Thanks for al the fish!

[Westbroek]

In any case, and there are lots of them evidently, so long UG. It's been good reading your thoughts over the years. Hope to see you back some day in the future. Until then, Godspeed you on your journeys.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by JScones

Did someone say ?

Nice....an everlasting refill/supply

[krashkart]

Originally Posted by JScones

Did someone say ?

That was totally corny.

[Méo]

Originally Posted by IanC

Aha!! I knew under that soft cuddly exterior Meo, beats a heart that is colder and darker than an arctic night...

Naaa , that was just a silly example.

[gimpy117]

they way i see it is that there's a difference between discussing wither the game has been cracked and actually discussing how to crack the game.

he was just commenting on how the game was cracked after UBI said it was foolproof. It didn't look like he was asking how to crack the game or showing others how to.

I think you guys pulled the lock lever too soon on that one

[HunterICX]

Originally Posted by gimpy117

they way i see it is that there's a difference between discussing wither the game has been cracked and actually discussing how to crack the game.

Again, read the rules of this forum.

it put it very simple, that we do not discuss the topic around here at all.
so if you find your thread locked at the sudden, don't be suprised.

HunterICX

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by gimpy117

they way i see it is that there's a difference between discussing wither the game has been cracked and actually discussing how to crack the game.

Not in this forum there's not.

Firstly, I think we all need to accept that the discussion of even the word 'crack' or 'pirated' is not allowed here. I may not like it, but there are plenty of other forums around that do allow such discussions, so I'm not overly worried. To be fair this is still probably one of the best game communities I've been involved in to date...so

Secondly, as nothing more that a point of interest. I'd like to enquire as to why the discussion of cracks is not permitted? Please don't mistake my intent to be subversive or stick one up to authority. I'm genuinely interested as to why, and to be fair I think it may do some good to the people in this thread who think that its unfair. After all, its all well and good to say 'No, not allowed, no way, never, final.' However perhaps just a small explanation as to the reasons for such a rule may ease the mind for a few of us. Like I said, I accept that the rules and would never request them to be changed, just am curious as to the reasons.

Sev.

[jdkbph]

Originally Posted by pythos

Now, looking at what Neal has said, I want you to point to me where it says discussion of the EFFECTS OF a crack is prohibited. The Cnet article was about the EFFECT not the crack itself.

As I have said, this is equal to a news agency covering the effects of a break in. Not going into full detail or giving how to instructions of the break in.

Ubisoft's DRM is a very controversial matter as seen by how people have behaved on this normally civil forum.

Yep. Agreed. Everything is subject to interpretation, but in reading what Uber Gruber wrote I can see no interpretation which would violate what I perceive to be the spirit of this rule. If I am mistaken, then obviously so too are many others here, and perhaps the rule should be further clarified and explained?

(note to those with opposing viewpoints: please don't just continue quoting it... if there is a significant difference of opinion regarding the application of said rule - in this case - there is obviously room for clarification)

What I did see was a member challenging a moderator on a questionable call. Is there a rule against that? If so, it was definitely violated.

With regard to Uber Gruber's treatment... that can easily be perceived as an inappropriate response from the moderator in question. Neal's response did surprise me a bit... at first. But on second thought, the credibility (and effectiveness) of a moderator with no skins on the wall depends on authority. What I saw was the board owner protecting his moderator... all other things being equal. Totally understandable I think.

JD

[jdkbph]

Originally Posted by severniae

Firstly, I think we all need to accept that the discussion of even the word 'crack' or 'pirated' is not allowed here.

I know this is silly and I'm being intentionally silly to make a point. But didn't you just violate your own "rule"? Are we - you and I - not now, at this very moment, engaging in discussion which prominently features the words 'crack' and 'pirated'?

Where is the line?

As to your request for an explanation of the thinking behind the rule...? I concur. It would be helpful.

JD

[pythos]

The rules need to be clarified that is a given. There is NOTHING in the rules that simply say you cannot say the word Crack, or so on. No where in the rules is the prohibition of the discussion of the effects of cracks. There are clear details about not discussing THE ACTUAL crack. There is clear prohibition on directions to obtaining cracks.

The spirit of the law WAS NOT VIOLATED.

The law needs to be re written.

Oh Cnet's article was not even about sh5. It was about a console game. This article dealt with assassin's creed II.

Oh, and to all those that say it should have been dealt through PM. I have been trying to contact Neal through that method about other things, and have received only on response. He is extremely difficult to contact through that method. So that would not have been any help to U.G.


Also, understand my view here. I in no way support pirates (I am kinda in support of no cd cracks though because I hate leaving my cds or DVDs in my drive, I have heard nightmare stores of how drive failure has resulted in radial scratches in the media which is essentially ruined). Pirates are the reason we legitimate players have to go through all this lunacy. I don't like how the resale value of the game is all be ruined by this DRM. To me it is equal to a car company saying you cannot sell your car to someone else. But that being said, I do not support these entities. But I also do not like to see the unfair application of rules THAT DON'T EXIST. This is where bad policies based on good laws come from. In this case neither the letter of the rule, nor the spirit of the rule was violated.

Uber's leaving of the forum was a wrong move, in my opinion.

[John Channing]

Originally Posted by pythos

The rules need to be clarified that is a given. There is NOTHING in the rules that simply say you cannot say the word Crack, or so on. No where in the rules is the prohibition of the discussion of the effects of cracks. There are clear details about not discussing THE ACTUAL crack. There is clear prohibition on directions to obtaining cracks.

The spirit of the law WAS NOT VIOLATED.

That is not actually the case. Here it is, cut and pasted from the FAQ (bolding and underlining mine).

We do NOT allow discussion or even mention of warez,abandonware, peer-to-peer game swapping, game cracks, illegal download sites, or illegal file-sharing.

As to the other points being raised perhaps this will inform the discussion. Again, directly from the FAQ (bolding and underlining mine)...

If a member wishes to challenge a Moderator action that involves the member, this challenge must be raised in private via PM or email, not in public.

Neal's house, Neal's rules.

JCC

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by severniae

Secondly, as nothing more that a point of interest. I'd like to enquire as to why the discussion of cracks is not permitted? Please don't mistake my intent to be subversive or stick one up to authority. I'm genuinely interested as to why, and to be fair I think it may do some good to the people in this thread who think that its unfair. After all, its all well and good to say 'No, not allowed, no way, never, final.' However perhaps just a small explanation as to the reasons for such a rule may ease the mind for a few of us. Like I said, I accept that the rules and would never request them to be changed, just am curious as to the reasons.

Sev.

Subsim Review has a good working relationship with the game industry. In order to keep that good relationship some mutual support is required. On the industry's part this means that Neal gets some inside access, and is treated as a respected equal. On Neal's part it means that he doesn't allow anything that will harm the industry or the relationship.

This doesn't mean he can't or won't say things are good when actually they are bad (just read his SH5 review), and it doesn't mean he's in anybody's pocket. It just means that he has a good relationship and it's in everybody's interest to keep it that way.

That's just what I gather - I don't actually know anything.

[gimpy117]

I've known we cant talk about how to hack or steal...but i was unaware that we cant even mention that the game has been cracked

I swear I've seen it mentioned before and nobody got locked for it.

[pythos]

Okay, now this quote does indeed cover the issue..

We do NOT allow discussion or even mention of warez,abandonware, peer-to-peer game swapping, game cracks, illegal download sites, or illegal file-sharing.

I have also verified the statement. It is within the FAQs.

I humbly concede the debate.

I will say however, I am not a fan of total prohibition. Reason being. DRM is a security risk. It is intrusive, and can easily be exploited by a crack. I would hope that this community would be the first place I would read of any such exploitation. But with such a prohibition this may not happen.

But I will abide by the rules.