>J'Lo, no that other one


You took one sentence from my post but conveniently left out the accompanying sentence that showed I wasn't talking specifically about the original poster on the particular quote you pulled. I don't care if he did or did not AFK script, I am not a GM nor am I Simu to determine if he is guilty of AFK scripting or not, from what I see, neither are you. I merely was offering encouragement for a discussion (not trolling for conflict) on policy.

The original poster suggested something he saw a need for a change in, and from what I see, everyone is missing that point and playing finger pointing on how he screwed up instead of how to change script checks to be fair to people who are at their computer but don't realize the messaging they got was a script check, AND fair to everyone else to allow GM's to catch AFK scripters. It is a tricky slope to make it fair on both ends since there are so many folks out there that can write a script to get around nearly all the script checks.

I have played in Plat pretty much exclusively since 2000, we have an extremely strict AFK policy. I see bee's buzzing around alot in normal room messaging, we have folks in RF playing around with other folks, Prydaens in hiding brushing folks with their tails etc?I would hate to see someone get a permanent lockout because they just happened not to respond to one that turned out to be an actual script check. I would also hate to see the whole gate respond every time a bee buzzed, it would get rather old after awhile. We don?t get so many chances as you all do in Prime, and we do have someone that got an unfair AFK warning the first year plat was open, from a GM who is no longer there after the first year. Since it wasn?t resolved then, it hasn?t been able to get overturned, and if that player gets another AFK warning, he is gone from Plat for good. So this policy is very important on our side of the fence. Which is why I stated the quote you chose to pull "Who wants a blemish on their record if they genuinely did not deserve it?" with the additional following sentence "Who meaning anyone, not just the original poster".

There are many folks who over the years have voiced a concern about how subtle script checks are, and how easily they can get lost in scroll. There has been enough rational complaints about it, and it would be nice to have an actual logical discussion on how to get this problem fixed for all.

~Mary, plat player