We know that you do not like the use of /trade for things other than the buying and selling of goods and services. We know that is one of your pet peeves.
Others, though, apparently do not share your opinion. Even Blizzard has consistently permitted the use of /trade for things other than the buying and selling of goods and services.
That’s fine. Keep spamming your little heart out. I’m not gonna stop you.
Yes. Unless you’re reporting Guild Advertisements, PuG Recruitments, opposite Faction invading your major cities warnings, etc., too, I might see your point.
Just friendly advice.
OK? And handing a tool that has been in use for 10 years (if the reports are true) in order to HELP determine what is acceptable, that 6 year old quote speaking to how valuable a tool it is to them, that is not a clue to how blizzard would like things handled?
It is disrupting communication. Full Stop.
Regardless of my “pet peeve” (which is actually the possibility of not getting an older version of AV), it is disruption of communication.
I would wager that many if not most if not almost ALL people attempting to carry out trade in /trade have an issue with it being used as a general channel.
This is why we have “Ignore” (Game, not Forums). Although, I agree, Forum “Ignore”, should come back.
You do not speak for them.
That is YOUR opinion. While that opinion maybe shared by some, it is obviously not shared by everyone.
Even Blizzard has consistently permitted the use of /trade for things other than the buying and selling of goods and services.
If Blizzard felt that it was a “disruption of communication”, I doubt they would have consistently permitted it to occur.
Eve if you were right in that belief (and we cannot know whether you are or not), even Blizzard (in who’s hands the final decision rests) has consistently permitted the use of /trade for things other than the buying and selling of goods and services.
Holy moly. The thing about those restrictions that gets me is the Blizzard Chat.
So, wait. Is that the auto-applied version or is that what you get hit with after a GM reviews the reports and deems you a bad person? Or is it all the same thing?
It is not a “opinion” that it disrupts communication of trade activities. It is fact. I as a player conducting trade in the trade channel have my commerce/communication disrupted. Unless you are going off a completely different definition of “disruption”.
Oh for chist’s sake. It is pointless even having a discussion with you.
We silence your account if you are reported multiple times for Spam or Abusive Chat.
It’s both. They both perform the same functions.
Again, “Ignore”.
Then you’ll have no issues exiting this thread.
It’s not. But seeing how you feel it’s “pointless”, there’s no issues, right?
Hmm. So, I guess that means there is no difference between a squelch and a silence after all. Or rather, there is no squelch. Makes sense. Why have two different systems with different sets of rules when the purpose of them is essentially the same.
The difference is, one is automated, and the other isn’t. The automated goes off by X amount Reports. Don’t really know anything about the Manual one. Point being, I don’t mind the Manual. I just don’t like the Automated.
Wrong wrong wrong =D Trade chat is just a chat that links between cities that just so happens to be called ‘Trade’ chat. It is fairly common knowledge that it is acceptable to post LFM and LFGs in trade chat or even reports on horde/alliance attacking your cities. I have never once in all my years of WoW had someone tell someone else in trade to stop posting LFGs, LFMs, or even guild recruitment info unless they were specifically SPAMMING in which case also includes people using it to ‘trade’.
Personally I rarely use trade chat to actually ‘trade’ anything because I normally just pvp so I don’t have anything to sell and if I want to find enchants I would just ask my guild, so to ME people using trade chat to sell their stuff could be seen as disrupting MY communications in trade chat because of how I specifically use it. But, I wouldn’t claim that it actually bothers me because I have a level head and realize what trade chat is used for, a vast amount of topics.
You consider it a disruption of communication.
Others, apparently, do not.
Even Blizzard (in who’s hands the final decision rests) has consistently permitted the use of /trade for things other than the buying and selling of goods and services.
Why? Because I point out that your “belief” may not be correct?
Oh, I didn’t mean to imply that. I was just trying to say that the power the players wield in terms of the silence is just as powerful as the GMs. I always thought the player imposed silence was weaker. But, apparently not!
Now you see why I’ve been fighting to the death (nearly 3,000 Responses) over this. It’s crazy!
I’m just gonna leave these here:
I do not know if the silence is more comprehensive than the squelch.
My objection to the squelch is that players wield the power to conspire to impose that squelch on any player at any time for every little slight they think they had to suffer–including, but not limited to, things such as:
a player having the audacity to use /trade for things other than the buying and selling of goods and services, even though Blizzard has consistently permitted such use
a player telling Chuck Norris jokes
a player trying to sell the same good or service for a lower price
I am NOT opposed to players being able to right click report rather than having to manually fill out a report if submitting that report is the extent of their power. I am not opposed to implementing an escalating priority system for the review of tickets based on the number of tickets received. I have even suggested significantly raising the target report number to trigger a player imposed punishment of a squelch if that player imposed punishment of a squelch absolutely had to be retained in Classic.
I’m not sure if these links were suppose to prove the guy wrong that you quoted or not, but this really just reinforces what Fesz was saying.
My primary concern lies in facts, not in proving certain individuals wrong. Despite what certain individuals may think.
I’m not suggesting you did anything otherwise I am just saying that this reinforces what he is saying.