-
Posts
-
Polar Bear
Posts: 48It means they are no longer going to subscribe.
I think you’re really out of touch with reality Left. Your time lines are all pretty far off. Your understanding of the bans is wrong too. No one got a 1 month ban. Sephi and Sir got 1 week bans for discovering the exploit and then sharing it without reporting it, proof of that was provided in screenshots. Nefer and Oracle got 3 week bans for repeated use of the exploit. The bans were then extended, probably for ban evasion attempts, which is in the rules.
All the kills FL got with the exploits were pre-casual patch, the only people who benefited from the casual patch was FL themselves. FL absolutely does not only kill people for those specific reasons you listed, the shit they pull goes so much deeper than you are clearly aware of. You wouldn’t know since you don’t play, and only hear what they tell you.
Ivana provided specific clear cut proof of bug exploitation and you still they think are innocent because they didn’t know they would get banned? That is F’ing laughable dude, like duh, most criminals wouldn’t commit a crime if they knew they would get in trouble. Considering that you haven’t played in a while, which is obvious by how out of touch you are, it’s annoying that you even expect them to provide you with that crap. I don’t want to see JVH wasting his time trying to defend himself from a smear campaign from some butt-hurt crooks and their white knights. He is a busy man and us existing players want more patches.
edit: holy shit, had to replace my pronoun with a specific name since like 5 people posted before I could finish.
-
This reply was modified 7 years, 7 months ago by
RobinHood.
Polar Bear
Posts: 45I mean third party source as in something like Wayback Machine, or similar cache archives. The point is for evidence to come from a source that can’t be tampered with by either party.
And the low-penalty algorithm came with the most recent update on the 15th, so unless my understanding of the situation is wrong all the deaths happened with that algorithm.This is apparently wrong, so never mind.They shouldn’t.
But they shouldn’t be punished for doing so either.
And I don’t know anything about the circumstances regarding your deal with Oracle, so I can’t speak to that, but again, any hostile actions taken towards non-FL members would necessarily have been for the purpose of preserving the security of FL’s property.
Skeleton
Posts: 119It means they are no longer going to subscribe.
Thank you
I’m a part of an out of game communications thread because people suspected FL could even read /t chats
Ahem! It’s me who started it. I might have used the wrong words — its not that I suspected it, but, as a non code-savvy person, I don’t know how difficult it would be to do so, so in any case I wanted to be sure.
Polar Bear
Posts: 48I think we should all use the same forum. we all play the same game and we do it for fun. We should really be connecting more as a gaming community.
Goblin
Posts: 94but again, any hostile actions taken towards non-FL members would necessarily have been for the purpose of preserving the security of FL’s property.
I’ll paste just the relevant part of my post since you didn’t read it.
Friendly died and hotel was robbed for what exactly? The answer FL gave was: “because Friendly probably quit”. Hotel still had active members still playing the game, chatting, and were on every day repairing the place, Friendly said she’d be back in a week or so, but FL still came and killed our cherished leader and stole from our shared vault. To say that FL needs a reason to attack someone, even when they don’t present a threat, is ridiculous to me, as someone who’s witnessed it first hand.
And to be very VERY clear, I don’t even CARE about that outside of for RP reasons that died with Native IV. As a player, I feel that it’s fine FL robbed us, that’s truly something part of the game and it’s fine with me. What I do care about is you acting like it doesn’t happen unless provoked. It does, and that’s reality.
Skeleton
Posts: 119I mean third party source as in something like Wayback Machine, or similar cache archives. The point is for evidence to come from a source that can’t be tampered with by either party.
But this isn’t the attitude, it’s not that you have a right in a legal sense. I wouldn’t even call it proof because it sets expectations. I don’t see how setting these expectations would be benefical.
And I don’t know anything about the circumstances regarding your deal with Oracle, so I can’t speak to that, but again, any hostile actions taken towards non-FL members would necessarily have been for the purpose of preserving the security of FL’s property.
Not in my case.
Oh ok it was not an initiative of the whole Frost Legion as far as I can tell, but the reason I couldn’t retaliate against Oracle is because of Common Shelter With People That Would Be A Threat To Me.
Wolf
Posts: 13left macroed so long that he got disconnected with reality.
Boom.
Polar Bear
Posts: 45What does pulled funding mean?
FL was comprised almost entirely of donors. Shortly before the bans were issued, but after the most recent patch, those donations were pulled. Julius explained this with his post earlier.
You wouldn’t know since you don’t play, and only hear what they tell you.
I’ve been absent the last couple weeks, but prior to that I was online for upwards of six hours a day every day for nearly two months. My understanding of how FL operates is much more intimate than you seem to think.
I’ve played several games where players were permanently banned for using exploits.
Those games have Terms of Service that outline these sorts of things in very explicit terms, don’t allow players to die while logged out, and don’t have remotely similar death penalties.
That’s the problem here. A week long ban is a guarantee not only that your character will die, but also that your base will be looted. Banning all the core members of a tribe is a guarantee that the entire tribe will be destroyed. It’s not a punishment that should be given without warning or justified with “well you should have known that you couldn’t do that.”
With this in mind, the precedent set by Sir and Sephi’s bans is horrifying. Handing out death sentences for failing to report a bug is beyond excessive.
There actually is no evidence to suggest that the admins want Frost Legion gone due to pulled funding.
Unprecedented bans on all their core members, two of whom didn’t even use the exploit, a week and a half after the incident but less than a day after funding was pulled followed by an immediate and devastating raid.
You’re kidding yourself if you don’t think that points to an ulterior motive.
I’ll paste just the relevant part of my post since you didn’t read it
I was busy writing a post when you posted it and didn’t see it. I’m not familiar enough with the incident to speak to it, but I’ll acknowledge that it’s relevant.
Polar Bear
Posts: 48i think further discussion will yield no results as Left will not agree with anybody.
Polar Bear
Posts: 45I wouldn’t even call it proof
It would be an unbiased source confirming that exploiting bugs was explicitly declared to be against the rules in a place where everyone could access it.
And since I haven’t already said this I’ll say it now: I don’t actually care whether the bans on FL’s members are lifted. The tribe, myself included, has quit, and will not be coming back. I’m here because I feel the rest of the playerbase needs to be made aware of the fact that there is compelling evidence suggesting that this set of bans was a means of exterminating a group of players over disagreements with the developer, not a fair response to the exploitation of a bug.
People need to be aware that the developer has directly caused the extinction of the game’s most populous tribe, and they need to know whether that developer is willing to prove that it was fair and just.
Ivana did prove it. No one in their right mind buys this crazy Frost Legion propaganda anyway. You’re just making yourself look dumb for FL high fives, not doing a service for the community.
Polar Bear
Posts: 48Everyone is allowed to have their own opinion. You’ve made your point. I do not think many people will agree with you though.
Polar Bear
Posts: 45I’m making the case that exterminating an entire tribe without warning because two of its members used an exploit to kill six people is unjustified in the absence of a set of terms that explicitly defines that as a potential punishment.
Imagine one of your members talked about an exploit in chat then used it to kill several people. Would it be right for everyone in that discussion to receive one week bans? Suppose those people were your most powerful members, and your rivals used the opportunity to destroy your tribe’s base, steal everything you have, and kill all your members. Can you claim the bans are justified knowing that’s a likely outcome? Would you call them justified if the bans were the first of their kind, with no mention anywhere that they could even happen, and no mention that failing to report a bug was grounds for such a ban?
I don’t think so, and I think if this had happened to any other tribe most people would agree.
-
This reply was modified 7 years, 7 months ago by
The topic ‘Ex post facto law’ is closed to new replies.