Current and future event guidelines

[esmecat]

Thats not a complete exaggeration at all...nope not at all. /facepalm

actually, it might not be. it is something that has yet to be checked against the logs of commands used to spawn the mobs to confirm or refute. we have one EC on the one hand making statements about it saying only a few were spawned... but also saying she doesn't know how many in total and she was not the one present at the event... and on the other hand we have multiple eye witness accounts of numbers that add up to months worth of spawns. you can't claim positively that they weren't any more than he (or i) can claim that they were. only those logs can say for sure at this point.

HOWEVER, it really doesn't matter if they were or not anymore since the policies that allowed it have been looked into and revised to help prevent something like that occurring again.

[Revanis]

and on the other hand we have multiple eye witness accounts of numbers that add up to months worth of spawns

Yeah I doubt eye-witnesses can claim having seen over 400 Acklays.

[esmecat]

Yeah I doubt eye-witnesses can claim having seen over 400 Acklays.

perhaps you should read back through that other thread.

Revanis, i had been trying to believe your statement that you were sincere. but you are back to flippant on something that i just supported you on. seriously? seriously?

[Revanis]

Revanis, i had been trying to believe your statement that you were sincere. but you are back to flippant on something that i just supported you on. seriously? seriously?

I am just reminding others of the fact that 360 can spawn in a month, nowhere near that was spawned, just to save people the misunderstanding of "omg they spawned months of acklays???!!11" in the future. That's all.

[esmecat]

I am just reminding others of the fact that 360 can spawn in a month, nowhere near that was spawned, just to save people the misunderstanding of "omg they spawned months of acklays???!!11" in the future. That's all.

you are not JUST reminding when you make a statement that you *doubt* someone *can claim* to have seen them. especially when they had. you could simply say that it would be over 400 and that doesn't fit with what you know and leave out the sarcasm and flippancy. when you word things the way you do, you are pouring fuel on the fire. you said yourself you haven't checked the logs. you were not there. your information is just as much eye witness testimony as the other side. the logs will know... but either way it is irrelevant at this point. why force an issue that doesn't need to be one. if you push this, people (myself at the very least) will push back to require proof of your statements.

Exactly what I thought. Esme cmon, MONTHS worth of loot is a gross exaggeration

you really want to make issues out of things that have been resolved, don't you.

did you even notice my point that we do not have enough information for either side to make positive claims?

[imhotep71]

you are not JUST reminding when you make a statement that you *doubt* someone *can claim* to have seen them. especially when they had. you could simply say that it would be over 400 and that doesn't fit with what you know and leave out the sarcasm and flippancy. when you word things the way you do, you are pouring fuel on the fire. you said yourself you haven't checked the logs. you were not there. your information is just as much eye witness testimony as the other side. the logs will know... but either way it is irrelevant at this point. why force an issue that doesn't need to be one. if you push this, people (myself at the very least) will push back to require proof of your statements.

Im not sure but Im thinking the burden of proof here is on the community. If I were Rev or Vlada I wouldnt show you a damn thing. If you've got unaltered screenshots then lets see them.

you really want to make issues out of things that have been resolved, don't you.

did you even notice my point that we do not have enough information for either side to make positive claims?

Then why are you jumping up and down about how many Acklays were spawned???

[Revanis]

you are not JUST reminding when you make a statement that you *doubt* someone *can claim* to have seen them. especially when they had. you could simply say that it would be over 400 and that doesn't fit with what you know and leave out the sarcasm and flippancy. when you word things the way you do, you are pouring fuel on the fire. you said yourself you haven't checked the logs. you were not there. your information is just as much eye witness testimony as the other side. the logs will know... but either way it is irrelevant at this point. why force an issue that doesn't need to be one. if you push this, people (myself at the very least) will push back to require proof of your statements.

Er, okay. If anyone does claim those numbers, then they're either blind or lying.

400+ Acklays would be pretty nuts.

[esmecat]

Im not sure but Im thinking the burden of proof here is on the community. If I were Rev or Vlada I wouldnt show you a damn thing. If you've got unaltered screenshots then lets see them.

1. there is no burden of proof on the community. the community did nothing wrong. the point is not to prove something... but transparency after contradictory claims are made when the ECs and the event were discovered. this transparency is only required if the SWGEmu staff keeps making claims after the issue at the core has been resolved that basically call the eyewitnesses liars without supporting those claims... AND only if they want to maintain the trust of the community.

2. i didn't ask for it. i asked for the issue to be laid to rest. i did say i would push for it if it wasn't. that doesn't mean that they need to provide it. however, if they don't, in that situation, they would be making a point about how they value the community that will impact trust and support of the project..

Then why are you jumping up and down about how many Acklays were spawned???

um, actually, you are. i'm asking you to let it rest. lmao.

Er, okay. If anyone does claim those numbers, then they're either blind or lying.

400+ Acklays would be pretty nuts.

Revanis, all benifit of the doubt is gone. i really tried to believe you were sincere. you have proved otherwise.

[Jade_Enigma]

you are not JUST reminding when you make a statement that you *doubt* someone *can claim* to have seen them. especially when they had. you could simply say that it would be over 400 and that doesn't fit with what you know and leave out the sarcasm and flippancy. when you word things the way you do, you are pouring fuel on the fire. you said yourself you haven't checked the logs. you were not there. your information is just as much eye witness testimony as the other side. the logs will know... but either way it is irrelevant at this point. why force an issue that doesn't need to be one. if you push this, people (myself at the very least) will push back to require proof of your statements.

Oh gawd could you please just put your pointy stick away for awhile. If you have issue with her method of speaking to you, shake your head and sigh but for the sake of everyone else just take her admission of guilt and let it go.

FUZZY PURRY KITTEH GODDAMNIT!

[esmecat]

Oh gawd could you please just put your pointy stick away for awhile. If you have issue with her method of speaking to you, shake your head and sigh but for the sake of everyone else just take her admission of guilt and let it go.

FUZZY PURRY KITTEH GODDAMNIT!

where was her admission of guilt? i missed it. i did see the repeated statements that she felt no remorse for her actions.

[SoulReaper78]

you are not JUST reminding when you make a statement that you *doubt* someone *can claim* to have seen them. especially when they had. you could simply say that it would be over 400 and that doesn't fit with what you know and leave out the sarcasm and flippancy. when you word things the way you do, you are pouring fuel on the fire. you said yourself you haven't checked the logs. you were not there. your information is just as much eye witness testimony as the other side. the logs will know... but either way it is irrelevant at this point. why force an issue that doesn't need to be one. if you push this, people (myself at the very least) will push back to require proof of your statements.

This person must be a life counselor or something. If the staff were as bad as you keep trying to portray them, your *** would have been banned a long time ago.

[esmecat]

This person must be a life counselor or something. If the staff were as bad as you keep trying to portray them, your *** would have been banned a long time ago.

i'm not trying to portray the staff as bad. i am not at issue with any staff besides Revanis and only because of her behavior over this issue and her lack of remorse over it.

[imhotep71]

actually, it might not be. it is something that has yet to be checked against the logs of commands used to spawn the mobs to confirm or refute. we have one EC on the one hand making statements about it saying only a few were spawned... but also saying she doesn't know how many in total and she was not the one present at the event... and on the other hand we have multiple eye witness accounts of numbers that add up to months worth of spawns. you can't claim positively that they weren't any more than he (or i) can claim that they were. only those logs can say for sure at this point.

HOWEVER, it really doesn't matter if they were or not anymore since the policies that allowed it have been looked into and revised to help prevent something like that occurring again.

What is the acklay spawn timer? I think to have MONTHS worth of loot there would have to be a lot of creatures spawned.