Welcome to Gaia! ::

<3 </3

What's the best solution?

Sell Integrity in CS for 249 0.375 37.5% [ 3 ]
Make it a rare drop in dms 0.5 50.0% [ 4 ]
Something else (post) 0.125 12.5% [ 1 ]
Total Votes:[ 8 ]
< 1 2 3 4 5 6 >
Hashtable's avatar

Shameless Noob

14,500 Points
  • Invisibility 100
  • Peoplewatcher 100
  • Ultimate Player 200
gataka
Hashtable

Exploit:
Make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource)

Don't get how having a CL of 18.6 was useful and/or had any benefit?

weird bug

Abuse ring pl0x! xd Ban me while you're at it! 3nodding
Huh, what a weird bug D:


Lol it's just a silly typo. xd It will say that every time unless leader is in VILLAGE GREENS.

That said, my triggering of this bug was repeated and willing. 3nodding And I took a screenie, so I was "exploiting" it to get this "illegitimate" image. 3nodding

But whatever, I see this has already been discussed to death, so meh. xd Still think that Gaia labeling it's users like that was uncalled for. xp
beckygrendel's avatar

Aged Nerd

RafiCat
I was surprised to find out people are still bothered by the whole abuse/integrity thing. I wish this issue would go away.
....
Becky, I'd give you my extra ring if I could!


Yes, I'm partly to blame for the reason this issue has been brought up again, and yes, it is still a sore spot with me. To say that I don't play with integrity is a slap in the face. It was fairly easy to ignore until the ring actually found some use (I'd love to try heal/tanking with it, for instance), but the day I was turned down for a DMS crew because I didn't have one, was the day I went on a personal boycott until it was available to everyone.

If it's never made available, I'm sure no one will miss me, but that's life.

And thanks for the offer of your spare! My other account has one. 4laugh rolleyes
beckygrendel's avatar

Aged Nerd

Random Acts of Awesome

and all the people still bitching about it need to be reminded that they could have been banned.


Then just f-ing ban me already and put me out of my misery.

It could also be argued that it wasn't a glitch. The high level monsters are programmed to drop high level rings. That's not a glitch. If anything, it's an oversight on the devs' part, but to ridicule or punish people who got one of those rings is preposterous.
whee
RafiCat's avatar

Mega Hoarder

beckygrendel


If it's never made available, I'm sure no one will miss me, but that's life.


You couldn't be more wrong.

And I feel sure that they will make it available in some way.
beckygrendel's avatar

Aged Nerd

Red Kutai

It is "comical" in that it was a completely absurd response to the situation, I suppose; but being absurd is hardly a goal that one should be aiming to achieve, in terms of public relations. whee


Which seems to be their modus operandi...

emotion_donotwant
Red Kutai's avatar

Benevolent Codger

beckygrendel
It could also be argued that it wasn't a glitch. The high level monsters are programmed to drop high level rings. That's not a glitch. If anything, it's an oversight on the devs' part, but to ridicule or punish people who got one of those rings is preposterous.
whee

While you know (or rather, I hope you know sweatdrop ) that I agree with you on the poor handling of the situation, this particular argument - which arose ad nauseum when the topic was fresh - is actually a moot piece of semantics. ToS is worded to include glitches and oversights both, no matter how glaring or longstanding - ToS forbids us from using the site and any of its features in any way other than that in which it was intended to be used. Unless you feel comfortable making the assertion that rings in excess of CL 10.0 were intended to exist at the time, you must admit that intentionally producing such rings would be a violation of those terms. sweatdrop

However, not every infraction of ToS deserves such a heavy-handed response; indeed, vastly more injurious infractions - trolling, as a prime example - commonly receive vastly less significant responses. In fact, it is quite common that ToS infractions deserve absolutely no real response; as one might notice from what I mentioned above, encountering glitches even unintentionally can be technically perceived as an infraction of ToS (as you are using the site, and the manner in which it is being used is unintended) - what's important is understanding that there exists the letter of the law, and the spirit under which it can be rightfully enforced...
beckygrendel's avatar

Aged Nerd

Red Kutai
beckygrendel
It could also be argued that it wasn't a glitch. The high level monsters are programmed to drop high level rings. That's not a glitch. If anything, it's an oversight on the devs' part, but to ridicule or punish people who got one of those rings is preposterous.
whee

While you know (or rather, I hope you know sweatdrop ) that I agree with you on the poor handling of the situation, this particular argument - which arose ad nauseum when the topic was fresh - is actually a moot piece of semantics. ToS is worded to include glitches and oversights both, no matter how glaring or longstanding - ToS forbids us from using the site and any of its features in any way other than that in which it was intended to be used. Unless you feel comfortable making the assertion that rings in excess of CL 10.0 were intended to exist at the time, you must admit that intentionally producing such rings would be a violation of those terms. sweatdrop


I would make the argument that the average player wouldn't be capable of (nor therefore be responsible for) determining the intent of the devs. If a crystal ball is required for playing, they should hand them out when we sign up.
3nodding
Red Kutai's avatar

Benevolent Codger

beckygrendel
I would make the argument that the average player wouldn't be capable of (nor therefore be responsible for) determining the intent of the devs. If a crystal ball is required for playing, they should hand them out when we sign up.
sweatdrop

"Capable of," no; however, "responsible for," yes. Because whether or not you feel that it's a reasonable expectation, it's an expectation that you - and all of us - agreed to when you created your account. Use of the site and its features is predicated upon that agreement - however unreasonable - making the discussion of how practical that agreement is moot, from our perspective. redface

I'm sure you understand that Gaia's ToS - and, really, all Terms of Service agreements - exists to protect their rights, more than ours; it is their site, after all. We agree to them, acknowledging that those rules are stacked against us, and put our faith in Gaia to exercise those rules justly. We can always object to what we believe are unjust applications of that authority, but in the end we have already submitted to it - just or not - all the same... whee
beckygrendel's avatar

Aged Nerd

Red Kutai
beckygrendel
I would make the argument that the average player wouldn't be capable of (nor therefore be responsible for) determining the intent of the devs. If a crystal ball is required for playing, they should hand them out when we sign up.
sweatdrop

"Capable of," no; however, "responsible for," yes. Because whether or not you feel that it's a reasonable expectation, it's an expectation that you - and all of us - agreed to when you created your account. Use of the site and its features is predicated upon that agreement - however unreasonable - making the discussion of how practical that agreement is moot, from our perspective. redface

I'm sure you understand that Gaia's ToS - and, really, all Terms of Service agreements - exists to protect their rights, more than ours; it is their site, after all. We agree to them, acknowledging that those rules are stacked against us, and put our faith in Gaia to exercise those rules justly. We can always object to what we believe are unjust applications of that authority, but in the end we have already submitted to it - just or not - all the same... whee


Yes, I'm well aware of TOS's and actual legal responsibilities and interpretations. In my prior life, as I'm sure I mentioned during one of our EB runs, I helped attorneys tear holes left and right in internet TOS's, etc, You don't actually sign your rights away when you agree to them. Many have holes big enough to drive trucks through. Been there, done that.
pam_pam's avatar

Interesting Grabber

8,400 Points
  • Tipsy 100
  • Friendly 100
  • Peoplewatcher 100
Um... ppl still talk about this?
Moving on....
Red Kutai's avatar

Benevolent Codger

beckygrendel
Yes, I'm well aware of TOS's and actual legal responsibilities and interpretations. In my prior life, as I'm sure I mentioned during one of our EB runs, I helped attorneys tear holes left and right in internet TOS's, etc, You don't actually sign your rights away when you agree to them. Many have holes big enough to drive trucks through. Been there, done that.

I'm certainly not an attorney - nor do I make a point of consorting with them - so I'll naturally have to cede the experience card to you, in that regard. sweatdrop

However, it's fair to say that submitting to an agreement under the premise that you can undermine the intent thereof violates the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, no? While I have no doubt at all that - despite the legal team's valiant efforts - Gaia's ToS would be little more than swiss cheese to the right lawyer, the notion that one would knowingly submit to such an arrangement without intending a good faith effort to uphold it seems... Sketchy, at best. redface

The majority of the cases you're referring to, I presume, would involve things that are not immediately obvious upon reading such a document - Gaia's requirement for users to utilise features 'as intended' is hardly obscure. As you point out, it's not strictly possible for users to discern a feature's intent, but by willingly agreeing to such a clause, they do resign themselves to making a good faith effort toward that end. I simply have difficulty resolving the intentional creation of glitched rings to a good faith effort to preserve the intent of the game... whee
II_Kisame_II's avatar

Genius

As many of you guys know I was a prominent ring glitch-er xD but what frustrated me the most wasn't me getting the abuse ring or being called abusers. Its the fact that these two rings entered the game in the first place, when in fact they weren't even needed. I'm a zOMG romantic who doesn't like having passives and the fact that we now have 5 in total annoys me. What we should be getting are real rings that do something, have animations and etc. Not some lame excuses of rings.

And what saddens me more is the need to have integrity for heal tanking, even though many of you guys know I was legendary at it. I guess I'll heal tank with abuse then.
beckygrendel's avatar

Aged Nerd

Red Kutai

I'm certainly not an attorney - nor do I make a point of consorting with them - so I'll naturally have to cede the experience card to you, in that regard. sweatdrop

However, it's fair to say that submitting to an agreement under the premise that you can undermine the intent thereof violates the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, no? While I have no doubt at all that - despite the legal team's valiant efforts - Gaia's ToS would be little more than swiss cheese to the right lawyer, the notion that one would knowingly submit to such an arrangement without intending a good faith effort to uphold it seems... Sketchy, at best. redface


Yes, when I personally agree to a site's TOS, I do so in good faith with no intention of doing anything to get in trouble.

Red Kutai

The majority of the cases you're referring to, I presume, would involve things that are not immediately obvious upon reading such a document - Gaia's requirement for users to utilise features 'as intended' is hardly obscure. As you point out, it's not strictly possible for users to discern a feature's intent, but by willingly agreeing to such a clause, they do resign themselves to making a good faith effort toward that end. I simply have difficulty resolving the intentional creation of glitched rings to a good faith effort to preserve the intent of the game... whee


Ahhh but in my imaginary court case, Joe Average Player doesn't know they're "glitched rings" to begin with. As far as he knows, the game is operating exactly as intended.


EDIT:
TOS debates are all water under the bridge at this point. At issue now is the hope that Gaia will make the Integrity Ring available to everyone.
Red Kutai's avatar

Benevolent Codger

beckygrendel
Yes, when I personally agree to a site's TOS, I do so in good faith with no intention of doing anything to get in trouble.

And I'd expect nothing less from you, dear. heart
Quote:
Ahhh but in my imaginary court case, Joe Average Player doesn't know they're "glitched rings" to begin with. As far as he knows, the game is operating exactly as intended.

There was some evidence of that occuring in the midst of the fiasco, so I don't doubt the possibility - but it seems like a very hard-to-justify position. The manner in which ring farming was commonly orchestrated was itself very peculiar, and in fact very contrary to how an experienced player would expect to play the game - peculiar enough, I'd assert, to reasonably arouse suspicion. If it is reasonable for one to be suspicious of such a situation, and one simply ignores that suspicion, it becomes difficult in hindsight to make the claim of a good faith effort... sweatdrop

EDIT: Yes, I understand the futility of the discussion - but if there's one thing I simply cannot resist, it's maintaining an interesting discussion long past the death of its relevance. You're perfectly free to abandon me to it at any time, as I suspect I'm plenty capable of mulling over the subject internally... redface

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get Items
Get Gaia Cash
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games