THE GRUPO INCIDENT (legitimate discussion)

[Sateru]

Regardless if Solo is dumb for giving out his info to random noobs, he did however help a lot of people get xp and progress their toons. Grupo was always on, always in an xp group, always getting people xp, always helping the random noobs on this server.

I doubt Solo really had helping newbies on his mind when he gave out his info.

If someone blew up your car and the insurance company says "fuck you, you are out of luck", would you be happy about it too?

If you offered a copy of your cars key to anyone walking by I don't think your insurance would cover them wrecking your car.

Charge a fee for restoration...if it really mattered...

This is probably a bad idea.

And like Fuwok says, you're letting the bad guy win by not restoring the character.

You're also not learning to be more careful with who you give out your info to. What Solo did with Grupo's info has always been very strongly discouraged.

 

[eqjenius]

Out of curiosity, if I guest lock my character and advertise my username and password publicly, does anyone else have a problem with that?

 

[Nwaij]

Out of curiosity, if I guest lock my character and advertise my username and password publicly, does anyone else have a problem with that?

Dunno, would you have a problem with some random noob "accidently" fucking up every faction out there on your toon ever, making all your quest augs/gate necks go poof in the process, then binding you in a funny place with hard-hitting now KoS mobs like murk portin?

Just pointing out that such things still can happen even with guestlock, if you are careless about with whom you share your info.

 

[Sateru]

Grupo has been restored and boy let me tell you he better not do this again.

Of all the policy changes and decisions made recently this is the only one that I feel strongly against.

 

[Stryda]

I doubt Solo really had helping newbies on his mind when he gave out his info.

He actually did have that in mind, helping noobs get xp while they get Grupo xp.

If you offered a copy of your cars key to anyone walking by I don't think your insurance would cover them wrecking your car.

Mine does. OMGEE!

This is probably a bad idea.

Just an opinion that was thrown out, didnt say it was a good idea...

You're also not learning to be more careful with who you give out your info to. What Solo did with Grupo's info has always been very strongly discouraged.

Most people learn from their mistakes...strongly discouraged but why are you going to punish someone for something that doesn't break rules or hurt anyone.


Anyway, grats on Grupo restoration tho. I'm done here!

 

[Minerios]

Dunno, would you have a problem with some random noob "accidently" fucking up every faction out there on your toon ever, making all your quest augs/gate necks go poof in the process, then binding you in a funny place with hard-hitting now KoS mobs like murk portin?

Just pointing out that such things still can happen even with guestlock, if you are careless about with whom you share your info.

What I'd like to know is if the staff would restore eqjenus's character to its previous state should this happen.

If so, why isn't the policy laid out clearly?

If not, why?

 

[Slaariel]

If your intent is to troll the staff, you are doomed. If you are just an idiot, I am here for you.

 

[jew_nose_it]

Before this got resolved I was just going to say, charge people 1-5k per item or something to restore in instances like this.

Also I would like to use grupo.

 

[Minerios]

I don't mean to troll, I'm at a loss to understand the decision. I know that deleting characters or changing an account password are stuff that can be restored, but I thought it was pretty clear stolen money/items wouldn't be reimbursed. I'd like a clear rule to be made so that people know what they get into when they share account info.

Excerpt from the policy question thread:

Re: Account Sharing and loss of pp/items/accounts -

(snip)

To Summarize: We will not reimburse anything that was stolen. Your accounts are your responsibility. We will still ban any thieves we catch.

 

[Slaariel]

Here is a clear rule: use as much common sense as you can and don't be a jerk and steal delete people's stuff but if someone manages to X your account or chars we don't want it to be the end of the game for you. There is nothing to be gained by saying 'welp, see ya!'.

 

[Slaariel]

Here's another perspective: I only ban thieves, cheaters, and creeps. Having a char or acct eradicated and not restored is equivalent to a ban. The person with the wiped char/acct is not a thief, cheater, or creep. Therefore I will not ban him.

 

[neonovas]

Dunno, would you have a problem with some random noob "accidently" fucking up every faction out there on your toon ever, making all your quest augs/gate necks go poof in the process, then binding you in a funny place with hard-hitting now KoS mobs like murk portin?

note: never piss of nwajj

 

[eqjenius]

1) Grupo is an alt, not a main. It's highly unlikely Solo would have quit over this.

2) Grupo was not deleted, so it's not equivalent to a ban. He only lost his gear, which is very inconvenient. Heaven forbid he has to lead another IS pug and claim 80% of the loot for his alt.

3) Silo said in the OP that he finds it "difficult" to level up Grupo on his own because the people he XPs with have better tanks available. I.E., he doesn't care enough about this toon to actually find groups for him.

4) If this does set a precedent, it sets the precedent that if you screw up in the game and are inconvenienced for some reason (accidently looted a QP on the wrong toon, accidently deleted something, etc), it might be returned. Not only does this go against every other rule already out there regarding these instances, it creates a situation where GMs are going to get more petitions asking for help when a player screws up. That might be good for the players, but it's inconvenient for the GMs, which is why those rules were created in the first place. Congratulations, you've just given yourself more work.

Nothing against Silo here. I just think a better way of approaching this for the GMs should have been, "Silo's been around for a long time and has contributed a lot to the SoD community. As such, we're going to give him a one-time special break" rather than trying to justify this decision. Because it doesn't make much sense by any other rationale.

 

[Tarutao]

Just for the record, this call wasn't Slaariel's. He was kind enough to assist with the character restore process after I made the call to rollback Grupo to before the incident. Please don't attack his judgment on the issue.

I get about as many complaints about this server being a nanny state that enforces its rules too harshly and treats players with kid gloves as I get for being a tyrannical dictator that allows "might equals right" and silences the populace... so when you take one of the loud yelling stances, just remember that someone yelling the opposite is around here somewhere. You're cancelling each other out.

 

[Prospero]

1) Grupo is an alt, not a main. It's highly unlikely Solo would have quit over this.

2) Grupo was not deleted, so it's not equivalent to a ban. He only lost his gear, which is very inconvenient. Heaven forbid he has to lead another IS pug and claim 80% of the loot for his alt.

3) Silo said in the OP that he finds it "difficult" to level up Grupo on his own because the people he XPs with have better tanks available. I.E., he doesn't care enough about this toon to actually find groups for him.

4) If this does set a precedent, it sets the precedent that if you screw up in the game and are inconvenienced for some reason (accidently looted a QP on the wrong toon, accidently deleted something, etc), it might be returned. Not only does this go against every other rule already out there regarding these instances, it creates a situation where GMs are going to get more petitions asking for help when a player screws up. That might be good for the players, but it's inconvenient for the GMs, which is why those rules were created in the first place. Congratulations, you've just given yourself more work.

Nothing against Silo here. I just think a better way of approaching this for the GMs should have been, "Silo's been around for a long time and has contributed a lot to the SoD community. As such, we're going to give him a one-time special break" rather than trying to justify this decision. Because it doesn't make much sense by any other rationale.

Emphasis mine.

Basically this post hits the nail on the head. I don't know any of the people involved so this is just my take on the situation pretty objectively I would say. This happened as a result of something that as far as I know is looked down upon by staff, and I am sure is looked down upon by the community. The feature that was implemented for this exact situation was ignored (when this feature was implemented it was stated that now anyone who loses stuff is out of luck). I am not saying you should take a "screw you" attitude toward the players at all - but players should also be responsible for the consequences of their actions when they do nothing to prevent those consequences. Also, this is an alt with a Juggo charm (puzzling why that is still even on the character tbh) clearly the owner is capable of gearing him back up - but that would require some effort which seems to have never been put into this character from the start. I do not understand why there was a reset here.

I am not asking for you to reverse your decision, that would at this point be unfair to a player who has already had a crappy thing happen to him. But still - I do not understand why it was thought a good idea to set this precedent.


PS: Stryda, this is a 100% serious question, what is your insurance company? Because if you blow up your own car on purpose there are no insurers that will replace it for you, and the ones I know of consider actions by someone you give your keys to equivalent to ones done by the owner.

 

[Silosobi]

It was pretty dumb to whore out Grupo and not guestlock, people did work on quests for him and that was my main reason for not locking. I had already seen boes and cash stolen, but I wasn't really worried about that, and I honestly just never thought anyone would go to extremes like this.

Sure, I share Grupo's info because I want him to get exp. And other people play him to exp/progress their main. Its a mutually beneficial relationship.. and I have even made some friends along the way. I'm not sure why people think that I'm some ultra elitest. Maybe I troll ooc on occasion, but if anyone sends me a serious tell I will give a real response and I'm generally open to talk to anyone.

To the people saying this decision contradicts policy and former decisions... first I kind of have to ask if you even read the entire thread because its all already laid out here? The common situations that policy talks about are accidental item deletions and theft. The case of someone maliciously deleting everything a character has is quite new. Sure, Grupo happens to be an alt and I wouldn't quit if he was not restored, but if you set the precedent here that situations like this are not fixed, then next time when it happens to a main, or even a lot of mains (eg: guild drama meltdown where people share a lot of infos), then you are risking having people quit this game, and like slaar said, you essentially let the bad guys win by not fixing this situation.

To the person asking how guestlock slows down progression: Ive seen someone fail a time sensitive quest turnin bc of guestlock. I've seen people go LD mid raid encounter because they left GL on and tried to hand a pot or w/e. More often, it just wastes a bit of time. This isn't to say guestlock is bad, just that there are situations where it can be a nuisance. Regardless Grupo will be using it from now on.

 

[jew_nose_it]

TLDR Regardless Grupo will be using it from now on.

And everyone lived happily ever after.

 

[booster]

And everyone lived happily ever after.

except me, who read all these awful threads.

 

[Waldoff]

Basically the rule was overturned in this case for public policy reasons. If a character is destroyed past use we will most likely reimburse to take away the incentive of destroying characters.

It is very ironic to see people calling for more blood. The man got a break from his toon, publicly berated and had a revert done that lost him a couple of weeks work on the character.

There will always be extreme situations that deserve an exception to the rule. That is what makes the law human and not just rote. Giving Tao a hard time for this one seems pretty insane to me given the anger that came out of the codification of the pug rules.

 

[Sateru]

Basically the rule was overturned in this case for public policy reasons. If a character is destroyed past use we will most likely reimburse to take away the incentive of destroying characters.

It is very ironic to see people calling for more blood. The man got a break from his toon, publicly berated and had a revert done that lost him a couple of weeks work on the character.

There will always be extreme situations that deserve an exception to the rule. That is what makes the law human and not just rote. Giving Tao a hard time for this one seems pretty insane to me given the anger that came out of the codification of the pug rules.

I wouldn't really call it being destroyed past use in Grupo's case. And it would probably be safe to say that the exp loss wasn't really work he put in in the first place.