Gil stolen through market board

[TurtlesAWD]

not sure exactly what you are getting at here.

sounds more like cheating is just a way to flout your independence? rules that people follow, are a bad thing?
please feel free to clarify your position here.. extensively, because it sounds an awful lot like you are meaning the TOS doesnt affect your free spirit and you can do what you want without consequence.

As it happens, I'd say what I generally want to do is play the game and interact with other people fairly and equitably. I mostly trust myself to do this. I imagine a ToS will generally line up with that and can likewise be mostly trusted to represent a fair set of agreements for people to abide by. But let's not pretend these are commandments handed down from god, or moral absolutes argued from first principles, or that unpredicted cases can't arise - and let's not pretend like this thread's decision on what the ToS says is the correct interpretation as a consequence of this thread being in agreement with itself. If there was a subset of players who required a tool excluded by definition due to a disability, that would be better if it were changed - or ignored because the needs of players in that case outweigh the value in obedience to a rule which would consequently exclude them from normal play.

So no there isn't equivalency here.
The manual method: this person tries more times in hope they'll get it.
The automated method: they leave their computer to do it for them.

These things are the same to me - systemic circumvention with the same gameplay impact for the user and for other players. Ideally neither would occur. One isn't more worthy of punishment by virtue of being more persistent - get a wireless mouse and click while you piss, no one is stopping you.

literally what are you talking about. what rejection of reality? a statement of, yeah Square doesn't actually care that much about any illegal programs whatsoever but its super embarrassing that you tried to get your gil by accusing another player of cheating, is using you as a surrogate for them?

Uh yeah dude that wasn't me and this never happened. Are you okay? Who do you believe made this thread?

[Kes13a]

As it happens, I'd say what I generally want to do is play the game and interact with other people fairly and equitably. I mostly trust myself to do this. I imagine a ToS will generally line up with that and can likewise be mostly trusted to represent a fair set of agreements for people to abide by. But let's not pretend these are commandments handed down from god, or moral absolutes argued from first principles, or that unpredicted cases can't arise - and let's not pretend like this thread's decision on what the ToS says is the correct interpretation as a consequence of this thread being in agreement with itself. If there was a subset of players who required a tool excluded by definition due to a disability, that would be better if it were changed - or ignored because the needs of players in that case outweigh the value in obedience to a rule which would consequently exclude them from normal play.

what you are ignoring, is that tools used for accessibility, and not typically used to automate gameplay, they are used to allow gameplay to the same level as someone without a disability.

your argument in this direction is flawed.

use of third party software to gain an advantage over people who are going about their "fair and equitable" gameplay is cheating.

cheating is generally considered by most, aside from yourself and a few others who feel rules dont apply to them, to be bad.

sorry, you have not come up with any applicable examples to convince me that cheating is good for anyone but the cheater.

[Penthea]

what you are ignoring, is that tools used for accessibility, and not typically used to automate gameplay, they are used to allow gameplay to the same level as someone without a disability.

This is exactly it. Accessibility is about LEVELING THE PLAYING FIELD. It's not about having more accessibility than an able bodied person.

Using an autoclicker to purchase a house removes the need to stop interacting with the placard when you need to go to the toilet or sleep. Able bodied people need to go to the toilet and sleep. An autoclicker used in this manner makes the user have more advantages than an able bodied person engaging in normal gaming activity. This is why it's cheating and not engaging in accessibility.

Accessibility is supposed to enable disabled people to do something by themselves, not have it done for them.

I wish people would stop using disability to make it appear that some forms of cheating have any shred of merit.

[Kes13a]

This is exactly it. Accessibility is about LEVELING THE PLAYING FIELD. It's not about having more accessibility than an able bodied person.

Using an autoclicker to purchase a house removes the need to stop interacting with the placard when you need to go to the toilet or sleep. Able bodied people need to go to the toilet and sleep. An autoclicker used in this manner makes the user have more advantages than an able bodied person engaging in normal gaming activity. This is why it's cheating and not engaging in accessibility.

Accessibility is supposed to enable disabled people to do something by themselves, not have it done for them.

I wish people would stop using disability to make it appear that some forms of cheating have any shred of merit.

people who condone cheating/botting or try and defend it often use whatever thin ideas pop into their head.. then defend them to death.

[Mavrias]

As it happens, I'd say what I generally want to do is play the game and interact with other people fairly and equitably. I mostly trust myself to do this. I imagine a ToS will generally line up with that and can likewise be mostly trusted to represent a fair set of agreements for people to abide by. But let's not pretend these are commandments handed down from god, or moral absolutes argued from first principles, or that unpredicted cases can't arise - and let's not pretend like this thread's decision on what the ToS says is the correct interpretation as a consequence of this thread being in agreement with itself. If there was a subset of players who required a tool excluded by definition due to a disability, that would be better if it were changed - or ignored because the needs of players in that case outweigh the value in obedience to a rule which would consequently exclude them from normal play.





These things are the same to me - systemic circumvention with the same gameplay impact for the user and for other players. Ideally neither would occur. One isn't more worthy of punishment by virtue of being more persistent - get a wireless mouse and click while you piss, no one is stopping you.



Uh yeah dude that wasn't me and this never happened. Are you okay? Who do you believe made this thread?

have you never heard of the royal you, chief? or do you just assume every comment in this thread is a personal attack on you specifically?