Rule Modification Suggestion

• Kingofrunes wrote on 2012-11-13 17:23
  Should we modify the rule about modding discussion to just outright ban it to make it more clear?
  
  As it's written now, it's confusing and the reason for the rule to begin with I think is well past it's relevancy.
  
  Thoughts?
  
  *looking at Keapro especially considering his recent response on the matter and am just wondering for clarification purposes*
• EndlessDreams wrote on 2012-11-13 17:25
  Which part of the rules is confusing? How is it past its relevancy? As long as Mabinogi exists, there are mods. As long as any game exist, there are hacks/cheats/mods for that game.
  
  

  Quote from Forum Rules:

  
  Dicussion of "mods", hacks, cheats, or other exploits for Mabinogi, Vindictus, or other Nexon games is permitted, however, you may not request or post additional information concerning exploits (to include their names, creation, and usage) nor may you link to websites which provide this information or access to this content.

  
  
  Or you can just not talk about mods at all.
• Kingofrunes wrote on 2012-11-13 17:31

  Quote from Kaeporo:

  That rule was added in order to allow people to discuss the effects of certain past exploits on the health of the metagame. It was not created in order to help people troubleshoot their mods.

  
  
  Should mods be discussed and to what level? This is in regards to Spat's threads if you want to get down to specifics and what constitutes "acceptable" mod discussion.
  
  Personally I don't mind not talking about mods as I don't use them but I'd like to know for sure as to what degree we aren't allowed to discuss mods at so that I know next time if I should report a thread or not.
• Knightmehre wrote on 2012-11-13 17:39
  Well seeing as how the nation was endorsed by Nexon at one time (I think it was in an Erinn Walker?) I think they approve of our forum's guidelines, at least to a certain extent. Trying to talk about mods here will probably land us out of that spotlight and land us in some trouble/take us on a different direction. I don't think we need to talk about this here.
  
  EDIT: There are no acceptable mods, as all modifications are still mods of some sort, the current reason for the discussion of mods are to talk about effects (according to Kaeporo)
• Kingofrunes wrote on 2012-11-13 17:45
  K, so report all threads with any level of mod discussion? Understood. Will keep that in mind and pretend that the rule says that no mod discussion is acceptable :thumb:
  
  Thanks.
  
  At least that's what I'm getting from you what you guys are saying which makes the rule somewhat misleading when it gives any hope or inkling that discussion of mods is "permitted".
  
  Partly why I made this thread to begin with >.>
• Kueh wrote on 2012-11-13 18:09

  Quote from Kingofrunes;980539:

  Will keep that in mind and pretend that the rule says that no mod discussion is acceptable

  
  
  No one is saying that. The rule doesn't say that. I don't know where you keep getting this from or why you're so obsessed with it.
  
  Here is the distinction:
  
  Okay.
  

  Sally mods.

  
  

  He can see your combat power because he uses a mod.

  
  

  There are some mods that make the mushrooms in the forests grow larger to make them easier to see.

  
  

  I feel like I have less lag now that I mod.

  
  

  I feel like I have more lag now that I mod.

  
  
  Not okay.
  

  Hi, I'm Sally, here's a link to Sally's mod.

  
  

  I want to see combat power, does anyone have the mod for that?

  
  

  I don't know if it's okay to post the link to the mod here, but you can get the mushroom mod from this website.

  
  

  The reason why lagging is [increased/decreased] after modding is because the mod works like this...

• Kingofrunes wrote on 2012-11-13 18:10
  Thanks for the clarification Kueh. So you can mention mods, just not have an actual discussion involving the installing or them.
  
  The Okay's aren't really a discussion about mods though. It's just mentioning they exist or that you use them. The Not Okay's are CLEARLY discussions about mods.
• Kueh wrote on 2012-11-13 18:12
  Yes, exactly.
• Kingofrunes wrote on 2012-11-13 18:13
  As for what's my obsession with them. Ambiguity pisses me off to no end. Rules need to be black and white and no gray area as that leaves things open for misinterpretation which I have a tenancy of doing anyways
  
  Of course asking for rules to be clear/cut black/white is impossible as there's always varying cases and scenario's. I thank you for clarifying at the very least.
• Knightmehre wrote on 2012-11-13 18:28
  That's a good way to stand by things but you can't cut everything into black and white, even rules have to be clarified upon
• Kueh wrote on 2012-11-13 22:38
  That's neither here nor there.
  
  I think the current rule is descriptive enough, especially when compared with Kaeporo's quote.
• Episkey wrote on 2012-11-13 22:51

  Quote from Knightmehre;980557:

  That's a good way to stand by things but you can't cut everything into black and white, even rules have to be clarified upon

  
  
  Of course.~
  
  Which is why threads like this exist, in order to gain more clarification. Since I very much just recently started playing Mabinogi again, I at least think this an interesting point to bring up.
  
  
  

  Quote from Forum Rules:

  Discussion of "mods", hacks, cheats, or other exploits for Mabinogi, Vindictus, or other Nexon games is permitted, however, you may not request or post additional information concerning exploits (to include their names, creation, and usage) nor may you link to websites which provide this information or access to this content.

  
  
  As it stands, actual discussion about mods is alright - so long as you follow the guidelines made in the second clause.
  
  "However, you may not request or post additional information concerning exploits (to include their names, creation, and usage) nor may you link to websites which provide this information or access to this content."
  
  Well, that takes of specific names, how to create mods, and stating how to use mods ... nor can you request or post additional information. As to what constitutes are additional information would surely fall under the Staff's discretion. To be fair, troubleshooting does fall under the category of the usage of mods.*
  
  

  Quote from Forum Rules:

  Note: The staff also has the final say on rules or problems where ambiguity can be present or where the rules are not well defined.

  
  
  But then, does that mean that what are considered mods ALSO falls under the Staff's discretion? Because if you are talking about ALL mods, as the rules currently state, then a thread like this (for example) would certainly not be alright.
  
  
  I'm not going to try and delve too much into this - but I just wanted to say that King is bringing up a good point.
  
  
  
  P.S*
  
  Assuming, that all mods fall under the category of exploits.
• Kaeporo wrote on 2012-11-14 03:03

  Quote from Kingofrunes;980527:

  Should mods be discussed and to what level? This is in regards to Spat's threads if you want to get down to specifics and what constitutes "acceptable" mod discussion.
  
  Personally I don't mind not talking about mods as I don't use them but I'd like to know for sure as to what degree we aren't allowed to discuss mods at so that I know next time if I should report a thread or not.

  
  
  Things of this nature should not be discussed beyond making blanket statements similar to "(modders/hackers/scammers) are really hurting the economy", "I don't see why people have an issue with (mods)", or "I reported someone earlier that was (abusing an exploit)".
  
  I don't believe that we need to clarify that particular rule because it's already pretty clear and the actual consequences for rule violations will be left up to the moderator handling the situation. If you believe that you've received unfair punishment, you can always make a repeal with site leadership. Do not fear reprisal if you posted something that "falls into a gray" area, as it'll come out in the hotwash.
  
  Splatulated's threads left no room for discussion outside of modding. Any post made in response to his thread would likely either violate our guidance or would be considered off-topic.
  
  Not to mention, whole threads are far more "visible" than passing comments. Perception is a bitch.
• Episkey wrote on 2012-11-14 03:25

  Quote from Kaeporo;980805:

  
  Splatulated's threads left no room for discussion outside of modding. Any post made in response to his thread would likely either violate our guidance or would be considered off-topic.

  
  
  May I present what could have been a possible, yet legitimate conversation?
  
  
  Thread title: "How long does it does it take for the game to patch after you install mods?"
  
  
  OP: "It's already been 20 minutes, and it's 20/280. I don't like the new mod launcher."
  
  Person #1: "Oh. It took me only about 5 minutes. Why don't you try re-installing them?"
  
  Person #2: "Well, it took me about 10 minutes, but that's because I have a slow internet connection."
  
  Person #3: "I don't use mods now, but when I did - they installed pretty quickly. But I'm sure it depends on how many mods you are trying to implement."
  
  
  The conversation continues ad infinitum until the thread dies or someone decides to de-rail it.
  
  
  
  Instead of this, however - we get a lock and an ultimatum stating that anyone else who tries to procure a similar topic will be punished.
  
  
  Episkey: "What? ... ಠ_ಠ"
• Mentosftw wrote on 2012-11-14 04:10
  I think basically the best thing to do is just discuss mods with people you know who use mods.
  
  General rule of thumb is that we're not allowed to openly discuss about them although I recall a while ago that we were more lenient about discussion. Not sure why we're getting all anal about them again.