Character name can't be hidden.

[RAIST]

Why should someone pay an extra fee each month for something they don't need--even if it is only $1? I've been playing for years and never needed a mule....got 10 jobs to 90 and 6 locked at 51, and currently have like 25 slots free to carry junk on me and I logged out on NIN.

Someone shouldn't need to create and pay for an alt if they don't want to display anything about their main. They should have the option to hide that inormation just like they can elsewhere.

[GlobalVariable]

Did I not just argue that there is no reason to not have a hide option because of mule use?

[RAIST]

Did I not just argue that there is no reason to not have a hide option because of mule use?

did I not just mention I have never used a mule and have no need for one? Again, why should someone in the same set up need to pay for an alt if they want to remain private?

[GlobalVariable]

Facepalm. We're asking for the same option. I used it as a reason for said option. Direct it at SE not me...

Why should someone

Hint: I didn't say they should have to. I said they can.

[RAIST]

Facepalm. We're asking for the same option. I used it as a reason for said option. Direct it at SE not me...

my bad... the wording threw me off... post #113 before sounded more like you were saying there is no need to have a hide option because you have the option to use a mule...caused a knee-jerk reaction to the follow up post.

That seems to be the problem with some of the division here... a lot of the really old players are saying "just use a mule", glossing over the fact that many (especially newer players) may not have one. There are many that have been around a reasonable amount of time, but came late enough to have access to more storage and may never have needed one so never created one in the first place.

[GlobalVariable]

Likely my fault anyway, a bit distracted atm no time to re-read and I think I skipped part of the middle segment of the thread. I remember the 1st posts had to do with it being silly to require it since we'll use mules, and would also be silly to remove mule use because we'd just stop posting. They are correct.

[Runespider]

And folks...We can use a mule. All this stuff we're talking about isn't a prob because you can use a mule. And since you can use a mule there really isn't a reason to not let us have a hide option, but its still no problem right now since we can use a mule. Jeez. 13 pages.

If you were to be a real cynic you could suggest the reason for forced accountlinking and the probablility of using a mule would bea good way to get a few extra $1 a month.

[Alhanelem]

BG is not devoted to tracking players they don't like. If you're talking about the "Cross-Server Warning" sub-Section. its not devoted to people BG hates, It tracks people who have performed terrible deeds in their past in an attempt to keep others from falling victim to these players bad deeds.

As they have been shown to repeat said deeds.

whether you intend for it to be or not, you're effectively maintaining a s**tlist of bad people. It's not to say they don't deserve it, only that it's not really necessary. Also, it's subjective how "terrible" the deed was, and people can lie about others to defame them. And the internet in general finds a lie easier to accept than the truth. Even if it's well-intentioned, it can go wrong.

Side note: It's only 7 pages here. You can increase the number of posts per page, I have it set to 20.

[Karbuncle]

whether you intend for it to be or not, you're effectively maintaining a s**tlist of bad people. It's not to say they don't deserve it, only that it's not really necessary. Also, it's subjective how "terrible" the deed was, and people can lie about others to defame them. And the internet in general finds a lie easier to accept than the truth. Even if it's well-intentioned, it can go wrong.

Those threads are moderated pretty heavily. Only the really bad stuff is even on there anymore. The only one i can think of right now "active" is futchy. (I had to read back through them...)

Dallas made it sound more like "The entire forum is dedicated to finding people and harassing them" and this is completely untrue. I know im wasting my time explaining this becuase people who hate BG usually hate it to such a unrealistic extreme i have no hope of convincing them otherwise, but i'll still try.

I agree its "unnecessary" but i also see absolutely NOTHING negative about keeping track of a guy who has f*cked multiple people over on multiple servers time and time over and has shown he is WILLING and ready to continue doing it as much as possible.

It isn't FFXIAH-level "Player Warnings" the thread in the BG Cross-Server Warnings are again, heavily moderated, You can't really go in there and say "XX guy did YY" and get away with it without proof. it will either be locked or nuked.

Edit: Plus most people really don't care about the Player Warning Section... So it does seem almost for naught. I'm sure if you asked a lot of players today none of them would know who Futchy Was.

[Greatguardian]

Warnings that don't come with photographic evidence or basically an admission of guilt from the party in question are generally laughed off the boards.

BG just informs its own when people do things worthy of a multi-server warning. It's not a craplist, or a hitlist. It's a compendium of really bad things people have done. It promotes accountability. See? There's that word again.

If you Quartermastered some linkshell's Ridill in 2005, and it got put up on BG, I'm going to know about it when you apply to a linkshell in 2011. And depending on the mood of the recruiter, you will have to explain yourself, or you will be told to get lost.