Tarnbriar

If you want a consensus for a change like this, and you also want to avoid angering a large portion of your player base, then I suggest grandfathering the existing NMTs. This can be easily accomplished by keeping NMTs unbreakable but make them no longer drop at all. Then introduce a new cloak which drops and breaks (or degrades). This should benefit everyone. Existing NMT owners will likely see the value of their cloaks increase (but not too much -- I suspect 400K gc is already the most the market can bare before players turn to other alternatives like the perk or breakable cloaks). People who don't own an NMT get a cheaper way to acquire the NMT benefit. Game developers get the unbreakable NMTs slowly eliminated (by owners becoming inactive or unbreakable cloaks being destroyed) and get the 400K NMT windfall drop eliminated.

Purchased. Thread can be closed/deleted if a moderator is willing. Thank you.

I would like to buy a No More Tears Cloak. I am offering 380K gc for it. Please post here or PM in game. Thank you.

This rule is going to create a complication for Vista users. Because of Vista's new User Access Control feature, Vista forces EL to create and use .elm files in a local Program Files folder for each user account. Where USER NAME is the chosen user name, the active .elm files can be found in the folder: C:\Users\USER NAME\AppData\Local\VirtualStore\Program Files\Eternal Lands I recently uninstalled and completely reinstalled EL. That didn't remove the outdated .elm files associated with my user name. So Vista users may need to manually delete all the .elm files in the folder that I identify above each time that there is a client update. Alternatively, Vista users could run EL "as an administrator" every time they play. (This is done by right clicking on the EL icon and then scrolling down to "Run as administrator.") It may be hard for people to remember to always do that though. Note: I am no computer expert, and I am relatively new to Vista. I discovered this issue while trying to find my chat_log. Mods, if I've provided erroneous or misleading info here, please feel free to delete this post.

This is a result of the User Access Control security feature that Microsoft added with Vista. Unless you choose to run EL "as an administrator" the EL program doesn't have permission to write to files in your Program Files folder (C:\Program Files). Instead, Vista directs EL to write to another folder associated with your User Name on your computer. You can find chat_log in that folder. Where USER NAME is the user name you've chosen for your computer, you'll find chat_log in the folder: C:\Users\USER NAME\AppData\Local\VirtualStore\Program Files\Eternal Lands I've created a shortcut to chat_log at that location and placed it on my desktop. Alternatively, you can run EL "as an administrator" every time you play. You do this by right clicking on the EL icon and then scrolling down to "Run as administrator." By the way, Vista also writes .elm files to the folder that I mention above. That will make things tricky for Vista users with the new rule against using outdated .elm files. I recently uninstalled and completely reinstalled EL to try to solve another problem that I am having. That didn't remove the outdated .elm files associated with my user name. EDIT: Two additional notes. First, Vista's search function will not find the chat_log file for you. You need to manually open up the folder. (At least, I didn't figure out any way to find it with the search function, even though the folder is there.) Second, AppData is a hidden folder, so you'll need to configure your folder options to show hidden folders.

20K

I'll pay 15K gc for it.

It would've been better to include such an option, because those who didn't agree with either can't vote, or make non-representative choice. If you had included one, you could've got a greater idea of who has voted (and thus better figures as to the size of the audience this affects). I'm not convinced that an "other" option would have provided any useful information, whether about who has voted or about anything else. There would have been no meaningful way to interpret the "other" responses, making them useless. My opinion remains that forced choice is the better format.

Just a reminder: I created this poll because a poster in the related Outlaw topic used the previous poll to argue that most players don't believe that actively seeking and taking hyperbags violates community norms. Also, the guild at issue justified its hyperbag “treasure hunt” policy based on the results of the previous poll. In my opinion, the previous poll was about hyperbags accidentally found. You disputed my opinion. Rather than argue the point, I simply created a new poll to find out whether people would respond differently if specifically asked about actively seeking and taking hyperbags. They do. I tend to agree that polls aren't the right way to establish community norms. Unfortunately, the guild at issue decided to do just that. I hope that they will re-evaluate their policy now that its clear that their reliance on the previous poll is unjustified. I think the results of that poll would be purely random, because no one would understand the question. As to your previous post, your suggestion to substitute “bad” for “bagjumping” in the poll question would render the results uselessly ambiguous. If the word "bad" were used, then people could have correctly answered the question “no” even if they believe that actively seeking and taking hyperbags violates community norms. I might have answered it that way myself. There's nothing inherently “bad” about choosing to violate community norms. This is a game, and the game needs people playing all sorts of characters. People who violate community norms aren't “bad;” they are just outlaws. I considered substituting “outlaw behavior” or “violates community norms” for bagjumping, mainly because I thought people might see the activity as a different violation of community norms than the one against bagjumping. All of the phrasing that I produced along those lines, however, seemed to require too much explanation, or to be too confusing, to produce a useful poll. I vacillated on using the word “taking” instead of “stealing” in the poll title. I worried that “stealing” would unduly slant the question. The problem, though, is that “taking” could include taking with permission. So I concluded that the word "taking" would not produce an accurate poll title. I've paid particular attention to the posts in this thread that object to the wording of the poll. I haven't seen any suggested wording, though, that I think would have produced a better poll. I considered including an "other" option, but I elected instead to use a forced choice format for the poll, and I continue to believe that is the right approach. An “other” option encourages people to avoid making a decision, and I wanted as many people to make a decision on the question as I could get. People who do not wish to vote either "yes" or "no" can still voice their opinion with a post in the thread. Edited to correct typos.

I don't see how that is any different than regular bagjumping. The ability to steal is intentionally coded into the game and is an important part of the game. For example, one of the harvest events is teleportation, which is designed to give thieves a chance to steal any bags harvesters may have dropped. Likewise death would be meaningless if there weren't any players who stole deathbags. Even though theft is allowed, and part of the game, players can still try to prevent it. That's part of the game as well. To protect ourselves from theft, we need to know who we can trust not to take our things and who we can't trust. That's the purpose of the Outlaws forum. Outlaws shouldn't be disliked as people. We should just know that those are the people we can't trust. LoGG has a policy that allows its members to steal hyperbags. That means that if any of our other guilds is working on a guild project, and sees a LoGG member around, then we need to be wary, because we can't trust your guild not to steal the ingredients in the hyperbag that we've spent hours gathering. That means people need to be warned about LoGG, and it makes a post in Outlaws highly appropriate. No matter what justifications you offer for what you do, we still need to be warned about you. My new poll is running about even, with a small majority of respondents saying that intentionally opening other people's hyperbags is bagjumping. I'm surprised by the complexity and diversity of the opinions on the subject. For me, this is a simple application of the Golden Rule: "Do unto others as you would have them do onto you." I certainly don't want anyone to steal a hyperbag that my guild has invested hours into making; so I think its wrong for me to steal hyperbags from others.

If I'm wrong, it wouldn't be the first time. I created a new poll to find out.

This is a question that arose in a discussion on a topic in the Outlaws forum. Posters disagreed about the meaning of an earlier poll, and so I thought another poll, with a more specific question, would be useful. (I posted this poll here instead of in the Outlaws forum because the earlier poll was here and because I think Outlaws is for posting incidents, not taking polls.) Thank you for taking the time to respond.

The answers clearly suggest that the poll is about hyperbags found by accident. The answers assume that “there is no way to know who it belongs to.” That assumption doesn't hold when you hunt for a bag that you saw someone else creating. If you read the responses to the poll, you'll see a discussion started about intentionally hunting for hyperbags. The overwhelming majority of people who responded said it was wrong to intentionally hunt for them. One notable exception was Entropy, but his opinion was in the decided minority of respondents. I took that from Blackthorne quoting you here: Regardless, this topic is about LoGG's policy that appears to allow its members to intentionally hunt for hyperbags created by other people. Here is a quote from Nardo about hyperbags on the LoGG forums: “We recently have a member who is quite skilled in this, by clever reasoning, calculation and deduction, levels way above my capabilities, he can determine when in the mood the best possible location where bags could possibly be discovered.” Statement from Nardo concerning h-bags. That statement clearly indicates to me that LoGG allows its members to use “clever reasoning, calculation and deduction” to steal hyperbags created by other people. If that doesn't accurately reflect LoGG policy, please clarify.

In this case it is no difference at all. No one in LoGG had any idea of the location of that bag before it was found. Not either did I have the slightest idea of who was the one who made the FEs in the bag before Insidious told me it was him and I returned it all to him, including the money for the 44.66666(6) keys that had been spent finding the location of the bag that I had created. Thanks for the clarification. I'm glad to learn that you only accidentally happened upon the bag and that you weren't actively searching for a hyperbag to steal. I hope that means we agree that actively searching for hyperbags to open, raid and move would be outlaw behavior. Another reason I'm glad you clarified is that I doubt that I am the only one who believed, after reading the logs in this thread, that you were actively searching for a hyperbag to steal. Some of the statements certainly lead to that erroneous impression. For instance, you stated that you don't have any hyperbags. What an amazing coincidence; the one time that you decided to create a hyperbag, you accidentally created it immediately on top of the bag that -AR- used for their guild project. Coincidences, of course, do happen. When, however, that coincidence is coupled with -AR- frequently observing you in the area while they were working on their project, the combination leads directly to an unfortunate conclusion. So, once again, I am glad that you clarified.

That poll deals with a completely different situation from what happened here. That poll asks what your responsibilities are if you accidentally open someone else's hyperbag. In that situation, most people don't think they have any responsibility to pay their money to close the bag or to spend time hunting down the owner. That's only common sense. Personally, I would get a key and close the bag, but its not reasonable to expect everyone to do that for you. This situation is completely different. In this situation, someone intentionally opened, raided and moved someone else's hyperbag. That's just theft. It's allowed by the rules of the game, but there's nothing honorable about it.