Talk:Ragnarock/@comment-173.65.114.44-20131229092812/@comment-172.13.246.4-20140102005724

Wow. Misdirection on your part. Charles proxy, of course, was not created by a PB member. The coding, which enhances rescue, was created by a PB member. I have no idea how you gathered that I claimed a PB member created the 3rd party program itself.

He created the coding to modify the game. He used a 3rd party program. Both of these actions breach the Terms of Service in an unprecedented way. Others may have done so, but they hid it. So, yeah, it's unprecedented. Of course others break the ToS, by selling cards. That now has a one year precedent of acceptance by the player community. Also, it created an unfair advantage for PB against any guild that didn't have it. Here's the Terms of Use: Attempt to gain for yourself or any other person any unfair advantage with respect to the use of the Services, including by using cheats, exploits, automation software, bots, hacks, mods, or any unauthorized third-party software, or by exploiting any bugs or errors in the Services. You also agree not to inform any person (other than Company) of such bugs or errors.

PBs action breaks the Terms of Use here in 3 ways. First, it's a modification or hack. 2. It uses a 3rd party program. 3. It gives PB an unfair advantage over every guild that doesn't want/care to use Charles Proxy. 4. PB basically told everyone else (AFTER the first GGvG) to use, thus informing other person.

Again, PB changed the coding of the game to give themselves alone an unfair advantage. It goes against the Terms of Use and the very most basic ideas of fair sportsmanship. If this isn't cheating, then nothing is. I ask you, give me an example of cheating? I would be hard pressed to think of what could constitute cheating if the doesn't.

The only thing left I'd to see whether Drecom/Gree acts on its Terms of Use. I don't need your agreement for anything. You've been reported to the developer. You certainly didn't ask for my agreement before you used the revive hack.