Can the supermods (not all, but some) please grow up ?

[Psi Kiya Trist]

You used it to infer an ingame advantage, allowing yourself to hit someone but keep your ID (4811) secret (not that it matterd, as the ID wasnt a secret).

by this statement, you show that it wasn't an ingame advantage.

12/23/2006 12:40:43 PM jason - back. cheat implies benefit other account in some way.. and technically the 'multi' accoutn was authorized. so...
12/23/2006 12:42:26 PM Psi Kiya Trist. well, my test account was an officer to a real player for at least part of it's existance
12/23/2006 12:42:46 PM jason - back. shades of grey.

there is no black and white, as you claim so wholeheartedly.

~_+Psi Kiya Trist+_~

No shades of gray to it at all.

- You thought your ingame ID was secret (your real one) Thus you used that account (which had your real name, and was in your real alliance) to soak up attacks meant for you AND to camouflage your real account
- Part of its existence it was under your CO as an officer, not JUST a real player but YOUR CO.
- You used it to gain an unfair advantage, that is to say, you were able to attack someone, regardless of real damage done, without fear of real retribution, AND you used it as a way to sidestep alliance NAPs too, that is also an advantage of sorts


Now that said, I never called for you to be banned, just to admit you screwed up, that you cheated.

Im holding you to the same standrd I Hold the fourm staff to.

You screw up and refuse to admit it, I shall bring the pain.

you're blind as well as stupid apparently. i addressed the first two points you made already.

- You used it to gain an unfair advantage, that is to say, you were able to attack someone, regardless of real damage done, without fear of real retribution, AND you used it as a way to sidestep alliance NAPs too, that is also an advantage of sorts

he had the ability to give retribution. i had no ability to stop him from doing that. NAP or no NAP.

also, for the record, i never said i didn't screw up. i just said i'm not a cheat. which is actually not something you decide. but something the game owner decides.

~_+Psi Kiya Trist+_~

[Psi Kiya Trist]

You used it to infer an ingame advantage, allowing yourself to hit someone but keep your ID (4811) secret (not that it matterd, as the ID wasnt a secret).

by this statement, you show that it wasn't an ingame advantage.

12/23/2006 12:40:43 PM jason - back. cheat implies benefit other account in some way.. and technically the 'multi' accoutn was authorized. so...
12/23/2006 12:42:26 PM Psi Kiya Trist. well, my test account was an officer to a real player for at least part of it's existance
12/23/2006 12:42:46 PM jason - back. shades of grey.

there is no black and white, as you claim so wholeheartedly.

~_+Psi Kiya Trist+_~

No shades of gray to it at all.

- You thought your ingame ID was secret (your real one) Thus you used that account (which had your real name, and was in your real alliance) to soak up attacks meant for you AND to camouflage your real account
- Part of its existence it was under your CO as an officer, not JUST a real player but YOUR CO.
- You used it to gain an unfair advantage, that is to say, you were able to attack someone, regardless of real damage done, without fear of real retribution, AND you used it as a way to sidestep alliance NAPs too, that is also an advantage of sorts


Now that said, I never called for you to be banned, just to admit you screwed up, that you cheated.

Im holding you to the same standrd I Hold the fourm staff to.

You screw up and refuse to admit it, I shall bring the pain.

you're blind as well as stupid apparently. i addressed the first two points you made already.

- You used it to gain an unfair advantage, that is to say, you were able to attack someone, regardless of real damage done, without fear of real retribution, AND you used it as a way to sidestep alliance NAPs too, that is also an advantage of sorts

he had the ability to give retribution. i had no ability to stop him from doing that. NAP or no NAP.

also, for the record, i never said i didn't screw up. i just said i'm not a cheat. which is actually not something you decide. but something the game owner decides.

~_+Psi Kiya Trist+_~

Not really, the fact is that if ANY OTHER PLAYER THAN THE ADMINS FREIND had used a 2nd account they would have been banned, or at least punished.

And you didnt adress my points, you just declared them irrelvent, despite relevence.

As I recall, we had this argument once before, you refused to admit you cheated, then admin went and declared that you had in fact done wrong, gave you a slap on the wrist and clsoed the matter.

In my eyes, youre a cheat, you just got a light punishment.

being wrong, and being a cheat, are in fact two different things :-p

for example: you calling me a pedophile. you're wrong, but you're not a cheat for that.

~_+Psi Kiya Trist+_~

[Psi Kiya Trist]

Once you misused your account, it became just one more multi

this is purely opinion, not fact. and that's the crux of my issue. you, won't accept the fact that i was cleared of charges of cheating BY JASON, THE OWNER. and continue to call me a cheat when i am not. there are not cut down the lines rules or examples to follow with this, so you're guessing. and you just so happen to be guessing the wrong answer.

i guess it comes down to intent, rather than actual actions. because my actions ARE validated. oh wait, my intent was not to "cheat" as you put it, either.

~_+Psi Kiya Trist+_~

[CDRrules]

Wow. If this is what our admins can get away with (and they still don't think they are doing anything wrong), I'm not so sure that I want to play this game anymore

[Spacey]

do u have to meke a thread for every stuff that u find out? jesus...give mods a break with ur spamming....

Do you have to troll ever post of Tok`ra makes?

I think the point is that we really would like to see something different than the thousandth topic by Tok'ra insulting this mod or that mod, or calling them cheats. Gets rather old and annoying.

1- Ive never called mods cheats. I HAVE accused mods of stuff, but I tend to be RIGHT when I do. Freespirit and DaDiigi and the fake ETL/Geisha fourm accounts ring a bell ?

2- Were am I insulting mods here ? READ THE DAMNED THREAD YOU FOOL.

Im actualy DEFENDING a member of the mod staff who is being given a hard time, simply because he wasnt a member of the mod club til recently.

I think she's talking about Psi

I don't understand.

You guys mention Psi. You bring him into the topic... then you say that he has changed the subject/ is not getting back to the topic at hand, etc.? What ever happened to 'this is the natural progression of conversation' etc., etc.? If that is the natural progression that you guys want why make a stink about it 5 pages later?

=====

For the purposes of these paragraph 'x' is an abstract concept with no context, and I speak to what tok'ra has said here:

New Fourm admin who didnt 'come up thru the ranks' and thus isnt in the same cliqe as the supermods.

A number of supermods are giving the admin a hard time and questioning every move he makes, thus making any effecteve change to the fourm slower to come.

This info I got seperatley from 2 mods, and one supermod, which I considerd enough to verify it.

Tok'ra, I think part of the problem people have with your posts is that they are 'don't make me leak x', but by mentioning 'x' it becomes common knowledge. Therefore, you are leaking when you mention it... and (this goes back to my questions on page 1.):

If you know something why don't you just say it. I think people are tired of seeing so many threads (ie. one for discussion around an issue, one for 'don't make me leak' threads, and one for the 'leak', etc.). I think that is what people are tired of seeing: from talking to them and reading their posts. Why are you dancing around issues? It seems like you are trying to spin it so that it looks like you or other mods aren't/haven't leaked something, but rather that you or the other mods had no other option.

Again, I speak abstractly, and do not say one way or another. I ask so that I may understand you tok'ra.

[Spacey]

That is true, you have not denied it, but that not what I'm saying.

I am saying, I think, people don't like a lot of your threads because you have "3" or more for one issue. Three is just an example. Of course you don't have always have three, etc., etc.

But as I understand the issue, is that people just want you to 'get on with it' or stop 'dancing around' stuff.

I make not statement to do either: just passing on this. There are lot of people that say certain things to you when you make a thread. They have no choice in you being here or not, just want it to be a little less painful for them.

Maybe this posted perspective can help reduce the friction.

[Spacey]

*sigh*

Didn't bring Psi into it, Antius did. I was just clarifying

And Tok'ra tried to end it

"didn't bring psi into it, antius did."
I quoted 5 people Jack, not only you.

Did antius mention psi?
Antius posted 3 times in this thread, all are on the first page.

Antius never said Psi name.

Tok'ra tired to end it?
Tok'ra saw Psi's name and decided to make this about him.

I just noticed that tok'ra's posts are gone...
forum has spoken:
viewtopic.php?f=132&t=95771&view=unread#unread

[Psi Kiya Trist]

Wow. If this is what our admins can get away with (and they still don't think they are doing anything wrong), I'm not so sure that I want to play this game anymore

also, for the record, i never said i didn't screw up. i just said i'm not a cheat.

i addressed that before you even entered...

~_+Psi Kiya Trist+_~