So resetting's against the rules now?

[Alukah]

That makes sense, Alukah. But I'd still like that confirmation from this GM, because it's pretty clear that resetting a mob CAN be done with non-malicious intent. In fact, removing the option to reset is a big leg-up for people who pull early with bad intent (which does happen... the doors swing both ways).

There is a GM confirmation, post #77, even if your personal reasons to reset a monster are not malicious, resetting itself is, you are disrupting other players and that is not allowed, they have the final word to determine if your disruption was intentional or not.

[Ashkendor]

Show one quote of someone saying this. That they must be at every mob. Just one.

Or admit you are misrepresenting the views of others to make your argument easier.

There's no quote in this thread, but it's quite evident from the behavior that I see ingame. Whenever I hunt, I see people haranguing others for pulling early (when in reality they waited 3-5 minutes for people to show up), people screaming for a reset, and even people clamoring for blacklisting of whomever pulled it. At every single mark. The mob mentality runs rampant, and that mob apparently believes that it is entitled to every single hunt mark ever.

Then mods should say that only accidental resets are ok. That would be acceptable too. But they haven't. They've left it vague

I'm pretty sure this falls under "intent". >.>

[Thayos]

There are no early pulls, there are only just pulls.

No, there are early pulls. If a mob is found by members of a group who are then waiting for their friends to arrive before pulling, and then you run in there and pull, then that's an early pull.

Justify it all you want, but it is what it is. You can't say people who reset are always in the wrong but then act like early pullers are always in the right.

Keep in mind, I'm not talking about "being within the rules." I'm talking about ethical vs. unethical.

The situation described above is unethical.

I have more respect for people who just say, "I early pull, and I know that screws some people out of seals, but in the end it doesn't really matter because sometimes people do resets, and things balance out."

[Tridus1x]

There's a reason provoke doesn't work on the mobs. Same with FATE mobs. The reset is done by someone who can out enmity the people already on the mob, not provoke. Which is why if I see something, I always claim it on my Paladin since most people can't rip off me if I have those first few hits in.

Ah that's good to know. Then I agree resetting a mob is a grief tactic. No matter the intentions.

[Aegis]

There's no quote in this thread, but it's quite evident from the behavior that I see ingame. Whenever I hunt, I see people haranguing others for pulling early (when in reality they waited 3-5 minutes for people to show up), people screaming for a reset, and even people clamoring for blacklisting of whomever pulled it. At every single mark. The mob mentality runs rampant, and that mob apparently believes that it is entitled to every single hunt mark ever.

Screaming for a reset? You mean shouting? That's the only way to broadcast across a zone. Blisting of early pulls have nothing to do with resets. People also Blist resetters on some servers.

Well, then do you believe that even one of those players believes they are entitled to every single hunt mark ever? Including those while they are offline? You keep making exaggerations to demonise the other side of the argument. Just try tone down your rhetoric. How about "The sense of entitlement that leads people to believe that mobs should ideally be held to allow greater numbers of people to get rewards baffles me"?

[Thayos]

There is a GM confirmation, post #77

I wouldn't call that a confirmation. The GM says that yes, resetting a mob does disrupt gameplay... but the GM already said this in his/her first post here. The GM then went on to say that investigations are ultimately done to determine the nature of the violator's intent... which, in post 77, the GM says can be "good, " even if disruptive.

Also, everyone in this thread should read Aegis' post up above.

This is a giant gray area, and a lot of resets/early pulls happen in this gray area. What's against the rules can also be right, and what's within the rules can also be wrong.

The fact this is a giant gray area may be why the GM isn't giving a straight-up answer on this... but if there's a straight-up answer to be given, I think everyone would benefit from hearing it.

[ValkyrieL]

I find an elite, give x/y waiting for my pt, some 1 come in 30 sec later and pulled... I will reset it 3x over if necessary for my pt to arrive.
What I don't understand is why GM made a long post about this when the response was so simple...are resets allowed? Yes/NO...there should be no intent...it should just be clear...or make it mechanically impossible to reset.

[Ghishlain]

I wouldn't call that a confirmation. The GM says that yes, resetting a mob does disrupt gameplay... but the GM already said this in his/her first post here. The GM then went on to say that investigations are ultimately done to determine the nature of the violator's intent... which, in post 77, the GM says can be "good, " even if disruptive.

Umm...

As a player myself, I can certainly appreciate the good intentions of resetting to try to let as many people as possible get the rewards as possible.

He's agreeing that there can be good intentions to resetting a mob in this sentence, then he goes on the following:

However, that being said, the reality of these intentions have been pointed out in this thread by others: by intentionally resetting a hunt mark, you have chosen to interfere with the game play of other customers.

If you are resetting a mob, you are interfering with the game play of others, regardless. If you are even affecting ONE person in a mob of one hundred, you are grieving that one person, and S-E has to attempt to try to treat all their customers equally.

If this isn't clear, I'm not sure what to tell you.

[Enkrateia]

I'm going to be using the terms "you" and "your" a lot in this post. This indicates the personal view of anyone who may be reading, not a reference to a specific person. The use of those terms can be interpreted aggressively through text, and that is not their intent here.

The idea of good/bad intent comes from the ideas presented in whatever hypothetical situation you bring up. However, in most cases, the intent to reset was there, which can be reported and will be investigated by a GM. Trying to consider different types of intents clouds the reality that a course of action was chosen that had the potential to negatively impact other customers playing the game, which could be determined to be a violation of the rules. You may have the intent of giving the most possible customers the best chance at rewards; however, if reported, this may result in account actions. Appreciating good intentions (as a fellow human being) does not mean condoning that it resulted in a violation of the rules or ignoring the negative impact of those intentions. Making those decisions about the violations of the rules, despite the purity of your intentions, is the job of a GM.

A GM will determine, after an investigation, if the actions constituted a violation of the rules. Again, there is no single, absolute definition of what will be found to be a violation, since every situation is unique and must be considered as a whole. The infinite possible permutations of unique situations prevents an absolute definition. For cases that are questionable, the investigating GM will request a higher level of scrutiny.

Returning to my original post,

To begin, at its most basic level, resetting hunt marks can be considered a grief tactics violation.

Resetting hunt marks, for any reason, can be reported as a violation, and a GM will make the final decision on if this action was in violation of the rules or not. While intent is considered, it is also weighed with factors like impact and account history, just to list two of the many considerations a GM may allow into the investigation. Focusing on your good/bad intentions will only cause any account action to come as a surprise, since you may consider yourself on the "good" side of that split. Historically, almost everyone in Mordion Gaol for this violation does (or claims to). Focusing on your intent also removes focus from the second part of the investigation, which is:

That detail is the intent of the customer as determined by a GM.

In light of that external analysis, your claimed intent may not be considered the actual intent at the end of the investigation.

LGM Enkrateia

[Alukah]

The clear area: Resetting elites is against the rules.
The black and white area: Whether you do it intentionally or not, the GM will decide either based on several factors.
The gray area: The reasons why you reset the mob, but this gray area is irrelevant, your reasons simply don't matter, they will go based on the clear rule that resetting is griefing and then decide if you intended to reset or not, that's all there is to it.

I don't know how much more clear than this you want it to be.