Queltar: You are probably the most annoyingly self-righteous person on TIF. You would fail an ethics class if you took the approach you're taking towards me.

someone was playing his awful phone music way too loud on the bus on the way home from work today, i gave him a dressing down and ended up throwing his shades out of the window [it was a good day]

 

crash the crashers, if you cant - go sit on the top deck and shut the [bleep] up

 

 

;)

someone was playing his awful phone music way too loud on the bus on the way home from work today, i gave him a dressing down and ended up throwing his shades out of the window [it was a good day]

 

crash the crashers, if you cant - go sit on the top deck and shut the [bleep] up

 

 

;)

 

I always sit on the top of the bus. It is a grossly misunderstood method of cooling down during the hot summer days.

Why would I tolerate intolerance?

 

Look, every decision involves trade-offs. If I decide to be considerate to players in game, I give up something: the time it takes me to find a different spot or world. If you decide to be selfish in game and refuse to make an effort to be considerate, you also give up something: people think you're a jerk.

 

Shoot the messenger if you want, but someone who proudly declares that they do what's good for them without considering others because all they care about is themselves is a selfish jerk. If you believe other players *don't* think that, you know nothing about people.

 

So, as before, make your choice, live with the consequences.

 

I really must learn from you to avoid the points you can't answer. That is, that you purposely avoided replying to the fact that your usage of abusive language simply reflects your lack of respect for others.

 

I'll just take this opportunity to make myself clear: I'm quite a nice person in real-life. I can be sarcastic, blunt and slightly impulsive (sometimes ending up offending people), but I respect people and am not selfish or rude.

 

Who here plays RuneScape as if it was some form of homework? No one. Playing RuneScape lets you relax. When you're tired out after a long day of school/work/what have you, you simply don't give a damn for respect, especially with the internet culture nowadays. Did you ever see people hanging out being polite to others? When people are tired out they simply don't care for anyone else except for themselves and their friends/family/whatever. Most people, that is.

 

The internet culture is that nothing you say or do online will have any real-life implications. Obviously this isn't true but most people act like it was.

I crash people at the KBD all the time on my 99 def 99 ranged level 101 ranged tank. During prime hours it takes quite a long time to find any empty world, besides odds are I eventually get crashed by a level 138 with turmoil and extreme antifire. It's nothing personal, it's just how jagex forces us to play. I work 3rd shift and go to college full time so really i don't have a whole lot of time to play rs, i'm not going to spend 50% of the time i do get to play hopping from world to world.

Maybe we can stop arguing about who 'deserves' to be at a boss monster and instead come up with a solution to automatically redistribute players in this situation?

Maybe we can stop arguing about who 'deserves' to be at a boss monster and instead come up with a solution to automatically redistribute players in this situation?

 

Unlimited servers, which isn't going to happen.

 

So instanced dungeons is the answer.

Or maybe you guys could stop being such a bunch of whining babies and deal with something that's been around since the game was created.

 

I don't crash people often, but when I do it's typically because all the worlds are full. Know what I tell people? Sorry about your damn luck. :mellow: