Should luring be against the rules?

[SuF]

Dear god, do we really need to address this issue every other month?

RICHARD HAS ALREADY SAID IT'S ALLOWED. QUIT ARGUING WITH THE FUCKING OWNER OF THE SITE.

Yea basically but I think that people should be allowed to discuss it.

 

[Emperor Nero]

Dear god, do we really need to address this issue every other month?

RICHARD HAS ALREADY SAID IT'S ALLOWED. QUIT ARGUING WITH THE FUCKING OWNER OF THE SITE.

There has obviously been a huge shift in public and staff opinion, why not discuss these issues? They're relevant to the community and they're important matters.

Scamming doesn't necessitate a broken contract. Would it not be scamming if I were to befriend a wealthy individual so that I can be invited into his home so I can steal expensive stuff. Isn't that the same? It's theft, scamming, and social engineering with no contract broken. If you do that you're a shyster and a con artist.

 

[Zicellix]

Dear god, do we really need to address this issue every other month?

RICHARD HAS ALREADY SAID IT'S ALLOWED. QUIT ARGUING WITH THE FUCKING OWNER OF THE SITE.

Lol. We are always addressing this issue because a majority of us disagrees.

If we have to follow Richard's rule every single time, what's the need for a suggestions forum for us to want things to be changed?

Hence, this poll was created to show the whole of Sythe what the members here thought. Not just Richard or a few high-ups lol.

The suggestions forum is a place for us to put out possible changes to this forum. This IS A possible change.

Deal with the constant bugging of this matter monthly until it's somehow solved or a compromise is made to make everyone happy.

They disagreed even when Jagex said it was perfectly fine.

SuF, this is a comment by Wulfspade which I'm pushing back to you for you to answer.

Source? Why would the official website say the complete opposite, though? Also, this message from a Jagex moderator was also recent:

-------------------------------------------------------------

Once when I first started runescape, someone convinced me to follow them into the wilderness. They pked me and I lost my steel 2h. I was pissed. Was this scamming? No. Was it luring? Yes. Whose fault was it? Mine. Luring, although immoral, is not scamming.

Xolr, let's look at it this way.

Once when I first started Sythe, someone convinced me to trade them for gold. They lied/scammed me and I lost my 200m rs3. I was pissed. Was this scamming? Yes. Was it luring? Yes. Whose fault was it? Mine. Luring, although immoral, is A FORM OF scamming.

 

[SuF]

Lol. We are always addressing this issue because a majority of us disagrees.

If we have to follow Richard's rule every single time, what's the need for a suggestions forum for us to want things to be changed?

Hence, this poll was created to show the whole of Sythe what the members here thought. Not just Richard or a few high-ups lol.

The suggestions forum is a place for us to put out possible changes to this forum. This IS A possible change.

Deal with the constant bugging of this matter monthly until it's somehow solved or a compromise is made to make everyone happy.




SuF, this is a comment by Wulfspade which I'm pushing back to you for you to answer.




Th

As I said, did.

 

[SuF]

There has obviously been a huge shift in public and staff opinion, why not discuss these issues? They're relevant to the community and they're important matters.

Scamming doesn't necessitate a broken contract. Would it not be scamming if I were to befriend a wealthy individual so that I can be invited into his home so I can steal expensive stuff. Isn't that the same? It's theft, scamming, and social engineering with no contract broken. If you do that you're a shyster and a con artist.

Not really how we define it on Sythe and regardless, it is part of the game. Killing people in GTA and stealing their stuff is part of the game.

 

[Zicellix]

Not really how we define it on Sythe and regardless, it is part of the game. Killing people in GTA and stealing their stuff is part of the game.

For GTA, killing people in that manner is part of the game lol, I agree. GTA is an all-kill zone, unlike RS. Everyone who plays GTA expects/"wants" to risk dying to kill others and get their stuff.

But for RS, the only player kill-zone that I know of are wildy areas.

A person who is being lured does not want to risk dying and losing his stuff. If he does, then he's not being lured.

A lurer tricks and makes someone who doesn't wanna lose their stuff, lose everything after being lured.

That's totally not the same as the game concept of GTA.

My point is: Luring IS NOT part of the game (RS)

 

[S]

Abusing glitches and luring are basically the same thing, and involve the same concepts, yet staking/game glitches are acceptable?

Luring, especially wilderness lures are a part of the PvP element. How would we even define what types of lures are acceptable? I.e, someone is at East Dragons, they are skulled (luring for their team in Multi), said skulled person finds someone Pking in the single area with their friends, he lures them all out to multi, for his team to kill. This is PvP, this is also luring. So we would ban users for doing what the wilderness is for?

Luring and scamming involve similar concepts, maybe even the same, but they do not equate to each other. Scamming involves a trade happening, and items/whatever being given to another user in return for monetary/whatever compensation; when compensation isn't provided, that is a scam. How is this even relative to luring? Luring doesn't promise any compensation, it's not a sale, it's not a trade.

 

Knowingly luring Sythe members should be indeed against the rules. However as for looking for luring partner it should be ok

 

[Feelgewd]

The rule states that you can lure so long as you're not knowingly luring a Sythe member.

I think we should only ban lurers if they're luring other Sythe members, that's what this poll should be about.

that would make it still risky, what if you lured someone (you do not know) and he has an active profile and sythe and he finds out, you'll get banned for that?

just wondering

 

[Zicellix]

Knowingly luring Sythe members should be indeed against the rules. However as for looking for luring partner it should be ok

Yep, I totally agree to this.

Luring and scamming involve similar concepts, maybe even the same, but they do not equate to each other. Scamming involves a trade happening, and items/whatever being given to another user in return for monetary/whatever compensation; when compensation isn't provided, that is a scam. How is this even relative to luring? Luring doesn't promise any compensation, it's not a sale, it's not a trade.

As I have always said, luring definitely is a form of scamming.

Similar concepts, maybe even the same, it's all true mate.

You must remember that there are many ways and methods to lure.

Lurer: Wanna partner me and lure some newbs (newb B)?
Newb A: Sure dude. Let's go.
Newb A then brings all his killing/expensive gear in prepare for battle.
Lurer then brings Newb A deeper into the wildy while Newb B is waiting.
Lurer and Newb A then start attacking Newb B.
After Newb B retaliates against Newb A, the lurer also gangs on Newb A and rapes him.
Newb A: F**k you both, you both are actually partners.
Newb A: Arghhhhh *dies*

In this case, the lurer promises the Newb A some bounty (obviously) by killing Newb B and obtaining gear/money whatever.
Newb A agrees because he thinks that he can split the spoils.

In this case, Newb A agreed because the lurer did PROMISE compensation which was the killing of Newb B and the obtaining of Newb B's gear which never happened.

This is a form of luring, which then, following your explanation = scamming.

 

[S]

As I have always said, luring definitely is a form of scamming.

Similar concepts, maybe even the same, it's all true mate.

You must remember that there are many ways and methods to lure.

Lurer: Wanna partner me and lure some newbs (newb B)?
Newb A: Sure dude. Let's go.
Newb A then brings all his killing/expensive gear in prepare for battle.
Lurer then brings Newb A deeper into the wildy while Newb B is waiting.
Lurer and Newb A then start attacking Newb B.
After Newb B retaliates against Newb A, the lurer also gangs on Newb A and rapes him.
Newb A: F**k you both, you both are actually partners.
Newb A: Arghhhhh *dies*

In this case, the lurer promises the Newb A some bounty (obviously) by killing Newb B and obtaining gear/money whatever.
Newb A agrees because he thinks that he can split the spoils.

In this case, Newb A agreed because the lurer did PROMISE compensation which was the killing of Newb B and the obtaining of Newb B's gear which never happened.

This is a form of luring, which then, following your explanation = scamming.

If someone follows you into the wilderness, that should never be ban-able. It's PvP and part of the game.

Same logic can be applied to a staking glitch. So many variations and forms of how it applies to nearly every glitch past and present. I hope Richard still maintains his stance on allowing it.

 

[Shin]

that would make it still risky, what if you lured someone (you do not know) and he has an active profile and sythe and he finds out, you'll get banned for that?

just wondering

If the rule is amended to disallow luring members of Sythe, you would not get banned if you were not aware they were a member of Sythe (at the time the lure occurred).

 

[Chris]

If the rule is amended to disallow luring members of Sythe, you would not get banned if you were not aware they were a member of Sythe (at the time the lure occurred).

Isn't that rule already in place?

 

[Shin]

Isn't that rule already in place?

No. The rule currently states that it is against the rules to anti-lure a member from Sythe after agreeing to lure with them.

The rule does not state that luring members from Sythe is against the rules.

 

[SkullPi]

I think so. Luring involves a manipulation tactic, as well as scamming. They're nearly identical to the state on what the outcome is - the victim loses money. Now, I am not saying all things that someone loses money on should be banned (in regards to PK'ing, and that sort), but luring is just as bad as scamming, because you're knowingly taking advantage of someone, and in the end, taking his wealth. I have been lured before, and it makes me feel bad. Someone took a partyhat off me, and it is a terrible feeling because you don't really know what to do, much like being scammed.

All in all, I think luring should be banned, just due to the fact that it isn't righteous in any means.

 

[Emperor Nero]

Not really how we define it on Sythe and regardless, it is part of the game. Killing people in GTA and stealing their stuff is part of the game.

Breaking a contract is breaking a contract and it falls under the umbrella of scamming. A person who knowingly snipes a name is using a game mechanic, but we still ban them for scamming. No contract broken and it's in the game. The 'in the game' argument is weak at best.

 

[SuF]

For GTA, killing people in that manner is part of the game lol, I agree. GTA is an all-kill zone, unlike RS. Everyone who plays GTA expects/"wants" to risk dying to kill others and get their stuff.

But for RS, the only player kill-zone that I know of are wildy areas.

A person who is being lured does not want to risk dying and losing his stuff. If he does, then he's not being lured.

A lurer tricks and makes someone who doesn't wanna lose their stuff, lose everything after being lured.

That's totally not the same as the game concept of GTA.

My point is: Luring IS NOT part of the game (RS)

Yes it is. You can not argue that it isn't. Personal responsibility.

Breaking a contract is breaking a contract and it falls under the umbrella of scamming. A person who knowingly snipes a name is using a game mechanic, but we still ban them for scamming. No contract broken and it's in the game. The 'in the game' argument is weak at best.

Name sniping should not be against the rules. I'm not sure why it is.

 

[funbox]

tl;dr Yes.

If sythe member A "lures" sythe member b for 50m, sythe member A should be permanently banned for luring which is also scamming.

If scamming is against the rules (obviously), so should luring.
When a player get scammed he looses his ingame items of value.
when a player gets lured he also looses his ingame items of value.

The lurer, if on sythe will also then obviously sell his gp, which then should lend the gold buyer in trouble for knowingly accepting stolen goods.

 

Now here's a question for those supporting luring to be allowed on sythe. Lets say Dave is doubling money in game and he does a few "legitimate" doubles and proceeds to take one of the larger ones. Would he be scamming or would he be luring? He gained their trust then betrayed it which seems a lot like luring doesn't it? We've banned atleast one person for the doubling money scam thus I think we need to make the line clear on what is okay and what is not.

 

[Busta305]

PvP lures shouldn't even be in this discussion... It is part of the game and players know the risk when they go into wilderness. However other type of lures that don't include PvP are up for discussion.