If you say H/c x2 in game you will be muted. (Taken from Reddit)

[Hobgoblinpie]

So, to try it out, I said 'Hosting h/c x2', with no-one around, just outside of ports, on w48 (the 2400+ total world).

 

Muted for 24 hours. Last mute was 4 years ago.

 

 

All I can say is good. Thank christ for that - a genuinely good update from Jagex.

 

Edit:

 

Everyone saying "Obviously it's against the rules so get the message"... It is NOT. If you can show me ANYWHERE in the rules/rswiki/ToS that it is against the rules I will pay you 100M. Stop saying it is when you have no proof.

 

See above. No offences for 4 years, muted for 24 hours for that one line. It's against the rules, get used to it.

[Krampell]

Everyone saying "Obviously it's against the rules so get the message"... It is NOT. If you can show me ANYWHERE in the rules/rswiki/ToS that it is against the rules I will pay you 100M. Stop saying it is when you have no proof.

I'm pretty sure that getting muted on 4 different account for saying the same thing would be clear proof that it's against the rule. Like a norm.

[Fallstar]

Even though it'd be against my personal interests to remove the DA, it really is the greater of the two evils.

Out of curiosity, do you have the numbers for buyers? I'm remembering a time in mid-2007 where the mod team went after RWT'ers, and we'd watch players in the generic staker gear of the day pick up their gold and hop straight to world 6. I'm wondering if today's would-be gamblers recover from their losses by buying gold (Even on a higher scale - regardless of what Vann might argue, high level players break the rules quite regularly).

 

Obviously I've never actually RWT'd, but I'd imagine most stakers would buy and sell gold using websites rather than directly to one another, as RWTing generally involves some sort of trust trade.

 

If a successful staker were to lose a lot, they'd generally get a loan from a friend and continue staking until the maths does its thing. Obviously that has its own problems - Channel 4 (One of the worst pieces of shit to ever log onto this game) was once relatively trustworthy, and took several Bill in loans he couldn't repay and ended up stealing around 15B off Gws2 (his friend at the time).

 

People also tend to keep funds in a liquid state, so they sell their gold whilst up, but keep some of it in a PP or other easily transferable format, so that if they get a bad luck streak, they can buy back the starting cash.

 

Stake based RWT tends to use sites as a Middle Man - with gambling, the owner of the fc usually has their own website that allows the gambler to buy money back off the host, but usually at an extortionately high rate compared to the market value of gold. For example, our site charged $.70/M at a time when gold was barely worth half of that. But people paid it as they were willing to pay extra because of the 0% chance of being scammed. Our site was https://wad.rs/ (the site is dead now and you can't buy or sell gold there)

 

So gambling based RWT is where you see the cycle of Player loses bank -> buys bank back off host -> loses bank etc.

 

Whereas the DA tends to involve the staker buying gold that probably came from bot farming.

 

People get on at hosts because hosting was more easily accessible - 6B for a general rank in Win All Day or 7 in dragon dyce and you were good to go. Consider that dicing became popular just after a lot of people became very rich from the release of Nex, and you can see where the first wave of hosts got their rank money from. Stokenut is a famous (ish) example of someone who did this.

 

Staking properly involves a lot more knowledge of how the game works and skill - tick perfect prayer on plate on staking takes a long time to perfect. So people don't tend to get involved with the staking community and so don't understand the extent of RWT, ddosing and general underhandedness that goes on there.

[Ginger_Warrior]

Everyone saying "Obviously it's against the rules so get the message"... It is NOT. If you can show me ANYWHERE in the rules/rswiki/ToS that it is against the rules I will pay you 100M. Stop saying it is when you have no proof.

I'm pretty sure that getting muted on 4 different account for saying the same thing would be clear proof that it's against the rule. Like a norm.

So if a policeman arrests me tomorrow under a law which doesn't exist, and the magistrate asks for evidence I've broken this law, the police say "...Well obviously the fact we've arrested him four times proves he did it!"

 

No.

[Hobgoblinpie]

No.

 

I don't think you realise that RuneScape is not a democracy. It's a dictatorship. Jagex will do whatever they want (as long as they see some benefit, monetary or otherwise). If you don't like it, tough.

[constrictor]

No.

 

I don't think you realise that RuneScape is not a democracy. It's a dictatorship. Jagex will do whatever they want (as long as they see some benefit, monetary or otherwise). If you don't like it, tough.

 

Now that someone has finally sad this, we can all go home. The discussion is done.

[Fallstar]

No.

 

I don't think you realise that RuneScape is not a democracy. It's a dictatorship. Jagex will do whatever they want (as long as they see some benefit, monetary or otherwise). If you don't like it, tough.

 

Not true at all. A JMod decided that slayer xp in the EoC was too high, so they nerfed it. A group of players argued why they should un-nerf it. Jagex hotfixed the xp rates back to the previous rates today.

 

Yes they have the ultimate power to say Yes/No, but if you don't like it and have good reasons that are shared by others, it's not 'tough' at all. They do occasionally listen.

 

In this case, I doubt anything will get reverted however :P

[PolarBearBlue]

Everyone saying "Obviously it's against the rules so get the message"... It is NOT. If you can show me ANYWHERE in the rules/rswiki/ToS that it is against the rules I will pay you 100M. Stop saying it is when you have no proof.

I'm pretty sure that getting muted on 4 different account for saying the same thing would be clear proof that it's against the rule. Like a norm.

So if a policeman arrests me tomorrow under a law which doesn't exist, and the magistrate asks for evidence I've broken this law, the police say "...Well obviously the fact we've arrested him four times proves he did it!"

 

No.

 

Which is why I said Vann has a right to be upset because this poor sloppy work on Jagex because they have noy posted this rule anywhere in the guides.

 

However, what Vann is doing is adding oil to a fire. He is continuing to test the bounds of Jagex's limits by logging on to other account to break a rule he now knows exist. Yes he's done nothing wrong but we haven't heard him say he's posted on RSOF expressing how Jagex is wrong for their action. He's debating people on here, some of whom have said "Yes, we agree Jagex is bogus, but you should really stop doing it since you now know."

 

Now the situation is different if Jagex had indeed changed changed the rules in writing, and will be different once they do, because they don't have to announce it...

 

Wait, didn't Jagex mention in the written March BTS they they were changing the gambling in Runescape...If so then we have our answer. Sort of.

[Alg]

=

Wait, didn't Jagex mention in the written March BTS they they were changing the gambling in Runescape...If so then we have our answer. Sort of.

And I *think* they mentioned putting the fix live this week, but I need to find a hard source for that.

[Vann]

@Polar- can't post when you are muted and you aren't allowed to post on another accounts behalf (whether it's yours or a friends. I looked that rule up.) I have however emailed and tweeted them

[Krampell]

Everyone saying "Obviously it's against the rules so get the message"... It is NOT. If you can show me ANYWHERE in the rules/rswiki/ToS that it is against the rules I will pay you 100M. Stop saying it is when you have no proof.

I'm pretty sure that getting muted on 4 different account for saying the same thing would be clear proof that it's against the rule. Like a norm.

So if a policeman arrests me tomorrow under a law which doesn't exist, and the magistrate asks for evidence I've broken this law, the police say "...Well obviously the fact we've arrested him four times proves he did it!"

 

No.

I see that what I said might have been unclear. But what I mean is, he wanted proof that something he did was not right, doing it 4 times with the same result should shed atleast some light that it was wrong.

Continuing to do it won't make things any better.

Jagex could go and say that it's an updated rule but just been too busy with updating the page stating it.

[Tim]

Here's a fix, love gambling but don't want repercussions or the obvious, runing a game? go play this: http://store.steampowered.com/app/31280/

[PolarBearBlue]

@Polar- can't post when you are muted and you aren't allowed to post on another accounts behalf (whether it's yours or a friends. I looked that rule up.) I have however emailed and tweeted them

1) Good you have emailed.

2) I know you can't post on another account behalf. But you could have posted (on one of you account prior to mute) that you recognize players are being muted for a crime not listed without it alluding to yourself.

[Ginger_Warrior]

But what I mean is, he wanted proof that something he did was not right, doing it 4 times with the same result should shed atleast some light that it was wrong.

Continuing to do it won't make things any better.

Jagex could go and say that it's an updated rule but just been too busy with updating the page stating it.

Agreed, to react so obnoxiously to the decision won't change things and it just makes you look like you were deserving of the punishment in the first place. I'm not supporting him necessarily, I'm just saying it's a poor excuse for Jagex. If you're too lazy to update the rules page and give people fair warning, but you're not too lazy to start muting people, there's a problem there.

 

It's not even about democracy vs totalitarianism. It's just basic respect really. If you want someone to stop behaving in a certain way, tell them and give them the opportunity to stop doing it first, and if they still don't comply, feel free to escalate your punishments.

[Krampell]

It's a good thing they're taking a step against gambling.

But something rational like this. Auto muting for saying a sentence without a warning is a bit over the edge.

Giving a big update on it in the other news section would still cause a big comotion on the whole deal. So whichever way they decided to do it. They'd still get yelled at.

But as people say, it's Jagex. They can do whatever the hell they want.

[Golvellius]

When I was a pmod, I only muted the goldselling spammers.

I never bothered to warn them since they were probably bots.

It was official policy not to be seen in the gambling crowd or your mod status could be revoked.

Also, we were instructed that we couldn't interfere in it as well.

Is this a change of policy or a rogue pmod? I don't know.

I stopped being a pmod when they started telling me to do this and do that.

I only accepted pmodship in the first place because they specifically said no strings attached.

I'm a player not their free babysitter.

[Ginger_Warrior]

Isn't it official policy to only act as a P mod when it's absolutely necessary, though? Gold selling is clearly a necessary use of mod powers. Clamping down on H/C games... much more subjective. I'd be surprised if P mods are spending their time on gamblers unless it's clearly RWT, chat box abuse, or scamming.

[Grainy]

Isn't it official policy to only act as a P mod when it's absolutely necessary, though? Gold selling is clearly a necessary use of mod powers. Clamping down on H/C games... much more subjective. I'd be surprised if P mods are spending their time on gamblers unless it's clearly RWT, chat box abuse, or scamming.

 

As I stated earlier, confirmed on the Moderator forums - it's their choice. It's not considered absolutely necessary - it's at their discretion. If a player mod chooses to report & mute a player, a JMod will not dispute it anymore, whatever the appeal from the reported player contains. It is not however, an obligation of player moderators to report & mute every single host that they see in-game. That's the difference. And this is the point I'm pushing, Jagex should make this a proper rule - it will clear things up and remove any grey areas that are confusing players/hosts such as Vann who are claiming they haven't directly broken any rules - which they haven't.

 

HOWEVER, this is NOT really Jagex taking it seriously, just Jagex passing on some of the responsibly to player mods (and no longer revoking mutes/black marks for gambling mutes which previously happened).

 

Incorrect. This is clearly them actually doing something about the issue, and its not Pmods doing it. They've clearly had enough of the likes of Fishy and other dicing hosts pissing all over them, thinking they can do whatever they like without fear of the repurcussions. Now there are some, they're whining. Yes they should have stated that they were going to do the mutes, Yes I do think it was unfair upon Vann and such to be muted without warning, but I believe it is perfectly justifiable.

 

To begin to stamp down on something that has ruined the game for so many, torn the economy apart and given rise to rwt like never before, and an unbelievable level of ignorance and ego, should be praised.

 

tl;dr Kudos to Jagex for doing something about gambling.

 

I disagree - if Jagex were actually doing something about it properly, it would be clearly stated in the rules that hosting flower/dice/gambling games IS against the rules. It isn't. They are passing the responsibility on to the PMods - how is that not clear? I'm not saying it's wrong what they are doing, I just think it's not too incoherent and inconclusive. Yes there are repercussions now, which didn't exist before, but is that enough? I don't think so. If something is worth doing (which it is), it's worth doing properly. I don't see how my view is "incorrect", not only is it an opinion, it's logical. Why do something half-arsed, and let players who believe that they aren't breaking the rules suffer the consequences?

 

 

EDIT: I've just read back and it seems that there's an auto-mute system now in place for certain phrases such as "H/C" - this kind of makes my post invalid as Jagex CLEARLY are doing something. However, at least update the rules so the somewhat innocent player-base who previously were not breaking the rules are aware? My point about that still stands. I'm going to bed - g'night all. :)

[Jettaco]

Hi guys! I just made an account to ask about this topic. I was tricked into saying h/c x2 by some rich trolls. They told me to log out and in and of course I was muted. I don't have access to the forums now and there is no offense on my account, so I can't appeal it. It's my birthday and I really don't want to be muted, uggh. Is there anything I can do to get unmuted any time soon? Any email I can send an appeal or anything to? If I could repeal it, the mods looking at it could see that I was tricked. Any idea what to do, or can I only wait out the 2 day mute?

[Krampell]

You're going to have to wait two days, like the rest of the people that has said it.

In the report, only what you said is listed, so they won't be able to see what the other guys that tricked you had said.

And I doubt there's an email you could send to them that would make them revert it.

[stonewall337]

Anyone want to tackle the issue of why gambling should be in Runescape? People have made their case against it, but I have yet to see any real reason it should exist besides making a select few filthy rich and "satisfying players who crave high risk". Does that really justify all the spam, the very possible scams and an extremely profitable method of RWT?

 

Libertarianism. Non aggression principle. Free market. Anti-statism.

[Alg]

Libertarianism. Non aggression principle. Free market. Anti-statism.

I'm not a libertarian and I don't like the free market. Come at me, bro. :twisted:

 

In all seriousness, it's probably not a good idea to justify a highly divisive game policy (Remember: this is a game, and not the real world) with even more divisive real-world politics. If only because a full-blown political flamefest is the last thing that this forum needs.

[Yoko Kurama]

Anyone want to tackle the issue of why gambling should be in Runescape? People have made their case against it, but I have yet to see any real reason it should exist besides making a select few filthy rich and "satisfying players who crave high risk". Does that really justify all the spam, the very possible scams and an extremely profitable method of RWT?

 

Libertarianism. Non aggression principle. Free market. Anti-statism.

 

Though I am not a Libertarian and I don't care for any of those things that you have posted, even by Libertarian standards what Jagex is doing is perfectly acceptable. Remember, Runescape is not public property but private property. According to Libertarian tenets, as long as what Jagex does is consensual and without the threat of explicit violence (and of course it is consensual because we all signed their conditions/terms on day one without any aggression from Jagex), then they can do whatever they want because it is private property. In fact, according to the terms that we have agreed to, we don't even *own* our accounts, Jagex does. So if tomorrow they decided to log on, go to GE World 2, and ban everyone wearing blue colours, they'd be perfectly allowed to do so by Libertarian standards.

 

So according to Libertarianism, it's inappropriate for the Government to set restrictions, but private individuals certainly have the right to do so. For instance, Libertarians would oppose the government banning alcohol, but they'd certainly support my right to ban alcohol in my house because it's private property. The same goes for "Free Markets". Runescape is not a public market/public domain/country, the entire operation is, in other words, private property of Jagex. Libertarians would oppose restrictions on the public market, but if I decided that on my private property (my house) that no one could gamble, that'd be acceptable according to Libertarian principles. Libertarian tenets/logic actually supports what Jagex is doing, rather than opposing it.

 

I also forgot to add, that Jagex is not the "government" or "state" of Runescape, so the question of statism doesn't even enter into the equation (neither does the question of democracy). Runescape is not a country or a public domain, it is private property. Jagex is the private ownership of Runescape.

 

I find it amusing that you've failed to recognized this - the tenets of your own ideology (I assume you're a Libertarian).

[Omali]

Anyone want to tackle the issue of why gambling should be in Runescape? People have made their case against it, but I have yet to see any real reason it should exist besides making a select few filthy rich and "satisfying players who crave high risk". Does that really justify all the spam, the very possible scams and an extremely profitable method of RWT?

 

Libertarianism. Non aggression principle. Free market. Anti-statism.

 

 

I guess if you twisted them to mean something completely different, they'd be suitable reasons.

[V O R K]

Freedom of choice.

 

It should be implented because it should get out of player hands and remove all said scams, RWT's and moneymaking methods. NPC's are just code.