Difference between revisions of "User talk:Mogri"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Recent Reversion) |
(→Recent Reversion) |
||
| (7 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Recent Reversion== | ==Recent Reversion== | ||
| − | + | Why did you revert my edits? I was editing the cheating category to only include things that were listed as cheating in the cheating article. | |
| − | * | + | :Really? In the article [[Cheating]]: |
| − | + | :*[[Farming]] and [[Pudding farming]] are listed explicitly. | |
| − | + | :*"Exploiting a bug" is listed, implicitly including [[Naming artifacts]] (which the DevTeam has said is a bug) and [[Astral call bug]]. | |
| − | + | :Why did you remove the reference to changing the system clock? That is pretty clearly cheating. --[[User:Mogri|Mogri]] 02:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC) | |
| − | + | :Adjusting the system clock is "cheating" like using a FPS keyboard instead of a standard QWERTY keyboard is cheating. It's something completely external to the game. | |
| − | : | + | ::No, the game would receive the same input from the keyboards, whereas you are deliberately changing the information received by the game when you alter the game clock. A better analogy might be a turbo controller versus a standard controller. --[[User:Mogri|Mogri]] 00:29, 27 January 2007 (UTC) |
| + | Pudding farming is listed as "degenerate behavior" not as "cheating". Try again. | ||
| + | :Semantics. It's listed on the cheating page and is therefore behavior considered by some to be cheating. This isn't an ethics board; we should notify readers which behaviors might be frowned upon and leave it to their discretion whether to take advantage of those behaviors. Perhaps you can explain your other edits? | ||
| + | :If this isn't an "ethics board" then why do you list anything other than the two things that are clearly cheating (savescumming and startscumming) under cheating? | ||
| + | ::"we should notify readers which behaviors might be frowned upon and leave it to their discretion whether to take advantage of those behaviors" <-- | ||
| + | ::I'd like to point out that I'm not the only one opposed to your changes -- 65.110.6.36 also reverted your edit. Also, you neglect to mention your other edits -- I assume you have abandoned those? | ||
| + | ::More to the point, instead of squabbling pettily over what makes it onto the cheating page, your time and mine is better spent adding fresh content to the wiki. --[[User:Mogri|Mogri]] 00:29, 27 January 2007 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 00:29, 27 January 2007
Recent Reversion
Why did you revert my edits? I was editing the cheating category to only include things that were listed as cheating in the cheating article.
- Really? In the article Cheating:
- Farming and Pudding farming are listed explicitly.
- "Exploiting a bug" is listed, implicitly including Naming artifacts (which the DevTeam has said is a bug) and Astral call bug.
- Why did you remove the reference to changing the system clock? That is pretty clearly cheating. --Mogri 02:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- Adjusting the system clock is "cheating" like using a FPS keyboard instead of a standard QWERTY keyboard is cheating. It's something completely external to the game.
- No, the game would receive the same input from the keyboards, whereas you are deliberately changing the information received by the game when you alter the game clock. A better analogy might be a turbo controller versus a standard controller. --Mogri 00:29, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Pudding farming is listed as "degenerate behavior" not as "cheating". Try again.
- Semantics. It's listed on the cheating page and is therefore behavior considered by some to be cheating. This isn't an ethics board; we should notify readers which behaviors might be frowned upon and leave it to their discretion whether to take advantage of those behaviors. Perhaps you can explain your other edits?
- If this isn't an "ethics board" then why do you list anything other than the two things that are clearly cheating (savescumming and startscumming) under cheating?
- "we should notify readers which behaviors might be frowned upon and leave it to their discretion whether to take advantage of those behaviors" <--
- I'd like to point out that I'm not the only one opposed to your changes -- 65.110.6.36 also reverted your edit. Also, you neglect to mention your other edits -- I assume you have abandoned those?
- More to the point, instead of squabbling pettily over what makes it onto the cheating page, your time and mine is better spent adding fresh content to the wiki. --Mogri 00:29, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
