POLNews - GM Policy (12th December)*Update* - continued from the other thread

[RoM]

Do show where I said that.

http://www.playonline.com/polapps/s/...olg_loc=en&c=2

Community links supported by SE:

http://wiki.ffxiclopedia.org/Warrior:_Guide_to_Playing_the_Job

Can be used to increase accuracy for skillup or use Sharpshot in order to aid with ranged weapons. However, not a widely accepted EXP party subjob. RNG gives WAR access to most ranged attack weapon skills and in addition an Accuracy boost at lvl 20. This allows a WAR/RNG the ability to start distortion without having to surrender its Axe/Great Axe (filling the one spot in the skillchain chart that axes do not). This sub is also very useful for skilling up, in particularly any ranged weapon.

This subjob has recently started to gain more appeal in FFXI by allowing a Warrior to act as a Pseudo-Ranger. The premise behind this setup is to act exactly like a normal Ranger, spamming arrows/bolts/bullets at a enemy to inflict damage. However, Warrior has a fairly higher STR naturally than Ranger and will get more damage per successful hit, but with access to less +Ranged Accuracy means that it will generally hit less often. A warrior/ranger takes advantage of the effect of the generally accepted diminishing returns of +Accuracy to hit nearly as often, but compensates with more damage. Currently only 1 parser exists to my knowledge that proved that a Warrior/Ranger successfully out damaged a Ranger/Ninja.

Update: After the July 2005 update, this combination is no longer considered very valid, the ability of a WAR to hit nearly as accurately as a RNG still exists; but due to the complications of having to learn positioning combined with meager results has nearly destroyed this concept.

SE Community Approved site. Guide written by a cheat. It's a damn good guide too, such a shame.


http://twpa.net/ffxi/spells/

Direct link to myster tour (read: datamining) which is where it got at least a portion of it's information from (is that still considered third part or fourth?) direct links from mystery tour to gil buying. SE approved community site.

http://www.ffmworld.com/index.html

Direct links to video only obtained via third party. SE approved. Weak example but by your strict definition all are breaches in ToS. Approved by SE.

Top 3 pages, 3 examples. I could go on....

Your links prove my points about your line of thinking.

You've seen fight club? Remember the formula applied to recalling cars vs settling with accident victims? Same kinda thing.

If the cost of litigation outweighs the potential profit by innaction they simply allow it to occur. This is why blanket statements are used in such agreements in software, the only time they bear definition is if the company itself wants to take action on something in which case they do. Your definitions do not matter as SE itself blurs what is permissable and what is not and often contradicts itself as has been shown.

There is still no excuse for the bitch of it being a cheat when simply knowing the information you possess in the client itself yields no more information than the parser. The parser is no more than an extended log that doesn't require digging or carpel tunnel. It is also known of by SE and is not commented to in ANY banning attempt. Chances are they really don't care. It really doesn't hurt anyone that isn't already hurting themselves by not knowing as much as possible.

If requiring someone to know what they're doing is elitist sign me right the fuck up.

Now, there's not a damn thing you've had to say on this issue that i haven't immediately twisted back on itself. You've been arguing against your own logic from post one and proving you've no grasp on how to argue semantics. Your evidence proves nothing but that you don't read it before posting it. Much like everything else you reply to.

The end.

Go away. :rtfm:

Edit: forgot a word. Broke a link/quote.

Edit Edit: Fucking LOL ... http://forums.ffxiclopedia.org/search.php?mode=results

Search keyword parser, do it.

SE approved :thumbsup:

 

[Uzor]

Community links supported by SE:

http://wiki.ffxiclopedia.org/Warrior:_Guide_to_Playing_the_Job



SE Community Approved site. Guide written by a cheat. It's a damn good guide too, such a shame.

That guide isn't written by a cheat. You fail horribly. All it does is mention at 1 point that someone parsed RDM/NIN vs. WAR/RNG, and the WAR/RNG outdamaged him. For all we know the parsing was made by hand.

http://twpa.net/ffxi/spells/

Direct link to myster tour (read: datamining) which is where it got at least a portion of it's information from (is that still considered third part or fourth?) direct links from mystery tour to gil buying. SE approved community site.

And you, offcourse, know that mystery tour take all of their information from datamining, right? Because, you know, it's damn hard to look in the spell listing the spell cost etc. right?

http://www.ffmworld.com/index.html

Direct links to video only obtained via third party. SE approved. Weak example but by your strict definition all are breaches in ToS. Approved by SE.

I do believe I said earlier that SE isn't known to be smart. But by yoru deffinition, gil buying is allowed because of the gil buying adds, and botting is also allowed since people do it. Even though SE constantly fight it, right?

Top 3 pages, 3 examples. I could go on....

Your links prove my points about your line of thinking.

You've seen fight club? Remember the formula applied to recalling cars vs settling with accident victims? Same kinda thing.

If the cost of litigation outweighs the potential profit by innaction they simply allow it to occur. This is why blanket statements are used in such agreements in software, the only time they bear definition is if the company itself wants to take action on something in which case they do. Your definitions do not matter as SE itself blurs what is permissable and what is not and often contradicts itself as has been shown.

I've never said MY definition is all that matters. I'm arguing with you because you think YOU are the one that decides what's allowed and what isn't.

I've said it before, there's different levels of cheating, just like there's different levels of breaking the ToS. atm, SE are putting almost all of their energy on stopping botting and more serious hacks, and thus, they let other things like parsing and video recording slip by. It's like a police officer, whom if he catches you speeding outside a bank, and then someone robbs the bank, he'll let you go and hunt the bank robber instead. They prioritize the more serious crime. Just because they let the smaller crimes slip by doesn't mean they allow it.

There is still no excuse for the bitch of it being a cheat when simply knowing the information you possess in the client itself yields no more information than the parser. The parser is no more than an extended log that doesn't require digging or carpel tunnel. It is also known of by SE and is not commented to in ANY banning attempt. Chances are they really don't care. It really doesn't hurt anyone that isn't already hurting themselves by not knowing as much as possible.

Read what I said before. They don't consider it a serious threat like other programs, and thus, they let it slip by. Doesn't mean they allow it. And I do fnd it ironic that you say "There's still no excuse for bitching about it being a cheat", when you're the ones that brought it up saying it's NOT a cheat.

I've said it before, the parser reads the logs not ment to be read, and automatically calculates it without any input from the user. All the user have to do is play the game, and the parser calculates it all automatically with 100% accuracy.

I'll take an example. If someone is going to bed, and want to logout in their MH, would speed hacking from Wajaom Woodlands to Al Zahbi to the moghouse in order to go to bed earlier be cheating? It doesn't put anyone in a bad position, but the speed hacker saves some time?

Would you consider this cheating or not?

Now, there's not a damn thing you've had to say on this issue that i haven't immediately twisted back on itself. You've been arguing against your own logic from post one and proving you've no grasp on how to argue semantics. Your evidence proves nothing but that you don't read it before posting it. Much like everything else you reply to.

Right back at you. Not once did I argue against my own logic. Your evidence didn't prove anything either.

Hell, you even used the WRONG evidence. Your evidence consists of quoting the User Agreement about copyright infringement, and usign that as proof that PlayOnline doesn't agree with someone writing a guide... Hello idiot?

Go away. :rtfm:

Wow, that really hurt me, right? LOL

Edit Edit: Fucking LOL ... http://forums.ffxiclopedia.org/search.php?mode=results

Search keyword parser, do it.

SE approved :thumbsup:

Yes, that is a FORUM, where people talk. Very much like here. People are free to post what they want. The staff of the site still doesn't provide any hacks or parsers to be downloaded. SE approved the site itself, but I doubt SE bothers reading the forums.

Let's go kill them, k?

 

[Uzor]

But its still against the EULA and ToS, which is your grounds for defining a cheat. So it must be cheating.

No, that wasn't my grounds for it being a cheat. That's his grounds that everything that's against the ToS is cheating.

 

[Uzor]

That only works for ambiguous items.

What about the disambiguous items? Not every item is a mystery to link it to a mob..
Khimaira Horn, Mamool Ja Collars, Troll Helmets, Medusa's Armlet, Hydra Scales, Goblin Masks, Cerberus Meat, Diatryma Meat, Yagudo Feather, etc. the list goes on.

Items like that simply need confirmation. They're datamined. The mobs they drop from are datamined. The location of the mobs are datamined. Zone Maps are datamined.

Even some items, like Algol, are easy to link to where they drop by descriptions given by SE. They stated Algol had something to do with Hell. Cerberus is from Hell. Easy link, just needed confirmation.

Yes, but that's not datamined where it drops from. It's theories that people have that later shows to be true.

If recipes could be datamined (which is what RoM's argument was about), then people would have known how to make Goblin Drink a WHOLE LOT earlier.

And no, Mob <pos> can't be datamined. You can datamine what ZONE they pop in, but not on which map, nor where.

 

[Skaw]

I didn't say you can datamine their position? I said location, meaning the area they're in. And Zone maps.

 

[RoM]

Stuff i didn't read.

It's YOUR line of thinking used in every response. i simply apply it elsewhere and then have you tell me how wrong i am. You're a fucking braniac. How about those grey areas that are left to SE define, you know .. the ones i've been on about since my first post. Once again you make my point for me by responding to argue your own logic and exposing it's obvious flaws. You're too literal for this discussion.

You give SE and yourself entirely too much credit.

Edit: couldn't help myself, i did read some.

It specificly states only one 'parser' exists that proves this data. Not that he wrote the shit down. The statement quoted is beyond contest in the guide.

they let it slip by. Doesn't mean they allow it.

mmmmkay...

The gil buying reference is in lue of your claiming that SE community approved sites can't be in violation of the ToS EULA as they were in fact SE approved. Go back and look, i'm not going to quote it again. Just a post or two before the community link index you posted.

The arguement was that a breach in ToS is not always a cheat as the ToS can be interpreted (sp, fuck it) any way you like. Your logic was that a violation was cheating, which you ammended recently, your logic was then that if the information is SE approved it's not a violation of the ToS even tho SE approved sites feature breaches galore. All points were answered, countered, and found you to be lacking.

Do you think 'go away' and a smiley hurts me anymore than it does you? Just taking notes on that non-standard argument style you were on about, big man.

I can't bother with any of the rest, this simply isn't worth the effort you make it require as you don't bother reading what is clearly on the page, can't remember what you say, and continue to shift positions.

Look, all e-peening aside it comes down to this. I don't hold anyone to a higher standard than SE does, you do. Big deal, we know that about each other. Yippee. If SE can't be bothered to not only officially go on record about the parser unlike windower, rmt, flee/poshacks, etc which they have spoke freely about then i'm not likely to see it as a cheat by their terms as they decide what is and what isn't in the matter. Until such time as it can be shown that the parser puts a leg up on anyone with either a keen eye or a web browser it's a huge load that it's a cheat. You feel differently, that's wonderful. Really. It simply makes me a realist and you and idealist.

Any further attempts to bother me with this will be replied to along the lines of

I don't have much more than that left in me for this anymore.

 

[Bajaratt]

I've said it before, the parser reads the logs not ment to be read

This is completely false, given the parser ONLY shows data that appeared in your chat log, it ONLY shows data that you yourself have already read. If I filter my damage, I can't parse my damage, a parser accesses no hidden data.

 

[Uzor]

This is completely false, given the parser ONLY shows data that appeared in your chat log, it ONLY shows data that you yourself have already read. If I filter my damage, I can't parse my damage, a parser accesses no hidden data.

I know that. But that dosn't change the fact that Parser reads a file that's not ment to be read. You can't run the parser without reading those files.

It's YOUR line of thinking used in every response. i simply apply it elsewhere and then have you tell me how wrong i am. You're a fucking braniac. How about those grey areas that are left to SE define, you know .. the ones i've been on about since my first post. Once again you make my point for me by responding to argue your own logic and exposing it's obvious flaws. You're too literal for this discussion.

No, it's not my line of thinking. You mention points that's opposite of my points, and I ague them. Not once did I counter my own points. Hell, I even gave yoi points to use due to your lack of sense. You mention the same things in every reply, I counter those same points. you haven't thought of a new way to counter me in pages, except the ToS quote which you were wrong about. You make my points for me by responding with retarded logic that you've already used for the past, what? 20 pages?

You give SE and yourself entirely too much credit.

I haven't given SE any credit in this thread. Nor myself. All I said was that SE is currently working on countering bots.

And as you can see from other threads, they've banned a WHOLE FUCKING LOT of hackers and bots. Oh, I'm sorry, did I just give SE some credit? Well earned, I might say.

It specificly states only one 'parser' exists that proves this data. Not that he wrote the shit down. The statement quoted is beyond contest in the guide.
[/quot€]
"only one 'parser' exists that proves this data? K, you said yourself that parser isn't what proves it. Retatardeded logic ftw.

Parser is the program. A parsing it what proves it. You said this yourself.

]quote]
mmmmkay...

The gil buying reference is in lue of your claiming that SE community approved sites can't be in violation of the ToS EULA as they were in fact SE approved. Go back and look, i'm not going to quote it again. Just a post or two before the community link index you posted.

This isn't what I said. I said player written guides can't be in violation of the ToS. After you countered with ToS retarded logic (And you, might I add, didn't even quote the right parts), I said that the sites themselves isn't in violation of ToS, yes.

All pages, except maybe allakhazam, doesn't support gil selling themselves. There are, however, adds. QCDN, too, have gilseller adds that are automatically generated by google. This doesn't mean qcdn supports it though.

The arguement was that a breach in ToS is not always a cheat as the ToS can be interpreted (sp, fuck it) any way you like. Your logic was that a violation was cheating, which you ammended recently, your logic was then that if the information is SE approved it's not a violation of the ToS even tho SE approved sites feature breaches galore. All points were answered, countered, and found you to be lacking.

I didn't say breaking the ToS made it a cheat. The context I used it in, was that the parser opened a log, thus breaking the ToS. I didn't say it was a cheat.

the cheating part is that it works like a bot, automatically calculating everythign in it without the need of the user to help it out.

Do you think 'go away' and a smiley hurts me anymore than it does you? Just taking notes on that non-standard argument style you were on about, big man.

You said go away first, I used it after you. Don't try to act big and mighty big man.

I can't bother with any of the rest, this simply isn't worth the effort you make it require as you don't bother reading what is clearly on the page, can't remember what you say, and continue to shift positions.

Ditto, you're wasting my time with these useless posts. It seems you're not even thinking through them and just posting from tradition.

Look, all e-peening aside it comes down to this.

e-peen? Since when was this an e-peen contest?

I don't hold anyone to a higher standard than SE does, you do.

Yeah... since when do I hold people to a higher standard? In my own OPPINION (as I mentioned before), I don't even care if people use parser or not. I use it myself. I'm not arguing my oppinion, I'm arguing a point. point != oppinion.

If SE can't be bothered to not only officially go on record about the parser unlike windower, rmt, flee/poshacks, etc which they have spoke freely about then i'm not likely to see it as a cheat by their terms as they decide what is and what isn't in the matter. Until such time as it can be shown that the parser puts a leg up on anyone with either a keen eye or a web browser it's a huge load that it's a cheat. You feel differently, that's wonderful. Really. It simply makes me a realist and you and idealist.

Yeah... you... realist... LOL.

Any further attempts to bother me with this will be replied to along the lines of

I don't have much more than that left in me for this anymore.

Oh, so you've run out of arguments and just going to validify (sp?) your own arguments with POOP? Well, atleast you argee wiht me that your arguments are just that, POOP.

btw, you still didn't respond to my flee hacking example.

 

[Garvin]

I didn't say breaking the ToS made it a cheat. The context I used it in, was that the parser opened a log, thus breaking the ToS. I didn't say it was a cheat.

No, no, a thousand times no. Seriously, I can see where you're coming from, and it's wrong. The "negative" aspect of parser begins and ends at the fact that opening the file arguably violates SE's terms of service. ("Arguably" because they pick and choose which cases they would like to enforce.)

 

[RoM]

Go back and read this thread.

You: Breach in ToS = Cheating by my definition.

Me: If that's your definition then guides, community sites, etc are cheating.

(That's me applying your logic elsewhere and then we have the following)

You: nuh uh.

Me: uh huh.

You: i never said that.

Me: quotes where you said that.

You: i fail at life.

Me: Let's just drop it. You can really interpret it any way you want but SE is all that matters and they don't really give a shit.

You: i need to fail more. PAY ATTENTION TO ME!!!!!!

You misunderstand. My poop is about all that you're worthy of, kid. Adjust your helmet and get back to class, you need it.

QCDN does not require evaluation and approval by the corporation to have a site listed as accepted by SE. SE views those sites and determines whether or not they're acceptable. Your argument was that if SE saw ToS abuse SE wouldn't allow it, i countered, you danced around it with petty insults per usual.

The guide was written by someone who either new parser information or used it himself. Which to you is a violation of the ToS and cheating. End. Of. Story.

page fucking-A-1:

Seriously, before you respond, try making sure you're not just parroting someone you envy for having perspective. Aside from that entirely the actual argument was wether or not being able to research your shit outside of what the game provides is cheating, which by your terms isn't even though the information provided is a DIRECT result of ToS abuse

Fuck you and your fleehacking example, how's that work for ya? Didn't read it, doesn't matter. Fleehacking is not only acted upon and listed by SE but it's obvious it gives ONE player an advantage over the rest of the server. Contrary to the parser which progressively benefits everyone who's looking for information.

Meanwhile back at the ranch where the subject of the debate is the parser, cheating, and how it relates to SE, the ToS, and the EULA (remember that? the POINT of the conversation you hijacked because you didn't read it and didn't know what was going on? yea, me either tl;dr.) SE still has yet to even acknowledge the parser as a 'cheat' even though they're aware of it. By definition until SE makes a statement or takes action there is no concievable way to call it a cheat without sounding like a dumbass as it only provides what the game itself provides you with and doesn't disadvantage anyone but those who aren't looking to educate themselves with the content provided.

Anyway, you basicly just parroted my first post. SE assigns definition, everything else is personal opinion (read: grey area, remember those?) however claiming the parser advantages anyone over anyone else with a thirst for knowledge is just stupid, making you stupid by association as we had already arrived at this conclusion in a civil manner with hellstorm for the 6th goddamn time before you moved this bullshit to the FB, fucking drama queen.

Btw, you've gone from 'ZOMG PARSER IS CHEATING! EVIL EVIL CHEATERS!' to 'I use it myself' In 20 pages. GG. I think we're done here. Argue your point all you like, you're still wrong and now you're a hypocrit too.

If you honestly think i believe player guides, parser, etc are cheating you're more stupid than anyone's given you credit for. It's becoming more and more apparent that you walked in to the previous thread without bothering to read it and took me literally instead of reading and understand that throughout the course of the thread the ToS had been taken very literally to make points by others so i inturn did the same and crushed the opposition. You fucked up and didn't read it, don't come bitching to me.

Any moron could've seen this was an e-peen match from the OP, more specificly it was your e-peen match and now it's your sore vagina party because you got dealt with in an efficient manner over something you've no grounds to speak on. At least i don't play XI, i'm solid to my principles. When i did .. guess what? didn't use the parser once. I still didn't hold a grudge on those who did, on the contrary when they spoke up and threw out numbers i listened intently.

If you can't cop to being a dick, needing the attention, and/or weren't aware e-peening is what happens here (which i highly doubt since you're a DN vet) you've no business moving threads to the FB let alone participating in them. :rtfm:

P.s.

All those quotes and crap you almost make me miss Rones. Damn shame, really. You, sir, are no Rones.

Edit: You page 3
Datamining -

it's the same info that's provided in the game. You get the same info as when you talk to a NPC, thus it's irrelevant.

The only thing remotely resembling sentient thought you've managed in this whole thread.

Parsing - It's the same info that's provided in the game. You get the same info in battle, thus it's irrelevant.

Once again your words make my point for me.

Think of it like this for a second since you're ok with datamining. Parsing is simply a more specific and detailed form of datamining that does not erode new content unlike straight datamining which does, even if it's just a fraction it's relevant. Parsing is datamining current player/party/alliance/player-input-experience for informational gain much in the same way datamining is used to find the largest piece of the puzzle and infer from there until you can confirm with new content, thereby undermining it.

Pick up on the bias? That's nonstandard, makes people froth at the mouth and bloodpressure rise when they reply. They forget to think about what they're saying and blather on incoherently or simply don't read the post at all so much as clutter their brains with what they're going to say in response and how best to deflect from the exposed and obvious. Take notes. Move a couple words around and it works the other way depending on what stance you take and is basicly beyond argument based on the oppositions statements, which in the end is all we have. But i digress...

Both open files SE doesn't want you opening. Both result in usable information as opposed to working it out on your own. Both break rules, neither is a cheat. We arrive at our conclusion. The only problem is i was only using guides as a tool, a means to an end as i stated ('by that line of thinking, yadda yadda yadday) .. if you think i believe that load you're sadly mistaken it just shows how blanket statements are taken out of context and moral arguments such as cheating are entirely biased to the participants in conversation. It also exposes the fact that you couldn't be bothered to actually read the thread previous to this. The simple fact of the matter is were SE to want to they could take my interpretation of the ToS as their own and at any moment outlaw guides. It'd be a monumentally stupid move but it's within the realm of possibility given how flexible software liscence agreements are.

Can we be done now?

It's not like you read any of this shit to the point of bothering to understand it anyway, right?

 

[Flameass]

Is it me of does Uzor preach a lot about how using windower is cheating and so forth ever since Chasym opened up his and others' posts on the OH 'secret' forum?

 

[Uzor]

Is it me of does Uzor preach a lot about how using windower is cheating and so forth ever since Chasym opened up his and others' posts on the OH 'secret' forum?

I did that long before then. I have never preached using only windower is a cheat though.

We had this very topic long before Chasym ever opened those boards. What was your point anyway? 'cause my only posts on the "secret forum" was about how Windower couldn't be detected by GM's. I'm sure that makes me a cheater, right?

anr RoM. I find it hillarious that you didn't post the "poop" picture. As for your post, althought you keep messing up what my argument was. Your point was that if SE saw ToS as abuse, they shouldn't allow it. My point, and argument, was that while yes, ToS is abuse, SE doesn't see parser or windower as enough of a threat to do something about it. You obviously ignored this though.

And no, I haven't said that "Breach in ToS = Cheating by my definition.". As for the "i need to fail more. PAY ATTENTION TO ME!!!!!!", I find that highly hillarious since YOU are the one that screams "pay attention to me".

The guide was written by someone who either new parser information or used it himself. Which to you is a violation of the ToS and cheating. End. Of. Story.

last I checked you can't parse a quest moron.

Fuck you and your fleehacking example, how's that work for ya? Didn't read it, doesn't matter. Fleehacking is not only acted upon and listed by SE but it's obvious it gives ONE player an advantage over the rest of the server. Contrary to the parser which progressively benefits everyone who's looking for information.

No, the reason you "fuck it" is because you can't counter it. Try again chump.

Meanwhile back at the ranch where the subject of the debate is the parser, cheating, and how it relates to SE, the ToS, and the EULA (remember that? the POINT of the conversation you hijacked because you didn't read it and didn't know what was going on? yea, me either tl;dr.) SE still has yet to even acknowledge the parser as a 'cheat' even though they're aware of it. By definition until SE makes a statement or takes action there is no concievable way to call it a cheat without sounding like a dumbass as it only provides what the game itself provides you with and doesn't disadvantage anyone but those who aren't looking to educate themselves with the content provided.

Only, I wasnt the one that hijacked it. I responded to posts OTHERS made. You fail AGAIN.

Anyway, you basicly just parroted my first post. SE assigns definition, everything else is personal opinion (read: grey area, remember those?) however claiming the parser advantages anyone over anyone else with a thirst for knowledge is just stupid, making you stupid by association as we had already arrived at this conclusion in a civil manner with hellstorm for the 6th goddamn time before you moved this bullshit to the FB, fucking drama queen.

You didn't post anything in a civil matter. Or rather, you CAN'T. You're a moron. Always have been, always will be. And if you had come to a conclusion in a civil manner, you wouldn't even have responded to this thread moron. If I'm stupid by assosiation, so are you. And by your deffinition, you're just as much a drama queen as I am. GG.

Btw, you've gone from 'ZOMG PARSER IS CHEATING! EVIL EVIL CHEATERS!' to 'I use it myself' In 20 pages. GG. I think we're done here. Argue your point all you like, you're still wrong and now you're a hypocrit too.

Only, I've said I use parser before. Yes, I have said parser is cheating. Yes, I do use it myself. My point is still that parser is cheating, even though I use it. My point didn't change just because I posted I use parser. The reason I posted ti was that you think my OPINION is that it's a cheat. Mainly because you confused my OPINION with my POINT.

If you honestly think i believe player guides, parser, etc are cheating you're more stupid than anyone's given you credit for. It's becoming more and more apparent that you walked in to the previous thread without bothering to read it and took me literally instead of reading and understand that throughout the course of the thread the ToS had been taken very literally to make points by others so i inturn did the same and crushed the opposition. You fucked up and didn't read it, don't come bitching to me.

I haven't said I believe you think they're cheating. I'm saying you apparently think they're all breaching the ToS. I think you've got them confused. Thanks for helping me out I suppose?

Any moron could've seen this was an e-peen match from the OP, more specificly it was your e-peen match and now it's your sore vagina party because you got dealt with in an efficient manner over something you've no grounds to speak on. At least i don't play XI, i'm solid to my principles. When i did .. guess what? didn't use the parser once. I still didn't hold a grudge on those who did, on the contrary when they spoke up and threw out numbers i listened intently.

This was never an e-peen match. If you interpreted it that way it must be because you have a VERY small one. And how do I have a "sore vagina" because you're retarded? You got delt with in an efficient manner, and now you've got a grudge that you gt proven wrong over and over again.

I'm solid to my pronciples too. I can atleast own up to using a cheat (read: parser, tparty, distance...) where others can't. I'm not a hypocrit like some others we know.

If you can't cop to being a dick, needing the attention, and/or weren't aware e-peening is what happens here (which i highly doubt since you're a DN vet) you've no business moving threads to the FB let alone participating in them. :rtfm:

You're still a newb. You should maybe engage in some lighter arguments whether that toy is yours or not in the sand box at pre-school some more.

OH WAI, that'd be saying you have a larger penis too?

Parsing - It's the same info that's provided in the game. You get the same info in battle, thus it's irrelevant.

I've already said this. the POINT was that parser does it automatically. Although you're apparently too retarded to read that as I've mentioned it.... 100 times?

Once again your words make my point for me.

wow. you fail mroe then I thought was possible.

the last things I already asnwered to many times in this topic. If you would have bothered reading (or atleast remember them. You seem to have a very bad memory), you'd know my responce to them.

Anyway, you're apparently too retarded to have an argument iwth. You keep countering with the same arguments I've already slammed back in your face several times. Untill you come up with a better responce I won't bother responding. We're running in circles here.

 

[RoM]

Here, i don't want to disappoint.

First response paragraph proves beyond a shadow of a doubt not only did you not read the thread previous to this you didn't read this one. As such let me return the favor in kind. If in some point in time in the future you'd like to bother doing that we can have a conversation.

Until such time as you can manage that we're done here. I'm not going to continue going back just to quote myself and you anymore. It's there for you to read. Comprehesion, i fear, is simply outside the scope of your intellectual reach.

P.s.
Parser and the realtime combat log in game do it automatically, hence the combat log is a cheat. If that's your point, it sucks and can't be applied within the same parameters of argument elsewhere. This is why it doesn't work out as a cheat. SE allows it to happen because it's not enough of a problem to work on, it hurts no one. I've answered to that numerous times.

As is obvious by your replies you're too busy typing as fast as possible and quoting every little thing that i say to pause to consider it for a moment because, the facts aside, the little jabs here and there are more than that fragile little ego of yours can take. You've gotta learn to mix it up or no one's ever gonna have you in their sig with a zinger.

Oh and the reason i said 'fuck it' was because i didn't read it. It was probably a half-thought out braindead attempt at sounding like me anyway.

 

[Uzor]

You still can't seem to respond to my speed hacking example.

As for the other stuff, already countered it earlier. I won't bother typing it out again. If you want answers, work for it.

 

[RoM]

Echo

Echo

Echo

Echo

Echo

Echo

 

[hellstorm]

No, no, a thousand times no. Seriously, I can see where you're coming from, and it's wrong. The "negative" aspect of parser begins and ends at the fact that opening the file arguably violates SE's terms of service. ("Arguably" because they pick and choose which cases they would like to enforce.)

To bad the "negative" aspect don't just end at opening secret files. It effects game much much more.

 

[Bajaratt]

It effects game much much more.

No, it doesn't.

 

[RoM]

I'm sorry i just had to go look at this awe inspiring flee hacking example...

Bravo. You tried. I hit the nail right on the head, half thought out and completely braindead. Oh how you must wish you're me with regards to this conversation. It shows. Grasping at straws like that. It's cute around this time of year.

Is flee hacking to get to bed earlier cheating?

Yes.

SE recognizes flee hacking as cheating and makes attempts to ban people for doing so. It alters the function of the game whereas the parser does not. Were i to need to get to bed earlier i'd be at a disadvantage over a fleehacker ... or not since i have a higher brain function and can simply type /logout whereas you, apparently, cannot.

Gold star for effort.


Now then how about you clear up your tab on unanswered points made on my end.

I'll save you the time:

Rom you're such a fucking newb. *Drool* *spittle* *hiss* *cry* Your words make my point, blah blah blah. quote quote quote, where did i say that? yadda yadda, i really didn't read any of this before i bothered sticking my foot in it. huminah fail.

With love,

Uzor.

Now since you've been harping on it so long please do give us all the rebuttal you've been saving up for at least 2 days now about how what i said is wrong even though it makes absolutely perfect sense. Srsly, baited breath.

 

[RoM]

To bad the "negative" aspect don't just end at opening secret files. It effects game much much more.

Yes, the secret file that opens everytime you attack something.

What a great hiding place for that information. Right out in the open to have with SE's blessing. You win.

Edit: and no it doesn't. Noob. If you want to bitch about the gear/economy issue take that shit to IGE or SE for it's lack of action before this year.

That in mind, where's that inflation and economy bitchfest this year? *crickets*

Yeah, huge impact there dumbass.

 

[Tomasello]

It (flee hacking) alters the function of the game whereas the parser does not.

The land of fantasy called, they want their unicorn back. All 3rd party software (ie anything that didn't come with the cd you purchased) alters the function of the game. It does things for you it doesn't do for me genius. Hence Webster's Dictionary definition of cheating.


To save us both time feel free to choose from one of your recycled garbage comebacks:

A) It's technically a "cheat" but its not cheating...

B) It's a "grey area" and I can pick and choose the rules I obey.

C) It's not cheating cause if I harass someone I'm not cheating but breaking the ToS

D) I have an advantage over everybody yet somehow no one is disadvantaged

E) "Random declarative victory statement" after proving my point again

F) Whatever dumbass!

G) You spelled a word wrong score one for the grammar nazi!


Did I cover just about every excuse you've invented in your mind to convince yourself you're somehow playing a game fairly by breaking the rules?


Oh and since you like pictures so much here's one for you: