So resetting's against the rules now?

[Thayos]

Thanks, Enkrateia... that's still not a perfectly clear answer, but the fact it's not 100-percent clear adds to the clarity, imo.

My takeaway from that is even good-intentioned resets can still result in account actions, but that GMs aren't soulless beasts who blindly "side" with one point of view over another.

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

If it were that simple, the GM would flat-out say it... but, just above, the GM says "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."

Seems "clear" enough to me now.

[Irving]

Thanks, Enkrateia... that's still not a perfectly clear answer, but the fact it's not 100-percent clear adds to the clarity, imo.

My takeaway from that is even good-intentioned resets can still result in account actions, but that GMs aren't soulless beasts who blindly "side" with one point of view over another.

Please refer to this:

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.

[Thayos]

Please refer to this:

Why would I read someone's interpretation of the GM's post when I could just read the actual GM post a few posts back? /headdesk

I appreciate Alukah's attempt to make a simple interpretation, but the actual GM says: "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."

Although we'd all prefer a simple answer, the truth is just not that simple.

That's why it's called a gray area.

Also, to dispute Alukah on a point, a "gray area" isn't created by one person. In this case, it's that area of intersecting values of everyone's views and the GM's investigations. And it most certainly exists... otherwise, in the GM's own words, there wouldn't be an "infinite possible permutations of unique situations" preventing us from getting a simple answer.

[Alukah]

Why would I read someone's interpretation of the GM's post when I could just read the actual GM post a few posts back? /headdesk

Because it took the GM three posts, repeating himself, just to get "that's still not a perfectly clear answer".

I may be wrong but to me it seems like you are in denial and not accepting that resetting is griefing.

I'm not going to repeat myself anymore either so I take my leave from this thread.

Thanks Enkrateia for clarifying this.

[Thayos]

I may be wrong but to me it seems like you are in denial and not accepting that resetting is griefing.

Nope. In fact, I said several posts back that resetting is officially a disruption tactic, as termed by the GM.

But the GM clearly said (again and again) is the investigation focuses on intent.

The GM also says there's no simple way to resolve these investigations, saying there are an "infinite possible permutations of unique situations" that could decide the outcome of an investigation.

You're trying to say this is a black-and-white issue, but that's clearly not what the GM is saying. I know that's what YOU really want it to be (and I kind of wish it were, because that would make everyone's lives easier), but it's not.

Thanks Enkrateia for clarifying this.

That, we can agree on.

[Ghishlain]

Although we'd all prefer a simple answer, the truth is just not that simple.

That's why it's called a gray area.

It's only a gray area because you choose to ignore this simple tidbit of information.

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.

Which then leads to this:

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:


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

In short, the GMs would prefer you not reset the hunt at for, for any intent because though you may perceive it as good, you are still affecting the game play of others and you yourself are risking suspension / banning for doing such action.

The GMs would prefer you do not reset at all because they would rather not see you risk getting suspended despite good intentions.

[Thayos]

In short, the GMs would prefer you not reset the hunt at for, for any intent because though you may perceive it as good, you are still affecting the game play of others and you yourself are risking suspension / banning for doing such action.

YES!!! Finally, someone who gets it.

The GM definitely says this exists in a gray area, but to reset at your own risk, even if you have good intentions.

Personally, I'll continue to thank people who do resets for the right reasons, but I still won't do any resets myself. I don't like leaving my fate in other people's hands.

[Aegis]

LGM Enkrateia

It's a disappointing answer, but thank you for it anyway.

Resetting hunt marks for any reason, including accidentally pulling can be reported as a violation and a GM will investigate.

I know this will have a negative impact on my server. YMMV.

[Brine_Gildchaff]

I still wonder about the situation I posed earlier in the thread, though. What if a party that finds a mob elects to shout and wait to allow others to try for credit, but a lone griefer decides to run in and pull the mob on their own to prevent the finding party from waiting? Are they then justified in attempting to reset the mob and resume waiting?

[Thayos]

Are they then justified in attempting to reset the mob and resume waiting?

You are morally justified, but people can still report you, and you may or may not be punished.

Isn't it funny that some people here think that's fine?