<<<If this 110th circle "brother" came out of nowhere and shanked you then yes, that is a valid reason. Would I report? Nope, I'd go hunt him down with Galren and give him a taste of his own medicine.

If the brother is clearly and distinctly RP'ed differently and found a way into the conflict, that is one thing, but to just log in, show up and attack... no that is lame.

-Galren Moonskin>>>

ROFL. Umm yea. ROFL.

Asterid

Also, please remember to watch the conflicts ~Sidatura

Wait a sec Asterid, were you trying to make some hilariously ironic comment?

I'm not sure what you are referring to but I've got all of two characters, a Barbarian and an Empath. And I know I haven't stomped all over you yet with Galren as you tend to run from him and you've never met my empath.

Toss in a few more ROFL in your next post. It will do wonders for your post and prove you have the ability to make clear and coherent posts.

-Galren Moonskin

!>You hear the distant echo of a savage Horde screaming in barbaric approval of your deeds.

Take the conflict elsewhere.


Annwyl
Senior Board Monitor

If you've questions or comments, take it to e-mail by writing Senior Board Monitor DR-Annwyl@play.net, or Message Board Supervisor DR-Cecco@play.net.

Same people, same opinions, same old, same bat time.. blah blah blah


'When someone pushes your buttons, you're acknowledging what you have disowned.' -Dr. John Martini

Are there consequences for frivolous reporting? If not, there should be. That might remove people's inclination to misuse it.


Your mind hears Ragran thinking, "on account i like t'touch mrubbies...dats wart a jewel lubba do"
Your mind hears Rehoboam thinking, "can't blame him, playing wif me balls now"

>> Of course if a small minority of players are regularly being reported, even if the reports themselves are found not to be action worthy, it might be in DR's best interest to restrict access to the players generating those reports.

>> "militantly enforcing the overly rigid standards of you and your small collection of friends"

So well said.

---

Rev. Reene

Syralon whispers to your group, "Gentlemen, to evil!"

>>Once again- if the current reporting situation is such a burden on DR, then Simu should change it.

I agree.

>>If they don't change it, then I suspect that they have made a business decision that the current reporting situation retains more customers than it drives away.

That's obviously their decision. That doesn't change the fact that GMs have mentioned that dealing with so many reports take up a lot of their time.

When you get a GM almost begging someone to lay off their behavior even though they have been entirely in policy as a way to knock off the reports, then obviously it's taking up a lot of their time. When a GM says it takes up a lot of their time... guess what? It takes up a lot of their time. It can't get any clearer than that, heh. Whether they're actually doing something about it or not is a different story.

Reporting has been, and continues to be abused, and that completely destroys many chances for great RP. It prevents RP.

Simu wants to keep their customers, so even the whiniest, neediest ones will be kept. Can't blame them, money is money. I don't blame Simu or the GMs at all. It's why I do wish a CvC flag system was somehow made. It'd help a lot.

I'm guessing the main dilemma with a flag is the "how". People like to CvC. I'd say the majority of the realms love to CvC. It's when the CvC'ing becomes violent or doesn't go their way that they report.


Vinjince

---

"There are five possible operations for any army. If you can fight, fight; if you cannot fight, defend; if you cannot defend, flee; if you cannot flee, surrender; if you cannot surrender, die."

- Sima Yi

<I'm guessing the main dilemma with a flag is the "how".>

I'd been wondering about that. I'm not into CvC myself, was just thinking why can't they make a title as a flag? Something specific to let others know someone wants/is into CvC? Sure, there's the possibility someone will "forget" to put it up, whether by accident or on purpose...but same thing could happen with a flag. Might be an easier way to incorporate such a thing tho.


Your mind hears Ragran thinking, "on account i like t'touch mrubbies...dats wart a jewel lubba do"
Your mind hears Rehoboam thinking, "can't blame him, playing wif me balls now"

<Consider where you are getting your information from, Gal.>

Technically, no one hears one way or the other about anyone who reports, legitimate or not, at least not from the GM's. We're not supposed to hear about what happens. Folks who do report, given the response most folks have to it being done, aren't gonna brag at all.


Your mind hears Ragran thinking, "on account i like t'touch mrubbies...dats wart a jewel lubba do"
Your mind hears Rehoboam thinking, "can't blame him, playing wif me balls now"

"Don't get me wrong... there are people that grief. Never have I in any one of my posts said there weren't."

See here is another area of agreement- we do have things we agree about. There are griefers and there are those who report when they shouldn't. Both waste GM's time.

"How many times do I have to say that the GMs... let me bold it for you, GMs said it was a waste of time and resources."

Vin- just repeating it doesn't make it so. Show me where the GM's say it. But I already said that I assume that frivolous reports waste GM's time- as do those who get reported over and over and over.

"I think I may have went way over your head. It DOES happen in DR most of the time. CvC can be verbal. It can be competition. It can be a variety of other things. All the drama that happens in Crossing? The arguing? All of that can be included in CvC. I said when it becomes violent, or involves one person killing another person, that's what people don't like. Conflicts happen all over. When's the last time you were in DR?"

Nope- not over my head- I mentioned without qualifications. You are still making a huge assumption about the motivation of the majority of the players of DR, and as usual providing no backing for it. I will agree that CvC can be other than violent, but I see far more characters hanging around without conflict than characters actively conflicting- even in the Crossing. But I also agree that many players who enjoy a good arguement do not want to get into a fight everytime they open their mouth. This is where the grey areas occur and GM's get called in.

Oh last time I was in the game was for the last 2 hours- in Shard- didn't see or hear a single conflict between characters.

>>Secondly, during the DP/Spire event, tons of players died on both sides ....

"100% incorrect. Make that 150% incorrect. Want to know why there was no reporting? Because the GMs sponsored it. People don't report when the GMs do things. Do you know exactly what happened before that Crusade? Players ran an event in a similar way. Guess what happened? People reported."

Okay first of all- for someone who is big on correcting me- let me just tone down the hyperbole here- since there can be no "150% incorrect" of anything. Who knows you might be correct- perhaps it was only because it was GM sponsored. But you don't really know that either. You are assuming. Frankly neither of us even know for sure whether anyone reported, just no one whined about reports.

"You're making so so so many assumptions and can base it off no experience. Either that, or you're too stubborn to accept the fact that reporting is being abused, a lot. Not just from experiences... but from the fact that people will threaten to do it, and the fear that it will happen."

Pot calling the kettle black. You keep stating so many things as fact, but really you are guilty of making huge assumptions. I have plenty of experience with Dragonrealms. Been doing this quite awhile. I have stated my belief that reporting is likely being abused several times. I don't take your statement as fact because you have neither numbers nor documentation to back it up. Wierdly though I don't have experence of being threatened with being reported, nor do I fear being reported.

Why do I not fear being reported and you do? What is the difference between our playing styles that leads you to be in fear of being reported?

Finally- I say one more time- if Reporting is abused so badly then DR should do something about it. But neither you or I are privy to the facts about the degree to which reporting is abused or used, nor the amount of resources utilized.

Flavius


"militantly enforcing the overly rigid standards of you and your small collection of friends"

You don't have to be a griefer to worry about being reported.

---

Rev. Reene

Syralon whispers to your group, "Gentlemen, to evil!"

>>See here is another area of agreement- we do have things we agree about. There are griefers and there are those who report when they shouldn't. Both waste GM's time.

Yet only one is getting warned and possibly locked out, and the other isn't.

>>Vin- just repeating it doesn't make it so. Show me where the GM's say it.

Heh, you're one strange guy. You want proof? Do you go to every sports game for proof that a certain team won? You're just reaching. But for your own satisfaction, I'll throw this in:

>>GM X says, "Anyway. I don't want to take up too much of your time, but I do want to point out that sometimes, even if you haven't done anything against Policy, if one player is generating multiple complaints over a period of time and 90 percent of my time is being spent putting out the fires from ONE person..."

>>GM X says, "You can see how that's bad."

Is that good enough? Do you need further proof to show how much you look like you have no idea what you're talking about?

>>But I also agree that many players who enjoy a good arguement do not want to get into a fight everytime they open their mouth.

Then it's their responsibility not to cross that line. Some folks don't, some folks do.

>>Who knows you might be correct- perhaps it was only because it was GM sponsored.

I may be correct? Further proof you don't know what you're talking about and is just arguing for the sake thereof.

>>But you don't really know that either. You are assuming.

Did you just ignore my last post? Do you have any idea what happened before the GM sponsored Crusade? I won't explain, just tell me yes or no. Then tell me how that applies to what we're talking about right now.

>>Frankly neither of us even know for sure whether anyone reported, just no one whined about reports.

I know for a fact someone reported during the Player event right before the GM sponsored event. An event the size of the Crusade would NOT, I repeat... NOT have been the same had the GMs not been involved. You can argue, pout, tell me I "have no facts", or whatever it is you do. But it would have roused many more complaints had they not been involved (if there were even complaints on the Crusade in the first place). Keep reaching.

>>I have plenty of experience with Dragonrealms.

Experience with CvC? IIRC, you avoided CvC. How can you have any recent experience with it if you avoid it?

>>I have stated my belief that reporting is likely being abused several times. I don't take your statement as fact because you have neither numbers nor documentation to back it up.

Ha, I don't get you. More with this "documentation" stuff. Be open, be honest, and stop trying to just win an argument with the old "facts" gig. If you honestly can't get it through to yourself that there is a danger of being reported for any CvC action taken upon another character then you must be out of it. Either that or you truly do avoid CvC at all costs. There's more than just one type of player.

>>Why do I not fear being reported and you do? What is the difference between our playing styles that leads you to be in fear of being reported?

You avoid CvC. That's why you never have to worry about being reported. If someone slapped your character then you'd be A-OK with it.

>> But neither you or I are privy to the facts about the degree to which reporting is abused or used, nor the amount of resources utilized.

You gotta be kidding me. It's obvious that reporting uses up a lot of GM time. Do I need to know the exact numbers? Just because I don't know that it uses up 94% or 95% of a GM's time does not mean it doesn't use up a lot, especially if the GM said it.

If a GM told you that Lightning Bolt bypassed shield... do you have to know the actual code to believe it? No, you can go IG and find out. Instead of all this "not knowing/maybe" crap, get yourself into a CvC situation and see if you get reported or threatened to be reported.

Not willing to do it? Then that's more knowledge you won't have.



Vinjince

---

"There are five possible operations for any army. If you can fight, fight; if you cannot fight, defend; if you cannot defend, flee; if you cannot flee, surrender; if you cannot surrender, die."

- Sima Yi

">>However, I also assume that the opposite is true- that there are many who abuse consent in order to cause grief, and that report is also used correctly to prevent the bullying of some players by other players.

You need to stop assuming folks who play this game genuinely want to hurt you, the player behind the character. Most folks do have a conscience... even I."

Galren- I have observed folks bullying others without any attempt of roleplay, with the apparent sole interest of trying to provoke consent so that they can kill someone. I have observed people who lose and then call in their 'Big Brother' to then come in and kill the person they couldn't kill themselves. I have seen players taunt other players from hiding in completely OOC manner, simply to try to irritate other players. So I know that there are players who do this. What I don't know is the degree of which this is a problem within the game. I only can honestly comment on what I have seen

"I know more than a few people can attest to the uncommonly kind moments Galren has displayed on occasion in the past. If you and I interact and you automatically assume I'm trying to grief you I'll be instantly turned off from any further interaction. The best example I can give is if I'm interacting with someone and out of the blue that person throws a WARN at me other than the combat version."

Galren- I don't know whether you are addressing me directly or not- but we have interacted, and my brief encounter with you made me believe that you are no griefer, at least as how I would define one. I try not to assume anything about anyone and judge them on their behavior in game. (this however does not include my character who will judge other characters based in part on what he is told by his friends, besides his own observations)



"militantly enforcing the overly rigid standards of you and your small collection of friends"

Ah Vinjince, I find your righteous indignation and unsubstantiated claims amusing. Otherwise why would I continue with this?

(anyone who is bored with this already, please skip as nothing new will be learned here)

">>See here is another area of agreement- we do have things we agree about. There are griefers and there are those who report when they shouldn't. Both waste GM's time."

Yet only one is getting warned and possibly locked out, and the other isn't.

The only ones getting warned and locked out are the ones found to be violating policy. Do you think that they should be allowed to violate policy? Reporting is not against policy. Players who get repeatedly reported but are not found to be violating policy are not violating policy either. However, both use up GM time.

"Heh, you're one strange guy."

You have no idea how strange....

"You want proof? Do you go to every sports game for proof that a certain team won?"
I don't assume everything in Wikipedia is correct, and I won't blindly accept that because you repeat the same mantra over and over its correct. Yeah, I am strange that way. Until I see something actually substantiating a claim I consider it unsubstantiated. You are of course welcome to accept any claim anyone makes.

"You're just reaching. But for your own satisfaction, I'll throw this in:

>>GM X says, "Anyway. I don't want to take up too much of your time, but I do want to point out that sometimes, even if you haven't done anything against Policy, if one player is generating multiple complaints over a period of time and 90 percent of my time is being spent putting out the fires from ONE person..."

>>GM X says, "You can see how that's bad.""

"Is that good enough? Do you need further proof to show how much you look like you have no idea what you're talking about?"

Ummmmm you haven't ever tried to like file an insurance claim or make a legal argument have you? You do realize that in order to even accept what you posted here, I have to make the assumption on good faith that you didn't just write that yourself? You haven't provided anything that can be validated. Show me a post in Red- those I will accept.

But for arguements sake, I will accept that what you have posted is an actual copy of what a GM told you. You seem to have missed the entire point of the GM's message. No where does he say that people were abusing the Report policy- only that the person who was reported had not technically violated policy. What he is specifically pointing out is that a player can cause trouble, and waste GM's time, even if they are not technically violating policy. The question then is if 20 or 30 people report you(assuming the GM was addressing you) and you are never found to be in violation of policy- you are still the cause of the GM's time being wasted- not the 20 or 30 people who felt you were detracting from their fun in the game. If you are continually being reported by multiple people, then your actions are the indirect cause of the GM's resources being wasted.

">>But I also agree that many players who enjoy a good arguement do not want to get into a fight everytime they open their mouth.

Then it's their responsibility not to cross that line. Some folks don't, some folks do."

I would say if someone is generating multiple reports, then it is also their own actions and see if how they play their character is distressing enough other players that valuable GM resources are being wasted. I agree that folks who run off their mouths should be willing to take the consequences, yet at the same time, folks should be able to have a verbal conflict without it necessarily leading to violence.

>>Who knows you might be correct- perhaps it was only because it was GM sponsored.

"I may be correct? Further proof you don't know what you're talking about and is just arguing for the sake thereof."

Again- just because you claim it doesn't make it so- nor does one instance of something happen mean that "this is the way it always is"

>>But you don't really know that either. You are assuming.

"Did you just ignore my last post? Do you have any idea what happened before the GM sponsored Crusade? I won't explain, just tell me yes or no. Then tell me how that applies to what we're talking about right now."

Umm your last post where you posted a log of whispers between you and some other people....yeah I pretty much ignored it. One discussion between people doesn't prove how all or even the majority of people will do anything.

Do I have any idea about what happened before the last Crusade? Hmmmm I saw Kolaisa one shot Xelten. Other than that all I know is from what was posted on the boards here, where someone whined that Xelten had reported someone. Much whining ensued. The jist was that the person(I don't even know what character) felt like they had been part of the event, while Xelten did not believe that the person was part of the event. If there is more than that one report, then yes certainly I missed it. Is that what you are basing your whole conclusion that people will report during during player lead events vs GM sponsored events? My take on it is still simple- if the players are willing participants and know that they are involved in a RP event, then they are unlikely to report, and

>>Frankly neither of us even know for sure whether anyone reported, just no one whined about reports.

"I know for a fact someone reported during the Player event right before the GM sponsored event. An event the size of the Crusade would NOT, I repeat... NOT have been the same had the GMs not been involved. You can argue, pout, tell me I "have no facts", or whatever it is you do. But it would have roused many more complaints had they not been involved (if there were even complaints on the Crusade in the first place). Keep reaching."

Heh you are so funny when you try to be condescending. Yes- one person reported during the player event- which proves what exactly? That a single player reported over a single incident, out of how many players and deaths involved? Do you know for certain that no one reported anyone during the Crusade? I find it it amusing that when you are trying to prove your point that you go for personal attacks, and get defensive when I request actual facts. Facts are a good thing. Accepting conjecture without question is a bad thing.

>>I have plenty of experience with Dragonrealms.

"Experience with CvC? IIRC, you avoided CvC. How can you have any recent experience with it if you avoid it?"

Hmmm did I say that I avoid CvC? I thought I said that I don't seek it out. That being said- sure I see it happen. Most of what I have directly seen is people trying to bully others. If I were to go just on my own personal experience- like you are- and generalize- like you are- I would say that "Griefers are always bullying players who rarely have interest in dealing with the Griefers". However, I know that more is happening beyond my own personal experience. You, however, seem to believe that because it happens to you, or because one person reports one incident, that this means this is what always happens for everyone.

">>I have stated my belief that reporting is likely being abused several times. I don't take your statement as fact because you have neither numbers nor documentation to back it up.

Ha, I don't get you. More with this "documentation" stuff. Be open, be honest, and stop trying to just win an argument with the old "facts" gig."

Yep, thats me- the guy who likes facts. I get the feeling that people who like facts are frustrating for you.

"If you honestly can't get it through to yourself that there is a danger of being reported for any CvC action taken upon another character then you must be out of it. Either that or you truly do avoid CvC at all costs. There's more than just one type of player."

You posted earlier that CvC includes arguements, includes contests, includes any kind of conflict between characters. I will tell you right now, I have absolutely zero fear of being reported for getting into an arguement with someone. I get concerned that the person might try to ambush me later, or bring in his 102 level bonded spouse to attack me, hoping that our arguement could be construed as giving him consent. I had zero fear of being reported during the Spire event, even though I attempted to attack Trop without consent(he never even noticed I am sure). Oh lets see- I once dragged some dead Barb away from the crate for mouthing off- didn't worry about being reported then either. The danger of getting reported is being found to be in the wrong. The danger of being reported repeatedly is making a nuisance of yourself to the GM's. Both are avoidable. But if you regularly instigate conflict- yeah you might get reported alot. Hopefully you stay within policy.

">>Why do I not fear being reported and you do? What is the difference between our playing styles that leads you to be in fear of being reported?

You avoid CvC. That's why you never have to worry about being reported. If someone slapped your character then you'd be A-OK with it."

Hmmm best point out my post where I said that- oh wait that would be another one of those inconvenient 'facts'. I have been slapped before- mostly I just have laughed at the other player- almost always it was some attempt to draw me into a violence I didn't feel like participating in. I have been thumped in the clerics guild- and had the person thrown out. I could have attacked the thumper I suppose, but didn't feel particularly like dieing at that point. I will choose when to participate in the violence. And when on the very rare occasion that I do- I seriously give absolutely no consideration to consent, nor do I worry about being reported. If I am found in fault, I will take my lumps.

>> But neither you or I are privy to the facts about the degree to which reporting is abused or used, nor the amount of resources utilized.

"You gotta be kidding me. It's obvious that reporting uses up a lot of GM time. Do I need to know the exact numbers? Just because I don't know that it uses up 94% or 95% of a GM's time does not mean it doesn't use up a lot, especially if the GM said it."

Let us just accept for the moment your broad, unsubstantiated assertion- that reporting uses up a lot of GM time. The question shouldn't be "is Report taking up too much GM time" it should be- "is the problem frivolous reports, or is the problem that there are a small minority of problem players who generate an undue amount of reports- or is it both?"

"If a GM told you that Lightning Bolt bypassed shield... do you have to know the actual code to believe it? No, you can go IG and find out."

If a GM posts on the boards, or comes directly to me and says "lighting bolt bypasses shield" or came to me and said "frivolous reports are wasting to much of GM time" I would indeed take such at face value. However, since I can't remember a GM posting that(and you apparently don't remember one either), and since no GM has come to me and said- hey Flavius, the big problem with this game is too many reports", no I have seen nothing to substantiate it. Like I said, I know facts frustrate you.

"Instead of all this "not knowing/maybe" crap, get yourself into a CvC situation and see if you get reported or threatened to be reported."

Been in CvC situations. Never been reported or threatened with report. Therefore, using the Vinjince method of deduction, bad reporting never happens. The difference is that I don't seek out conflict, I don't attempt to instigate conflict, I don't get reported, and therefore I am not a drain on GM resources.

Come on Vinjince- please post again about how stupid it is for me to insist on this fact crap. It really, really amuses me.









"militantly enforcing the overly rigid standards of you and your small collection of friends"

<<See here is another area of agreement- we do have things we agree about. There are griefers and there are those who report when they shouldn't. Both waste GM's time."

<<Yet only one is getting warned and possibly locked out, and the other isn't.

I want proof. Give me proof that the griefer will get locked out, even if they have consent. I want proof that the serial reporter-without-a-reason will not get locked out. Otherwise you are making assumptions. You must be having a hard time with this providing proof thing.

<<Reporting is not against policy.

Reporting frivilously without basis can have your ability to report removed. It can also carry other consequenses. I can get proof on that if you want.

<<Other than that all I know is from what was posted on the boards here

Sounds like you don't know enough to be making an argument.

>>Ah Vinjince, I find your righteous indignation and unsubstantiated claims amusing. Otherwise why would I continue with this?

I find the sheer amount of ignorance you have to be amusing. You continue to make me laugh.

>>The only ones getting warned and locked out are the ones found to be violating policy. Do you think that they should be allowed to violate policy? Reporting is not against policy. Players who get repeatedly reported but are not found to be violating policy are not violating policy either. However, both use up GM time.

Again, I went over your head. Do me a favor? Sit down and think carefully about the point I'm trying to make. I'd rather see you disagreeing than completely missing what I'm saying. It's getting kind of redundant to have to explain it to you again and again. Now with that said...

This is an utter and complete contradiction in your statements. First you said:

>>See here is another area of agreement- we do have things we agree about. There are griefers and there are those who report when they shouldn't. Both waste GM's time."

The above ^^^ is your statement. Now you say:

>>The question then is if 20 or 30 people report you(assuming the GM was addressing you) and you are never found to be in violation of policy- you are still the cause of the GM's time being wasted- not the 20 or 30 people who felt you were detracting from their fun in the game.

I'm the cause of the GMs time wasted? When the others report when they shouldn't? Stop and think about that for a moment....

If others are reporting when they shouldn't then THEY'RE wasting the GMs time indirectly, not ME. I can only conclude with two things:

1. Either you really are this ignorant.

2. Or you're still stretching, trying to find a way to keep this argument going when you're clearly making no sense.

>>Ummmmm you haven't ever tried to like file an insurance claim or make a legal argument have you?

Yes, I have. If you want to compare that to what goes on in a game then you might need to take a step back and read this thread again.

>>You do realize that in order to even accept what you posted here, I have to make the assumption on good faith that you didn't just write that yourself? You haven't provided anything that can be validated. Show me a post in Red- those I will accept.

Heh, do you really take everything said this way? Whenever someone posts a bug, or a question with a log of something IG, or an event, a conflict, do you have a hard time believing it cause you think they made it up? I'm not saying there's a possibility they haven't, but I think you may need to loosen up some.

Anyhow, no, I didn't make that up. Ask Galren, or Reene, or whoever else may know about that particular situation.

So apparently you were wrong about a GM saying it uses up a lot of their time. Get over it and let's move on.

>>I agree that folks who run off their mouths should be willing to take the consequences, yet at the same time, folks should be able to have a verbal conflict without it necessarily leading to violence.

A verbal conflict and just running mouths can be different, so I agree there. But my character will often resort to violence if someone is constantly running their mouth. That's the way I RP. If you don't like it, then tell me OOC'ly and we can squash it. But don't go back to running your mouth when it's supposedly over.

>>Umm your last post where you posted a log of whispers between you and some other people....yeah I pretty much ignored it.

No, that post came afterwards and has a different subject.

>>Is that what you are basing your whole conclusion that people will report during during player lead events vs GM sponsored events?

No, I'm basing it on a multitude of experiences. Mine and many others that I have seen. You're basing all of your arguments only off what YOU'VE seen yet you don't seek out CvC conflicts.

>>I find it it amusing that when you are trying to prove your point that you go for personal attacks, and get defensive when I request actual facts.

LOL, if you think these are personal attacks then you must live on another planet.

>>Accepting conjecture without question is a bad thing.

When you're completely ignorant and have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, then this is true. But when you experience it yourself, and see many different situations that are similar, then it may very well not be.

As for the actual facts, I'm gonna jump in the sewer water to grab my fish. I'm gonna get all muddy to tackle my dinner.

I'm going to respond just like you respond to show you just how silly you've become in this thread. Starting now:

>>That being said- sure I see it happen. Most of what I have directly seen is people trying to bully others.

Show me proof. I want facts that players try to bully others.

>>I get the feeling that people who like facts are frustrating for you.

No, it's when ignorance is exposed at such a high degree. It's like if I say... The Cleveland Indians are winning the baseball game right now. Then you say... "You have no proof! They're probably not winning."

I say, "But I just heard a lot of other people say it."

You say, "You can't believe what other people tell you. Have you ever made a legal argument?"

I laugh and say, "It's not that deep, man."

You say, "I only like facts. Until you give me documentation stating the Indians are currently winning a baseball game, you can't say it's for fact."

---

Do you see how silly you've become? Reporting is being abused, it really is. But I'm not gonna try to convince you that it is.

>> The danger of getting reported is being found to be in the wrong. The danger of being reported repeatedly is making a nuisance of yourself to the GM's. Both are avoidable. But if you regularly instigate conflict- yeah you might get reported alot. Hopefully you stay within policy.

Did you not just see Galren's posts regarding people that will report you? Was he wrong for RP'ing the way he did? Or did he just make those up now? Can you really trust what he posted?

All I'm seeing is that your only defense to your ignorance is that you will claim someone is not being factual, yet you post your own experiences yet aren't living up to your own standards.

Regardless, you can't claim someone is wrong unless they are not within policy. And there's plenty of times where people are IN policy yet still get reported. Are they wrong? Oh wait, I didn't provide facts that this happened. You're full of it and you know it.

>>I suppose, but didn't feel particularly like dieing at that point.

On a side note, it's possible to kill people that thump you.

>>"is the problem frivolous reports, or is the problem that there are a small minority of problem players who generate an undue amount of reports- or is it both?"

Is it really a minority of players? (Going into Flavius mode here) Do you have facts and proof that it's a small minority? What if it's a large minority of "problem" players? Are they really the problems if they're in policy?

It all stems down to frivolous reports. Cut that out and it's done.

>>However, since I can't remember a GM posting that(and you apparently don't remember one either),

I've heard it from so many different angles, including from GMs, that I forget where to find all of it.

>>Been in CvC situations. Never been reported or threatened with report.

How long ago? Non-GM sponsored. If you'd really just laugh at someone slapping you then of course that would happen. If your character had any grapefruits then you'd see how many reporters there are. ;)

Come on, Flavius. Please keep posting your ignorance, I'm enjoying this here.

















Vinjince

---

"There are five possible operations for any army. If you can fight, fight; if you cannot fight, defend; if you cannot defend, flee; if you cannot flee, surrender; if you cannot surrender, die."

- Sima Yi

>>Why am I not surprised by your conclusion? However, you haven't brought anything to the table at all. Meanwhile, apparently Vinjince think enough of my arguements to continue to argue with me, and while I disagree with him- Vinjince is at least attempting to provide a cogent argument.

Actually, your posts are very poor and you're making yourself look more silly and ignorant each time. I only post to continue to embarrass you.


Vinjince

---

"There are five possible operations for any army. If you can fight, fight; if you cannot fight, defend; if you cannot defend, flee; if you cannot flee, surrender; if you cannot surrender, die."

- Sima Yi

Galren and I once engaged in a little Prydaen mocking on the gweth that was directed at no one in particular. Nothing extreme, nothing OOC, mainly things of the "go chase a ball of yarn" variety of banter.

In rather short order, we were both issued SENDs telling us to stop with the talk of Prydaens being no better than housecats because we had generated reports from offended players.

Who was in the wrong here, the people reporting or the people being reported? Has game policy suddenly become a democracy? Why should I be able to get my dozen friends together to report someone and actually be able to see results?

Someone answer these questions, please.

---

Rev. Reene

Syralon whispers to your group, "Gentlemen, to evil!"

Vinjince, the amount of patience you're showing by trying to convince Flavius of something he doesn't want to believe is astounding.

---

******************
SEND[Lirrak] I've got permaconsent on you and Im gonna find you now
******************

See Vinjince, we are both enjoying our discussion. Good times. Almost like mutual consent.

"I find the sheer amount of ignorance you have to be amusing. You continue to make me laugh."

As long as you are being entertained. The difference is that I don't think you are ignorant- I think you have a faulty thought process, and that view things only from your own very parochial viewpoint. While I admit that there are likely abuses of Reporting, and that there are also likely abuses by players that lead to excess reporting- and present that as my opinion- you continue to try to convince that everything you state is a cold hard fact.

"Again, I went over your head. Do me a favor? Sit down and think carefully about the point I'm trying to make. I'd rather see you disagreeing than completely missing what I'm saying. It's getting kind of redundant to have to explain it to you again and again."

You know, no matter how many times you repeat a bad argument, it still doesn't make it right.

Now with that said...

This is an utter and complete contradiction in your statements. First you said:

">>See here is another area of agreement- we do have things we agree about. There are griefers and there are those who report when they shouldn't. Both waste GM's time."

The above ^^^ is your statement. Now you say:

>>The question then is if 20 or 30 people report you(assuming the GM was addressing you) and you are never found to be in violation of policy- you are still the cause of the GM's time being wasted- not the 20 or 30 people who felt you were detracting from their fun in the game. "

Ummm where is the contradiction here? I address that there are people who waste GM's time by their actions. If you are causing action that motivate 20 or 30 people to report you, then even if you are within policy, you are the cause of the GM's time being wasted.

"I'm the cause of the GMs time wasted? When the others report when they shouldn't? Stop and think about that for a moment....

If others are reporting when they shouldn't then THEY'RE wasting the GMs time indirectly, not ME. I can only conclude with two things:"

And this is where I know you will never understand. No matter how slowly I type it. But one last time- if your actions are causing large numbers of people to report you, then your actions are creating the situation that wastes the GM's time. IF the concern is only about the wasting of GM resources, then a much more expedient solution for DR would be to remove you from the game, than to try to convince 20 or 30 other paying customers to stop complaining. At worst, they lose one customer rather than potentially losing the others.

What you refuse to consider- and will continue to refuse to consider- is that even actions totally within policy can create situations where GM's time is being wasted. In the past when Brands wasted too much GM time, they removed Brand from the game. It wasn't being used against policy, and technically everyone who reported you would consider to be a frivolous reporter. In this case, DR decided it was a better use of resources to remove a feature rather than deal with 'frivolous' reports. Likewise if DR decided too much GM resource is being used to police players whose actions cause large numbers of reports, they could take action against that player- which was the warning implied by the GM to you.

"1. Either you really are this ignorant.
2. Or you're still stretching, trying to find a way to keep this argument going when you're clearly making no sense."

To paraphrase the Princess Bride- I really think you misunderstand this term- ignorant. There are tons of things I happily admit my ignorance about- including how many times you have been reported, how many warnings you do or don't have, etc, etc. And I am ignorant about how much of a problem this is for DR- which I have admitted many times. I am ignorant because I have yet to see a post by a GM saying "yep, the biggest problem is just that people report too much". You however claim knowledge as how much of a resource drag Reports are for DR, and apparently you base this on one obviously misunderstood conversation with one GM.

I am comfortable with the sense I am making- I even understand your arguement- I just think you are making very broad assumptions based upon your very narrow and self serving point of view. You seem to think if you shout louder, call names or repeat yourself that it somehow reinforces your claims.

"Heh, do you really take everything said this way? Whenever someone posts a bug, or a question with a log of something IG, or an event, a conflict, do you have a hard time believing it cause you think they made it up? I'm not saying there's a possibility they haven't, but I think you may need to loosen up some."

As a matter of fact, I take most things people post with a grain of salt. Logs can be altered, conflicts can be misrepresented etc. Do you really accept everything that anyone posts at face value?

But as I said, I think you missed the point of the GM's conversation with you- he was asking you to cool it because even though your actions were not policy violations, that your actions were leading to too many people reporting and complaining about your actions. Nor did he say that the reports were frivolous. You seem to take the position that if a report is made against you, and the GM doesn't give you a warning, then the reporter is always in the wrong. If DR felt that way, it would be extremely simple for them to implement a system where if there was a report that one of the parties always got a warning.

"Anyhow, no, I didn't make that up. Ask Galren, or Reene, or whoever else may know about that particular situation."

Well not exactly an unbiased group there, but my point wasn't whether a GM had said that or not- it was that you posting a supposed GM conversation without any substantion wouldn't hold up to scrutiny on its own.

"So apparently you were wrong about a GM saying it uses up a lot of their time. Get over it and let's move on."

Why move on when we have such a good arguement going? Once again, you make an unsubstantiated assertion of what you think, and come to the conclusion that I am wrong. You have a conversation with one GM saying all the reports about your conflicts, even within policy, is wasting alot of GM time. He wasn't saying all reports waste all GM time, he was clearly applying this to your specific situation at that point. As always, I say that I assume that there are frivolous reports that regularly waste GM's time. I haven't seen a post yet from DR that addresses this and points at this being a broad game wide problem.


"A verbal conflict and just running mouths can be different, so I agree there. But my character will often resort to violence if someone is constantly running their mouth. That's the way I RP. If you don't like it, then tell me OOC'ly and we can squash it. But don't go back to running your mouth when it's supposedly over."

I agree with this. We probably would disagree at the details but in general I agree.

"No, I'm basing it on a multitude of experiences. Mine and many others that I have seen. You're basing all of your arguments only off what YOU'VE seen yet you don't seek out CvC conflicts."

Good- now you are actually presenting some facts- you are basing things on your experiences and 'many others'. Since you present no numbers, I will make some up for you. Lets assume that another 10 players are confirming your experience- that the biggest problem with DR is fear of being reported, and that anyone who is involved with CvC will get reported. 10 players out of a population of probably 1000 players. Just because those you associate with, agree with your point, doesn't mean that this is a huge issue for the rest of the population.

I dont' seek out CvC, and I don't get reported. Therefore I don't waste any GM's time and I don't have any fear of being reported. Therefore I don't have any of the issues you are complaining about. However, unlike you, I am willing to accept that your experiences are valid either, but that my experiences, and your experiences, should be taken in context with everyone's experience, and then DR should make a business decision based upon what they consider their best interest. Just as in the case of Brand, if reporting is too much of a problem- then they could change Reporting rules, or they could change policy to reign in those who are generating so many reports. Both would address the issue of GM time being wasted- if that problem is of a high enough magnitude to DR for them to change things.

">>Accepting conjecture without question is a bad thing.

When you're completely ignorant and have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, then this is true. But when you experience it yourself, and see many different situations that are similar, then it may very well not be."

So accepting conjecture is a good thing if you experience it yourself? Ah I see now- since you have experienced had many reports against you, you feel qualified to make the conjecture that this is a huge problem for everyone, and is a detriment to the entire game.

"As for the actual facts, I'm gonna jump in the sewer water to grab my fish. I'm gonna get all muddy to tackle my dinner."

You got me on this one- I don't even know how to respond to such a clear argument.

"I'm going to respond just like you respond to show you just how silly you've become in this thread. Starting now:

>>That being said- sure I see it happen. Most of what I have directly seen is people trying to bully others.

Show me proof. I want facts that players try to bully others."

Hmmm I think I pointed out that this was my observation. When you say that you have had players report you for malicious purposes, I didn't ask for proof- you were stating your personal experience. However, when you go beyond that to make the unsubstantiated claim that this is an overall game problem- sure I like actual facts.

">>I get the feeling that people who like facts are frustrating for you.

No, it's when ignorance is exposed at such a high degree."

Oh, everytime I call you on unsubstantiated claims, you like to call "ignorance, ignorance". Like I am missing out on some secret Playnet Forum where the GM's are all posting about the burden of frivolous reporting.

"It's like if I say... The Cleveland Indians are winning the baseball game right now. Then you say... "You have no proof! They're probably not winning."

I say, "But I just heard a lot of other people say it.""

Since you are bringing the real world into it, a more worthy example would be someone telling me- "too many people call 911 for frivolous reasons" and had nothing more to substantiate it than saying "well one cop told me this after people kept calling to report that my party was causing problems, and I should tone it down.

When people make broad assertions and use that as a basis to state that something should change, yeah, I would like to see something more substantial.

---

"Reporting is being abused, it really is. But I'm not gonna try to convince you that it is."

Then what have you been doing in all these posts?

I read Galren's post of his personal experience. So at this point, we have two players who are big CvC/Violence advocates stating that their observation is that report is abused. I accept both of your personal observations at face value. That doesn't mean that is the entire story, nor even that this is a problem for the entire population. It might be- or it might be just a problem for a very small cliche of players who live for CvC violence.

"All I'm seeing is that your only defense to your ignorance is that you will claim someone is not being factual, yet you post your own experiences yet aren't living up to your own standards."

Well, no. I have tried to make it very clear what are my personal observations and my conjectures. I have tried very hard not to present anything as fact, other than my personal experiences, because beyond that I don't really know.

"Regardless, you can't claim someone is wrong unless they are not within policy. And there's plenty of times where people are IN policy yet still get reported. Are they wrong? Oh wait, I didn't provide facts that this happened. You're full of it and you know it."

Sure I can. If you mean wrong as in a legal sense, like violating the law, or policy, then true. However, DR is a business and should decide what is right and wrong based upon what they believe is best for the game. A player who constantly starts trouble and just barely manages to stay on the right side of policy can still be wrong for the game. If the majority of other players are complaining then arguably that person can be considered wrong by DR.


"On a side note, it's possible to kill people that thump you."

Certainly its possible. I just suck at CvCviolence. Like I said, I didn't feel like dieing then. Unlike you, my first response to conflict is not to try to figure out how I can kill someone. In the case of the thump, I was actively RPing, and the other player didn't like my RP, and used thump to end it. So I just had him tossed out of the guild. Worked to my satisfaction just fine.

">>"is the problem frivolous reports, or is the problem that there are a small minority of problem players who generate an undue amount of reports- or is it both?"

Is it really a minority of players? (Going into Flavius mode here) Do you have facts and proof that it's a small minority? What if it's a large minority of "problem" players? Are they really the problems if they're in policy?"

You do realize I was asking a question don't you? My point- which you won't accept- is that it is possible that the big issue might be frivolous reports or it might be 'problem' players- or it could be both. And the persons who can answer that question work for Simu, and not you.

"I've heard it from so many different angles, including from GMs, that I forget where to find all of it."

Doesn't exactly inspire confidence.

>>Been in CvC situations. Never been reported or threatened with report.

"How long ago? Non-GM sponsored. If you'd really just laugh at someone slapping you then of course that would happen. If your character had any grapefruits then you'd see how many reporters there are."

I will honestly admit my character has no grapefruits. Often ale, sometimes tarts, but never grapefruits. Its been awhile since I was in CvCviolence, but didn't worry about getting reported then, nor do I know. As I said, my RP doesn't waste GM's time. (I have every confidence in the RP of DR players that Flavius will likely find himself confronted by more CvC as a result of my post)

There is a small group of posters- Galren, Caelumia, Strange, yourself and a few others who enjoy initiating conflict and bringing it to a violent end- and you feel that not only are you reported in error too often- you also feel that this is a game-wide problem of epic proportions. That the real problem is that most people are playing the game in a way that is different than how you think it should be played.

I simply say, if there is a real problem, DR should look at it, identify what the real problem is(GM resources being wasted?- what is the root cause of the resources being wasted) identify that and devise a solution that will lead to an environment that will make for a more enjoyable game experience for most players. Whether that means penalizing frivolous reporting or clamping down on problem players.


Flavius


















Vinjince

---

"There are five possible operations for any army. If you can fight, fight; if you cannot fight, defend; if you cannot defend, flee; if you cannot flee, surrender; if you cannot surrender, die."

- Sima Yi


"militantly enforcing the overly rigid standards of you and your small collection of friends"