RuneScape Classic > Runescape Classic Server Advertisement

RSCEmulation - RuneScape Classic Private Server

Pages: <<< (313/364) >>>

CodeForFame:


--- Quote from: Davidi2 on November 03, 2011, 08:00:24 PM ---
--- Quote from: CodeForFame on November 03, 2011, 07:49:11 PM ---
--- Quote from: Davidi2 on November 03, 2011, 07:35:55 PM ---It's case by case... normally (not always) it applies to things that people find offensive, like linking to prawns or something similar from a different link.

If I did this: Your answer is here, that would probably be misleading, but it's not against the rules. You guys are all just making it too complicated.

If you think a link is misleading, report it and then let a moderator decide if it should be removed.

--- End quote ---
How about you stop being ambiguous and nail down the definition.  You and I both know what you're trying to do...

--- End quote ---
Because there is no hard definition. It's that simple. And if there is one, I'm not in the place to define it. It's my job to interpret the rules that I was given (and you are given as well), and that's always a case-by-case basis.

A reply I sent to someone complaining about the title/misleading links a while ago:

--- Quote from: Davidi2 on November 03, 2011, 07:51:57 PM ---I suggest you hop off the entire 'misleading links' rule, I've already told you no mod is going to consider 'RuneScape classic' misleading. But I have asked him to change his title back and if he doesn't I'll do it myself.

--- End quote ---
Honestly, just fudge off. I told him to change it back and I'll do it myself if he doesn't.

I don't give Kryptix any special treatment, it's more of me not conforming to the crowd that's trying to take him down.

--- End quote ---
You do give him special treatment...  Also, it's not like I'm even trying to get his site taken down, I just want him to follow the rules like everybody else.  Unlike you, I don't give him special treatment, I speak out against any server that is breaking the rules, and I don't care about whose server it is, or the consequences.

Davidi2:

What special treatment? I think it's been proven (and another staff member confirmed) that he does not have misleading links there. If you want to report him for something else, just do so.

Then come to me with an example of the same circumstances of my 'favoritism' where the punishment was different so I can see where I favored Kryptix.

CodeForFame:


--- Quote from: Davidi2 on November 03, 2011, 08:25:14 PM ---What special treatment? I think it's been proven (and another staff member confirmed) that he does not have misleading links there. If you want to report him for something else, just do so.

Then come to me with an example of the same circumstances of my 'favoritism' where the punishment was different so I can see where I favored Kryptix.

--- End quote ---
The links have been changed numerous times in the past few days.

Gee let's see...  How about the numerous posts that 'disappear' from threads when they absolutely gut Kryptix, or offer evidence of him doing something unethical.  The timing of certain members being banned, after their identity has been known for quite some time.

Just today there have been somewhere between 4-10 posts deleted in this topic alone...  Sure, I can't actually tell who is doing it, but each time it happens you're online.

Here are two:

--- Quote from: Davidi2 on November 03, 2011, 07:44:49 PM ---
--- Quote from: b0nethugs on November 03, 2011, 07:38:32 PM ---"Official Jagex's RuneScape Classic (not a private server, it's the real thing)"

--- End quote ---
I hate to be a broken record but its pretty obvious he did that just to be a smartass, I'll ask him to change it back.


--- Quote ---<Kryptix> do you like my new title?
<Davidi2> dont be a smart ass
<Davidi2> lol
<Kryptix> lol
<Kryptix> plz leave it til someone mentions it
<Kryptix> they will have a field day
--- End quote ---

--- End quote ---

There were a few others by b0nethugs regarding Kryptix faking player count with links to pages on RSCE that support it.

Davidi2:


--- Quote ---Gee let's see...  How about the numerous posts that 'disappear' from threads when they absolutely gut Kryptix, or offer evidence of him doing something unethical.  The timing of certain members being banned, after their identity has been known for quite some time.
--- End quote ---
If you're talking about TX, first I was berated for letting him post, now I'm berated for deleting his posts? I will delete any post or thread by TX no matter the content, topic, or title. That was decided FOR me by a different staff member, so you can forget about that.  I also don't take any post by TX seriously or as true, I once did and was mistaken, so again that's a falsity. And TX is the only example I can think of that fits your description, I don't believe there are any others I have banned in relation to Kryptix.

That second one is also invalid, as I quoted, I said I would fix the topic if he didn't do it himself. When he didn't fix it, and only changed it to the 661 or whatever, I did fix it myself. So that's quite the opposite of what you're saying, no?

I remove every post by b0nethugs I see no matter the topic, title, or content. For reasons I will tell you in PM if you insist (if you don't already know). The reason is perfectly valid as well.

CodeForFame:


--- Quote from: Davidi2 on November 03, 2011, 08:53:27 PM ---
--- Quote ---Gee let's see...  How about the numerous posts that 'disappear' from threads when they absolutely gut Kryptix, or offer evidence of him doing something unethical.  The timing of certain members being banned, after their identity has been known for quite some time.
--- End quote ---
If you're talking about TX, first I was berated for letting him post, now I'm berated for deleting his posts? I will delete any post or thread by TX no matter the content, topic, or title. That was decided FOR me by a different staff member, so you can forget about that.  I also don't take any post by TX seriously or as true, I once did and was mistaken, so again that's a falsity. And TX is the only example I can think of that fits your description, I don't believe there are any others I have banned in relation to Kryptix.

That second one is also invalid, as I quoted, I said I would fix the topic if he didn't do it himself. When he didn't fix it, and only changed it to the 661 or whatever, I did fix it myself. So that's quite the opposite of what you're saying, no?

I remove every post by b0nethugs I see no matter the topic, title, or content. For reasons I will tell you in PM if you insist (if you don't already know). The reason is perfectly valid as well.

--- End quote ---
I don't see why people want to silence TX, there are quite a few people that I would rather be silenced before him.  The only time his posts should be deleted is if they're linking to something he controls because of his tendencies to infect people (a website he owns, a download link for something he's made, etc.).  Also, there are numerous topics that he's made that went on for days; I know you saw them because you're online 24/7 and have replied to threads below his.  Why don't you actually consider posts rather than just writing them off?  That's the kind of crap that I'm talking about with preferential treatment (it's on the other side of the coin, but it's still not right).  I don't recall off the top of my head who all has been banned, but that's not even the major issue...  It's the posts that are constantly being deleted whenever they have any shred of evidence.

How is it invalid?  It was evidence of you giving him preferential treatment, and you deleted it.  It's preferential because he should have been punished for posting a mislead link, seeing you acknowledged it as such.  If anyone else had done that they'd be punished straight away, and the topic would be locked.


--- Quote from: Kryptix on November 03, 2011, 08:54:10 PM ---b0nethugs is T_X. He's banned so his posts are removed...

And what he posted was idiotic. The URL he posted was RSCEmulation's old website that was in use for over a year. The 'fake player count' was the real player count, exactly as it's shown in-game... I'll happily go on TeamViewer and show people me directly querying the database to show how many players are online if it makes you happy.

--- End quote ---
There are many people that are banned that don't have their posts removed...

If it was idiotic then why was it deleted and not used to make a mockery of him?

Also, you and I both know that adding a modifier to the online count is primitive and going to get you caught.  Don't try and act as if you didn't learn that from the numerous times it happened to other people.  Also, don't forget that we've had numerous conversations on the topic in vent, including how to do it properly and how you've done it...

Pages: <<< (313/364) >>>

Go to full version