Jump to content

Welcome to Rune Tips, the first ever RuneScape help site. We aim to offer skill guides, quest guides, maps, calculators, informative databases, tips, and much more to help you get the most from the Massive Online Adventure Game, RuneScape, by Jagex Ltd © 2009.

Report Ad

Welcome to Forum.Tip.It
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Tip.It Times - 16th January 2011


  • Please log in to reply
57 replies to this topic

#41
PereGrin
[ Display Name History ]

PereGrin

    Skeleton Shield

  • Members
  • 1,092 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined:19 January 2009
  • RuneScape Status:P2P
  • RSN:Pere Grin


@Blyaunte

You can't have Wilderness without Free Trade, or vice versa. Bringing only one back removes every reason for the removal of the other, rendering it unnecessary and ineffective.


How do you reckon that one? :unsure:

Because they were both removed for the same reason.

Hypothetically, say Jagex put the Wilderness back in in 13 days. But they left the trade system and GE as it is now. Why would this not make any sense?

My answer


Doing something like this would give a much deeper meaning to the phrase "You got Jagex'd" though. :P

#42
evrythngtakn
[ Display Name History ]

evrythngtakn

    Chicken Feather

  • Members
  • 6 posts
I liked the Dungeoneering article. I've hated that "skill" since it came out. I don't even have mixed feelings. I hate it.

If I wanted to get a huge team of people and raid a dungeon I'd go play WoW. Is that what you want Jagex? You want me to go play WoW? The skill either needs to be removed and made into a minigame, or it needs to be more balanced so that people who want to go alone can actually level it up just like the people in huge teams.
Posted Image

#43
mara_planter
[ Display Name History ]

mara_planter

    Chicken Feather

  • Members
  • 23 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Joined:13 February 2006
  • RuneScape Status:P2P
  • RSN:mara_planter

I've got absolutely no interest in length of period playing, being on the forum, etc. That's just the equivalent of buying a car with a long...nevermind. If you check my profile, it gives my age. I'd don't believe that the advanced search options offer the option of searching by age, to be fair, if they do, they shouldn't. But I know giving a birthdate is a requirement of registration. So I'm interested in trying to find a player who was really born before the real me, rather than their characters age.

Hope that makes things clearer


I don't post often, but I do try to read the Tip.it Times regularly along with the associated forum topic. I was born in 1957, and my husband (who also reads the Times) was born in 1952.

Being this old, I have lived through many corporate dramas. This flourish (bringing back the Wilderness) on the part of Jagex reminds me of things other companies have done just before they try to access capital markets. Could be going public, could be owners want to sell a portion of the company, could be they want a loan for a project. Thoughts, anyone?
/\ ~Mara Planter
/ \ o
/ \ |=
/ \ ^ * * * *
| | / \ \ | /

#44
cultjunky
[ Display Name History ]

cultjunky

    Goblin Armour

  • Members
  • 88 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Leeds
  • Joined:9 December 2004
  • RuneScape Status:P2P
  • RSN:Cultjunky
Well, it did cross my mind that at some point there could be no new content added to RS. If for no other reason that it might discourage new members because of the huge amount of catch up required, if your shiney new character of level 3, comes face to face with a hoard of level 123's, it's bound to be daunting. Recently I've been wondering if there might be a RS - TNG coming to us. A similar game perhaps, that is only accesible if you have a valid quest cape, and a minimum number of skill capes. Perhaps it could be accessible via a portal near the Making History quest start, with it's own quests, perhaps preqels to current quests, extended skill tables and items etc to take a player upto a greater level. So yes, I do think that Jagex are gearing up for a new project
Posted Image

#45
Blyaunte
[ Display Name History ]

Blyaunte

    Demon Vanquisher

  • Members
  • 2,051 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Catherby
  • Joined:16 January 2006
  • RuneScape Status:P2P
  • RSN:Blyaunte



@Blyaunte

You can't have Wilderness without Free Trade, or vice versa. Bringing only one back removes every reason for the removal of the other, rendering it unnecessary and ineffective.


How do you reckon that one? :unsure:

Because they were both removed for the same reason.

Hypothetically, say Jagex put the Wilderness back in in 13 days. But they left the trade system and GE as it is now. Why would this not make any sense?

My answer


Doing something like this would give a much deeper meaning to the phrase "You got Jagex'd" though. :P


Your logic is circular and therefore flawed. Sure, both were removed for purportedly "the same reason", but they are not necessarily inter-dependent.

Unless you can provide an actual valid reason that demonstrates how they are completely and utterly inter-dependent, then there is no reason whatsoever why both options had to be included in the same poll.
:P

nyuseg.png


#46
Rsvote
[ Display Name History ]

Rsvote

    Rat Meat

  • Members
  • 36 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:29 December 2010
  • RuneScape Status:P2P




@Blyaunte

You can't have Wilderness without Free Trade, or vice versa. Bringing only one back removes every reason for the removal of the other, rendering it unnecessary and ineffective.


How do you reckon that one? :unsure:

Because they were both removed for the same reason.

Hypothetically, say Jagex put the Wilderness back in in 13 days. But they left the trade system and GE as it is now. Why would this not make any sense?

My answer


Doing something like this would give a much deeper meaning to the phrase "You got Jagex'd" though. :P


Your logic is circular and therefore flawed. Sure, both were removed for purportedly "the same reason", but they are not necessarily inter-dependent.

Unless you can provide an actual valid reason that demonstrates how they are completely and utterly inter-dependent, then there is no reason whatsoever why both options had to be included in the same poll.
:P


Firstly, it's worth pointing out that the vote was for the basic principle of how Runescape would progress; they didn't have to offer it, yet they did. Motives aside, this is a fundamentally significant act for the game. This vote, which yields a (predictable, maybe) clear result towards one side effectively solidifies the bulk of the community, as a clear majority has opted for this significant change as oppose to it being randomly added without consultation.

There are plenty of practical reasons why (I.E. Old Wilderness makes free trading entirely possible, people would do this and Runescape would yield a considerably higher scam rate) but I think that the principle reason why they did not is that if they'd have split the potential changes, the majority (who were willing to accept things they didn't like or didn't care about for the things they did) would definitely have been smaller on those issues which did yield a majority ("probably" most of them, but not all), and this would have caused so many more community splinters/clashes which would be terrible for the game as it stands; they knew this, they weren't prepared to risk it.

I'm almost inclined to write a "what if" blog over this. Jagex "splitting the vote" would have been potentially catastrophic and broken on so many levels.
Posted Image

Blogs on the free trade/wilderness referendum: http://rsvote.wordpress.com

#47
PereGrin
[ Display Name History ]

PereGrin

    Skeleton Shield

  • Members
  • 1,092 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined:19 January 2009
  • RuneScape Status:P2P
  • RSN:Pere Grin




@Blyaunte

You can't have Wilderness without Free Trade, or vice versa. Bringing only one back removes every reason for the removal of the other, rendering it unnecessary and ineffective.


How do you reckon that one? :unsure:

Because they were both removed for the same reason.

Hypothetically, say Jagex put the Wilderness back in in 13 days. But they left the trade system and GE as it is now. Why would this not make any sense?

My answer


Doing something like this would give a much deeper meaning to the phrase "You got Jagex'd" though. :P


Your logic is circular and therefore flawed. Sure, both were removed for purportedly "the same reason", but they are not necessarily inter-dependent.

Unless you can provide an actual valid reason that demonstrates how they are completely and utterly inter-dependent, then there is no reason whatsoever why both options had to be included in the same poll.
:P

You're argument is flawed because you make irrational and untrue claims. My post contains no circular reasoning.

Your implication that they were not removed for the same reasons without backing up that statement is also a mistake. I wonder if you were actually around at that time? They were removed for exactly the same reasons. Anyone paying attention during this time can affirm this.

Also, you are the one commiting the logical fallacy by asking me to provide proof. You wish to change the status quo, but you have yet to actually provide a reason why it should be changed.

You also commit the Appeal to Probability Fallacy by continuing to claim that Jagex rigged the vote.

You also commit the Argument from Fallacy.

In addition, your posts seem to be themed with the Is-Ought Problem.

Making the claim that what I say is untrue does not refute it. Your belief that I am wrong does not equate to the falsehood of my argument. Continually claiming I am wrong without backing your claims up with logic and proof merely renders your posts unsubstantive and repetitive. (e.g. continually saying "But you're wrong." is not a valid proof of your position)

However, because your posts are themed with the Is-Ought Problem, I believe that there is a very good chance you are merely a troll.

#48
Rsvote
[ Display Name History ]

Rsvote

    Rat Meat

  • Members
  • 36 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:29 December 2010
  • RuneScape Status:P2P

You're argument is flawed because you make irrational and untrue claims. My post contains no circular reasoning.

Your implication that they were not removed for the same reasons without backing up that statement is also a mistake. I wonder if you were actually around at that time? They were removed for exactly the same reasons. Anyone paying attention during this time can affirm this.

Also, you are the one commiting the logical fallacy by asking me to provide proof. You wish to change the status quo, but you have yet to actually provide a reason why it should be changed.

You also commit the Appeal to Probability Fallacy by continuing to claim that Jagex rigged the vote.

You also commit the Argument from Fallacy.

In addition, your posts seem to be themed with the Is-Ought Problem.

Making the claim that what I say is untrue does not refute it. Your belief that I am wrong does not equate to the falsehood of my argument. Continually claiming I am wrong without backing your claims up with logic and proof merely renders your posts unsubstantive and repetitive. (e.g. continually saying "But you're wrong." is not a valid proof of your position)

However, because your posts are themed with the Is-Ought Problem, I believe that there is a very good chance you are merely a troll.


Just for the record, I considered pointing out the fallaciousness of his arguments too.
Posted Image

Blogs on the free trade/wilderness referendum: http://rsvote.wordpress.com

#49
PereGrin
[ Display Name History ]

PereGrin

    Skeleton Shield

  • Members
  • 1,092 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined:19 January 2009
  • RuneScape Status:P2P
  • RSN:Pere Grin


You're argument is flawed because you make irrational and untrue claims. My post contains no circular reasoning.

Your implication that they were not removed for the same reasons without backing up that statement is also a mistake. I wonder if you were actually around at that time? They were removed for exactly the same reasons. Anyone paying attention during this time can affirm this.

Also, you are the one commiting the logical fallacy by asking me to provide proof. You wish to change the status quo, but you have yet to actually provide a reason why it should be changed.

You also commit the Appeal to Probability Fallacy by continuing to claim that Jagex rigged the vote.

You also commit the Argument from Fallacy.

In addition, your posts seem to be themed with the Is-Ought Problem.

Making the claim that what I say is untrue does not refute it. Your belief that I am wrong does not equate to the falsehood of my argument. Continually claiming I am wrong without backing your claims up with logic and proof merely renders your posts unsubstantive and repetitive. (e.g. continually saying "But you're wrong." is not a valid proof of your position)

However, because your posts are themed with the Is-Ought Problem, I believe that there is a very good chance you are merely a troll.


Just for the record, I considered pointing out the fallaciousness of his arguments too.

lol. I only did it because he tried to use his "knowledge" of fallacies to escape from responding to me.

#50
Rsvote
[ Display Name History ]

Rsvote

    Rat Meat

  • Members
  • 36 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:29 December 2010
  • RuneScape Status:P2P



You're argument is flawed because you make irrational and untrue claims. My post contains no circular reasoning.

Your implication that they were not removed for the same reasons without backing up that statement is also a mistake. I wonder if you were actually around at that time? They were removed for exactly the same reasons. Anyone paying attention during this time can affirm this.

Also, you are the one commiting the logical fallacy by asking me to provide proof. You wish to change the status quo, but you have yet to actually provide a reason why it should be changed.

You also commit the Appeal to Probability Fallacy by continuing to claim that Jagex rigged the vote.

You also commit the Argument from Fallacy.

In addition, your posts seem to be themed with the Is-Ought Problem.

Making the claim that what I say is untrue does not refute it. Your belief that I am wrong does not equate to the falsehood of my argument. Continually claiming I am wrong without backing your claims up with logic and proof merely renders your posts unsubstantive and repetitive. (e.g. continually saying "But you're wrong." is not a valid proof of your position)

However, because your posts are themed with the Is-Ought Problem, I believe that there is a very good chance you are merely a troll.


Just for the record, I considered pointing out the fallaciousness of his arguments too.

lol. I only did it because he tried to use his "knowledge" of fallacies to escape from responding to me.


Hehehe, I got that impression.

You'll observe that if an argument "for" (or an explanation of "why") is presented, it's ignored. Which is a pretty consistant problem amongst all of those who're disputing the validity of the referendum (there's been another reasonably prominent example in this thread, who went so far as to call someone as "idiot" because they didn't also agree with his stance). I expect a negative product of this referendum (or - to unambigiously make sure these posts are "on topic" - starting the year with a bang) might well be arrogance-ammo for those who feel it's appropriate to self righteously assault those who dissagree with their stance but not provide any argument to substantiate said stance. Oh such fun.
Posted Image

Blogs on the free trade/wilderness referendum: http://rsvote.wordpress.com

#51
Blyaunte
[ Display Name History ]

Blyaunte

    Demon Vanquisher

  • Members
  • 2,051 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Catherby
  • Joined:16 January 2006
  • RuneScape Status:P2P
  • RSN:Blyaunte



You're argument is flawed because you make irrational and untrue claims. My post contains no circular reasoning.

Your implication that they were not removed for the same reasons without backing up that statement is also a mistake. I wonder if you were actually around at that time? They were removed for exactly the same reasons. Anyone paying attention during this time can affirm this.

Also, you are the one commiting the logical fallacy by asking me to provide proof. You wish to change the status quo, but you have yet to actually provide a reason why it should be changed.

You also commit the Appeal to Probability Fallacy by continuing to claim that Jagex rigged the vote.

You also commit the Argument from Fallacy.

In addition, your posts seem to be themed with the Is-Ought Problem.

Making the claim that what I say is untrue does not refute it. Your belief that I am wrong does not equate to the falsehood of my argument. Continually claiming I am wrong without backing your claims up with logic and proof merely renders your posts unsubstantive and repetitive. (e.g. continually saying "But you're wrong." is not a valid proof of your position)

However, because your posts are themed with the Is-Ought Problem, I believe that there is a very good chance you are merely a troll.


Just for the record, I considered pointing out the fallaciousness of his arguments too.

lol. I only did it because he tried to use his "knowledge" of fallacies to escape from responding to me.


"She" and "her" ... I'm female. :P

You're attempting to argue that, because the Wildy and Free Trade were eliminated at the same time, then they MUST be inter-dependent. It's already been clearly demonstrated by LCool and others that the two aspects are not inter-dependent. You can have one without the other. :shame:

Jagex produces polls every week with multiple selections – and yet they are oddly unable and unwilling to do so in this circumstance? Why?

It is abundantly clear that this has been planned for a while – yet the actual production and presentation has been entirely shoddy, half-assed and half-baked. Why?

All that seems to matter is that you and people like you are happy about it. It appeases so many people, apprarently, that it is being blindly accepted and remains unquestioned. Why is that? Why isn't anyone asking "why now"?

Obviously – Jagex has neither the willingness or the ability to stop the rampant cheating being conducted within the game. Once the Wildy and Free Trade come back, players on Runescape will only become even more dishonest. Why would Jagex do this?

Is this move going to make an improvement on the quality of the Runescape community?

When offered the choice of drinking the Kool Aid or ask questions first – I always ask questions.

Why don't you? I'm curious ...

nyuseg.png


#52
Rsvote
[ Display Name History ]

Rsvote

    Rat Meat

  • Members
  • 36 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:29 December 2010
  • RuneScape Status:P2P




You're argument is flawed because you make irrational and untrue claims. My post contains no circular reasoning.

Your implication that they were not removed for the same reasons without backing up that statement is also a mistake. I wonder if you were actually around at that time? They were removed for exactly the same reasons. Anyone paying attention during this time can affirm this.

Also, you are the one commiting the logical fallacy by asking me to provide proof. You wish to change the status quo, but you have yet to actually provide a reason why it should be changed.

You also commit the Appeal to Probability Fallacy by continuing to claim that Jagex rigged the vote.

You also commit the Argument from Fallacy.

In addition, your posts seem to be themed with the Is-Ought Problem.

Making the claim that what I say is untrue does not refute it. Your belief that I am wrong does not equate to the falsehood of my argument. Continually claiming I am wrong without backing your claims up with logic and proof merely renders your posts unsubstantive and repetitive. (e.g. continually saying "But you're wrong." is not a valid proof of your position)

However, because your posts are themed with the Is-Ought Problem, I believe that there is a very good chance you are merely a troll.


Just for the record, I considered pointing out the fallaciousness of his arguments too.

lol. I only did it because he tried to use his "knowledge" of fallacies to escape from responding to me.


"She" and "her" ... I'm female. :P <--- Sorry.

You're attempting to argue that, because the Wildy and Free Trade were eliminated at the same time, then they MUST be inter-dependent. It's already been clearly demonstrated by LCool and others that the two aspects are not inter-dependent. You can have one without the other. :shame: <--- Can't be bothered to reply to this.

Jagex produces polls every week with multiple selections – and yet they are oddly unable and unwilling to do so in this circumstance? Why? <--- Read my earlier post in reply to you if you genuinely can't understand this decision, also note that there is a significant difference on the impact of this referendum and the weekly polls.

It is abundantly clear that this has been planned for a while – yet the actual production and presentation has been entirely shoddy, half-assed and half-baked. Why? <--- Read my blogs.

All that seems to matter is that you and people like you are happy about it. It appeases so many people, apprarently, that it is being blindly accepted and remains unquestioned. Why is that? Why isn't anyone asking "why now"? <--- Read multiple posts I've made on this subject.

Obviously – Jagex has neither the willingness or the ability to stop the rampant cheating being conducted within the game. Once the Wildy and Free Trade come back, players on Runescape will only become even more dishonest. Why would Jagex do this? <--- Clause 1: They do lack the ability, as the current scenario within the game illustrates quite clearly. RWTing is considerably worse now than what it was pre ge. Clause 2: You have no evidence for this; I personally would refute it, taking away free trade did more harm than good.

Is this move going to make an improvement on the quality of the Runescape community? <--- Yes. Read my earlier post in reply to you.

When offered the choice of drinking the Kool Aid or ask questions first – I always ask questions. <--- And don't listen when people offer their answers. You keep restating the same points without any regard for what others have said. It's fine if you dissagree, but don't suggest people haven't questioned something when they have indisputably done so.

Why don't you? I'm curious ... <--- If you haven't got the message by now, there's absolutely no hope for you.


Do read my comments in the quotation above this time, as you've clearly missed the point in my previous replies.

I'll spell it out for you: Yes I am very happy about the idea of free trade comming back, but the idea that because of this have not "asked questions" or that I'm not querying their motives is fundamentally flawed and evidentially disproven by my conduct on this thread, other threads and on my personal blog on the subject. I can't speak on behalf of the other person you've quoted, but I think it's abundantly clear that he/she has also questioned recent events.
Posted Image

Blogs on the free trade/wilderness referendum: http://rsvote.wordpress.com

#53
PereGrin
[ Display Name History ]

PereGrin

    Skeleton Shield

  • Members
  • 1,092 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined:19 January 2009
  • RuneScape Status:P2P
  • RSN:Pere Grin

Do read my comments in the quotation above this time, as you've clearly missed the point in my previous replies.

I'll spell it out for you: Yes I am very happy about the idea of free trade comming back, but the idea that because of this have not "asked questions" or that I'm not querying their motives is fundamentally flawed and evidentially disproven by my conduct on this thread, other threads and on my personal blog on the subject. I can't speak on behalf of the other person you've quoted, but I think it's abundantly clear that he/she has also questioned recent events.


You speak the truth. I actually took the time to come up with a coherent argument for my point of view rather then claiming that opposing views were invalid simply because they were not in agreement with mine.

Also, RWT included those people practicing credit card fraud. Both members and nonmembers worlds had bot accounts clogging the yew trees. It is far easier to use stolen credit cards/fake credit cards to pay for these accounts. Even if the account gets banned after a few months of botting yew trees or other moneymakers, you still get enough yew logs out of it to sell to people and then sell your gold to your paying customer. You don't even have to worry about running out of names for these accounts as there are 4.87x10^18 ( :shock: ) names possible on Runescape.

Even supposing that creating an account took 30 seconds, and you were creating 100million accounts (vastly vastly exaggerated) each time, it would still take 46,363.8 years to use all the names.

#54
Rsvote
[ Display Name History ]

Rsvote

    Rat Meat

  • Members
  • 36 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:29 December 2010
  • RuneScape Status:P2P


Do read my comments in the quotation above this time, as you've clearly missed the point in my previous replies.

I'll spell it out for you: Yes I am very happy about the idea of free trade comming back, but the idea that because of this have not "asked questions" or that I'm not querying their motives is fundamentally flawed and evidentially disproven by my conduct on this thread, other threads and on my personal blog on the subject. I can't speak on behalf of the other person you've quoted, but I think it's abundantly clear that he/she has also questioned recent events.


You speak the truth. I actually took the time to come up with a coherent argument for my point of view rather then claiming that opposing views were invalid simply because they were not in agreement with mine.

Also, RWT included those people practicing credit card fraud. Both members and nonmembers worlds had bot accounts clogging the yew trees. It is far easier to use stolen credit cards/fake credit cards to pay for these accounts. Even if the account gets banned after a few months of botting yew trees or other moneymakers, you still get enough yew logs out of it to sell to people and then sell your gold to your paying customer. You don't even have to worry about running out of names for these accounts as there are 4.87x10^18 ( :shock: ) names possible on Runescape.

Even supposing that creating an account took 30 seconds, and you were creating 100million accounts (vastly vastly exaggerated) each time, it would still take 46,363.8 years to use all the names.


RWT is also directly facilitated by the GE system, through clan manipulations.

Some examples:
1. Paying for clans ranks (some clans sell even the lowest ranks for £10 each)
2. Paying for someone to sell your junk.
3. "Buying in on a manipulation": where you pay a "leader" who instructs you on what to buy long before the manipulation, to then (if not scammed) reap the profit of the merch in full spring or (if you're scammed) for the item to never actually be merched.
4. Clan leaders raising "starter" accounts (training them to a reasonable level and gradually securing a high cash store due to manipulations). <--- Note that GE/trade limits did absolutely nothing to stop the selling of accounts.

I've never believed the majority should have been punished so much due to the minority of rule breakers, but for them to be punished for the measures to actually not work is an even greater insult.
Posted Image

Blogs on the free trade/wilderness referendum: http://rsvote.wordpress.com

#55
greecl
[ Display Name History ]

greecl

    Rat Meat

  • Members
  • 30 posts
  • Location:far over the bright cherry rainbow....
  • Joined:3 May 2009
  • RSN:greecl
  • RSN2:rasberry rulm
  • Clan:the dragons, by lite191
@TS_Stormrage:

Obviously, the first poll was a bit of a misfire. An absolute failure. But it did fulfill its stated purpose, which was merely to gauge interest in the old wildy and free trade. And as you keep going on about how it's so terrible that there is such a difference in the poll and the actual vote, i feel i must address this as well. When people first saw that they could possibly bring back the old wildy and free trade, OF COURSE they voted multiple times; after all, if Jagex had wanted it not to be that way, they would have required a login to vote. And as it did not affect the final outcome, it is inconsequential how many times people voted.
Greecl: agreed, mister Eskimo steroid wrestler black guy thingy.
Lite191: =] lol
Greecl: this is going on my siggy on tippit.
lite191: actually im a ninja Eskimo wrestler on steroids with a godsword… on fire.
Greecl: eating a Klondike bar. =p
lite191: yes but it melted=[
Greecl: aw…wish you weren’t on fire now, huh?
lite191 :no.
lite191: Still freaking awesome.documents/pictures/new_folder/me
Greecl: or as Greecl would say… Frosted flakes are better!!!
lite191: agreed.

#56
Rsvote
[ Display Name History ]

Rsvote

    Rat Meat

  • Members
  • 36 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:29 December 2010
  • RuneScape Status:P2P

@TS_Stormrage:

Obviously, the first poll was a bit of a misfire. An absolute failure. But it did fulfill its stated purpose, which was merely to gauge interest in the old wildy and free trade. And as you keep going on about how it's so terrible that there is such a difference in the poll and the actual vote, i feel i must address this as well. When people first saw that they could possibly bring back the old wildy and free trade, OF COURSE they voted multiple times; after all, if Jagex had wanted it not to be that way, they would have required a login to vote. And as it did not affect the final outcome, it is inconsequential how many times people voted.


The problem being that that wasn't it's "stated purpose" until AFTER it had been removed. Jagex made a flawed poll, they fixed it; they should have come clean and told everyone they mucked up.

Outside of that, everything you've said is fundamentally correct.

EDIT: http://rsvote.wordpr...tting-the-vote/ splitting the vote blog.
Posted Image

Blogs on the free trade/wilderness referendum: http://rsvote.wordpress.com

#57
helring
[ Display Name History ]

helring

    Skeleton Shield

  • Members
  • 1,203 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:2 July 2005
  • RuneScape Status:None
  • RSN:helring
While I wouldn't say Wildy and Free Trade are completely interdependent, the old wildy is completely dependant on there being free trade. A major part of the old wilderness was that when you killed someone, you got what they had on them not counting the safed items not this random item drop cabbage and maybe an item of theirs. If theirs no free trade then you can't really give all items dropped on death or it kind of defeats the purpose. As far as free trade without the wilderness, it's possible but why bother keeping the wilderness out if free trade comes back, they only removed it in the first place so that there wasn't an easy end run around new trade limits.

R.I.P. The olde nite. A legend is gone but not forgotten.

 

a Faction Related Item Sink for Rune Labs. https://secure.runes...ew-idea?idea=19

 

 


#58
Rsvote
[ Display Name History ]

Rsvote

    Rat Meat

  • Members
  • 36 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:29 December 2010
  • RuneScape Status:P2P
Following the hot debates in this thread and others, I did indeed compose a blog on the vote being split, as it's an issue of controversy which has contributed to starting the year with a bang: http://rsvote.wordpr...tting-the-vote/
Posted Image

Blogs on the free trade/wilderness referendum: http://rsvote.wordpress.com




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users