BAF and LAMBDA trials???

Except that Dev post is in the VIP Beta section. The section you can't see if you aren't VIP. And we can't assume that the poster is VIP, when their name isn't gold/yellow.

EDITed to add::

And since it dawned on me that non-VIPs might want to see the post:

Two things:

1. The post about the original change was also in the VIP Beta section.

2. If they're not VIP, why would they care about Incarnate changes?

Because they may want to become a VIP.........or maybe not......

If you're not a VIP you can't post on the forums. since the OP is posting he is clearly a VIP.

Not true.

There are "stealth added" forums that non-VIPs can post in.

Gameplay/Techical Issues is one. I think Player Questions is another. Essentially any forum that is used to get help from other players, should be postable by non-VIPs.

Player Questions isn't one of them.

Using my Premium account, I tried to post a reply here but couldn't. I also tried starting a new thread here but couldn't.

Notice the text in the red outlined area below:



Even though the New Reply and Quote buttons are in the above image (notice there is no Quick Reply box below the posts), clicking them gives me this page:



Trying to start a new post gave me the same page.

So no, it's clear that Player Questions is NOT one of the areas that Premiums can post to.

And the fact that I tested it previously had absolutely nothing to do with it. That test was in response to a post in the Gameplay / Technical Issues & Bugs section. This is just my most recent test and it was done so that I could document it with screenshots for those that demand proof.

It's possible that those who earlier in the thread commented about the VIP status had tested this themselves.

You apparently hadn't tested it before making your post. I'd rather test something and present evidence than jump on people without testing it myself (especially since those others may have tested it) and declaring their post to be "Not True." The fact that you didn't test it doesn't help with your point.

Note: "On the forums."

You were saying?

Actually, we can. As demonstrated.

And clicking if you regard clicking a link as some kind of superhuman, ultra-connected, dev following madness, then, well, that's just sad.

My point is - if you're going to comment on beta stuff outside the beta forums, then you should either note that what you're talking about is beta and subject to change (especially since Z noted on Friday that they were reviewing it), or else keep up to date on what the devs are saying. Preferably both.

It's very possible that Adeon Haywood was using "on the forums" as shorthand for "on this forum section".

It's possible that they were just referencing what we've been told would be the case (non-VIP's would not be able to post) and the information that is still on the main website.

We won't know unless they say.

I was saying that you made a post to contradict someone else's post without first checking your facts by testing to make sure your statements were accurate.

That's still a factual statement.

Had you bothered to actually test it, you wouldn't have used phrases like the following:

"I think" and "should be" are fairly clear indications that you hadn't tested it. The fact that you hadn't tested it didn't help your point.

And I'm not going to, because I'm feeling evil today. You will all be left to wonder for all eternity. Muhahahahahaha!!!!


Ok, I was going by what the official web page says, I wasn't aware they had added the feature (although given where this thread is located my original point is still valid).

Let us assume that is true.

So you are just giving Adeon Hawkwood a free pass, and assuming they actually tested their statement before posting. And for clarity:
That assumption is clearly false.

Of course, had you verified (in other words tested) it before posting, you would have known that.

So:

• You do not hold Adeon Hawkwood to that standard.
• You do not hold yourself to that standard.
• The only person you are holding to that standard is... Me.

That paints a pretty clear picture of a personal vendetta. Possibly bordering on harassment.

Of course, let me guess: "I'm just reading things into your posts that don't actually exist" (Again.)

The fact that someone else saw something of it (and their post was deleted, for those curious), might be relevant.

Of course, if I just have a bad habit of reading to much into your posts... You would think you would simply avoid interacting with me. I mean, if you had the goal of these forums looking friendly.

Maybe you should meditate on all of that.

Since one of the possibilities I listed was that Adeon was basing their statement off of officially posted (and still currently posted) information and he didn't claim anyone's statement was "Not True" I didn't hold them to that standard. Adeon has posted that this was the information they were using, so yes, given that they were basing it on officially posted information I'll give it a pass. Since it's only been in a handful of posts that Zwaffendorger has said he's working on trying some things on the forums and the plans aren't finalized, I don't expect everyone to have seen those posts even though I do encourage people to regularly check the Dev Digest and Community Digest. He said there would be an official announcement once the plans are finalized. It would be reasonable to accept information in official announcements and on the website as accurate until an official announcement is made.

I actually did hold myself to that standard as proven by me testing again before making my posts (with screenshots for those that need visual proof, that whole "Pics or it didn't happen" crowd). This also isn't the first time I've tested this. I test it anytime the subject comes up just in case Z has made another change in his tinkering. Anytime I've not been able to test something at the time, ingame or on the forums, I base my information on the information I have available with the qualifying statement that I can't test it currently, then outlining the steps I'd use so that those that can test it have a plan to follow.

I held you to that standard for calling other posters comments "Not True" without actually testing to see if they were "Not True". I even quoted where you said "I think" and "should be" as to whether or not this forum section was included. If you had based that on official announcements or postings on the main website instead of comments of something they are trying to accomplish but hasn't been finalized, I'd have not commented on that part. I merely said that your not testing it yourself didn't help your point, and I stand by that statement.

If you feel that this is a personal vendetta or borderline harassment, click the Report Post icon on the post you thing violates the forum rules against those particular behaviors. If the Moderator's agree that it is a violation, they'll take action either by modifying or deleting the post, by sending me a warning in a PM, or both. If they feel it is an extreme enough violation or a continued repeated violation, I'll get either a temporary ban or a permanent ban from the forums.

Do I think you are reading things into my posts that aren't there? In this instance I definitely do think that way. Which is one of the reasons I'm replying to your post.

The other reason I reply to your posts, or any other post I find has incorrect information, is that I don't like to let incorrect information stand unchallenged and uncorrected, no matter who made the post. But I don't make posts claiming other peoples statements are "Not True" if I don't test it first or have an official statement/website posting or Dev or Community post to reference. That's as bad as posting misinformation in the first place. True, some of the Dev posts have gotten lost in forum purges over the years, but I've got other sources to back me up in those cases and I'll state that the comment is one that I can't find through that Dev's post history.

If people post incorrect information and people don't correct them, people reading that information then believe it to be correct. We've had enough of that over the years with people claiming things like "The Devs said we'd never get power customization" when that wasn't what was said at all. That's just one example of incorrect information.

When people question my motives for some of my posts, as you have, I'll reply to make my motive for those posts clear. Some people would classify those types of posts as attacks on their character. I merely consider them to be someone deriving an incorrect conclusion, and I'll respond to try to clear up their misconceptions. Some people refuse to change their incorrect conclusions no matter what evidence is presented, but I'll always respond rather than let that stand unchallenged. Just like other incorrect information I see posted, as stated above, if it's left unchallenged then people reading it will assume it's correct.

EDIT: When people correct me when I post incorrect information, I simply admit I was working off of old information and thank them for correcting me. I don't make posts calling their motives into question or denigrating them in any way. I simply admit that I was wrong.

With all of the recent changes in the game and on the forums I'm making it a habit to test things each time I run across a post about the forum posting rules, in case Zweebleswobblebuttheydontfalldown has made changes since my previous test. I've been trying to do that with testing things in the game itself to keep from basing my remarks on outdated information as well.

You mean, "Let's beat this dead horse some more."

We're no longer discussing the original subject.
We're no longer discussing posts about the original subject.
We're discussing posts about other posts and parsing 'state of mind' at the time of posting.
ugh....

But that's the beauty of the Internet. Arguing tangents of tangents of tangents. It mirrors the flotsam of random thoughts that every person's brain keeps churning up again and again.

It's wonderful, and you can't stop it. Well, I guess you could on moderated forums. But that just means it will pop up somewhere else. That's why I loved the alt hiarchy on Usenet.