TIF is bit over-moderated

[obfuscator]

And I have registered there. But it's an inconvenience.

 

. . . really? :rolleyes:

Compared to being able to click and view in one second, yeah.

[The Observer]

Think of it this way: if the moderators make a topic in private boards discussing this, they'll have no reference material to work with. I suppose they could take screenshots, but it will just make the process slower overall if the content changes.

[Danqazmlp]

Well, that process should be revised imo. I remember when I had my signature removed a while ago, I didn't have the original signature coding and had to ask for it through PM. It was a pain because the mod in question wasn't on until the next day.

 

The moderator after removing it should contain a code with the original signature (in hide tags at the bottom of the message) and a code with the fixed signature that has all the rule-breaking subject matter removed from it. This makes it a lot easier for the user to know what rules were broken, etc. To make it easier, it should have some form of a format already supplied in some form of pinned topic in the moderator forums.

 

Apologies if something similar like this is already in place because the last time I had a signature removal was almost 2 years ago. (Not going to bother to check my PM box to find my exact date. :P )

 

Currently when we do a full signature removal, a copy of the signature is given so the person can see the offending part and remove it as they wish. This was done in this case as well. Some mods such as Y_guy were more lenient in the removal, and some (myself included) removed the whole signature according to our SOP (Standard operating procedure) for inappropriate signatures, with a PM explaining why it had been removed a full copy of the original signature for the user.

 

Now while the removals could have been more lenient, it was nothing worse than the majority of the signature removals which have happened on the forums in recent memory. We are all advised now to give some form of copy of the signature in the PM with the explanation for users who don't have a copy of it themselves.

[das]

It really is. Such a shame.

 

Edit: @ Das, not Obt

 

 

Especially since fault still lies with both sides imo at trying to work things out.

 

It's becoming increasingly clear again - that some of you guys really have no intention of working things out here. Some of you - Like yourself Nifflin - do have that intent and I hope this [cabbage] ends soon, but some like grimy, never had a [bleep]ing desire to work it out, I know I spent hours talking to him as an admin as was all but blown off as he "never intended to agree"

[Laikrob]

this is still going on? Really?

Ridiculously enough; yes.

[Michael]

I'd love to resolve all this [cabbage], but it's immovable force vs. unstoppable object.

[das]

this is still going on? Really?

Ridiculously enough; yes.

 

 

I feel the administration and staff has been more than fair, and interested in solving this for the last few pages.

 

Does it really [bleep]ing matter how the original jagex contact was made? as an ex-admin, I could of picked up the phone and played god and contacted jagex myself and posted an answer. I suggested email, because it's really plain as day obvious to anyone with an IQ high enough to wipe their ass that nothing short of a written answer, most likely, research paper with citations from jagex would be written off as [cabbage].

 

I'm not going to say the tip.it staff has handled this entire start to finish perfect. I believe they are painfully aware of that. I can name [cabbage] i'd of wanted done differently, stuff that should of been done differently and stuff that was done right.

 

The part that matters? the group of volunteers thats getting pretty much crucified upside down here actually cares and WANTS to improve. I've seen [cabbage]ty run forums, and yeah, that includes tip.it in the past - guess what? I've been banned for criticizing staff (and I was less harsh, obnoxious and more professional than the vast majority of you guys have been the past few pages) and pretty much my only words of wisdom are "grow the [bleep] up"

 

You went from people i respected to a degree to what i can't but help as read as whining sniveling, burthurt spoilt brats.

 

I want a happy nice tip.it thats an intellectual haven as much as ANYONE, i worked 3 years trying to promote that, but if you seriously keep acting the way you have been.

 

Get the [bleep] out.

 

Thanks

 

~Das

[Vex]

this is still going on? Really?

Ridiculously enough; yes.

 

 

I feel the administration and staff has been more than fair, and interested in solving this for the last few pages.

 

Does it really [bleep]ing matter how the original jagex contact was made? as an ex-admin, I could of picked up the phone and played god and contacted jagex myself and posted an answer. I suggested email, because it's really plain as day obvious to anyone with an IQ high enough to wipe their ass that nothing short of a written answer, most likely, research paper with citations from jagex would be written off as [cabbage].

 

I'm not going to say the tip.it staff has handled this entire start to finish perfect. I believe they are painfully aware of that. I can name [cabbage] i'd of wanted done differently, stuff that should of been done differently and stuff that was done right.

 

The part that matters? the group of volunteers thats getting pretty much crucified upside down here actually cares and WANTS to improve. I've seen [cabbage]ty run forums, and yeah, that includes tip.it in the past - guess what? I've been banned for criticizing staff (and I was less harsh, obnoxious and more professional than the vast majority of you guys have been the past few pages) and pretty much my only words of wisdom are "grow the [bleep] up"

 

You went from people i respected to a degree to what i can't but help as read as whining sniveling, burthurt spoilt brats.

 

I want a happy nice tip.it thats an intellectual haven as much as ANYONE, i worked 3 years trying to promote that, but if you seriously keep acting the way you have been.

 

Get the [bleep] out.

 

Thanks

 

~Das

 

I'd be mad too if I spent 3 years "working" with those people lol

[Andy]

Good job on missing the point, das.

Jagex have been contacted regarding the scripts (with examples provided) and yes, they confirmed that is against the rules.

All we asked to see what jagex had to say on the issue - Darkdude failed to do that for whatever reasons (i'll not post them here because last time I did that, my posts were deleted.)

[Grimy_Bunyip]

It really is. Such a shame.

 

Edit: @ Das, not Obt

 

 

Especially since fault still lies with both sides imo at trying to work things out.

 

It's becoming increasingly clear again - that some of you guys really have no intention of working things out here. Some of you - Like yourself Nifflin - do have that intent and I hope this [cabbage] ends soon, but some like grimy, never had a [bleep]ing desire to work it out, I know I spent hours talking to him as an admin as was all but blown off as he "never intended to agree"

You told me that you wanted us to come back to tip.it BEFORE a change in moderation.

All I told you, was that I would never agree to anything involving such a stipulation.

 

We disagreed because you wouldn't back down on that stipulation.

Don't attribute it to never intending to agree.

 

Your attempt to make a power grab, and divide the efficiency community after you perceived a failure of negotiations, was not appreciated either.

[Stev]

I'd like to see things worked out. However, all of my posts are ignored. I made a 56 line reply explaining why my scripts were legal (For those who aren't AHK-literate) and 2 pages later I see:

Evidence on your scrips not being rulebreaking, too please.

 

Evidence on your posts not being in contradiction with the forum rules.

 

I'm defending my work here. I code to help people out. I have written countless programs both for free and for pay for those with disabilities... To help people out. I play RuneScape to help people out (That's why I give away about 1B+ per week to friends FFS). I'm not about to be called a botter and say I promote botting when I write functions that abide by the rules.

[Lose No Hope]

I feel the administration and staff has been more than fair, and interested in solving this for the last few pages.

As grimy and others have said multiple times, guilty until proven innocent and making claims of contacting Jagex regarding the issue without proof is not fair and isn't helping solve the problem.

[Gandorf61]

All we asked to see what jagex had to say on the issue - Darkdude failed to do that for whatever reasons (i'll not post them here because last time I did that, my posts were deleted.)

 

Well chances are they probably just said "that's against the rules" which is why we're waiting for a more detailed and informative email from them so this whole fiasco can be resolved by fully understanding what is and isn't allowed on both sides.

 

 

I'd like to see things worked out. However, all of my posts are ignored. I made a 56 line reply explaining why my scripts were legal (For those who aren't AHK-literate) and 2 pages later I see:

Evidence on your scrips not being rulebreaking, too please.

 

Evidence on your posts not being in contradiction with the forum rules.

 

I'm defending my work here. I code to help people out. I play RuneScape to help people out (That's why I give away about 1B+ per week to friends FFS). I'm not about to be called a botter and say I promote botting when I write functions that abide by the rules.

 

Quote of my response which was ignored:

 

Just because a user may not want to require 3 inputs does not make my functions against the rules. If this was the case, mousekeys would be illegal because they too can be set and used against the rules. It's all up to the user. If I post a link to a C++ forum, will you remove it too? It can be used to control mouse movements and send/receive keystrokes.

 

The thing with your example there is that it would only be ok if 1:1 means that as long as the number of keys pressed to call the function equals the number of actions that the function does. Personally I've always understood that by 1:1 it means

press key -> move mouse

press key 2 -> click mouse

 

Because essentially nothing happens with your script until the last key is pressed so then the previous keys wouldn't matter would they? This is what needs to be cleared up with Jagex because if it is ok to press 3 keys together and then have 3 actions performed then most of your functions are perfectly fine (also assuming that Jagex is ok with moving to a point on the screen which there also seems to be controversy over).

 

However I think what a lot of people are understanding is that an action must be performed after each keypress and not press 3 keys = 3 actions.

[The Observer]

I feel the administration and staff has been more than fair, and interested in solving this for the last few pages.

As grimy and others have said multiple times, guilty until proven innocent and making claims of contacting Jagex regarding the issue without proof is not fair and isn't helping solve the problem.

 

Why would a fansite lie about contacting Jagex?

 

If you really don't trust it, then just contact them yourself.

[Soma2035]

I feel the administration and staff has been more than fair, and interested in solving this for the last few pages.

 

You have a very odd definition of fair.

 

Why would a fansite lie about contacting Jagex?

 

If you really don't trust it, then just contact them yourself.

Just recently, a post was deleted for notifying a specific moderator he was "good at deleting posts." The given reason was that the post was a derogatory comment about a moderator. News flash - telling someone they're good at something is not derogatory, unless you consider that something to be inherently wrong. Ironically, their solution was to delete the post.

 

Why would this fansite lie? Dumb pride. Plenty of evidence has been shown, supporting that these scripts were perfectly legal as defined by previous statements by Jagex and the current wording of the rule. But of course, they can't admit that a mistake was made. So they need SOMETHING to make it look as if they weren't assuming "guilty until proven innocent."

 

Besides, it's just not about contacting Jagex - it's the way Jagex is contacted. There are hundreds of ways you can phrase the question, not all of which convey the proper message. In either case, if the administration believes that it's against the rules even though plenty of arguments have been made for why it's not (arguments that have, for the most part, gone unaddressed), then it's the fansite's responsibility to contact Jagex and provide the evidence.

 

And finally, the most important piece of evidence is still completely lacking. It was claimed by the administration that its interest is in protecting the users from being punished for something they were lead to believe is permissible. If that's the case, the administration should at the very least show evidence that using these scripts, according to the given instructions (maintaining a 1:1 input to output ratio) has previously resulted in a ban or some other form of punishment.

[Lose No Hope]

I feel the administration and staff has been more than fair, and interested in solving this for the last few pages.

As grimy and others have said multiple times, guilty until proven innocent and making claims of contacting Jagex regarding the issue without proof is not fair and isn't helping solve the problem.

 

Why would a fansite lie about contacting Jagex?

 

If you really don't trust it, then just contact them yourself.

Yes, because I'm Jagex's first priority if I sent them an email.

[Stev]

All we asked to see what jagex had to say on the issue - Darkdude failed to do that for whatever reasons (i'll not post them here because last time I did that, my posts were deleted.)

 

Well chances are they probably just said "that's against the rules" which is why we're waiting for a more detailed and informative email from them so this whole fiasco can be resolved by fully understanding what is and isn't allowed on both sides.

 

 

I'd like to see things worked out. However, all of my posts are ignored. I made a 56 line reply explaining why my scripts were legal (For those who aren't AHK-literate) and 2 pages later I see:

Evidence on your scrips not being rulebreaking, too please.

 

Evidence on your posts not being in contradiction with the forum rules.

 

I'm defending my work here. I code to help people out. I play RuneScape to help people out (That's why I give away about 1B+ per week to friends FFS). I'm not about to be called a botter and say I promote botting when I write functions that abide by the rules.

 

Quote of my response which was ignored:

 

Just because a user may not want to require 3 inputs does not make my functions against the rules. If this was the case, mousekeys would be illegal because they too can be set and used against the rules. It's all up to the user. If I post a link to a C++ forum, will you remove it too? It can be used to control mouse movements and send/receive keystrokes.

 

The thing with your example there is that it would only be ok if 1:1 means that as long as the number of keys pressed to call the function equals the number of actions that the function does. Personally I've always understood that by 1:1 it means

press key -> move mouse

press key 2 -> click mouse

 

Because essentially nothing happens with your script until the last key is pressed so then the previous keys wouldn't matter would they? This is what needs to be cleared up with Jagex because if it is ok to press 3 keys together and then have 3 actions performed then most of your functions are perfectly fine (also assuming that Jagex is ok with moving to a point on the screen which there also seems to be controversy over).

 

However I think what a lot of people are understanding is that an action must be performed after each keypress and not press 3 keys = 3 actions.

I missed that post, most likely as it was when I was concerned about my posts begin removed.

 

I was not under the impression that that was the issue at all. What is the different between pressing 3 buttons, then 3 actions being produced... Or press button 1, action, press button 2, action, press button 3, action? I'm simply doing what Jagex refuses to: Make a customizable game/interface. Why the whole issue about it, I have no idea.

 

Like really, think about the Click_T(). it simply makes it so when called, it opens another tab (Such as friends chat, options, etc). The following example is illegal, but what is honestly the problem with it:

F2::
  Click_T("Options")
Return

 

Ofc, you could make it 2 inputs, such as Ctrl-F2, but for arguments sake, let's keep it as 1 input. Jagex has already made pressing F1 open the inventory. F2 open the equipped. WHY would/should there be a problem with remapping F2 to instantly open your attack styles instead?

[das]

you're the most unprofessional and worst spoken person i've ever attempted to negotiate with. You displayed zero faith, you didn't want to come to a compromise....Let's see what Gem's I can find

 

[4/15/2011 12:19:11 AM] Grimy Bunyip: i said at the start das

[4/15/2011 12:19:16 AM] Grimy Bunyip: i had no intention of not splitting

 

 

[4/15/2011 12:10:42 AM] Tyler (Logdotzip): Well Ancient the way you're wording it makes it sound like nothing was going to chage your mind regardless of discussion

[4/15/2011 12:10:48 AM] Jesse (The Ancient): which

[4/15/2011 12:10:49 AM] Jesse (The Ancient): is pretty much true

 

 

[4/15/2011 12:08:50 AM] Tyler (Logdotzip): Just my opinion here, since Im not part of either party, largely unbiased, but ancient, grimy, you two seem a little unreasonable, Das is basically giving you the whole farm

[4/15/2011 12:08:58 AM] Jesse (The Ancient): i know

[4/15/2011 12:08:59 AM] Jesse (The Ancient): and i really

[4/15/2011 12:09:01 AM] Jesse (The Ancient): really appreicate that

[4/15/2011 12:09:04 AM] Jesse (The Ancient): but

[4/15/2011 12:09:07 AM] Jesse (The Ancient): it's not our vision

 

 

 

I came, I had the power to make some changes, shakeup the boards, you rejected it. So why the [bleep] are some of you guys still here?

[The Observer]

I feel the administration and staff has been more than fair, and interested in solving this for the last few pages.

As grimy and others have said multiple times, guilty until proven innocent and making claims of contacting Jagex regarding the issue without proof is not fair and isn't helping solve the problem.

 

Why would a fansite lie about contacting Jagex?

 

If you really don't trust it, then just contact them yourself.

Yes, because I'm Jagex's first priority if I sent them an email.

 

Yeah, but any other option appears to be avoided. I don't see why a fansite would purposely lie about asking Jagex about something related to rule breaking.

[Lose No Hope]

I feel the administration and staff has been more than fair, and interested in solving this for the last few pages.

As grimy and others have said multiple times, guilty until proven innocent and making claims of contacting Jagex regarding the issue without proof is not fair and isn't helping solve the problem.

 

Why would a fansite lie about contacting Jagex?

 

If you really don't trust it, then just contact them yourself.

Yes, because I'm Jagex's first priority if I sent them an email.

 

Yeah, but any other option appears to be avoided. I don't see why a fansite would purposely lie about asking Jagex about something related to rule breaking.

It doesn't matter who it is, whether it is a fansite, myself, or anyone else, if you make a statement and aren't prepared to back it up with proof, the statement can't be taken as anything more than a lie.

[Andy]

Grimy's opinion on this does not represent mine - I'm only here on tif because I care about dgs.

[Ginger_Warrior]

It doesn't matter who it is, whether it is a fansite, myself, or anyone else, if you make a statement and aren't prepared to back it up with proof, the statement can't be taken as anything more than a lie.

Who told you that? Not everything has to be referenced. So seriously, where did you get that from?

[das]

Grimy's opinion on this does not represent mine - I'm only here on tif because I care about dgs.

Then I suggest if you honestly want to be heard - act professional. I can tell you from experience that You guys have acted like a lynch mob the past few pages. As someone who actually sympathized to a degree with the situation you guys had, your actions and attitude has turned me off majorly.

 

Also - How the piss do you document a phone call anyways? xD

 

~Das

[Lose No Hope]

It doesn't matter who it is, whether it is a fansite, myself, or anyone else, if you make a statement and aren't prepared to back it up with proof, the statement can't be taken as anything more than a lie.

Who told you that? Not everything has to be referenced. So seriously, where did you get that from?

I meant with the contacting Jagex, which the moderation hasn't shown proof of doing after being asked multiple times for it.

[The Observer]

It doesn't matter who it is, whether it is a fansite, myself, or anyone else, if you make a statement and aren't prepared to back it up with proof, the statement can't be taken as anything more than a lie.

 

Well, if it's something like a phone call or text message then how the hell do you provide proof?