>I agree that he was a jerk. I never disagreed with it. I
>even posted that I thought he was. But, part of this game
>allows you to get even. And that's the one thing that
>everybody seems to be missing. Sure, he killed 130 or so
>players. He also ate over 70 some odd deaths from players.
>And because of his reputation, he was treated worse than he
>treated other people. Yes, it's true. He knew that when he
>died and came back, the chances were huge he was coming back
>to nothing. And when he did, guess how he responded? He
>cracked a smile and got ready for the next battle.

There's no 'getting even' in this case. Killing him is not getting even. Even saccing his gear afterward is probably not getting even. I'm pretty sure someone brought this up in the other (locked) thread, so I won't go into it.

>Do I think if we had a game where everyone acted this way it
>would have a positive affect? Not with most of our playerbase
>as it is, no. It might attract a different crowd of players
>though. Who knows? But, there once was a norm where if you
>died, you were lucky if you got anything back. When you die,
>expect to be naked. That's the easiest way to get over your
>gear. When you die, the gear is no longer yours. It goes to
>the victor. They don't have to live you a leaf to cover
>yourself with. Some might call that action griefing. I call
>it gear distribution and have no problems with it at all.

I'm sorry that we're not hardcore enough for you anymore.

Really though, mass saccing of gear is hardly 'gear distribution'. In fact, who is more libel to go and collect that very same gear that is now 'in'? The person who just died! Gasp. So you've got it completely backwards. The gear is -less- likely to change hands when you sac it rather than loot it. Or were you thinking people are complaining because he looted their things and put them to use? Cause they weren't.


>Some people say summoning mobs out of pk range and plaguing
>them is griefing. But, it's okay to do it in a cabal defense.
> I disagree. That's a matter of opinion.

See, you've taken the most important part of the entire controversy and dedicated only a couple sentences to it - out of all this banter. Obviously the playerbase is concerned about this behavior, even if you are not. This is what we want to hear though: the IMMs opinions on that sort of thing. Not...


>The one thing that everybody is missing is this. Aunkdunell
>didn't cheat. He didn't out anybody on the forums. He didn't
>complain. He just played the game and caused a lot of
>controversy. The sad part was that it went ooc to nth degree.
> That is against the rules. And instead of the staff showing
>sympathy to those who thought he acted like a jerk, those same
>players were the ones who went ooc about it, broke the rules
>and forced us to deal with it from a cheater standpoint. When
>all the players had to do was get together and kill him until
>he wasn't around anymore. He played it like RL and it annoyed
>you. What would you do in RL if this were the case?

..your pathetic justification of his behavior based on 'you guys are worse cause you took it OOC'. Can we at least attempt to be constructive here?