TIF is bit over-moderated

[All_Is_Great]

My pleasure.

[Aiel]

While I didn't actually see the posts, Im inclined to believe you guys at least somewhat trolled/flamed the admin thread as my post disaagreeing did not get deleted. Im also sort of split on this issue, while I agree with TEFs ideas, a lot of them are acting really immature, and the format of their forums sucks.

 

Basically at this point its just a few mods/TEF members trying to fix the actually issues, and a few mods/TEF members who either dont understand the issues, or just feel like trolling/undermining the attempts to fix the issue. The metagame board DOES need to be done better, a decision on wickeds scripts needs to be found (and Im inclined to think jagex was never actually contacted), and mods need to understand an issue before banning for it. Users need the ability to request guides/posts be removed after they get banned, and the trolling from both sides of the fun vs. efficiency debate needs to stop.

[muuuuuuuuuu]

As far as I'm aware, the comments made were negative, but not intrinsically insulting. If I posted on that thread with a simple "I disagree with Jimmy_Jim being made an admin," it would be removed because it's "negative." Sorry, but I see no reason why I can't voice my disapproval.

You need to say "I respectfully disagree with Jimmy_Jim being made an admin." so they can't get you for being disrespectful.

[The Observer]

We specifically asked that the scripts be reviewed be reviewed by someone qualified and outside of CM. And we are equally as frustrated as you guys with the slow response time :(

 

Maybe could reference them on those boards and if Jagex mods start asking questions, they might allow other methods of communication. Or at least respond to them a lot quicker.

 

Probably not the most ideal method of communication, but might speed things up a bit.

[Youmu]

While I didn't actually see the posts, Im inclined to believe you guys at least somewhat trolled/flamed the admin thread as my post disaagreeing did not get deleted. Im also sort of split on this issue, while I agree with TEFs ideas, a lot of them are acting really immature, and the format of their forums sucks.

 

Basically at this point its just a few mods/TEF members trying to fix the actually issues, and a few mods/TEF members who either dont understand the issues, or just feel like trolling/undermining the attempts to fix the issue. The metagame board DOES need to be done better, a decision on wickeds scripts needs to be found (and Im inclined to think jagex was never actually contacted), and mods need to understand an issue before banning for it. Users need the ability to request guides/posts be removed after they get banned, and the trolling from both sides of the fun vs. efficiency debate needs to stop.

This, I'm surprised everybody is looking at this whole admin issue with rose-tinted glasses and completely overlook the post Aeil made in that thread.

 

I agree with the suggestions you have posted there by the way. I for one really want to find a solution to end this whole tension between the two sides, because seeing arguments like this nearly every single day just sickens me. Although I am in support of some of the decisions from both the TEF members and the staff, I am definitely not in support of arguments and flame wars thrown over the place. Can't we just all be friends anymore?

[obfuscator]

My scripts are not functioning. If you simply copied and pasted any of the functions in that first post and executed it, nothing would happen.

 

Your scripts are functional. They have to be called, yes - but the functions you provided do work.

 

Sure, the functions produce many actions. But if it's going against the 1:1 rule, that's the fault of the user; they set the requirements to call such functions. If my functions aren't 1:1, that your fault. :).

 

You've made this point already several times while ignoring my problem with it. It is impossible to call a function with more than one input. Therefore, any function with more than one action cannot be legal.

 

 

However, according to you, the TIF administrators and mods, the above is legal. What you're having problems with is scripts being 2:2 or 3:3. Pushing 2 buttons and then the 2 actions being performed. I thought macros and things were illegal if they gave players and unfair advantage. Is it not? How is changing a script from 1:1 to 2:2 or 3:3 giving them an advantage? After-all, the following are the exact same...

^F3:: RS_Click_Quick_Prayer()   ;~ Moves the mouse to the quick prayer and clicks. 2 actions produce 2 outputs. 2:2.

...and...

 

Sorry, what two inputs are being required here? I see you pressing CTRL+F3, which is two keys, one input. You're mixing up keys and inputs. If you require a function to use two key presses to run, it won't run if you press one then the other, it will run if you press both simultaneously, AKA one input. That's my problem with your functions - because they all use more than one action.

 

Now of course, we can debate for some of the longer functions whether your users will even bother requiring as many simultaneous key presses (were that possible) as they need to, but I agree that people should be given the benefit of the doubt.

F3:: RS_Move_Quick_Prayer()   ;~ Moves the mouse to the quick prayer. The user must then press a second button to click.  2 actions produce 2 outputs. 1:1.

 

They both require to buttons to be pushed for the same outcome. Why in God's name are you making such a big [bleep]ing deal over it? Is the first one giving someone an advantage that the second one isn't? Is the first one any faster then the second? No? Then what the hell is the big deal?

 

But the function itself is only doing one action, as you said moving the mouse to the quick prayer.

 

You people seem to think those functions and scripts were written with ill-intent. "Zomg! Botting with AHK!" Believe it or not, they were written to make RuneScape more enjoyable and perhaps a little easier. They were written to help out. They do what Jagex fails to do; Provide a customizable gameplay. For example, I don't like my F5 key opening my attack styles. I'd rather it open my friends list for quick chatting. Imagine that; there's functions for just that!

 

Ask yourselves, administrators and mods, what is the difference between 1:1, 2:2 and 3:3? A few milliseconds, if any at all. Is that worth the hassle that you are causing over it?

 

How do you call a function using three inputs? Give me an example, right now, and tell me how you'd use those inputs as a user. I already know what you'll say, something like "^!F2" which is CTRL+ALT+F2 - three keys, one input, since the key presses are simultaneous.

 

Also remember that staff are people too, having your name slandered across the forum you volunteer on is a horrible thing to happen and I wouldn't wish it upon anybody.

Which is exactly what you, and I mean the TIF staff in general, are doing to me. Saying that my work, which was designed for the sole purpose of helping out, are scripts and functions for botting.

 

I don't doubt that you had the best intentions when you created these, and I don't think you're a botter. I do still think your scripts break runescape rules for the reasons I've specified.

 

I'd also like to mention that I agree with you about it being unfortunate that Jagex obviously doesn't really care about customizeable gameplay. You look at the success WOW has had with the API Blizzard gives developers to customize their game, and some great apps have been written by players that are widely used today.

 

But the fact is that Jagex doesn't do that, and they have rules against the equivalent. That doesn't change. Even if you disagree with their stance, it doesn't give you the right to break those rules.

 

I've used the real life legal parallel several times in this topic already.

 

Much of the clamoring from TEF in regards to our actions have basically been trying to make something illegal legal by doing it. This doesn't work.

If you disagree with marijuana being illegal, you don't smoke it to make it illegal, you lobby the government/get petitions, etc - you follow the appropriate channels.

You may still smoke it in the time being, but certainly you have to accept that as it is illegal (even if you don't agree with the law) that you may well be punished for it.

[jimmy_jim]

'sup. I know some of you have grievances with me which started a couple of months ago, and have caused you to feel like I shouldn't be an admin. I understand your concerns, and the point Aeil made about me not being as community involved in forums such as General Discussion is true, and it is something I'll work hard on fixing in the coming months :) It was a bit sad to see posts such as the ones removed from my welcome thread, but I did expect them. Being constantly in conflict like this is not a good thing, I along with a lot of other members of the community (including staff) would like to see this resolved and we should try to work together to achieve it rather than some of the ways in which the conversation has turned recently.

[obfuscator]

While I didn't actually see the posts, Im inclined to believe you guys at least somewhat trolled/flamed the admin thread as my post disaagreeing did not get deleted. Im also sort of split on this issue, while I agree with TEFs ideas, a lot of them are acting really immature, and the format of their forums sucks.

 

Basically at this point its just a few mods/TEF members trying to fix the actually issues, and a few mods/TEF members who either dont understand the issues, or just feel like trolling/undermining the attempts to fix the issue. The metagame board DOES need to be done better, a decision on wickeds scripts needs to be found (and Im inclined to think jagex was never actually contacted), and mods need to understand an issue before banning for it. Users need the ability to request guides/posts be removed after they get banned, and the trolling from both sides of the fun vs. efficiency debate needs to stop.

 

We don't allow this kind of discussion on that thread, even if it's not insulting, so what I've done is I've merged your post (that was actually constructive) on to this topic, where it can be properly discussed. See my response below (the post is near the top of this page).

 

I disagree with this, mostly because nobody knows a lot about jimmy jim, he never really posts which is what I feel makes a strong mod (for example mods/admins like quy, tripsis, and formerly das were very active and connected to the community where as I feel jimmy jim isn't), in fact the only reason I even know about him is that he recently deleted my sig for having 7 lines of text and an image ~1 line of text large, which, while technically against the siggy rules (only 6 lines w/ an image), is obviously not how what the rule was trying to prevent, which is my second issue with his moderating technique, that he moderates to the letter, and doesn't really think about what the rules were intended to prevent, just what they say.

 

I can't speak (and won't) on his forum involvement, but as for the signature rules I have this to say:

 

Yes, your sig was probably largely harmless. But it did technically break rules, and as a result it was removed. We have rules for a reason, and they should be enforced. If there's really nothing at all wrong with having an oversized sig, why should we bother having the rules at all?

 

I'd also like to mention that just because it was Jimmy who removed your signature doesn't mean he was just viewing the forums, saw yours and decided "No one else would remove that, I will". We discuss these things quite a bit as a collective, and then somebody takes action. I can safetly say that if your sig was over, it would have been removed by anyone on staff; Jimmy was merely the mod who was on to do so at the time.

 

Personally, I've had to remove my own signature once or twice even after being a moderator, I didn't realize that I had too many lines of text, or a big image, or whatever. Even though it was harmless, and not "what the rule was intended to prevent" per se, I still removed it with good grace because it breaks the rules.

 

Now, if you feel our signature rules are too strict, perhaps, feel free to make a topic in this forum to discuss it. Contrary to popular opinion (it seems) we are open to making rule changes if they make sense and it's what the community wants. Personally, I have no problem with making changes to sig rules to incorporate more lines of text, for instance, if the image is small or nonexistent. We don't want sigs to be too big because then they stretch the page and make topics annoying to read, but if it's within reason and doesn't hurt I see no reason not to make changes.

[Ginger_Warrior]

I think you mean it *did* technically break rules, even though it was harmless. You've put a negative in there.

 

EDIT: Dealt with, delete as appropriate.

[Stev]

Y_Guy, don't look at them as ^F1 being one input. Two actions are being required (You have to press two keys). Two actions are being generated.

 

How do you call a function using three inputs? Give me an example, right now, and tell me how you'd use those inputs as a user.

::q::
  RS_Click_Quick_Prayer()
Return

There's an example. For that to click your quick prayer, you would have to press q, release the key, and then press space/enter/esc/etc. 2 inputs.

 

Now of course, we can debate for some of the longer functions whether your users will even bother requiring as many simultaneous key presses (were that possible) as they need to, but I agree that people should be given the benefit of the doubt.

 

Again, that is up to them. I simply provide the building blocks and foundation for them to build upon.

[obfuscator]

Y_Guy, don't look at them as ^F1 being one input. Two actions are being required (You have to press two keys). Two actions are being generated.

 

I'm aware this is how YOU look at it. This is not how I (and I believe Jagex as well) looks at it.

 

How do you call a function using three inputs? Give me an example, right now, and tell me how you'd use those inputs as a user.

::q::
  RS_Click_Quick_Prayer()
Return

There's an example. For that to click your quick prayer, you would have to press q, release the key, and then press space/enter/esc/etc. 2 inputs.

 

Then the function is still running when you click one key, not when you click two, that's the problem.

 

@ginger, yes I've edited it.

[Stev]

How do you call a function using three inputs? Give me an example, right now, and tell me how you'd use those inputs as a user.

::q::
  RS_Click_Quick_Prayer()
Return

There's an example. For that to click your quick prayer, you would have to press q, release the key, and then press space/enter/esc/etc. 2 inputs.

 

Then the function is still running when you click one key, not when you click two, that's the problem.

 

@ginger, yes I've edited it.

What do you mean by the functions is still running?

 

Also, the second button must be pushed for this to work. And I'm not talking both pressed at once, such as ^F1. You must press q, release it, and press space.

[obfuscator]

How do you call a function using three inputs? Give me an example, right now, and tell me how you'd use those inputs as a user.

::q::
  RS_Click_Quick_Prayer()
Return

There's an example. For that to click your quick prayer, you would have to press q, release the key, and then press space/enter/esc/etc. 2 inputs.

 

Then the function is still running when you click one key, not when you click two, that's the problem.

 

@ginger, yes I've edited it.

What do you mean by the functions is still running?

 

Also, the second button must be pushed for this to work. And I'm not talking both pressed at once, such as ^F1. You must press q, release it, and press space.

 

Then the function doesn't run when you press Q, it runs when you press space, and it all runs when you press space (one input).

 

The only way this could be legal is if you could somehow run half the function when you press Q, and the other half when you press space.

[Nifflin]

'sup. I know some of you have grievances with me which started a couple of months ago, and have caused you to feel like I shouldn't be an admin. I understand your concerns, and the point Aeil made about me not being as community involved in forums such as General Discussion is true, and it is something I'll work hard on fixing in the coming months :) It was a bit sad to see posts such as the ones removed from my welcome thread, but I did expect them. Being constantly in conflict like this is not a good thing, I along with a lot of other members of the community (including staff) would like to see this resolved and we should try to work together to achieve it rather than some of the ways in which the conversation has turned recently.

 

Actions talk, bull[cabbage] walks. Some mods and admins have actively engaged in trying to resolve the problems. Kimberly comes to mind as one of those mods. If you would like to see it resolved then actually do something about it.

[Youmu]

Actions talk, bull[cabbage] walks. Some mods and admins have actively engaged in trying to resolve the problems. Kimberly come to mind as one of those mods. If you would like to see it resolved then actually do something about it.

And he said he would be doing something about it in the future, didn't he?

 

Of course being simply a spectator of this whole mess probably won't get me very far, but I'm not one who likes seeing negativity all over the place. Isn't the purpose of TEF to start the community on a clean slate and to get rid of past grievances? If so, why are we still getting personal feelings and crap involved?

[Stev]

How do you call a function using three inputs? Give me an example, right now, and tell me how you'd use those inputs as a user.

::q::
  RS_Click_Quick_Prayer()
Return

There's an example. For that to click your quick prayer, you would have to press q, release the key, and then press space/enter/esc/etc. 2 inputs.

 

Then the function is still running when you click one key, not when you click two, that's the problem.

 

@ginger, yes I've edited it.

What do you mean by the functions is still running?

 

Also, the second button must be pushed for this to work. And I'm not talking both pressed at once, such as ^F1. You must press q, release it, and press space.

 

Then the function doesn't run when you press Q, it runs when you press space, and it all runs when you press space (one input).

 

The only way this could be legal is if you could somehow run half the function when you press Q, and the other half when you press space.

Then you are getting into my 1:1, 2:2, 3:3 argument. It will not run without the Q and the space being pressed. It will not run by simply pressing Q or by simply pressing space. Both actions are needed.

 

And I put a script up, my first post this morning, which did the first half for the first input, then the second half with the second input; My RS_Move_... functions.

 

But, what is the big difference between pressing 2 buttons and then 2 actions being done, compared to pressing the first button, it does the first half, then pressing the second button and it does the other half. They still require 2 actions for the exact same outcome.

[obfuscator]

Then you are getting into my 1:1, 2:2, 3:3 argument. It will not run without the Q and the space being pressed. It will not run by simply pressing Q or by simply pressing space. Both actions are needed.

 

And I put a script up, my first post this morning, which did the first half for the first input, then the second half with the second input; My RS_Move_... functions.

 

But, what is the big difference between pressing 2 buttons and then 2 actions being done, compared to pressing the first button, it does the first half, then pressing the second button and it does the other half. They still require 2 actions for the exact same outcome.

 

So the space is the trigger, the Q is a prerequisite. If, as you said, you can make scripts that do the first half for first, second for second, then why not do that for all of them, since that would be unarguable legal?

 

The difference is that the actions are done at once, much faster then they can be reasonably done. I believe muuuuuu said adding sleeps would negate this effect, but that would have to be done. (and even then I don't know what Jagex's opinion on this is)

 

The problem with Jagex's stance on AHK is that it's ambiguous. In my opinion they should either make it all legal, or all illegal - this half way sort of rule makes it very difficult to determine what's legal and what isn't; which is why I imagine it's taking them so long to respond to our email.

[Stev]

The difference is that the actions are done at once, much faster then they can be reasonably done. I believe muuuuuu said adding sleeps would negate this effect, but that would have to be done. (and even then I don't know what Jagex's opinion on this is)

Say I did...

::q:: RS_Click_Quick_Prayer() ;~ Pressing q, then pressing space, will click quick prayer.

...and...

q:: RS_Move_Quick_Prayer() ;~ Pressing q moves the mouse to the quick prayer. You must then click.

I can press q-space just as fast as I can press q and click. In fact, I could probably press q then click much faster then I could press q-space. Therefore, your 1:1 is much faster then the 2:2, the one you are arguing is bad.

[obfuscator]

In that scenario, sure. But surely you admit with most of your functions that's not the case.

[Stev]

In that scenario, sure. But surely you admit with most of your functions that's not the case.

Some are faster 1:1, some are faster 2:2. So do we pick and chose so that they must be the slower or the 2?

 

Also, most of my functions do exactly as that one does. Simply moves to a location and clicks. Therefore, most are faster as 1:1 and not 2:2. Look at click summoning, click inventory item, click prayer, click spell... All the same. A move and a click. All, with the setup above, would be in-fact faster as 1:1. Therefore the argument of the 2:2s being quicker, therefore should not be allowed, is invalid.

 

Is a few milliseconds really worth that hassle of TIF trying to disallow TEF links from being posted. Are those few milliseconds worth the hassle of arguing back and forth about Jagex e-mails and [cabbage]? Especially since, as you've seen, when my functions are used 1:1 they are, in fact, faster!

[obfuscator]

Some are faster 1:1, some are faster 2:2. So do we pick and chose so that they must be the slower or the 2?

 

Also, most of my functions do exactly as that one does. Simply moves to a location and clicks. Therefore, most are faster as 1:1 and not 2:2. Look at click summoning, click inventory item, click prayer, click spell... All the same. A move and a click. All, with the setup above, would be in-fact faster as 1:1. Therefore the argument of the 2:2s being quicker, therefore should not be allowed, is invalid.

 

Is a few milliseconds really worth that hassle of TIF trying to disallow TEF links from being posted. are those few milliseconds worth the hassle of arguing back and forth about Jagex e-mails and [cabbage]? Especially since, as you've seen, when my functions are used 1:1 they are, in fact, faster!

 

It's not just the speed though, it's the actual principle. And you forget, we're talking about Jagex's rules here, not ours. We're disallowing your scripts because we believe Jagex thinks this way. If they don't, the scripts will be re-allowed. It's that simple.

 

It's also a slippery slope. If 2:2 is allowed, why not 3:3. And then 4:4, 5:5, 6:6, etc etc...where does what's acceptable stop?

 

That's why the only solution is to wait (however much longer we must) for a response from jagex.

[Stev]

But 1:1 is no different from 2:2 or 3:3 or 4:4. etc. Having x amount of inputs result in x amount of actions is the same whether it's 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or more. And as pointed out, when the functions are used for 1:1, they are faster and more efficient anyways, so why should it bother Jagex if someone choses to take a slower/less efficient route?

 

I thought this whole thing was about someone having an advantage over the rest of the players. Someone using them to be 2:2, 3:3, etc, is actually giving themselves a disadvantage compared to the speed of 1:1. Although it's easier, it's still a disadvantage.

[obfuscator]

It's not true that its never more efficient. Personally, I can press CTRL + Space just as quickly as I can click, but that's largely irrelevant. What it boils down to is that you're saying "my scripts can be legal 1:1, but not as they are currently".

 

Once again, this should be taken up with Jagex, not us. I've already made it quite clear why I personal believe they've taken the viewpoint (i think) they've taken, and certainly I have no power to change rs rules.

[Stev]

"my scripts can be legal 1:1, but not as they are currently"

Again boils down to the user. If they prefer, they can use the Move functions instead of the Click functions. And if you look, for ever Click function on that thread, there is a move one to do the equivalent as 1:1.

[obfuscator]

I can't access the thread, could you pm me the c/p please?

 

EDIT: I do not have access to my account at this time.