Dear Skele Master

[unity]

I'm not trying to tell you how to do your job or remind you of the rules, I'm going to assume you just didn't understand the thread properly as you were dealing with a lot of scammer reports so you probably just thought I meant infract them or something.

http://sythe.org/showthread.php?t=852334

You dealt with it? All you did was remove their threads/posts. If that is dealing with it, and how Sythe feels about people recovering accounts that aren't theres - please unban the following members Nawoo and Blazelion as they were banned for exactly the same thing. I mean fucking precisely over 9000% the same thing you deleted Fuzion Ltd's and Jet_Blacks threads for but instead banned Nawoo and Blazelion.

http://www.sythe.org/showthread.php?t=826291&page=4 - What Nawoo was banned for.

http://sythe.org/showthread.php?t=838699 - What Blazelion was banned for.

There is no ifs and or buts about it, there is no hard decisions here. There is no difference in the offences committed between these four members. All of them openly admitted right here on Sythe that they recovered accounts. You either ban the two members I reported, or unban the two who were banned for the same thing.

Community, feel free to post your opinions.

 

[Necromancer24]

I suppose it is only fair. I'd support a ban for those two or unban for the other two.

 

[unity]

I suppose it is only fair. I'd support a ban for those two or unban for the other two.

It is not a matter of whether or not it's fair. I don't like the fact that the staff seem to be bending the rules (or perhaps forgetting them?) when it comes to this offense and who's involved. They clearly revealed where they stand on people recovering accounts when Nawoo and Blaze were banned but now seeing these two get away with it is just bullshit. Please don't forget that all four people involved were unaware that it is against the rules yet two seem to be receiving some special treatment. Either make it clear where you stand and ban these two or share the special treatment love on the two other banned members.

 

[Skele]

The staff haven't come to a decision on what to do about recovering accounts, so I used my own judgement. I don't think we should allow it, but don't think it's worth banning them for. I asked Pen for a second opinion, and he agreed.

 

[unity]

The staff haven't come to a decision on what to do about recovering accounts, so I used my own judgement. I don't think we should allow it, but don't think it's worth banning them for. I asked Pen for a second opinion, and he agreed.

Alright, if that's the decision then unban Nawoo and Blazelion now and close this thread. If you aren't going to unban them, leave it open so the community can share their love and opinion towards this split banning between the four people involved.

 

[Piez Like]

The staff haven't come to a decision on what to do about recovering accounts, so I used my own judgement. I don't think we should allow it, but don't think it's worth banning them for. I asked Pen for a second opinion, and he agreed.

Isn't recovering an account you've sold considered as a scam?

 

[Skele]

Isn't recovering an account you've sold considered as a scam?

Yes, but what unity is talking about is recovering random accounts that haven't been played on for years or were leaked around. I even believe there was a guide on this a few years back on Sythe.

 

[unity]

Yes, but what unity is talking about is recovering random accounts that haven't been played on for years or were leaked around. I even believe there was a guide on this a few years back on Sythe.

I'm sorry but quit ignoring my question it's not nice. Cool, that is what I'm talking about. Now all four people did the same thing, two are banned and two are unbanned. Please ban two or unban the other two.

 

[Skele]

I'm sorry but quit ignoring my question it's not nice. Cool, that is what I'm talking about. Now all four people did the same thing, two are banned and two are unbanned. Please ban two or unban the other two.

I'll let you know once we (staff) come to a decision.

 

[unity]

I'll let you know once we (staff) come to a decision.

Alright. But answer me this, either way you have to do one or two things:

1. Unban the two banned members
2. Ban the two unbanned members

Am I right? Either of those should be the outcome regardless of what the staff decide. It will not be acceptable to say 'We've concluded it's not a bannable offence anymore however the two banned members will remain banned as they were banned before we decided this.' The two people banned were banned very recently so that won't be cool if you say something like that. Either option 1 or 2 has to occur am I right Skele?

 

[Skillers FTW]

The majority of name sales are also recovered accounts.

For instance, i'm pretty sure M I K E recovers all his/her rare names.

Future prevention of recovered account sales should warrant a rule put on the list of rules stating that users will get banned if proved to be selling cracked accounts. (If the decision is met, that it be the case)

 

[unity]

The majority of name sales are also recovered accounts.

For instance, i'm pretty sure M I K E recovers all his/her rare names.

Yeah I mentioned that in my scammer report. No need to worry though, Skele Master apparently 'dealt with it' by deleting their posts (lol). No way they can now go and re post the same thread and not mention the account is recovered!

Seriously I will crusade this shit till the day I die if a fair outcome isn't reached which can only be the two options I mentioned in my previous post.

 

[1234567ASDF]

I think you should be just as responsible for youraccount as you are your msn.

With the exception of... How can you prove the acc was recocvered? Allowing people to get banned over tthis could allow a lotta ppl to be unnecessarily banned

 

[unity]

I think you should be just as responsible for youraccount as you are your msn.

With the exception of... How can you prove the acc was recocvered? Allowing people to get banned over tthis could allow a lotta ppl to be unnecessarily banned

I'm sorry dude but either I'm mis-reading what you are trying to say or you are retarded. Be responsible for your account? There is no way for someone to insure their account won't be recovered by some fuck after they quit. Even if you set recoveries and an email, your account can still be recovered by someone who knows little to no correct information. It's just the way it works, it's how accounts are recovered (even ones that play rather frequently). It's because of Jagexs shitty recovery system.

So really I hope I took what you were saying the wrong way otherwise damn dude that is a fucking dumbass opinion. Responsible for your Runescape account lmfao.

 

[1234567ASDF]

Im glAd you read my entire post. I put up two sides of the subject ., just not in detail as im on a mobile


Tl dr?

 

[unity]

Im glAd you read my entire post. I put up two sides of the subject ., just not in detail as im on a mobile


Tl dr?

Oh ok well let me examine your whole post then.

First sentence - Retarded (see above post).

Second paragraph - It doesn't even make sense, probably because of your bad ENGRISH. Trying to piece what you said to make sense, all I see is that you contradict yourself. The members involved all posted proof that they recovered the accounts, none of them would be 'unnecessarily banned' as they dug their own graves by openly admitting they recovered the accounts because they are such haxors and even posting screenshots lol.

Still retarded, sorry.

 

[Sin666]

I see absolutely no reason why Fuzion wasn't banned for that. Names that were created and never used, sure, the owner won't miss them; but what fuzion was hacking was obviously a once-active account. There are two problems with this: one, just because the owner isn't using it currently doesn't mean he won't return (and what distinction is there to be made between that and a currently-owned account?); two, a user can't tell whether an account is inactive without first hacking it, and then checking the last login - so what, you want users to break the rules and then find out whether it was okay to have?

 

[wombakage]

The staff are human, they use their judgement. I don't see it as a big deal.
Wrong section for bitching about bans also

 

[Spyike]

I see absolutely no reason why Fuzion wasn't banned for that. Names that were created and never used, sure, the owner won't miss them; but what fuzion was hacking was obviously a once-active account. There are two problems with this: one, just because the owner isn't using it currently doesn't mean he won't return (and what distinction is there to be made between that and a currently-owned account?); two, a user can't tell whether an account is inactive without first hacking it, and then checking the last login - so what, you want users to break the rules and then find out whether it was okay to have?

Words of wisdom. I totally support Sin's view on the subject. Good Post

 

[unity]

I see absolutely no reason why Fuzion wasn't banned for that. Names that were created and never used, sure, the owner won't miss them; but what fuzion was hacking was obviously a once-active account. There are two problems with this: one, just because the owner isn't using it currently doesn't mean he won't return (and what distinction is there to be made between that and a currently-owned account?); two, a user can't tell whether an account is inactive without first hacking it, and then checking the last login - so what, you want users to break the rules and then find out whether it was okay to have?

Right on. Glad that someone finally sees the logic. Not sure if you looked at Jet_Black's post but he even posted a screenshot of the account he recovered and openly admitted he recovered it. So there's one 'right' outcome which would be to ban Jet and Fuzion because what they did is rules, if that doesn't happen then the only 'fair' outcome is to unban the two banned members Nawoo and Blaze.

However I guess we leave it up to Skele so he can 'deal with it' again.

Edit: Also, I don't agree with one part of your post. There is no 'okay time to have an account' - it doesn't matter when the account was last logged into or if it was ever logged into, neither of those factors make it up for the taking by someone that doesn't own the account or didn't create it. It'd be dumb to say 'Ok the account was last logged into three years ago it's fine that you recovered it.'