Agnarr's Irrational Hatred of Boxers

You aren't very imaginative then. A small number pad, set up right next to the main keyboard and properly set up hotkeys on an easy to box character. A little practice and it is easy to box a toon better than many people play one. My cleric can heal my mage, the pet or herself with a single button press each. Buffs are set up on another hotkey, a follow hotkey, a sit hotkey, a DA hotkey. One button cancels spell casting. I don't group with her often while boxing but I have room on my setup to make a hotkey for each group member. Once you have memorized the layout it become second nature. It takes less than a second of movement for me to do something on the cleric. It feels more like playing a mage with a heal button than it does like playing two characters.

I do the same thing on my Beastlord/Druid combo on Phinny.

KVM software

Here is my setup, don't need something quite as complicated as the picture from the Truebox guidelines thing or whatever. And when I'm not boxing or playing EQ I can easily fold up and move the laptops out of the way and rehook up my third monitor to main pc.

I mostly get called scum just from running across a zone.

Or, I purposely put myself at the worst spot for a camp as to not get in other groups way and then still get called names and get told I'm stealing a camp lol. This happened on the goblin island in oot. 2 groups on the outter edge, i move to the center which has very few mobs and I'm getting hate tells... I mean did you prefer I stood on your group and killed your mobs...? There were plenty of mobs up. They just wanted to complain irrationally.

I was running through commons and got called a boxing scum. I reminded this person of who the toxic person is here. Me, minding my own business, or some guy who goes out of his way to mistreat someone who is doing nothing wrong except running across a zone.

NERD! <3

This post made me laugh. Just 3 good misuses of popular phrases in the same post. I though it was great.

It really is a doggy dog world. To all intensive purposes we should all have an escape goat ready for a quick getaway.

Looks like you miscounted, there are six, heh. Doggy dog (sic), take it for granite (sic), for all intensive (sic) purposes, escape goat (sic), pre-Madonna (sic) and blessing in the skies (sic).

Well those are certainly troubling accounts, I assume most to be acurate as they are fairly consistent and seen some of it myself even in the chat channels.

Not being exactly inclined to box and one of those that think a No-Boxing Server idea has come of age this is just wicked. Never seen things go this far before.

We all know what is the new element in large numbers as regards player populations.
Not being one to collectivize people yet it does not bode well for the general character of many of those that came over from P99, the new element.

IIRC these are all actionable even under the loose remains of the PNP. Take your screen shots and send em in even if you don't box, this has to be curtailed or this will become too toxic to bother playing on the server.

Yes I assumed people would read the quote and take my minor addition in context to that. I still assert this is not an unreasonable assumption. Additionally you had time to try and hammer me but not read my follow up post. Your priorities in your assumptions and your effort spent reveal your character.

I didn't make false statements lol, I literally quoted the FAQ and referred to a type of cheating boxing referred to in what i just had quoted. If someone assumes I am not referring to the thing I quoted (which is far longer than my own comment) that doesn't change what I said and quoted. Yes I could've been more clear, hence why I mad an entire post detailed everything that seemed implicit in what I said, but again it's not unreasonable to expect people to assume my comment is made in context to what I had just quoted.

Yes and you assumed I meant something I didn't mean, so it goes both way friend

I've clearly outlined my assumptions, I've also clearly referred to the rules and a specific group of people. Further to have an opinion on whether a boxer (OP or not) isn't following the true box rules is an assumptions either way... unless you're looking through their window or something lol. A lot of things can't be talked about with making some assumptions, again the difference for me is I clearly outline such assumptions, others instead assumed my statement didn't stand in context to my quote and childishly insulted me lol.

"read more and speak less" is perfectly valid when referring to an entire post you didn't read of mine and assumed my comment wasn't made in context to the quoted content that I posted with it. Now read some of those comments at me lol, a whole different level.

That's fine, I do not have thin skin but I call it like it is. I actually had assumed the EQ community might be a bit more mature (or at least not have quite this many voices of vocal immaturity, not fair to generalize the whole community due to a couple people who couldn't help but make ridiculous insults), I was pointing that out. I have no issue clarifying myself (again as I had posted shortly after my original post) and standing up to ridiculous statements made to me.

I also never said you attacked me, please don't put words in my mouth... what I said was

Your assumptions about what I mean were simply wrong, you read my first post and a final post and didn't read a post of clarification in between. Additionally you assumed my statement about boxing being cheating was not applied to the rules context I had just quoted before my statement.

You did not attack me you simply hammered a point on a fault assumption, one I assert is unreasonable. If you can't handle me pointing this out then I might suggest you are the one with thin skin.

How is this grasping at straws? I don't think this idiom applies. He never said he was true boxing in his OP he simply described how easy it would be and would only cost about $1000. This is a fact, if not then please quote the OP and correct me.

As such I don't see a reason to assume he is true boxing so I'll assume he isn't. You are welcome to assume otherwise.

He seems to feel he need to prove something or he wouldn't be posting here. I simply responded based on what he said and what the rules say. If he didn't want responses then he shouldn't have posted on the forum lol. I'm not sure what you are accusing me of, how dare I have an opinion and reference the rules expressing that opinion? You can disagree with me, that's fine. People can peacefully disagree.

Also that is not the only assumption one can make, there are many other assumptions that can be made, here are two:

1) They couldn't prove he wasn't true boxing (either do to his own setup or do the limitation of information on their side)
2) They simply don't care, they send out a warning and it's not worth their time (this is a common game support strategy, often it's not worth the cost to do more than this)

No, I'm not lol. I like how you come to this conclusion that I took his words for being true, where he doesn't say he was true boxing (just describing how easy it is) and my vehement supporting of the rules. I'm not sure which offends you and why.

I'm not those people... I'm not sure what we're talking about. I responded to a post on a forum, I didn't send a tell to your mage or report anyone.

So your saying for all purposes that are intensive, boxing is here to stay? Can you give me a list of all the different purposes that are intensive?

What if I were to tell you that for all intents and purposes that boxing was here to stay?

No I did not, this is an incorrect assumption. I quoted the rules and made a comment in context to those rules. You assumed my comment wasn't meant in context with the rules I just quoted. Additionally you can see on post #39 I spent a great deal of effort clarifying what was implied in my original post... an excerpt

and so on.

You and others assumed my quote wasn't made as part of the context of my statement (which seems like a silly assumption considering I posted it lol). Additionally you apparently feel like putting the time to post this but not read the follow up post I made (before most of the comments making childish insults towards me).

That's fine but it doesn't make your base assumption true.

I would tell you you were trolled.

You most certainly did, your opening statement in this thread is:

Which was and still is wrong. You then quoted the rules as if they supported your erroneous statement that "boxing in Agnarr is against the rules," which of course they do not.

Word salad is tasty

Cherry-picking proves nothing, the part you cut off is me quoting the FAQ specifically talking about how true boxing is ok but other types of boxing is not ok (including things you can do in a true box to break the rules as well).

My post did not only include that sentence, it's completely ridiculous to cut that out and act like that was my post lol.

Nothing you will say will change the fact my statements were made in context to what I literally quoted (the FAQ). Additionally I made post #39 completely clarifying it (pointing out again that I did in fact mean the context I gave). This was well before your comment.

And nothing will change the fact that your first statement was completely wrong no matter how much backpedaling and "context" you try to throw at it in post #39. Furthermore, there is nothing in your first post that says true boxing is ok, i just didn't see the point of quoting the whole post.

I am honored that my first post on these forums resulted in 3,000 views. I think this speaks to the fact that there are legitimate concerns on both sides of the discussion. Just today a player dispelled my charm pet and then said "reported box army," when I asked him to stop. So let me get this straight. He harassed me, then threatens me with reports, and somehow doesn't see the hypocrisy or toxicity of his own behavior and actions. I've never met him in my life. Never interacted with him before today. I think the above quote, which was the conclusion of my original post, sums up my very real concern for some of these poor souls.

If your happiness in a video game depends upon how others play that video game--within the rules--you will never find happiness in this world or any other. Interestingly, the point I thought most poignant in my post was never even mentioned during the entire discussion. To paraphrase Lord Buddha: You trouble yourself endlessly. You go into the dark. You will not see light.

I'm sorry but no, my first post has the quoted FAQ in it, I assumed people would read it and take my comment in regards to that, it's usually reasonable to assume people will assume you are referring to the quoted content when you quote the content.

It's not backpedaling to refer to literally what I posted. I didn't need to say true boxing is ok since I literally quoted something that said that. This is a fact, you can't change it.

This will be my last response regarding my posts which you can still read, since this is silly lol. I said what I said and then I quoted the rules for context, as should always be assumed, all the content of my post (including the quoted portion) was part of the context. No matter how you try to explain it away you cannot change the fact I posted what I did. If you didn't understand something that's fine, I could even understand how it might be confusing, the hyper-defensiveness to jump to conclusions and assuming I wasn't referencing the content I quoted when I quoted and posted it is your problem. Face it or not I don't care at all lol.

What you claimed was wrong was said as a part of a post with additional content you are specifically choosing to ignore, do whatever you want, I don't care.