Forums

Require infernal cape to voteThread is locked

Quick find code: 322-323-114-66080808

of 5
Str8cashjigg

Str8cashjigg

Posts: 742Steel Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Players should need to sacrifice an infernal cape to vote in each poll to prove their competence as a player to prevent noobs who have zero merit from having the same power as those of us who are actually semi-decent at this game. Besides, the inferno is a joke in 2019 and almost every noob can do it. The only people who can't are the casual mobile crowd who don't know what's good for game integrity at all. The ditch is gonna get endless repolls while sand buckets can pass the first poll and never be implemented. After the ditch passes the 7th poll attempt, it'll be implemented an hour before the poll closes because it's actually important. Deal with it.

03-Feb-2019 05:17:02

Str8cashjigg

Str8cashjigg

Posts: 742Steel Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Why not? Do you have an army of bots with sub-1000 total that you love to abuse when it comes to the flawed polling system? The ditch is gonna get endless repolls while sand buckets can pass the first poll and never be implemented. After the ditch passes the 7th poll attempt, it'll be implemented an hour before the poll closes because it's actually important. Deal with it.

03-Feb-2019 06:24:05

rishinger l

rishinger l

Posts: 1,725Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
FisherGaming said:
No.


I see the point they are going for though.

A 300 total level and 25 hours of playtime is nowhere near enough experience to be able to safely say that you know what updates are good or bad for the game.

The 'requirments' of the polls are FAR too low.

Like...honestly look at it....anyone who has played for 2 days is allowed to vote on them....2 days is NOWHERE near enough time to be able to confidently say that you have experienced the majority of this game and know what is good or bad for it.

I think that at the minimum in order to vote on the polls you should have like....maybe a quest cape or something.

It forces to you go out and experience about 60% of the games content...and at that point you'd hope that people have experienced enough game content to know whats good for it.



Anyway here's my main point:

A total level of 300 and 25 hours of in-game time is NOT enough experience to adequately say that you know what updates would be good or bad for this game.

03-Feb-2019 06:26:38

FisherGaming

FisherGaming

Posts: 5,103Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Str8cashjigg said:
Why not? Do you have an army of bots with sub-1000 total that you love to abuse when it comes to the flawed polling system?
No.

It's because this idea is terrible.

Not every legitimate player has an Inferno Cape. That doesn't mean they are botting.

Having an Inferno Cape doesn't necessarily mean you're knowledgeable about the game, and doesn't make you any more or less qualified to vote.

Inversely, not having an Inferno Cape doesn't mean you're ignorant and not worthy of voting.

Player skill is not, nor should it ever be, a determining factor in your voting eligibility.

It makes absolutely no sense that because a player doesn't have the BiS melee cape that they are somehow not allowed to vote on issues that might have absolutely nothing to do with the Inferno Cape.

"Should Pickpocketing Men give 4 gold?"
"I think y--"
"HOLD ON, NOOB! YOU DON'T HAVE AN INFERNO CAPE. THIS DOESN'T CONCERN YOU!"

That's stupid. This suggestion is stupid.

rishinger l said:
A 300 total level and 25 hours of playtime is nowhere near enough experience to be able to safely say that you know what updates are good or bad for the game.
Incorrect, because that 300 total level and 25 hours of playtime is tied to account, not to the individual. Lack of played time does not necessarily mean ignorance.

Furthermore, the limitations on voting are NOT in place to make sure you know about the game and what's good or bad for it; it's to make it more difficult for people to make thousands of accounts to influence the outcome of the polls. That's also why it requires membership, so people don't make throwaway bot accounts to vote.
I'll keep score from now on.
A: 3 | M: -1 | Tr: 0 | Tu: -2 |

03-Feb-2019 07:42:23

rishinger l

rishinger l

Posts: 1,725Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
FisherGaming said:
A 300 total level and 25 hours of playtime is nowhere near enough experience to be able to safely say that you know what updates are good or bad for the game.
Incorrect, because that 300 total level and 25 hours of playtime is tied to account, not to the individual. Lack of played time does not necessarily mean ignorance.

Furthermore, the limitations on voting are NOT in place to make sure you know about the game and what's good or bad for it; it's to make it more difficult for people to make thousands of accounts to influence the outcome of the polls. That's also why it requires membership, so people don't make throwaway bot accounts to vote.[/quote]


Yes...but can you guarantee that the person on that account has played the game before?

No you cant.

Plus...that doesn't really matter at all.

OSRS is an entirely different game to RS3....therefore if you want to vote on the future of the game i feel you should have invested a lot of time into the game....i.e. an account with high levels and a long play time.


i never said the limitations are there BECAUSE people should know about the game.

I said the requirements SHOULD be higher to vote so we can be certain that people have experienced the game.


Like going back to my first point there.....can you guarantee that all the people who havea 300 total level and 25 hours in game are experienced veterans with alt accounts? no, you cant.


" That's also why it requires membership, so people don't make throwaway bot accounts to vote."

There was 140,000 bots permentantly banned just last week....

Now lets say..... 1/10th of them we're members. (the number would be MUCH higher.)

So thats 14,000 bots right there.

Now....lets say again only HALF those bots got a total level of 300 and voted on the polls....so 5% of the total bots banned last week.

That's still 7,000 votes.

The average amount of votes on a poll is 30,000ish

so thats just a liiiitle under 25%

03-Feb-2019 08:17:03

rishinger l

rishinger l

Posts: 1,725Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
of the voters being bots....now.....after that do you seriously think that bots can't sway the polls?


The requirment for voting should be high enough that it takes about a month of ingame time to achieve....taht way we can be sure:

A. people have actually experienced some of the game

and

B. there aren't thousands of bots altering and swaying the vote.

03-Feb-2019 08:18:18

FisherGaming

FisherGaming

Posts: 5,103Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
rishinger l said:
can you guarantee that the person on that account has played the game before?

No you cant.

Plus...that doesn't really matter at all.
You're right. It doesn't matter.

As I just explained, the limitations are not in place to make sure you know what's good for the game. Those limitations aren't in place to ensure you've experienced the game. That isn't the point of the skill total requirement.

The whole point of those limitations is to diminish the quantity of people making multiple accounts to influence the outcome of polls.

If they have to have membership on every account, and the skill total, and the hours played, it makes it much more difficult to simply spam create accounts simply to vote more than once.

rishinger l said:
i never said the limitations are there BECAUSE people should know about the game.

I said the requirements SHOULD be higher to vote so we can be certain that people have experienced the game.
So what is the difference?

You just want people to have some arbitrary number of hours played or skill total for no reason? That makes no sense.

More hours played doesn't mean they experienced more of the game.
A higher skill total level doesn't mean you've experienced more of the game.

I can spend 10,000 hours AFKing in Lumbridge, and I can get a high skill total doing one thing.

rishinger l said:
do you seriously think that bots can't sway the polls?
Learn to read.FisherGaming said:
it's to make it more difficult for people to make thousands of accounts to influence the outcome of the polls.
I never said that bots can't sway the polls. I never even insinuated that.

I said that the membership requirement is what stops people from making throwaway bot accounts.

And your garbage analysis presumes that half of the bots are voting. Voter participation is not that high. Not even close.
I'll keep score from now on.
A: 3 | M: -1 | Tr: 0 | Tu: -2 |

03-Feb-2019 08:37:19 - Last edited on 03-Feb-2019 08:39:40 by FisherGaming

rishinger l

rishinger l

Posts: 1,725Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
"and your garbage analysis presumes that half of the bots are voting. Voter participation is not that high. Not even close."


...its obvious you don't read a single thing anyone writes...

Seriously kid...before commenting ACTUALLY READ A COMMENT.

i assumed 5% OF BOTS VOTED.

I want to see where you got HALF from 5%.

actually....read a comment for once in your life...god damn.



"A higher skill total level doesn't mean you've experienced more of the game."

im sorry...what?

Please...for the love of god...THINK before you write something that stupid.


"You just want people to have some arbitrary number of hours played or skill total for no reason? That makes no sense."

Again...for the love of god...read...and think before you reply.

"for no reason"

THE MORE YOU PLAY A GAME, THE MORE YOU LEVEL UP....THE MORE YOU HAVE EXPERIENCED....MY 2 YEAR OLD COUSIN COULD TELL YOU SOMETHING THAT BASIC.....ACTUALLY THINK FOR ONCE BEFORE YOU REPLY.



Im just...i can 't even....im done lol.

I will reply to literally anyone but you.

Because it is VERY obvious that you don't bother to think, or read anyones comments before replying.

03-Feb-2019 09:02:35 - Last edited on 03-Feb-2019 09:04:35 by rishinger l

FisherGaming

FisherGaming

Posts: 5,103Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
rishinger l said:
i assumed 5% OF BOTS VOTED.
Fine, allow me to correct myself: You assumed 50 percent of the eligible bots voted.

Obviously not half of all bots, but half of the bots who could vote.

rishinger l said:
"A higher skill total level doesn't mean you've experienced more of the game."

im sorry...what?

Please...for the love of god...THINK before you write something that stupid.
No, YOU think.

You don't HAVE to do more than one thing to level.

I could get 99 Thieving from pickpocketing men. Just because I have 99 Thieving doesn't mean I experienced more of the skill.

Similarly, I could get 300 total level while experiencing very little of the game. Even if you raised that skill total requirement to 1000, that doesn't mean I experienced more of the game; it means the skill total requirement is higher.

I could just as easily experience the same amount of content, but only have to do that content for longer.

You're making fallacious arguments.

rishinger l said:
"Because it is VERY obvious that you don't bother to think, or read anyones comments before replying.
Says the guy who literally thinks gold isn't brought into the game when you use High Alchemy on an item:rishinger l said:
8000 gold does NOT magically enter the game everytime you alch a dragon body.
LOL

Spare me. You don't know what you're talking about at all.
I'll keep score from now on.
A: 3 | M: -1 | Tr: 0 | Tu: -2 |

03-Feb-2019 09:09:40 - Last edited on 03-Feb-2019 09:10:59 by FisherGaming

Quick find code: 322-323-114-66080808Back to Top