*Opinion* noted...

What wrong with me stating my opinion?

 

Do you have any concrete evidence to support that claim? Any statistics?

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/

 

Evidence?

 

Your exam and sister analogies are straw man arguments.

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.

 

Does that really make them a bad person? Think of your friends in real life. None of your friends do what you just stated? I know plenty of people (including myself) who often choose to do the bare minimum. What's wrong with doing the bare minimum? First you're saying cheating is immoral, which is understandable, but now you're saying that not going the extra mile is also immoral?

 

Are you implying that there is a correlation between willingness to exert extra effort and friendliness/morality?

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.

 

So now are you saying that there's a negative correlation between willingness to exert extra effort and selfishness?

Selfishness? When did I say that? I did say that people who are willing to tell lies are more unreliable.

 

So...?

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.

 

Unethical decisions aren't illegal decisions.

In most case, they are?

 

If a person doesn't take RS seriously, then you shouldn't relate their in-game characteristics to their real-life characteristics.

 

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.

 

Do you honestly think that not taking the rules in a video game seriously leads you to becoming a law-breaking, immoral citizen?

 

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.

 

Following your logic, it's also impossible for someone to give away free sets of rune in f2p and then be immoral in real life.

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.

 

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.

 

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.

The Runscape rules are not a bunch of points Jagex pulled from nowhere. They are a set of rules which are in line with the majority of MMO games out there, in line with the majority of people's morals and therefore can be counted as the moral rules.

 

Botting is using an outside advantage for personal gain, which is something against the rules in every competition, sport and everything I have come across in life.

 

People seem to be removing the point between botting and immorality.

 

It isn't that Botting = immoral

 

It is that Botting = cheating = immoral

 

If botting were not against the rules, it would therefore not be. It is the cheating part that makes botting bad. Whether you agree with the rules or not, you should not cheat, in life, in games or anywhere.

 

I cannot see how people can argue the opposite to that, it is simple logic.

 

However, the OP's original point about it transferring to real life is what is debatable and what the thread is about.

 

On that point, desensitization is a real thing. If a person is in contact with something enough their mind becomes less opposed to it, allowing them to do it more. A simple google search will show you that so don't come asking for proof. This isn't the same as for example violence in games, as the majority of sane people will realise that they are not actually hurting people, but hurting something that doesn't exist. In Runescape however, the cheating is, even if minimal, hurting people. Could this then lead them to disregard people's feelings in the future more often or to cheat more often? That is the question, and until somebody does some research on it, everything said either way will just be pure opinion, so asking for facts is pointless.

Tact, answer me this.

 

Is it morally wrong to bot agility? Would it still be morally wrong if Jagex allowed botting like some other games do?

 

EDIT: Dan, so you believe in morality by consensus?

Tact, answer me this.

 

Is it morally wrong to bot agility? Would it still be morally wrong if Jagex allowed botting like some other games do?

 

 

I would say it is ethically wrong.

 

I would morally have no problem with botting, but my good gaming ethic has always kept me from doing so.

"Whether you agree with the rules or not, you should not cheat, in life, in games or anywhere. "

 

Lol, this ENTIRELY depends on your own set of morals. These morals are generally derived from culture, religion or other beliefs.

 

Morals are defined by nurture & not nature.

 

Society dictates morals, religion preaches morals.

 

However not every society is equal, not every religion believes in the same morals.

 

You also have the power as an individual not to be a member of society & not to have a religion.

 

There is nothing in our genetic code that tells us not to cheat.

 

You could perhaps argue because the game is HOSTED in the UK (Which again isn't true since they have servers elsewhere) we should abide by british morality.

 

The internet is it's own country, it's own society, it's own religion. There are no borders, there is no universal moral code on what should & shouldn't be allowed on the internet.

Cheating in this game is the same as cheating in any other game. It is just a game.

Tact, answer me this.

 

Is it morally wrong to bot agility? Would it still be morally wrong if Jagex allowed botting like some other games do?

 

EDIT: Dan, so you believe in morality by consensus?

 

No, as morals by an individual can be opposed to the morals of another. However, the morals of the majority, and in this case which is to cheat or not to cheat. Humanity has known on the whole for thousands of years that cheating is morally wrong. There may be a tiny minority who cheat, and then an even smaller minority of them which think cheating is morally right, but as we have to live by the rules which the majority want, cheating is immoral. Plain and simple.

 

Edit:

 

Cheating in this game is the same as cheating in any other game. It is just a game.

 

 

Football is just a game, but if you decide to use your hand to score a goal, you will be punished and people will be angry with you. It may be a game, but that doesn't mean rules don't apply. Hell, that is what makes it a game. If there were no rules, there would be no game.

Tact, answer me this.

 

Is it morally wrong to bot agility? Would it still be morally wrong if Jagex allowed botting like some other games do?

 

 

I would say it is ethically wrong.

 

I would morally have no problem with botting, but my good gaming ethic has always kept me from doing so.

 

Another person might say instead as the main reason they won't bot is because 3rd party programs are too risky. Practical outlook, that.

 

Wouldn't be surprised if a few who think that way decide to write their own - and led to this blow up of the botting problem.

 

EDIT: It's become clear the line's been drawn, those who believe Runescape is serious business they'll bring real life morality into the question, and those who are in, "it's just a game." Hah!

 

I pity those who cannot separate reality from fiction. Good day, sirs.

I mean video games

Tact, answer me this.

 

Is it morally wrong to bot agility? Would it still be morally wrong if Jagex allowed botting like some other games do?

 

EDIT: Dan, so you believe in morality by consensus?

 

No, as morals by an individual can be opposed to the morals of another. However, the morals of the majority, and in this case which is to cheat or not to cheat. Humanity has known on the whole for thousands of years that cheating is morally wrong. There may be a tiny minority who cheat, and then an even smaller minority of them which think cheating is morally right, but as we have to live by the rules which the majority want, cheating is immoral. Plain and simple.

 

Edit:

 

Cheating in this game is the same as cheating in any other game. It is just a game.

 

 

Football is just a game, but if you decide to use your hand to score a goal, you will be punished and people will be angry with you. It may be a game, but that doesn't mean rules don't apply. Hell, that is what makes it a game. If there were no rules, there would be no game.

 

What about country of majority shiite ruled by a sunni minority.

 

Laws and morals aren't necesserily always chosen by the vast majority for the vast majority.

So essentially OP's argument boils down to "this is my opinion and anyone who disagrees is a moral nihilist." Gotcha. I'm still waiting for you to explain why I can't up the ante on your analogies; you have no right to set the "moral parameters" of this argument, so to speak. If you can claim that botting is akin to cheating on a test, I can claim that botting is akin to rape. What's the difference? :rolleyes:

^that

 

if i cheat in a pokemon game does that make me a bad person?

Greeks cheated. They're immoral.

^that

 

if i cheat in a pokemon game does that make me a bad person?

 

Yes. And a rapist.

If you cheat in solitaire, or any single-player game, I don't believe that's relevant to the moral discussion. Your actions affect nobody other than yourself.

 

If you cheat in poker, you're a jerk. Runescape is the same. For all those saying "It's just a game" --- cheating in a game with other people makes you a jerk.

 

Yes, that does say something about the way you make decisions generally.

If you cheat in solitaire, or any single-player game, I don't believe that's relevant to the moral discussion. Your actions affect nobody other than yourself.

 

If you cheat in poker, you're a jerk. Runescape is the same. For all those saying "It's just a game" --- cheating in a game with other people makes you a jerk.

 

Yes, that does say something about the way you make decisions generally.

 

Apples and oranges. Poker is not an RPG.

If you cheat in solitaire, or any single-player game, I don't believe that's relevant to the moral discussion. Your actions affect nobody other than yourself.

 

If you cheat in poker, you're a jerk. Runescape is the same. For all those saying "It's just a game" --- cheating in a game with other people makes you a jerk.

 

Yes, that does say something about the way you make decisions generally.

 

Two things:

 

1) Lol. Do you know how to play poker? It involves very real money. Morality is the least of your troubles if you're caught cheating in poker.

2) To what extent does botting in Runescape affect other people? The best moneymaking methods for both noobs and high-levels are either devoid of bots (Nex, collecting mort myre fungi, unfinished pots [make-x is basically botting in itself, so not really applicable, I guess]) or aided by bots (letting armies of green dragon bots kill the dragons while you collect their loot). Then there are mining and agility bots, and I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and hope that you're not about to claim that those affect you.

 

1+

wait what rs=life? great, got that life I always wanted -cough-

Yes, see the two articles above. If you want I have more.

 

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.

So essentially OP's argument boils down to "this is my opinion and anyone who disagrees is a moral nihilist." Gotcha. I'm still waiting for you to explain why I can't up the ante on your analogies; you have no right to set the "moral parameters" of this argument, so to speak. If you can claim that botting is akin to cheating on a test, I can claim that botting is akin to rape. What's the difference? :rolleyes:

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:

 

^that

 

if i cheat in a pokemon game does that make me a bad person?

 

Yes. And a rapist.

 

Edit: Here's the fallacy you're using.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum

Yes, see the two articles above. If you want I have more.

 

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.

Yes, see the two articles above. If you want I have more.

 

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.

 

 

Yes, see the two articles above. If you want I have more.

 

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