Politician Archive

Message Edited by loiboy on 02-15-2005 10:34 PM

Message Edited by loiboy on 02-16-2005 10:15 AM

Theres a hotfix today, guess it was a bug they fixed now.
Dunno, perhaps you can file a ticket to a CSR claiming the used an exploit to get it there and if they could remove it? (doubt they'll do that, but worht a try)

---

Ikooga wrote:
Theres a hotfix today, guess it was a bug they fixed now.
Dunno, perhaps you can file a ticket to a CSR claiming the used an exploit to get it there and if they could remove it? (doubt they'll do that, but worht a try)

---

Its not worth a try if it's not true. Please don't try to trick the CSR's it only makes it more difficult for people with legitimate concerens to get help.

---

DocSavag wrote:

---

Ikooga wrote:
Theres a hotfix today, guess it was a bug they fixed now.
Dunno, perhaps you can file a ticket to a CSR claiming the used an exploit to get it there and if they could remove it? (doubt they'll do that, but worht a try)

---

Its not worth a try if it's not true. Please don't try to trick the CSR's it only makes it more difficult for people with legitimate concerens to get help.

---

Oh wording was perhaps poor, I did not want to say that he should lie to a CSR

But I could have sworn I read some patchnotes today "Hotfixed a problem allowing people to place houses in a city without zoning rights", but now I can't find it anymore

But he stated:
- they placed a new house (not transfered)
- they are inside the city (registered citizenship)
- they were not giving zoning rights.

I assume he has the option that Zoning rights are required active, otherwise the whole post would be a bit stupid.

But it only leaves the possibility really that the house was placed using a bug, if they were aware of it or not.

---

Ikooga wrote:

---

DocSavag wrote:

---

Ikooga wrote:
Theres a hotfix today, guess it was a bug they fixed now.
Dunno, perhaps you can file a ticket to a CSR claiming the used an exploit to get it there and if they could remove it? (doubt they'll do that, but worht a try)

---

Its not worth a try if it's not true. Please don't try to trick the CSR's it only makes it more difficult for people with legitimate concerens to get help.

---

Oh wording was perhaps poor, I did not want to say that he should lie to a CSR

But I could have sworn I read some patchnotes today "Hotfixed a problem allowing people to place houses in a city without zoning rights", but now I can't find it anymore

But he stated:
- they placed a new house (not transfered)
- they are inside the city (registered citizenship)
- they were not giving zoning rights.

I assume he has the option that Zoning rights are required active, otherwise the whole post would be a bit stupid.

But it only leaves the possibility really that the house was placed using a bug, if they were aware of it or not.

---

If in fact it was done without zoning rights and the city actually had zoning rights at the time then yea its a bug and an exploit and the CSRs should be notified immediately. However before that post was edited I seem to remember some wording in there that suggested it was a dispute and not an exploit. If that isn't the case then I agree with notifying a CSR.

Message Edited by loiboy on 02-16-2005 10:20 AM

---

loiboy wrote:

More details:

We have only 3 players who can grant zoning rights, our mayor, and two others.

The person who dropped the house had been citybanned the night before he placed the house.

The person who dropped the house did it when none of the 3 players with permission to grant zoning rights was online, and for the prior 24 hours none had granted zoning rights to any players, in fact, not in the previous week or so.

The mayor received an email stating "a structure has been added to your city...by "person".

The mayor then received another email stating "a citizen has joined your city ...same person"

The house is about 70m INSIDE the outer rim of our city limits, so it is not a partial placement thing.

Plain and simple, it HAS to be an exploit. Given the above information, do you agree?

Of course i filed a csr ticket, and they said that "we" must have granted zoning rights, or it was a /transferstructure, which it was not.

And, if you have an existing house in your city, and it is /transferstructure-ed to another toon, the mayor does not get the "a structure has been added to your city" email.

In fact, i transfer structures all the time between toons, and my mayor toon only gets an email IF i "lose" a citizen, or if after a /transferstructure, "add" a citizen, that being if the toon declared residence.

So, it was not a /transferstructure, it was a de novo placement of a structure, by a person who had been banned, and then said person "declared" and made himself a citizen, hence, unbanning himself.

It is fortunate he is a jedi, as we will be ganking him nightly, starting tonight, and banning his entire guild from our city.

Message Edited by loiboy on 02-16-2005 10:20 AM

---

Wow! Strange stuff. I wonder if it is an offshoot of the citizenship bug. You know the one where if you are the citizen of one city and then go and declare in another you still show as a citizen on both cities terminals. Was the person in question ever a member of you city and then left?

I ask this because this bug happened to me and i received a tell from a person asking me to vote for them as mayor of my old city. I explained that i was no longer a resident and the bug and he understood. However, he went on to tell me thatI show up on his city terminal as being in the militia. WhileI am militia in my new city I was never Militia in my old one.

Now I have not gone back to the old city to see ifI can grant rights becauseI am not that kind of fellow. But if it does allow me too this is one way around zoning rights.

By the wayI plan to go to my old city and relinquish my citizen ship via the terminal to clear the bug. But the militia thing has me concerned.

Regards,