Back at you, SOE - Page 27

Faabio · 03-21-2008, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iboo

To everyone whining about LFGs ethics STFU and get off of flames this isn't the site for you pussies.

ooo and LFG change your sig so it says Aeralik over the guy getting his head fucked over

It's open for personal interpretation, you fag.

Lern 2 subtlety

Caswydian · 03-21-2008, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cuz

I don't like you're all too favourable outlook of everything SOE, but I do think you're an intelligent person. I'm surprised that in this case you're playing dumb to defend them. I had hope your own pride was bigger than your love for SOE.

If someone could provide conclusive evidence that this is an exploit - you know, like a dev or CSR or other representative saying it explicitly - then I would have no problem accepting that Aeralik is in the wrong with his actions. However, everyone here seems to be dodging this essential question. Why is that?

Second, I am questioning LFG's motives for going public like this, instead of attempting other means to resolve this issue. If he'd gone to Sony or SOE first, or even a representative thereof like Bruce or Smed, and was ignored, then I could understand making this public, but he went public first. To me, that is a sign that he's more interested in milking this for whatever personal enjoyment or gain he gets, and not seeing that SOE cleans up any wrongdoing on their part.

Odii · 03-21-2008, 03:43 PM

I'm surprised anyone would take SoE's side in this instance.

As far as what Niber and LFG did, think of it this way.

The account they logged on to, was of a person that had stated they would no longer be a member of this site. They never said they've gone through any active member's PMs without consent.

Pantz, thanks for having the balls to come and shed some light on the situation. Looks like you were put in a bad spot. You had asked a question and was told "i can look the other way", that really puts you in a bad spot; You're being told (vaguely) that it is an exploit, but its no big deal and go ahead and do it.

Everything else aside, someone earlier in this thread said it was "up to SoE to determine what an exploit... blah blah blah bullshit". Thats a really shitty position to be in.

This add more fuel to the fire that these Devs are the people responsible for the complete shit in this game.

First they fail at actually getting proper encounters implemented and turns honest, good natured people/guilds into people that are "thinking outside the box" and toeing the line of exploits/cheating.

Then these idiots justify and support the people doing this, rather than saying "No, don't do that, we're fixing it soon so you can kill it without exploiting".

Its time to lay it all out on the table.

SoE had their chance to get their shit straight, and instead it went sour.

It takes a lot for me to call for someone to be fired, but i think its time. We need some new Devs, community leaders and some fucking support.

Thanks LFG and Niber for havin the balls to actually stand up for something. It makes a change ;)

Faabio · 03-21-2008, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caswydian

If someone could provide conclusive evidence that this is an exploit - you know, like a dev or CSR or other representative saying it explicitly - then I would have no problem accepting that Aeralik is in the wrong with his actions. However, everyone here seems to be dodging this essential question. Why is that?

Second, I am questioning LFG's motives for going public like this, instead of attempting other means to resolve this issue. If he'd gone to Sony or SOE first, or even a representative thereof like Bruce or Smed, and was ignored, then I could understand making this public, but he went public first. To me, that is a sign that he's more interested in milking this for whatever personal enjoyment or gain he gets, and not seeing that SOE cleans up any wrongdoing on their part.

Are you really that stupid...really...?

I mean seriously I'm not kidding, how do you function in life if you can't even reason out something as simple as that PM

Gori · 03-21-2008, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caswydian

If someone could provide conclusive evidence that this is an exploit - you know, like a dev or CSR or other representative saying it explicitly - then I would have no problem accepting that Aeralik is in the wrong with his actions. However, everyone here seems to be dodging this essential question. Why is that?

Cas. Can you tell me the frequency with which SOE announces exploits verses fixing ones without announcing it? Are you aware that SOE explicitly will not mention some exploits to even acknowledge they exist befoe fixing them? You seem to be dodging the the facts and past history. Why is that?

quasigenx · 03-21-2008, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caswydian

If someone could provide conclusive evidence that this is an exploit - you know, like a dev or CSR or other representative saying it explicitly - then I would have no problem accepting that Aeralik is in the wrong with his actions. However, everyone here seems to be dodging this essential question. Why is that?

Because rational human beings can read between the lines on this one, given all the evidence?

I maintain that this quote, plus the fact that they hotfixed the exact issue, is proof enough that it was an exploit.

Of course, if your definition of exploit is that SoE says it's an exploit, then you are shit out of luck.

Why don't you propose a definition of "exploit"?

Daedalus · 03-21-2008, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KFizzle

So for him to basically be fighting back, at this point he knows its irreparable damage, but fuck that shit, you cop a swing at me and i'm gunna lay you out. It's not about 'an eye for an eye' it's about not letting people bully you, and not backing down when your right. No, the ends doesn't always justify the means, but sometimes the means aren't so bad, and the 'ends' need accomplishing.

/agree
Perfectly put IMO.

kenman · 03-21-2008, 03:48 PM

LFG, there shouldn't even be a rule stating admins can't view PMs. In all my time on the internet, private messages are not literally private. They never have been, and they never will be. People just use them to send messages to other people without bothering other people with it, like a topic on the main boards asking if somebody is still on for dinner tonight.

My suggestion is to amend the rule stating admins can view PMs whenever they want for whatever reason they want. Clearly state that people should never PM information to somebody that they wouldn't want anybody else to see, such as account information and the like. Even if admins refuse to view it, on the off-chance the forums got compromised you know a hacker sure isn't going to obey such a rule. Plus, it gives you all the leeway to post juicy things like this.

Caswydian, have you even raided in this game ever? Use some common sense, why would a mob even have adds attached to it if leashing them and pulling the named without them was even remotely close to the intended way to fight it? You'd think it would be a lot easier to not bother making it have those adds in the first place. Der. Now factor in the fact that fighting any encounter without adds is trivial as fuck, and VP is supposedly an end-game raid zone, yeeeeeeeah.

Fomka · 03-21-2008, 03:49 PM

@Pantz
Shut up, we don't care about SoN or you, and tell those who asked you questions to fuck off pls.

Iboo · 03-21-2008, 03:49 PM

my bad Faabio =(