SRL Archive - SRL Site Discussion

I got this idea because I received an infraction for multiple postings in succession. I made a post and then worked on a scripting issue for an hour or so and then posted a followup with other issues I found during my investigations into the code and then another shortly after that indicating I was going to post a working copy of the script with new instructions for it after I had resolved most of the issues with it.

I didn't realize that multiple posts were such a serious infraction here. I've seen other sites have that rule of etiquette, but they don't actually penalize people for violating it. So I started to think why this site is different and why it's enforced so strictly and it seems obvious that the reason is because we have this requirement of a certain number of posts before you can become a Junior Member. We're essentially creating an incentive for people to make lots of useless, unproductive postings. In the thread I was posting in, for example, there were tons of posts from people saying how great the script was when the script wasn't even working.

I think if you change this requirement, it will remove the incentive for people to make lots of stupid posts like that and clutter up the forums and the overall signal-to-noise ratio will be increased. Also, it will eliminate the need to constantly police this activity, saving moderators time to do more productive things. In fact, you wouldn't really need the rule at all. It would just become basic netiquette like it is on most sites. I'd like to see Junior Member status be granted more on the merit/quality of your posts rather than quantity. Have users submit links to a few examples of their posts after they've been on for at least a week and moderators can glance through them and give a thumbs up/down. If you want to save even more moderator time, perhaps evaluate potential Junior Members by endorsement of posts by other Junior (or higher) Members with the caveat that endorsers could receive infractions for endorsing a bunch of losers. Then it could be almost automatic.

Just my 2 cents. Feel free to comment on or make modifications to this idea…

Nice Idea, Btw WOW, nice english;)

But if they do make stupid posts then there post count gets reset to 0. And it will continue doing so until banned or they make 10 USEFUL posts.

And also, they still have access to the Free Scripts area..

I've always failed to see the point of the 10 posts, but just about everything else in your post doesn't apply at all to this site. There is a huge influx of people who want to purely leech scripts. If the admins didn't care, then they wouldn't have the Junior member status at all and just have it so new members can instantly access Jr Scripts, but then that encourages people to leech and not post at all. Although it takes heavy moderation, it is a much better system and I'm sure hundreds of useless members have been filtered out and thousands of leechers who were put off by the week wait.

This sounds like a good idea. Perhaps the best way to weed out the leachers isn't a post count, maybe time would be the best incentive. I believe most leachers would look on the forum, create an account real fast, leach a script and wouldn't come back. I highly doubt some ADD little 13 year old that needs his R$ B0T is going to wait a week or two in order to access the higher quality working scripts.

It is strict because you will gain a lot more than the worth of ten posts in the exchange when you become a Junior Member, if somebody cannot make ten quality posts for the amount of scripts they will gain access to, they don't need them.

Next case.

There is an edit button, you know :rolleyes:

From: Hy71194
There is an edit button, you know :rolleyes:

Yes, I know. Apparently, I should have used that based on the feedback I got from the moderator. It's just that most sites don't really make a big deal about whether you use the edit button or just post a followup. Since post count is a big deal here, using the edit button becomes a big deal, too. The other problem I have with editing instead of posting a followup is that it often gets things out of order and you end up replying to something later in the thread. Or is that OK? For example, this entire message I'm writing now could have been an edit to my original msg, but the message wouldn't make any sense all out of order.

Oh, and thanks to the person who complimented my English. I'd normally reply separately, but I wouldn't want to be accused of double-posting. :)

Post Count isn't a big deal here, it's the space it takes and going by the rules.

Bah. I agree and disagree. I like the idea of banning useless posts, but, no offence to the mods or anything, I am generally pissed off with about a quater to a third of posts on this site being idiots saying "Nice script" or "I still dont get it" or my personal favorite "Proggy coming soon*2 weeks ago*"

I think that something should be done to combat crap posts, but removing this rule isnt. And you got an infraction for double posting, not posting crap.

From: tetazoo
Yes, I know. Apparently, I should have used that based on the feedback I got from the moderator. It's just that most sites don't really make a big deal about whether you use the edit button or just post a followup. Since post count is a big deal here, using the edit button becomes a big deal, too. The other problem I have with editing instead of posting a followup is that it often gets things out of order and you end up replying to something later in the thread. Or is that OK? For example, this entire message I'm writing now could have been an edit to my original msg, but the message wouldn't make any sense all out of order.

Oh, and thanks to the person who complimented my English. I'd normally reply separately, but I wouldn't want to be accused of double-posting. :)

Stop saying "most sites". Just because other sites are a certain way doesn't mean we can't be the complete opposite if we want to.

You posted 3 times in a row when you could have used the edit button, and should have, to merge the posts. 2 posts in a row isn't an infraction, but is still against the rules. 3 posts in a row is excessive. If you're post was the most recent, and you have something to add, edit you're post and edit it.


I've edited one of my posts before 10 times. Posting 10 times in a row on the same topic doesn't make a lot of sense when you could use the edit button.

Stop being such a big baby about this. Just read the rules and follow them. Simple as that.

No need to be harsh JAD although I see what you're saying. The rules are the way they are for a reason, and while you may have ideas on how to change them (which is good) be recommend having at least a bit more of a basis for those changes than you had.

Thanks for trying to contribute to the forum, we do need people who take an interest in bettering the forum.

From: ape
This sounds like a good idea. Perhaps the best way to weed out the leachers isn't a post count, maybe time would be the best incentive. I believe most leachers would look on the forum, create an account real fast, leach a script and wouldn't come back. I highly doubt some ADD little 13 year old that needs his R$ B0T is going to wait a week or two in order to access the higher quality working scripts.

There IS a time limit. You have to wait one week AND get 10 useful posts to become a Jr. Member.

When you say people are saying that it's a good script when it doesn't even work, that could be because it used to work, but now is outdated. Now, if recent posts are saying that, then yeah, there's a problem. (I'm not saying that 'Nice script' isn't spam, it is)

I like the idea of having moderators accept the Jr. Members. We would need a few more moderators though. And we could require someone who wishes to see if they would be accepted PM a mod/admin.

From: Runescapian
There IS a time limit. You have to wait one week AND get 10 useful posts to become a Jr. Member.

When you say people are saying that it's a good script when it doesn't even work, that could be because it used to work, but now is outdated. Now, if recent posts are saying that, then yeah, there's a problem. (I'm not saying that 'Nice script' isn't spam, it is)

I like the idea of having moderators accept the Jr. Members. We would need a few more moderators though. And we could require someone who wishes to see if they would be accepted PM a mod/admin.

Are you saying you think it'd be cool if registered users were made junior members manually? That just wouldn't be worth it for all the time wasted… And they wouldn't just make the whole forums moderators just for that.


@Special ed, that went further than what you saw here (personal messaging).

From: JAD
Are you saying you think it'd be cool if registered users were made junior members manually? That just wouldn't be worth it for all the time wasted… And they wouldn't just make the whole forums moderators just for that.


@Special ed, that went further than what you saw here (personal messaging).

@JAD - Alright, I figured you had more of a reason but I wasn't sure.

I think that JMembers are fine as is personally. There really is no effective solution that comes to mind when dealing with the "SPAM" created by people posting to get JMembers.

Wouldnt it be better if it were linked to the SRL stats? Say, a weeks worth macroing will let you become a junior member? That way, they would be:

A) Supporting the script writers by totting up the time on their scripts.
B) Having to join up to SRL stats. (I admit, I used to just remove the piece of code which forced people to sign up… *slap on the wrist*)
C) Increasing the macro community as well as the SRL community (Lots of people give up macroing when their account gets banned. More people, more pressure on Jagex, more people getting banned… but less likely chance of it being us individually =D)

I, personally enjoy forums, and saw the scripts more as an added bonus. I would like to think that the forums could be kept clean, whilst the macroing levels kept high.

There you go, my 2 cents also added… and with me being british, the exchange rate goes in my favour :D

From: splbooth
Wouldnt it be better if it were linked to the SRL stats? Say, a weeks worth macroing will let you become a junior member? That way, they would be:

A) Supporting the script writers by totting up the time on their scripts.
B) Having to join up to SRL stats. (I admit, I used to just remove the piece of code which forced people to sign up… *slap on the wrist*)
C) Increasing the macro community as well as the SRL community (Lots of people give up macroing when their account gets banned. More people, more pressure on Jagex, more people getting banned… but less likely chance of it being us individually =D)

I, personally enjoy forums, and saw the scripts more as an added bonus. I would like to think that the forums could be kept clean, whilst the macroing levels kept high.

There you go, my 2 cents also added… and with me being british, the exchange rate goes in my favour :D

No, I don't even run scripts often (less than once a month?) and I don't think I've even used SRL stats before. I still contribute to the community and I help people fix their code but I don't run scripts that often.

Also increasing the macroing community is a bad thing, brings more attention to us (which we don't want) from Jagex. Also people using SRL shouldn't get banned if they auto-correctly so that disproves another theory of yours. Also if there are more people macroing Jagex will take more time to sniff out macroers banning people who wouldn't normally get banned.

Also increasing the macroing community is a bad thing, brings more attention to us (which we don't want) from Jagex.

I hate to say it, but I think that SRL is probably the main focus for Jagex in terms of macroing… Most of the attention that they focus will be on the largest macroing community, which I believe (correct me if im wrong) is this one.

Also people using SRL shouldn't get banned if they auto-correctly so that disproves another theory of yours.

I just got banned using SRL for less than half an hour, whereas people have run the exact same script for over 100 hours. In some cases, its all a matter of luck.

Also if there are more people macroing Jagex will take more time to sniff out macroers banning people who wouldn't normally get banned.

Heres my theory. If there are 100 people macroing at any given time (using SRL and using it properly), and jagex bans 10 of them… thats a 10% chance that the user could get banned.

If there are 1000 people macroing at any given time, and Jagex are put under strain to ban twice as much, then thats only a 2% chance of us getting banned.

Obviously, thats a watered down example… lots more people macro and lots more get banned, but the percentage should still hold true.

No, I don't even run scripts often (less than once a month?) and I don't think I've even used SRL stats before. I still contribute to the community and I help people fix their code but I don't run scripts that often.

Granted, and you must have been commended for the amount of time you spent helping others, hence that should be another way for people to become junior member… just like having to post a script will make you a full member. Not that im experienced, but I should imagine its hard to monitor whether 10 posts are actually useful. I could easily post 10 posts which are related to the topic, yet still a load of dribble.

From: splbooth

Heres my theory. If there are 100 people macroing at any given time (using SRL and using it properly), and jagex bans 10 of them… thats a 10% chance that the user could get banned.

If there are 1000 people macroing at any given time, and Jagex are put under strain to ban twice as much, then thats only a 2% chance of us getting banned.

I think the assumptions and logic here are slightly off. We don't know how many people Jagex can ban in a given time period and we have to be careful about what assumptions we make about how that will relate to the number of macroers. I think we can assume, however, that macroing will get more attention as the percentage of runscapers macroing increases and that they will likely devote more resources to deal with it such as writing detection programs to analyze for patterns. Online poker sites, for example, have very sophisticated analysis tools to detect cheating and ban people for collusion and other offenses. We don't want that to happen here and I think the more macroing becomes a problem, the more likely it is to happen.

On the other hand, giving the noobs flawed scripts so that they keep getting banned and keeping the good scripts under closer guard might help those with the good scripts. Essentially, that's how some drug running works (not from personal experience, of course). They'll pay some poor sap to carry a small amount of drugs through the airport (and either drop a dime on them or tell them to do/wear something that fits the profile of a "mule") to attract the attention of law enforcement so that the real runners with the bigger loads have a better chance of getting though without being detected. Kind of a cruel spin on it, but that's the only special situation where I think increasing the number of macroers makes sense. That wouldn't make it safer for macroers, in general.

Final note: Be careful not to draw the conclusion that a lower percentage of total macroers getting caught each month means that you're less likely to get caught in that same time frame. That's not necessarily true. The probability that you get caught isn't necessarily highly correlated to the number of other people macroing. Like the poker example illustrates, it may turn out to be the opposite of what you think. The last thing we need is for Jagex to develop a sophisticated program to detect cheaters and it really wouldn't be all that difficult for them too do it. Then, we'd be constantly going back and forth with modifications to our scripts to avoid detection and they'd constantly do the same. That just creates a lot more work for us programmers when we could be using that time to create more and better scripts to do more things.

I doubt SRL is the main focus of Jagex, because if we were that large of a problem and Jagex wanted to we'd be long gone by now. There is a possibility that we are Jagex's #1 target but seeing as they've done basically nothing to stop us completely why change what we're doing if they're not bothering us?

If you got banned for using SRL for less than a half an hour then you've got some serious issues. If you're using a good quality script and meeting all specifications and guidelines there is a very, very minuscule chance that you will be banned.

So… if 100 people are macroing and Jagex bans 10% then, 10 people lose there accounts… but if 1000 people are macroing and Jagex bans another 10%, 100 people lose there accounts and Jagex has 900% more of a reason to shut down SRL.

If SRL were to make 10 people a JMember a day then fine… that would be reasonable, but when there are 30 more people wanting to be JMember and complaining to us we can tell them it was splboons ingenious idea to have moderators evaluate JMembers. Moderators have lives outside of SRL too, and they have other jobs here as well that take up a lot of time.

I'm not saying that suggesting ideas is bad, but why fix something that isn't broken? (unless you're blizzard, then fix it until it is broken).

tetazoo - I agree, we cant assume the likelyness of getting banned, which is why my example is only an example. We can however assume that they are limited to the resources they can acquire to stop macroers. Their press release stated that they got rid of RWT because they knew that macros were getting better, and eventually they would become undetectable… essentially, they tried to break "the loop".

That, to me sounds like an act of desperation because they were afraid of being unable to tackle the problem, which is also why the updates were so extreme. More players = more testing = greater scripts = unbroken loop. All done through SRL (Or at least contributed).

The last thing we need is for Jagex to develop a sophisticated program to detect cheaters and it really wouldn't be all that difficult for them too do it.

According to what they have said in Rule 7 - Third party software, they already have a sophisticated system which records suspected macroers and gives the reports to the staff, who then analyse it.

EDIT: I guess people arent in favour of my idea :( Oh well, was worth a shot

Please don't take it that we shun new ideas, it's good to have people contribute their ideas although when ideas are presented to the public people find flaws or have new ideas. That the beauty, because when someone can't find a flaw we end up having the best solution.

From: Special Ed

If you got banned for using SRL for less than a half an hour then you've got some serious issues. If you're using a good quality script and meeting all specifications and guidelines there is a very, very minuscule chance that you will be banned.

I agree. There's luck and then there's skill. If you have a flawed scripts, then you're going to need luck to keep from getting banned. Some will have good luck and others won't. The better your script is, the less you need to rely on luck. If it's truly exceptional, then luck will be nearly irrelevant. The user that Special Ed was responding to obviously used a script that was easily detectable. The fact that someone else used the same script for 100 hours without getting caught does show that luck is a factor, but it doesn't show how much of a factor and my theory is that it is big factor for bad scripts and a small factor for good scripts. Any tool using the same method that SCAR does can theoretically be written well enough that it is totally undetectable with enough programming and processing power/speed because it's performing the same functions that a human does.

From: Special Ed

I'm not saying that suggesting ideas is bad, but why fix something that isn't broken? (unless you're blizzard, then fix it until it is broken).

Not sure whose idea you're referring to here, but my original idea was based on the fact that we're giving people an incentive (potential Jr Member status) to make posts and that is causing us to see more spam in the forums than we would get without that rule. I don't think anyone disagrees with my assertion that there are a lot of users out there making useless posts simply because we have this rule and that, if we take away that rule, we'll have fewer posts like that.

My opinion is that, because we have a rule in place that essentially creates spam, the process is not ideal (call it broken or whatever). That doesn't necessarily mean that it needs to change. If all of the suggested cures are worse than the disease, then it's obviously best to simply leave it as it is until we figure out a cure that works.

The whole point of my post was just to point out that one of our rules is causing unnecessary spam and to do a little brainstorming for ideas on what we could do to fix that problem. I also offered an idea to get the brainstorming process started. It has the benefit of reducing spam, but if the approval process is completely manual, then the time moderators save from having too police spam may be outweighed by the additional time required to approve users for Jr Member status. If that approval process could be more automated (I made some suggestions along those lines as well, but I don't know what all the out-of-box capabilities of this forum software are), then it may turn out to be a good way to reduce the amount of spam in these forums. Maybe there's functionality in this forum software that allows people to bump up the reputations of other users and we can just use that as a basis for Jr Member status instead. If that kind of feature is available, then it might even reduce the workload on moderators and users won't bother posting spam because they know that no one is going to bump their reps for posting garbage and will give a strong incentive for them to post messages that are as informative, helpful, and useful as possible. To me, that sounds like the ideal state we should strive to achieve.

I was referring to both your idea and splbooths. The problem with using reputation to determine JMembers is the fact that people will start doing the "You rep me I rep you" thing and then they don't even have to make 10 constructive posts. I think what may work though, is if 5 SRL Members rep a Free Member then that free member will be granted JMembers. I think that if that was in addition to the 1 week wait I think it would solve a lot of problems. That would get people to try to get noticed and it would keep people from doing the whole "You rep me I rep you" because SRL members (should) be mature enough to only rep those that deserve it.

From: Special Ed
I was referring to both your idea and splbooths. The problem with using reputation to determine JMembers is the fact that people will start doing the "You rep me I rep you" thing and then they don't even have to make 10 constructive posts. I think what may work though, is if 5 SRL Members rep a Free Member then that free member will be granted JMembers. I think that if that was in addition to the 1 week wait I think it would solve a lot of problems. That would get people to try to get noticed and it would keep people from doing the whole "You rep me I rep you" because SRL members (should) be mature enough to only rep those that deserve it.

I think you and I are in agreement here. This is essentially what I suggested near the end of my original post (having upper level members do the rep, not free members). If we happen to find a member endorsing a bunch of losers to Jr Mem status, you can deal with that member (temp/perm demote, warning, or whatever)…that's something else I alluded to at the end of my original post. If you ever wanted to have more control over the quality of new Jr Mems, this could easily be done by limiting the number of reps a member could give out per month/week/etc.

Woo, I actually prefer your idea now =P

If you ever wanted to have more control over the quality of new Jr Mems, this could easily be done by limiting the number of reps a member could give out per month/week/etc.

The amount of rep a person needs to get could also be changed as well, although that could spark some comments…

"HOW MUCH REP DO I NEED NOW!" - That kinda thing…

It doesn't actually take that much time to moderate spam posts as long as people report them. What then happens is that in the mod cp, they get a little a flag thing on the post with why people say it needs deleting, then they go check and delete it. This in all can take between 5~15 seconds depending on the length of the post etc. so with a small group of around 5 mods/admins who, between them, are pretty much on the whole day, it doesn't add up to a lot of work. The problem of then relying on rep is that they don't have a clear, visual way of judging whether or not rep is deserved or if a member is just "boosting" up people to Jr as the only way to find out would be to go to the member, find all his rep's to non-Jr's then check the posts that he rep'd (which could be a lot of he is an active member) and then remove the rep from the users they think were unfairly given and send the member a warning (I just used he in the example referring to the member because it's easier:)) which could range between a minute and 5. Also, Fawaki "disabled the rep" a long time ago because people were "abusing" it, where some people just didn't like some people and -rep'd any post where they did anything wrong, and other users liked each other and +rep'd any above normal post to try and stop/boost them to members (used to be 30 rep = members). Creating a similar system would be less abused like that was, as it is members who are trustworthy (on whole), but friends of their's that join etc. will get the same sort of boosting that happened before and members would still -rep people that they didn't like, because they are all human (except R0b0t1).

I think the ideal way to filter out the spammers/leechers from the good users, would simply to have an IQ Test to register and they have to get a certain amount to pass or close registration and make it invite only from Community members and SRL Members upwards.

I think the ideal way to filter out the spammers/leechers from the good users, would simply to have an IQ Test to register and they have to get a certain amount to pass or close registration and make it invite only from Community members and SRL Members upwards.

I know lots of spamming idiots with high IQ's… doesnt make sense really, but yeah.

From: splbooth
I know lots of spamming idiots with high IQ's… doesnt make sense really, but yeah.

…and I'm sure people trying to gain access to a site about cheating wouldn't DREAM of cheating on that IQ test, right? LOL Anyway, it doesn't really matter, because that suggestion was obviously just a joke.

You people don't read The Book enough -

We merely play "against the rules".

This site isn't a cheating site, we don't concentrate on being a failure and cheating some real life exam or anything related, we are a RuneScape macroing community, and we trick the system, not ourselves, - that, is what for example cheating in a real life is.

I understand that an idea sounds good when you first think of it, but think again, and it doesn't sound nearly as good as it did.

I think the ideal way to filter out the spammers/leechers from the good users, would simply to have an IQ Test to register and they have to get a certain amount to pass or close registration and make it invite only from Community members and SRL Members upwards.

Think number one would be - "Hey, let's make an IQ filter! That way we'll get only people here who got through the IQ test!"

Think number two - "Then again, there is other kinds of intelligency than just selecting the right one of a, b, and c."


Also, in my opinion, building something based on rep is as good idea as building a dozen skyscrapers in an earthquake zone. You cannot force people to give reputation, you cannot prevent them giving bad or plain useless reputation, unless the system was supervised which would be just waste of moderation resources.

Quote:
We merely play "against the rules".

This site isn't a cheating site, we don't concentrate on being a failure and cheating some real life exam or anything related, we are a RuneScape macroing community, and we trick the system, not ourselves, - that, is what for example cheating in a real life is.

So uh, If i were to go out with 4 other women whilst already out with someone… would that be cheating, or merely "going against the rules"? :D

Also, in my opinion, building something based on rep is as good idea as building a dozen skyscrapers in an earthquake zone. You cannot force people to give reputation, you cannot prevent them giving bad or plain useless reputation, unless the system was supervised which would be just waste of moderation resources.

Just like you cant force people to make useful posts… unless the system was supervised, which like you said, would be too much hassle. TBH, I think you can only settle for a system that doesnt always work :(