If it comes up DURING the game, ok sure, I'll generally hold off on using it until I can get a ruling, and I'd bet that MOST PEOPLE do this.dier_cire wrote:As for who can tell you it's wrong, the first person would be yourself. If you know something doesn't feel right, don't do it. If there is any question, JUST DON'T DO IT. You can and should police yourself better than any GM/Marshall. If you must prove a point, just do it somewhere inconsequential.
But if I go to the GMs and discuss an issue, and they don't feel it's an issue, I'm actually (*shock*) going to assume it's not an issue, and I'm going to do it. And I'm not going to consider it cheating, and I'm not going to feel guilty about it. And if I combine forces with my "friends" as well to do it, that's not cheating either, that's strategy, as I'm sure a few of you would argue from YOUR perspective, and have. Same as if I go to a GM and mention that player so-and-so was doing X, I'm going to accept "Yeah, he can do that" as an answer and not be pissed that I don't get a full disclosure on WHY.
I'm not going to put myself at a disadvantage over someone else, just because I think it seems odd that I can do it, if I made the open and honest attempt with staff to show how it was broken.
You should police yourself, sure, but only so far as the rules give your direction. I can't read the mind of the creator's intent, and this is where I am AGAINST the idea of "spirit of the rules." In fact, I've been outright WRONG as far as "spirit of the rules" go, because a lot of things HAVE been allowed in the past that I feel violate the "spirit of the rules" as far as I'm concerned, but that's why I'm for correcting and clarifying the rules, because I can only worry about the letter of the law, not the spirit of them.
If I've been forthright in showing where I believe the holes are, and I am told everything is fine, then I'm going to go with that. If you later decide, after someone has abused it, that you want to fix it, I'm ok with that, but I'm NOT ok with you retroactively saying the player was cheating, when I was pointing out what I believed was an error in the first place.
And yeah, if the rule writers can't see it, it's not my job to gimp myself. That doesn't prove anything except put myself at a disadvantage. It's nice to say "Ok, well, do it where it doesn't have a major impact on the game," but that sure didn't happen a few years ago.
I still disagree that it's cheating. At that point, it's not even really unethical, because you shared the information with the proper authorities. It was in THEIR hands at that point, and they made the decision that it was working as intended. To accuse otherwise after the fact is just petty. It's all in the interpretation. Look how poorly I have apparently perceived some of the posts in this thread?
I'm not even really sure why I am still arguing this, as I'll add that I'm not a rule nit-picker as a general rule, and I don't think anyone has ever considered me a cheater or cheese weasel. But, I've never seen where something is broken the way other people have. I follow the rules as they are written and how I understand them.
But I draw the line when you want me to just "assume" that I know what the rules are SUPPOSED to be, as opposed to what they actually are on paper. I obviously don't understand the invisible intent, and I think it can be safely agreed then, that I'm probably not the only one. Don't expect me to follow some unwritten rule or be accused of being a cheater.
Most people here know that playing fairly is very important to me or the game means nothing. My apologies if I'm having a tough time expressing exactly WHAT my frustrations are with this subject.
Anyway, I don't see either of us flexing on this point, and that's fine, so I'm done for now.
Again, NOT angry here. I find some of these comments ironic, but I'm not pissed. If anything, I'm amused. Why do people think I am so angry?