Eccezan (TMOfficer) and Thebest get logged by GM and subsequently get banned for MQ

[Frieza_Prexus]

Originally Posted by Massive Marc [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

furthermore, until this 'subsequent lifting of that ban' (which you seem so confident will happen.. wonder why ? dem cookies you know ?) your guild has officers that are scum bag cheaters.

I find the proffered explanation to be the most likely. However, at no point have I denied the possibility of Eccezan having cheated. I simply, based upon my experience and observation, consider the most probable scenario to be the one presented. It makes no sense for TMO's leadership to use MQ in any real way when we have such a massive infrastructure dedicated to tracking and pulling.

It's decision theory. What is to be gained when so much is at stake?

[Massive Marc]

Originally Posted by Frieza_Prexus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I find the proffered explanation to be the most likely. However, at no point have I denied the possibility of Eccezan having cheated. I simply, based upon my experience and observation, consider the most probable scenario to be the one presented. It makes no sense for TMO's leadership to use MQ in any real way when we have such a massive infrastructure dedicated to tracking and pulling.

It's decision theory. What is to be gained when so much is at stake?

Do you really need an answer for this ?

I CAN'T POSSIBLY IMAGINE WHAT WOULD BE GAINED FROM USING MQ ?

[Alarti0001]

Originally Posted by Massive Marc [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Do you really need an answer for this ?

I CAN'T POSSIBLY IMAGINE WHAT WOULD BE GAINED FROM USING MQ ?

Yes... what would be gained....Please provide examples as it pertains to eccezan.

[49shadesofgay]

Originally Posted by Frieza_Prexus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I find the proffered explanation to be the most likely. However, at no point have I denied the possibility of Eccezan having cheated. I simply, based upon my experience and observation, consider the most probable scenario to be the one presented. It makes no sense for TMO's leadership to use MQ in any real way when we have such a massive infrastructure dedicated to tracking and pulling.

It's decision theory. What is to be gained when so much is at stake?

This makes you sound incredibly naive. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
For all you know, Eccezan is platlord and is making a living off hacking and selling platinum. Not likely given his intelligence level, but for all you know it's a distinct possibility.

My understanding is that the "unban" has not yet happened.

That said, it seems that you're implying that a ban is acceptable evidence of wrong doing, yet an unban is not acceptable evidence of exoneration. Both are actions conducted by authority figures. Why would one be more persuasive than the other? It follows that if bans can be trusted, so should unbans.

I agree with you.. however in this scenario Eccezan the accused has already admitted to ninja looting another guilds mob. No matter what the outcome, he was wrong.

[Alarti0001]

Originally Posted by 49shadesofgay [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This makes you sound incredibly naive. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
For all you know, Eccezan is platlord and is making a living off hacking and selling platinum. Not likely given his intelligence level, but for all you know it's a distinct possibility.



I agree with you.. however in this scenario Eccezan the accused has already admitted to ninja looting another guilds mob. No matter what the outcome, he was wrong.

This makes you sound incredibly naive.

[Frieza_Prexus]

Originally Posted by 49shadesofgay [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I agree with you.. however in this scenario Eccezan the accused has already admitted to ninja looting another guilds mob. No matter what the outcome, he was wrong.

Ninja looting requires intent to defraud and dispossess the rightful owner. If it is proven that Eccezan looted the items with such intent knowing full-well that he had no possible rights to them, then yes, he would deserve a ban.

This makes you sound incredibly naive. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
For all you know, Eccezan is platlord and is making a living off hacking and selling platinum. Not likely given his intelligence level, but for all you know it's a distinct possibility.

I am naive for invoking decision theory and reasoned analysis yet you yourself say "not likely." How is this any different? For the third time, I deny no outcomes, I only claim that a specific outcome appears far more likely in my eyes. Perhaps you should parse your own thoughts before you inadvertently declare yourself naive again.

[Massive Marc]

Originally Posted by Frieza_Prexus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Ninja looting requires intent to defraud and dispossess the rightful owner. If it is proven that Eccezan looted the items with such intent knowing full-well that he had no possible rights to them, then yes, he would deserve a ban.



I am naive for invoking decision theory and reasoned analysis yet you yourself say "not likely." How is this any different? For the third time, I deny no outcomes, I only claim that a specific outcome appears far more likely in my eyes. Perhaps you should parse your own thoughts before you inadvertently declare yourself naive again.

Here is my Decision Theory:

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]


+


[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

=

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[49shadesofgay]

Originally Posted by Frieza_Prexus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Ninja looting requires intent to defraud and dispossess the rightful owner. If it is proven that Eccezan looted the items with such intent knowing full-well that he had no possible rights to them, then yes, he would deserve a ban.



I am naive for invoking decision theory and reasoned analysis yet you yourself say "not likely." How is this any different? For the third time, I deny no outcomes, I only claim that a specific outcome appears far more likely in my eyes. Perhaps you should parse your own thoughts before you inadvertently declare yourself naive again.

You're naive for believing that someone who uses MQ gains nothing by it.

Wait a second.. wasn't it your guild that claimed that a lot of the things TR did were cheating because Perun was caught using MQ2?

You're not denying outcomes, you're just denying that Eccezan being banned means something because you feel deep down (read: youre biased) that his case will be overturned.

Meanwhile, those of us who see that he was banned take it at face value for what it is. We don't try to cover it up, or claim the "most likely" outcome is that it will be repealed just because we think so.

We see Eccezan's alt is banned, due to past/present/future whatever MQ use.

That's a fact.

[Frieza_Prexus]

Originally Posted by 49shadesofgay [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You're naive for believing that someone who uses MQ gains nothing by it.

Wait a second.. wasn't it your guild that claimed that a lot of the things TR did were cheating because Perun was caught using MQ2?

You're not denying outcomes, you're just denying that Eccezan being banned means something because you feel deep down (read: youre biased) that his case will be overturned..

MQ clearly grants gains. I submit, however, that its utilization would produce a long-term net loss in utility. Thus, I find no logical motivation for its use here. Of course, human stupidity knows no bounds, and I freely admit that it is still well within the realm of possibility.

Yes, my guild members claim(ed) much when Perun was banned. And if you wish to take the time to search my post history, you'll notice that I generally take a consistent stance as I have here. I am not my guild. I speak for no one else, nor do anyone else speak for me.

Eccezan being banned clearly means that there's a chance he's guilty. I take no issue with that notion. If he's guilty, I'll support a ban myself. I'll go full blown Stannis Baratheon and mete out copious amounts deontological justice. Here, I am simply pointing out what I feel is blatant troll-opportunism. (Trollportunism? Opportrollism?) Like you, I am extremely interested in knowing the timestamp on the MQ flag. We would all find that incredibly informative.

[Godefroi]

Originally Posted by Frieza_Prexus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

MQ clearly grants gains. I submit, however, that its utilization would produce a long-term net loss in utility. Thus, I find no logical motivation for its use here. Of course, human stupidity knows no bounds, and I freely admit that it is still well within the realm of possibility.

Yes, my guild members claim(ed) much when Perun was banned. And if you wish to take the time to search my post history, you'll notice that I generally take a consistent stance as I have here. I am not my guild. I speak for no one else, nor do anyone else speak for me.

Eccezan being banned clearly means that there's a chance he's guilty. I take no issue with that notion. If he's guilty, I'll support a ban myself. I'll go full blown Stannis Baratheon and mete out copious amounts deontological justice. Here, I am simply pointing out what I feel is blatant troll-opportunism. (Trollportunism? Opportrollism?) Like you, I am extremely interested in knowing the timestamp on the MQ flag. We would all find that incredibly informative.

Could we get time stamps on Thebest, is he gonna claim he bought his account too ?

So btw, all that pharm pp was to buy accounts 'cause you guys are too bad at level themselves [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] ?

When ever you are bored you just run MQ on them 'cause GOSH FE is horrible they aren't challenging us VP after 4 months after their creation ?