Blackhat rule update

DNT'ing a black hat doesn't mean your safe.

Thas why it's so ironic that I post retardations ....just like the new rule. If you can't beat them.....join 'em. Hi Bobby!

Jus cos people dos others offsite doesn't mean we should ban them, but if their a threat we will ban them... I dont get how this weighs up, on top of the fact that dnt doesnt protect anyone you just mingle with the bobbys.

 

[Timefreeze]

I dont think this is right... There a big enough problem with scammers as it is. IMO Anyone scamming anywhere in runescape on a different site anything should not be welcome

 

We're basically giving people an opportunity to use Sythe if they are willing to comply with our rules as long as they are not threatening our users. This is a positive step people.

 

[John Devola]

Now that doesn't really make sense does it? If you're giving the green light for black hat activities, obviously anyone who DDos's/Hacks accounts will be perceived as a danger to the community. There is no safety net and that leads to the possibility of a blackhat being banned randomly because a staff member deemed you to be dangerous?

Who thought @Elite Dust would sum it up so correctly? I dont mind this rule, as long as it comes with a set formula for determining whether someone should be banned or not.

Saying someone will be banned if they "present a threat to the sythe community" means that this rule is 100% open to bias from staff favoritism. Theres really no denying that fact, staff are biased just like everyone else. Leaving a rule that is 100% based on an a bias oppinion is retarded imho. You guys need to define what is appropriate and what isn't. Not just leave it up to staffs to make the judgement.

Police officers dont make the law on a case by case basis, they enforce the rules that were created by government. Staff should not create the definition of what is a "threat" to Sythe.org on a case by case basis, but yet enforce the rules that have been created by the Admins or the team as a collective whole.

 

[Pain]

Took you long enough.

I've been advocating reduce the blackhat rules for years and I couldn't hack a toaster.

 

[Elite Dust]

Previously, selling botnets was not allowed on Sythe as it was labeled as "black hat", with this new rule does this mean it is now legal to sell botnets on Sythe if you state in a terms and service that it is not intended for use against fellow Sythe users?

 

[Pain]

Previously, selling botnets was not allowed on Sythe as it was labeled as "black hat", with this new rule does this mean it is now legal to sell botnets on Sythe if you state in a terms and service that it is not intended for use against fellow Sythe users?

Staff should answer this question very carefully because this answer will have long reaching affects, this would clear the way to essentially sell DDOSING services and many many other blackhat things here on sythe.

IF the answer to this is yes, I believe some sort of blackhat section or forum should be established because I highly doubt mixing botnets in with the current market is going to go over well.

 

[Loyal 2 da game]

Saying someone will be banned if they "present a threat to the sythe community" means that this rule is 100% open to bias from staff favoritism. Theres really no denying that fact, staff are biased just like everyone else. Leaving a rule that is 100% based on an a bias oppinion is retarded imho. You guys need to define what is appropriate and what isn't. Not just leave it up to staffs to make the judgement.

Police officers dont make the law on a case by case basis, they enforce the rules that were created by government. Staff should not create the definition of what is a "threat" to Sythe.org on a case by case basis, but yet enforce the rules that have been created by the Admins or the team as a collective whole.

are you retarded lmao? the laws aren't black and white and almost every time a police officer enforces a law, it's based upon his/her discretion to determine whether or not the offence is sufficient to warrant an arrest/charge/whatever, and then further goes to the courts where it is reviewed and interpreted on a case by case basis

 

[John Devola]

are you retarded lmao? the laws aren't black and white and almost every time a police officer enforces a law, it's based upon his/her discretion to determine whether or not the offence is sufficient to warrant an arrest/charge/whatever, and then further goes to the courts where it is reviewed and interpreted on a case by case basis

It happens, but it isnt supposed to. There are allowed to be interpretations and application of rules, interpretation itself is not a rule or a law.

 

[Aklan]

The scope for grey area abuse on this one...

 

We're basically giving people an opportunity to use Sythe if they are willing to comply with our rule as long as they are not threatening our users. This is a positive step people.

I'm not disagreeing that it's a step in the right direction, I'm disagreeing with the definition used to allow it. It's so vague and could either mean plenty of things are now allowed, or virtually nothing has changed. I'm not saying go through the list of hundreds of blackhat activities and give a yes/no to each, but at least make it a little bit more clear than what is presented in the original post and "clarifications" made on the first page.

 

I'm not disagreeing that it's a step in the right direction, I'm disagreeing with the definition used to allow it. It's so vague and could either mean plenty of things are now allowed, or virtually nothing has changed. I'm not saying go through the list of hundreds of blackhat activities and give a yes/no to each, but at least make it a little bit more clear than what is presented in the original post and "clarifications" made on the first page.

I feel you man, but you and I both know how hard it is to put a clear definition on which blackhat activities get a pass and which do not. I think we should be looking at it from a broader point of view - if you've been banned or in a normal case would be banned, you now have a "rule" which may help you get unbanned. I don't know if I answered it, but @Moes is the person to better explain the reasons.

 

[Azie]

I'm not disagreeing that it's a step in the right direction, I'm disagreeing with the definition used to allow it. It's so vague and could either mean plenty of things are now allowed, or virtually nothing has changed. I'm not saying go through the list of hundreds of blackhat activities and give a yes/no to each, but at least make it a little bit more clear than what is presented in the original post and "clarifications" made on the first page.

Sometimes some of the blackhat offences aren't that serious but we ban because the rules state any blackhat done offsite is a permanent ban unless older than 3 years. The rule is to only punish blackhat offences which can be a threat to the members of Sythe. A lot of the times some reports don't really indicate what that specific user was doing blackhat for and we just ban. It could be that they're using it for educational purposes and are curious about the subject which the team I guess wants to allow.

Some of the other reasons are to basically improve the PR of Sythe (a lot of traffic comes from some blackhat websites that often isn't a threat) and to increase activity levels in community. Anything deemed as a threat to anyone on Sythe still warrants a perm ban. It sounds more controversial than it is tbh .

 

Sometimes some of the blackhat offences aren't that serious but we ban because the rules state any blackhat done offsite is a permanent ban unless older than 3 years. The rule is to only punish blackhat offences which can be a threat to the members of Sythe. A lot of the times some reports don't really indicate what that specific user was doing blackhat for and we just ban. It could be that they're using it for educational purposes and are curious about the subject which the team I guess wants to allow.

Some of the other reasons are to basically improve the PR of Sythe (a lot of traffic comes from some blackhat websites that often isn't a threat) and to increase activity levels in community. Anything deemed as a threat to anyone on Sythe still warrants a perm ban. It sounds more controversial than it is tbh .

Again i'm not against the ruling, just the vagueness of the scale used to measure it. Any vague scale in the past has resulted in lots of discussion, headaches, and disgruntled people affected by it since they thought what they were doing was okay when staff did not, or vice versa.

 

[Pain]

Again i'm not against the ruling, just the vagueness of the scale used to measure it. Any vague scale in the past has resulted in lots of discussion, headaches, and disgruntled people affected by it since they thought what they were doing was okay when staff did not, or vice versa.

Any vague scale in the past has resulted in lots of discussion, headaches, and disgruntled people

Could be sythes motto tbh, amen to that.

 

[Jay]

No wonder everyone is leaving this site... This is just getting stupid. @Sythe you honestly think this is a good idea? DNT was already a shithole mistake. This whole site is DNT users and Big gold sellers now. thats it...

 

No wonder everyone is leaving this site... This is just getting stupid. @Sythe you honestly think this is a good idea? DNT was already a shithole mistake. This whole site is DNT users and Big gold sellers now. thats it...

^ this in a nutshell.

 

No wonder everyone is leaving this site... This is just getting stupid. @Sythe you honestly think this is a good idea? DNT was already a shithole mistake. This whole site is DNT users and Big gold sellers now. thats it...

^ this in a nutshell.

personally don't mind this decision, but the message still stands. Only here as long as this site is profitable for me. After that I'm doing the new gay SRB bs

 

personally don't mind this decision, but the message still stands. Only here as long as this site is profitable for me. After that I'm doing the new gay SRB bs

If I wasn't making any money I probably wouldn't be here either, I rarely check the forums, purely here for the market and the people I've dealt with before.

anyway hit me with your IP so I can "hit your toaster offline" dundun Kappa

 

[-Ryan]

I like the idea behind this but I don't like how it was done. You're just setting yourselves up for confusion down the line when it actually comes to handling reports/disputes for this kind of thing.