Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
It's funny.  Laugh. PC Games (Games) Entertainment Games

Researcher Trolls MMO, Surprised When Players Hate Him 895

D1gital_Prob3 writes with this excerpt from a story about David Myers, a Loyola professor who spent some time studying superhero MMO City of Heroes/Villains: "... he aimed the pointer at his opponent, the virtual comic book villain 'Syphris.' Myers, 55, flicked the buttons on his mouse and magically transported his opponent to the front of a cartoon robot execution squad. In an instant, the squad pulverized the player. Syphris fired an instant message at Myers moments later. 'If you kill me one more time I will come and kill you for real and I am not kidding.' ... As part of his experiment, Myers decided to play the game by the designers' rules — disregarding any customs set by the players. His character soon became very unpopular. At first, players tried to beat him in the game to make him quit. Myers was too skilled to be run off, however. They then made him an outcast, a World Wide Web pariah that the creator of Syphris — along with hundreds of other faceless gamers — detested."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Researcher Trolls MMO, Surprised When Players Hate Him

Comments Filter:
  • by mail2345 ( 1201389 ) on Monday July 06, 2009 @06:20PM (#28600607)
    If you read the article, it mentioned that he just took a different stlye of battle, instead of the socially accepted standard of sending robots at their robots, he just killed them directly. He did not insult them, just took action different from the normal battle.
  • Full Court Press (Score:5, Interesting)

    by nausea_malvarma ( 1544887 ) on Monday July 06, 2009 @06:21PM (#28600619)

    Some of the tactics used by this researcher remind me of the full court press in basketball. The rules of basketball allow a full court press, yet to do so never crosses the mind of most players. Playing one side of the court at a time is convention. The full court press is extremely effective, yet if you use it, the other team will no doubt call your win "cheap".

    Still, when you are the underdog, and must win at all costs, the press is your only option. I sympathize with those who use it (and recognize that it isn't easy to pull off either).

    If people complain that a tactic is cheap, it's really not the fault of the player, but the fault of the game. Past slashdot postings are full of examples where players exploited loopholes in city of heroes (remember the article about player-created missions?). With this in mind, I think it's obvious that City of Heroes was poorly designed to begin with. Game designers should never assume players will be on their best behavior.

  • by unity100 ( 970058 ) on Monday July 06, 2009 @06:24PM (#28600645) Homepage Journal

    just because a game developer didnt prevent something doesnt mean that its within the rules. the game developer doesnt play that game. even if s/he/they do, they constitute a near zero percentage of the game's players.

    any mmo you play are played by thousands of people. thousands of people create its environment, make it run, keep the machine running (raiding, pvp, crafting, trade, events, everything). they are the world there, and they set the social climate. noone, including the developers, can do shit about this. if developers force any player base into something they do not like, they QUIT. and go to another game. it happened many times, for many games, including some top, up-and-coming, much hyped titles.

    therefore, for all those badass/darth maul wannabee morons out there - you wont be able to freely be a badass asshole even in a mmo game - regardless how hard you argue that 'its within the rules', any assholery you commit is going to get added to your reputation, and eventually you'll find yourself changing your realm AND your character's nickname. people doesnt give a shit about what's within the hard rules of the game or not - they have their own opinions and judgments - noone can change that, neither a badass wannabee asshole, or self-righteous developer.

    so cut the bullshit about 'its within the rules', and get used to living in a society.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 06, 2009 @06:25PM (#28600655)

    What seems weird is that he was upset that people were punishing behavior "out of the norm" on one hand, and on the other hand was touting that he was merely following the rules. Huh?

    The folks in the game creatively and organically decided to set up their own customs opposed to the rules - Twixt seems more like a street preacher who hates everyone because they don't follow the rules like he does.

    Is he a cultural anthropologist (probably not, given that anthropologists are trained to work within the social framework of existing cultures as much as possible)? If not, I'd LOVE to see a cultural anthropologist do a write up on what happened here.

  • by Akoman ( 559057 ) <medwards@walledcity.ca> on Monday July 06, 2009 @06:27PM (#28600681) Homepage
    The professor seems surprisingly disappointed by the scorn heaped on his not-mainstream behaviour. He tries to liken it to cliques in high school, but the reality is he didn't just not follow rules, but he actively tried to destroy an existing social fabric and actively molested participants. He tries to paint his behaviour as 'following the rules, but independent' without the most important piece of information 'also, I actively antagonised people.' This is akin to painting himself a geek when really he's a bully (to follow on his high school example)
  • But who joins City of Heroes to "live in a society"? I've never played, but I thought about it. It wasn't so I could live in a society, but so I could have super powers, choose a side, and then run around kicking the asses of people on the opposing side with said super powers.

    When I was a kid, I didn't play Doom so I could learn about demon culture. If I want to live in a society, video games are not the appropriate place for that.

  • by judolphin ( 1158895 ) on Monday July 06, 2009 @06:39PM (#28600851)
    In the sports world, there are many instances of coaches and players using strategies that, although effective, are bad for the game for one reason or another. Sports leagues that deal with this effectively, like the NBA, are doing OK. Leagues that do not, such as the NHL (sorry Canada), are circling the drain. Once upon a time in basketball, teams started holding the ball for minutes at a time as soon as they got a lead. So, the NBA instituted a shot clock forcing the team to shoot the ball within 24 seconds. As players got taller, coaches started camping 7-footers under the basket. So, a 3-second lane was added to forbid any player from standing under the basket for more than 3 seconds at a time. Years later, the 3-point line was introduced to increase the value of long-range shooting and encourage players not to all crowd around the basket. The NHL started going down the tubes when teams like the New Jersey Devils used the horrendously boring "neutral zone trap" and "clutch-and-grab" defense to win Stanley Cups over more skilled and exciting teams. The NHL waited too long to do something about it, and as a result the Stanley Cup finals are now shown on a basic cable bicycle racing channel. If legal play can ruin the game, the rules need to be changed. Pure and simple. You can't trust the players to "be nice."
  • by Kelbear ( 870538 ) on Monday July 06, 2009 @06:42PM (#28600875)

    It sounds like this "professor" really never learned the details about what he's playing.

    In this particular game, player vs. player combat is for the most part consensual. The speed of travel in the game is so fast that the only way to kill someone is for them to be willing to slow down and have a fight to the death. The developers go to greath lengths to minimize the ways in which one player can interfere with other players.

    Being killed by a player has no penalty in a PvP zone, you're just sent back to the entrance of the zone. However, the computer controlled "cartoon" enemies in the zone will inflict an experience loss(known as "debt") on the players that die by their hand, and this loss takes a considerable amount of time to mitigate. There are players in this zone who are there to defeat the enemies because they give increased experience, they aren't there to fight or interact with enemy players in any way and are left alone instead.

    There's no benefit to winning by dropping the enemy into the computer controlled enemies, since the computer takes the credit for killing him. So essentially, he is disrupting the gameplay of the other players, inflicting a loss of time, and for no personal gain aside from schadenfreude. A classic troll.

    He's not bucking social norms, he's being a sociopath as far the game world allows. The results are not suprising, interesting, or even insightful. If he wanted to buck social norms, he should play a healer character who focuses only on his weak offensive abilities. That's the game-equivalent of being a social outcast. He's going for the game-equivalent of Charles Manson.

  • Re:Not trolling (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Xaoswolf ( 524554 ) <Xaoswolf&gmail,com> on Monday July 06, 2009 @07:01PM (#28601101) Homepage Journal
    There are many places that are instant kill for games where players level to gain power. If I'm playing WOW, and I find myself in an area that I shouldn't be in for 20 more levels, I will die when attacked. It's not the games fault, it's my fault for going where I shouldn't have gone. Likewise, if a much higher level player of the opposite faction, they may be able to kill my lower level character with one hit. Now, there are areas that they cannot attack me unless I attack first, but in others, I'm open game. Generally, hanging out to kill the character again and again is a dick move. The quote 'If you kill me one more time I will come and kill you for real and I am not kidding." makes it sound like he was doing something along those lines.

    Otherwise, fighting and killing aren't bad, unless the game is retarded, which is how the other comments make COH sound...

  • by greatica ( 1586137 ) on Monday July 06, 2009 @07:02PM (#28601123)

    So we hate the guy for following the rules online and writing a research paper about it, right?

    And we also hate those guys who did the speed limit and posted a video about it a couple of weeks ago, right?

    It may be considered trolling, but there is honest to goodness research in this realm inside and outside gaming. Questions need to be answered concerning basic intelligence (Did we forget the rules/laws?), ethics (Why are we punishing people that choose to follow them?), and self reflection (Are your extreme actions validated by abusing accused "trolls" who did significantly less damage than yourself?)

    I'd say the professor should read the comments on Slashdot and take them into consideration in his next research paper.

  • by Endo13 ( 1000782 ) on Monday July 06, 2009 @07:14PM (#28601231)

    It's not that your analogy was too complex... it's that it was just flat wrong. Nowhere does it say he was "insulting" anyone. It's like instead of playing basketball, both teams were just standing there chatting about nothing in particular and hogging the public court. He decided to start shooting some hoops, and some moron got hit on the head by the ball because he didn't move. Or perhaps the moron was standing there holding a public basketball that belongs with the court, and he decided to 'steal' the ball and start actually playing. There's plenty of analogies that would fit. Yours was not one.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 06, 2009 @07:27PM (#28601377)

    Speaking of rule changes, I think college and NBA basketball both really needs to do something about the "last minute fouling" problem where both teams constantly foul each other in the last few minutes of play. It is the epitome of poor sportsmanship, but every team does it because it's advantageous. Proposed simple solution: any foul in the last 5 minutes of the game results in an automatic ejection; second offense in a season = sit the next game out; third offense = sit the next two games out; etc.

  • by amicusNYCL ( 1538833 ) on Monday July 06, 2009 @07:29PM (#28601403)

    There is no law against me walking up to your mother and calling her a cunt

    That's what "Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress" is for.

  • by Maxo-Texas ( 864189 ) on Monday July 06, 2009 @07:31PM (#28601425)

    He played the game as designed. He was a hero who defeated villains in a PvP server. He played the game correctly, while everyone else wasn't.

    This is the thing with MMOs and really modern gamers. People lament that you can't actually role play in a computer RPG, but here's a guy doing that, and he's an outcast. Heros don't hang out and chat with villains. They fight.

    In my experience...
    First, I'm really shocked he wasn't hounded by PVP types from the second the logged on repeatedly killing him.

    Second, of course heroes and villians talk- they spend entire comic books fighting AND talking. And a lot of time, they spend a good third of the comic book talking before they fight and a couple pages talking after they fight. The fight is the sideline- the underlying philosophical point is the important thing (recall the recent joker/batman movie-- is society good / bad? was more important than killing or beating batman in a fist fight).

    Thirdly, if I"m running a business and one or two customers are causing a lot of complaints and costing me business- they would be suspended or transferred, and then banned unless after review, it looked like the complaining people were harassing them.

    on the other hand...

    Fourthly, if you play on a PVP server, what do you expect?

    And finally, it seems kind of foolish to give the guys name/location when people have already made death threats against him. What if the professor is beaten or killed now?

  • See, that's why I love Eve Online. We (an alliance of over 1000 players on a server with hundreds of thousands) *make* the rules, at least in our own section of space. Jumping a transport through our space as a neutral pilot (we don't know you and have no standings set) will get you killed where we hang out. Want your loot back? Sure, we'll offer it - but we'll put a steep markup on it compared to what we'd ask from the alliance. If you don't like it, stick to NRDS (Not Red, Don't Shoot, i.e. only kill hostile ships) space. On the other hand, if you want to join us, go ahead and ask - we're usually recriuting to some extent or another. We'll even take in new players and help them bet set up, which a lot of alliances have no interest in doing. Why operate this way? It's how we like to play. Don't like it? Stay out of our way (we occupy about a dozen systems, with presence in perhaps a dozen more, out of many hundreds) or get your own alliance together (or join one) and fight us. Seriosuly, bring it - the game is no fun when you have to fly 40 systems away to get an PvP.

    I can totally sympathise with this guy. He was just in the wrong game - apparently City of Heroes/Villians is simply overrun with carebears.

  • by Saxerman ( 253676 ) * on Monday July 06, 2009 @08:00PM (#28601751) Homepage

    I find it interesting you say that he 'played the game correctly' since that was the core part of the argument that I thought the professor completely missed in his paper.

    Who gets to define the 'correct' way to play? And if we look at the social dynamic of the game world as being larger than merely a 'game', who gets to define the correct way to live life? Can you really do it wrong? Is there anything interesting about that fact that players were put in an environment were they were suppose to compete against one another, and yet collectively choose to cooperate instead?

    Certainly, we could make a compelling argument that the game designers and developers are the ones who get to define the 'correct' way to play the game. But I should think an equally compelling argument could also be made that the players also get to make that decision. Or, even, that it is an entirely subjective and personal choice, and not subject to the tyranny of any majority.

  • by Digi-John ( 692918 ) on Monday July 06, 2009 @08:04PM (#28601809) Journal
    Of interest in the "players set the rules" topic is LambdaMOO, where players actually sent in petitions which became ballots which were voted on and implemented. Frequently, a ballot to permanently shut down the game was submitted; luckily, they never passed. Other ballots would include changes in quota policy, new user policy, etc.
  • by amicusNYCL ( 1538833 ) on Monday July 06, 2009 @08:40PM (#28602177)

    Actually, it is. People play MMOs for the social interaction.

    If you just want to kill stuff there's plenty single player games for that

    Cmon now, look at how every single MMO is marketed.

    WoW:

    World of Warcraft is a living, breathing online adventure world with over 10 million players. Log into the World of Warcraft and join thousands of mighty heroes in an online world of myth, magic, and limitless adventure.

    Eve Online:

    No classes, no restrictions - players are not locked into a single path. Changing your career is as simple as learning new skills. All previously learned skills and abilities are still available to you.

    Limitless opportunities to excel - player corporations are always looking for another market mogul, savvy diplomat, skilled fighter, or ambitious miner. Advancement among your peers is limitless.

    Impact the Game World - Decisions you make have a rippling effect. Market prices, region control, and availability of resources all fluctuate and change based on player choices and behavior.

    CoH:

    City of Heroes brings the world of comic books alive in this massively multiplayer 3D online universe.

    Craft your hero's identity and join millions of Hero characters in a constantly expanding universe, explore the sprawling online metropolis of Paragon City, and battle a host of foes including criminals, villains, and monsters.

    In any of those examples, does it talk about standing around and chatting with people? These are marketed as playable games - games in which you join and interact with other characters in the game world to accomplish the tasks of the game, not to chat. When someone buys one of these games, they are buying the game with the expectation that they will be playing it, not chatting. I mean, is that what you really think MMOs have come to?

    If you want to play a game, that's why we have single-player, if you want to chat, that's what multi-player is for. Don't mix them.

    Let me clue you in on something that you're obviously not aware of: when a lot of people, including myself, play a game such as Counter Strike or Team Fortress, the main reason they play is for the team gameplay. I can play TF2 for several hours and never say anything to anyone (other than possibly trying to get people to do their job). The specific reason I play is for the team interaction. If I wasn't interested in that, I would play an offline game. The reason I prefer online games is so that I can play with intelligent people on my team supporting me or using my support. Not to stand around and chat with everyone. That's just stupid.

    I would bet your claim of a win wouldn't be accepted in such a case.

    Big deal. Obviously the other people there don't care about the game anyway. But they shouldn't stand in the way of people who do. In other words, if you don't want to play the game, get the hell off the court.

    If however it's an informal gathering, and the two teams decided to have an impromptu break and chat with each other

    Again, that's not a good analogy. In this case, the only thing the other people were doing was chatting. It wasn't an "impromptu break", it was the norm. It sounds more like a chat client where people might occasionally take an impromptu break to play a game. Which, again, is not what NCSoft is marketing as "City Of Heroes".

  • Comment removed (Score:2, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Monday July 06, 2009 @08:49PM (#28602291)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by Dexx ( 34621 ) on Monday July 06, 2009 @09:10PM (#28602467) Homepage

    What I find interesting about all of this is that City of * had social areas where villains and heroes could socialize without combat, at least while I was last playing about a year ago.

  • by tirefire ( 724526 ) on Monday July 06, 2009 @09:11PM (#28602483)

    Actually, the driver's handbook my state publishes specifically says you should only use the left lane to pass. So when some asshole in a Winnebago camps the passing lane at (speed limit minus 10), he really is breaking the law, or at least driving improperly. Like jaywalking and littering, it's something cops don't really care about, so everyone does it, and most people don't even know it's wrong. And then everyone's surprised when they hear the Germans actually enforce rules like that. Sigh...

  • by zarzu ( 1581721 ) on Monday July 06, 2009 @09:31PM (#28602603)

    wait, what? in a prisoner's dilemma mutual cooperation wins every time? what?

    i have not ever seen a majority of people choose the communication channel to actually get a reduced sentence for both parties, the usual behavior of a one-run prisoner's dilemma is that nearly everyone chooses egoistically, this mostly even persists over multiple runs in my experience. the only real reason to actually go for a mutual cooperation is if you know that the game will continue for many rounds, else your best chances are to be egoistic and lie to your opponents about your choice (if you have communication, if you don't, then the egoistic route is always the way to go).

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 06, 2009 @10:16PM (#28602917)
    Wrong. He went to the arena (specifically for fighting), and fought. Anyone who didn't want to fight him could simply not have gone to the arena, an area specifically designated as for PvP fights.
  • by bigbigbison ( 104532 ) on Monday July 06, 2009 @10:20PM (#28602947) Homepage
    From reading his blog post on the matter http://dmyersloyola.wordpress.com/2008/11/21/im-finishing-up-city-of-heroes-today/ [wordpress.com] he didn't get irb approval. His dismissal of the need for it in the comments makes it seem like he doesn't know much about the ethics of ethnographic research.

    I'm also less than impressed with his responses. It doesn't come off as very professional.
  • by Arker ( 91948 ) on Monday July 06, 2009 @10:54PM (#28603263) Homepage

    yes he used abilities to damage his enemies in the most devastating manner, but he did so with no reason, he did not get any points for it, as he did not actually kill them (the npcs did)

    Huh? Because the game mechanics didnt give him XP that delegitimises his acts? Hardly. He played a hero, removing villains was his goal, not racking up points in a database somewhere!

    chatting is not ruining cox pvp since there are fights all the time

    According to TFA, there are arenas for duels, and a full pvp area as well. Despite this, the custom has evolved that both sides use the full PVP area for farming and duelling, and no true pvp takes place (set duels are not the same thing.) No? Because if that's not accurate then one must wonder why Twixt became so hated, if everyone else was doing the same thing he was...

  • Shaka Zulu (Score:3, Interesting)

    by whitefox ( 16740 ) on Monday July 06, 2009 @11:38PM (#28603625)

    Heros don't hang out and chat with villains. They fight. What we have here was people that didn't actually want to play the game. They just wanted to rack up (dubious) "achievements".

    Reminds me of a scene from the television series "Shaka Zulu [imdb.com]" where a young Shaka eagerly looks forward to proving himself in battle but instead observes a "battle" where the opponents simply dress up, dance, and hurl insults at each other to determine the winner. This method of warfare and Shaka's subsequent shakeup seems to be backed up by WikiPedia [wikipedia.org]:

    A number of historians argue that Shaka 'changed the nature of warfare in Southern Africa from 'a ritualised exchange of taunts with minimal loss of life into a true method of subjugation by wholesale slaughter'.

    Not that this has any bearing on the subject at hand but interesting none the less. Or does it?

  • Re:Correctly? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by coaxial ( 28297 ) on Monday July 06, 2009 @11:41PM (#28603661) Homepage

    How is teleporting people in front of NPC bots designed to enforce a safe zone instead of beating someone up yourself "playing correctly?" Especially when he was attacking people who didn't want to PVP by abusing a mechanism intended to protect people who didn't want to PVP?

    "Designed to enforce a safe zone?" Where are you getting that? The robots kill people. If they were to create a safe zone, you wouldn't have the robots, you'd have a shield that prevented anyone from entering or leaving. But that's not what they do. They kill people. They kill whoever gets in front of them. You're supposed to kill people. He killed people in the most efficient way possible. This wasn't exploiting some bug. This wasn't using some cheat. This is just using an established tool in a novel way to achieve the stated objective.

    Especially when he was attacking people who didn't want to PVP by abusing a mechanism intended to protect people who didn't want to PVP?

    If you don't want to PvP don't join the PvP server! It's just that simple. You decide to go somewhere where the stated objective of going there is to kill or be killed, and then you whine when you're killed? Grow up.

  • Re:Full Court Press (Score:2, Interesting)

    by mshieh ( 222547 ) on Monday July 06, 2009 @11:50PM (#28603729)

    Some of the tactics used by this researcher remind me of the full court press in basketball. The rules of basketball allow a full court press, yet to do so never crosses the mind of most players. Playing one side of the court at a time is convention. The full court press is extremely effective, yet if you use it, the other team will no doubt call your win "cheap".

    Still, when you are the underdog, and must win at all costs, the press is your only option. I sympathize with those who use it (and recognize that it isn't easy to pull off either).

    Full court presses are not considered "cheap". They just aren't used all the time because they are only effective under rare circumstances -- either when the offensive team is under a time crunch to move the ball across half court or score, or when weak ball handlers can be trapped and forced into a low-percentage pass.

    Otherwise, trying to guard the entire court is not as effective as concentrating your defense in the half where the other team can score points. A full court press is hard because it is basically a man-to-man defence over the entire court, giving the offense plenty of room to maneuver and making it that much harder to double team or switch defensive assignments.

    I think the full court press reference is "how david beat goliath". Basically, some guy who had never seen basketball had to coach for a league of 12 year old girls. The full tactic wasn't just full court press, it was 4 full quarters of full court press, at a level of play where no other team had the endurance necessary to sustain it. "How david beat goliath" is actually a pretty good analogy, as it came from a coach who was unfamiliar with social norms, felt that his job was to win at all costs, and received a lot of negative feedback for making the game not fun for other teams.

    http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/05/11/090511fa_fact_gladwell [newyorker.com]

  • by Locke2005 ( 849178 ) on Tuesday July 07, 2009 @01:51AM (#28604351)
    Sounds like the game mechanics are seriously broken. Exploiting a bug in the game implementation is cheating, but it sounds like this guy was exploiting a bad design. If you leave loopholes in the game mechanics big enough to drive a truck through, you shouldn't be surprised when somebody with no social conscience takes advantage. Bitch at the implementers to fix the game, not at the asshole who is demonstrating that the game is broken.

    I've always thought MMOs should have a karma system where you can grant others positive karma for helping you out or negative karma for pissing you off. The accumulated karma would then bias your "dice rolls" so that if you pissed too many people off, you would never be able to win a battle. Unfortunately, most games instead reward amoral behavior.
  • by elrous0 ( 869638 ) * on Tuesday July 07, 2009 @09:56AM (#28607353)
    I actually saw a real-world analogy to that when I lived in Hawaii. On the North Shore, the surfers had gotten together and formed a gang of sorts that basically "controlled" all the good waves. If a newbie came in and tried to surf one of the big waves, they would swoop in and knock him off his board or fuck with him in some way. Basically took the fun out of it for everyone but their select group.
  • by cmdr_klarg ( 629569 ) on Tuesday July 07, 2009 @11:25AM (#28608771)

    It's a power popular with PVPers called 'Teleport Foe'. There are very few defenses against it. If he was repeatedly using TP Foe to drop villains in front of the police bots guarding the hero base then he was guilty of being a griefer and an asshole. The police bots are there to keep the villains out of the hero base, not as a firing squad. I agree that the design is stupid, as anyone knows that if there is some way to turn a design feature into a way to 'cheat' then they invariably will.

    I am guessing that an earlier poster was correct in it being on the Virtue server, as you would likely find people on there doing RP, it being one of the few areas you can have both hero and villains together (most areas are faction-only) at that time. I'm guessing that he was doing his asshattery before the introduction of the Rikti War Zone co-op zone and the PVP retooling.

    Nowhere in the article did I see that he was so 1337 that groups of other PVPers couldn't defeat him, especially a group of them. If they did defeat him, he didn't lose anything and could go right back out and keep doing it.

    It's morons like him that keep me in the PVE zones. I'm know that I can be killed by another player in a PVP zone, its no big deal, its part of the game. But PVP makes it too easy for some asshole to screw with you with no repercussions on their part, and that's what this guy was doing.

  • Re:Not Research (Score:3, Interesting)

    by pugugly ( 152978 ) on Wednesday July 08, 2009 @07:56PM (#28630193)

    I find it odd that the definition of 'Troll' is 'used a PvP play area in the way it was explicitly designed to be used'

    Slandering the man in outside forums the OP is perfectly okay with.

    Which used to be a symptom of being a Troll.

    Interesting.

    Pug

Arithmetic is being able to count up to twenty without taking off your shoes. -- Mickey Mouse

Working...