Diablo Townkill (works with 1.02) now available!
Chris O'Rorke
Game NOT Over! @ The Adrenaline Vault
http://www.avault.com/cheat
PC Hints & Cheats
Game NOT Over is proud to bring you the new Diablo TOWNKILL cheat that
bypasses the anti-cheat update 1.02. It works with battle.net (but
only flame wave and fire wall will cause damage). So, get in there and
do sum killing!
D.D. Johnston
On Sat, 22 Mar 1997 14:05:45 GMT, ch...@avault.com (Chris O'Rorke)
wrote:
Proud???? Proud because you've ruined battle.net for the large
majority of players? Do you really think you've performed some type
of public service? Too bad you didn't keep your pride to yourself.
Proud, indeed!!!
duvy
ch...@avault.com (Chris O'Rorke) wrote:
>Game NOT Over! @ The Adrenaline Vault
>http://www.avault.com/cheat
>PC Hints & Cheats
>Game NOT Over is proud to bring you the new Diablo TOWNKILL cheat that
>bypasses the anti-cheat update 1.02. It works with battle.net (but
>only flame wave and fire wall will cause damage). So, get in there and
>do sum killing!
You've seen the last hit on your page from me, and many others.
Boycott PCRL and Adrenaline Vault.
Randy Bagwell
In <333b11d1....@netnews.worldnet.att.net>, se...@worldnet.att.net (Sens) writes:
>COOL!! Count me in as a new customer!! Adren Vault is now on top of
>my list of new sites to visit! :)
>
>Don't mind these stuffy guys too much. They squeal nicely, but
>they're pretty harmless blokes.
Gee, the threat to boycott their web site sounded pretty harmful to me. :)
Randy Bagwell
rbag...@hiwaay.net
degreeAbsolute
Well, you've just ensured that I will never visit your page. Anyone
who supports cheating over battle.net is an asshole.
degreeAbsolute
degreeAbsolute
After posting the message that follows this one, I received the
following "friendly" email:
--- start email ---
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 97 06:41:07 UT
From: "Daniel Edgington" <Daniele...@msn.com>
Message-Id: <UPMAIL02.1997...@msn.com>
To: deg...@icanect.net
Subject: cheating
X-UIDL: c74b53e7a070feb6fa04a8712242a27e
u bitch!!!!!!!!
why because u do not have cheating codes
--- end email ---
I think this shows just what level of intelligence we are dealing
with.
degreeAbsolute
--- My original post ---
Mark Asher
Personally, I think townkill sucks. I had your site bookmarked, but I'm
going to remove it now. Are you really that desperate for hits? How sad.
Mark Asher
Chris O'Rorke <ch...@avault.com> wrote in article
<3333e6c8...@news.onramp.net>...
Robert Music
Chris O'Rorke wrote:
>
> Game NOT Over! @ The Adrenaline Vault
> http://www.avault.com/cheat
> PC Hints & Cheats
>
> Game NOT Over is proud to bring you the new Diablo TOWNKILL cheat that
> bypasses the anti-cheat update 1.02. It works with battle.net (but
> only flame wave and fire wall will cause damage). So, get in there and
> do sum killing!
Delete one bookmark..................
eros...@aol.com
Why'd (Chris O'Rorke) have to go and say this:
>Game NOT Over is proud to bring you the new Diablo TOWNKILL cheat that
>bypasses the anti-cheat update 1.02. It works with battle.net (but
>only flame wave and fire wall will cause damage). So, get in there and
>do sum killing!
Cool! Now when is the CD-RIP and GAME CRACKS section going up so I can download some free games?
Ciao!
Eric
--
Eric Eckstein
Strategic Therapist
GamePen (http://www.gamepen.com)
Have you had your Therapy today? (http://www.gamepen.com/therapy/)
Dave M.
Robert Music wrote:
>
> Chris O'Rorke wrote:
> >
> > Game NOT Over! @ The Adrenaline Vault
> > http://www.avault.com/cheat
> > PC Hints & Cheats
> >
> > bypasses the anti-cheat update 1.02. It works with battle.net (but
> > only flame wave and fire wall will cause damage). So, get in there and
> > do sum killing!
>
Also deleting the bookmark...townkill added no enhancement to
the game or the fun in playing it multiplayer whatsoever. Pretty sad
AVault. I hope your advertisers are taking note.
Jimmy O'Donnell
And I used to like the AVault....BUT I'm never gonna use it
again.Support AVault boycott!!!
Gerald Hayes
Me too....bookmark gone.
e-mail address not included to protect from spammers
br...@avault.com
In article <ejMtBJx...@beast.hiwaay.net>,
rbag...@HiWAAY.net wrote:
>
> In <333b11d1....@netnews.worldnet.att.net>, se...@worldnet.att.net (Sens)
writes:
>
> >du...@mars.hotel (duvy) wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>>Game NOT Over! @ The Adrenaline Vault
> >>>http://www.avault.com/cheat
> >>>PC Hints & Cheats
> >>
> >>>Game NOT Over is proud to bring you the new Diablo TOWNKILL cheat that
> >>>bypasses the anti-cheat update 1.02. It works with battle.net (but
> >>>only flame wave and fire wall will cause damage). So, get in there and
> >>>do sum killing!
> >>
> >>Boycott PCRL and Adrenaline Vault.
> >
Greetings,
As editor of the Adrenaline Vault Game Site, I would like to address
the concerns of those here regarding the Diablo Townkill cheat on our
site. The Adrenaline Vault operates under the philosophy that gamer
information, once uploaded to a public domain, should be released to the
Internet community without delay and not to just a privileged few.
The Diablo Townkill cheat which has created such a huge commotion on
this forum can be found on numerous: BBS's, chat rooms, IRC channels, and
other websites. Boycotting our site will not remove the cheat, nor will
it have any effect in stemming the release of such information in the
future on ours or any other forum.
On a personal note, I find it interesting that during this time the
Internet community is fighting for it's right of free speech in the
Supreme Court of the U.S. Yet at the same time, many of you are fighting
to restrain that right with your boycott. What does that say about the
Net community in general? The Internet is the one place in the entire
world where everyone, regardless of race, color, or location can express
themselves freely and without fear of prosecution. It would be
unfortunate for us to give up this right freely as we have in our
non-virtual lives.
I would ask you all to consider this before you make hasty decisions.
If you wish to stop visiting our site, that's your right. However, I
would ask that you stop visiting for the right reason and not because of
some public domain cheat which is readily available everywhere. Should
any of you wish to play with myself or another AVault member on
battle.net, we would be more than happy to take on the denizens of Hell
with you - without cheating. :)
Cheers,
Brian
Editor - The Adrenaline Vault
http://avault.com
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
I...@really.am.sick.of.spammers
Gerald Hayes wrote:
>
> On Mon, 24 Mar 1997 06:10:47 -0500, Jimmy O'Donnell
>
> >> > > Game NOT Over! @ The Adrenaline Vault
> >> > > http://www.avault.com/cheat
> >> > > PC Hints & Cheats
Bookmark gone. Jerks. Guess i'll be going back to HappyPuppy.
Rasta Kyle
Geez, these five year olds have a pretty extensive vocabulary......
I'm impressed.......
Keith A
Gerald Hayes wrote:
>
> On Mon, 24 Mar 1997 06:10:47 -0500, Jimmy O'Donnell
> <jim...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> >>
> >> Robert Music wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > > Game NOT Over! @ The Adrenaline Vault
> >> > > http://www.avault.com/cheat
> >> > > PC Hints & Cheats
> >> > >
> >> > > bypasses the anti-cheat update 1.02. It works with battle.net (but
> >> > > only flame wave and fire wall will cause damage). So, get in there and
> >> > > do sum killing!
> >> >
> >>
> >> Also deleting the bookmark...townkill added no enhancement to
> >> the game or the fun in playing it multiplayer whatsoever. Pretty sad
> >> AVault. I hope your advertisers are taking note.
> >
> >And I used to like the AVault....BUT I'm never gonna use it
> >again.Support AVault boycott!!!
>
> Me too....bookmark gone.
And another bookmark gone! I now know why multiplayer is not that
important to me in a game. Piss off with you pathetic cheats!
AndreA^^
On Mon, 24 Mar 1997 14:36:09 GMT, nos...@joes.com (Gerald Hayes )
wrote:
>On Mon, 24 Mar 1997 06:10:47 -0500, Jimmy O'Donnell
><jim...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>>Dave M. wrote:
>>>
>>> Robert Music wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Chris O'Rorke wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > Game NOT Over! @ The Adrenaline Vault
>>> > > http://www.avault.com/cheat
>>> > > PC Hints & Cheats
>>> > >
>>> > > Game NOT Over is proud to bring you the new Diablo TOWNKILL cheat that
>>> > > bypasses the anti-cheat update 1.02. It works with battle.net (but
>>> > > only flame wave and fire wall will cause damage). So, get in there and
>>> > > do sum killing!
>>> >
>>> > Delete one bookmark..................
>>>
>>> Also deleting the bookmark...townkill added no enhancement to
>>> the game or the fun in playing it multiplayer whatsoever. Pretty sad
>>> AVault. I hope your advertisers are taking note.
>>
>>And I used to like the AVault....BUT I'm never gonna use it
>>again.Support AVault boycott!!!
>
>Me too....bookmark gone.
>e-mail address not included to protect from spammers
I deleted it as well.
I liked that page (since now).
C'mon guys, follow our example! ;-)
AndreA ^^
'The great man is he
who does not lose his child's heart.'
---- Mencius: c.300 BC, Chinese Confucian philosopher
_________________________
Bolzano, ITALY
_________________________
Warning: E-mail address altered to prevent unwanted mail. Remove the ^^ symbols to reply
-------
Stian Fagereng
Never visited the page.
Never will.
Stian Fagereng
Reddogg690
You guys are acting REALLY ignorant. AVault is one of the few sites that
does it's job and you are all condemning them for doing so. If Avault had
never posted the cheat, the cheat would STILL be out there! DUH! So don't
blame it on them, blame it on the guy that coded the thing!
If you boycott them for offering the cheat, then you have no right to
bitch about freedom of speech on the Internet. You want AVault to be like
Big Brother watching over your lame gamer ass. As a GOOD game site, they
report what is out there. Maybe they went a little overboard hyping it
up. But hype or not, the cheat is readily available in the internet. So
either way, this cheat by someone outside of Avault would have released
it.
Angel L. Munoz
Hi Everyone,
First a background explanation on where this controversy started and
then our official position on this matter.
After a careful analysis of the posts on this "Boycott AVault" thread,
we have concluded that the instigators behind this dilemma are several
game sites that I'm sure have ulterior reasons for their actions.
One of the offending sites is none less than eXscape.com. Interesting
that Phil and Anish have such high morals and ethical values to
criticize our site and stage a boycott. Specially after we had to
threaten them, a few months back, with legal action to get them to
remove, what they admitted to in writing, was the misappropriation of
copyright material from AVault. But then posting a cheat is so much
worse than engaging in theft of copyright material.
Our position on the TownKill cheat is plain and simple. We will keep it
on our site. If that offends you enough that you decide not to visit
our site, I am truly sorry. But we believe in freedom of speech and
equal access to information to all, and we will not be forced to make
moral choices for our visitors.
It is a sad day in this country when sites like ours get boycotted
because of offering information that is already available in the public
domain.
For those of you that will no longer visit our site, I recommend that
you visit Gamespot, OGR, Games Domain, Gamecenter or GamesMania. These
sites are all very professional and updated daily.
Mark Asher
> Angel L. Munoz <an...@avault.com> wrote in article
<333838...@avault.com>...
snip
> Our position on the TownKill cheat is plain and simple. We will keep it
> on our site. If that offends you enough that you decide not to visit
> our site, I am truly sorry. But we believe in freedom of speech and
> equal access to information to all, and we will not be forced to make
> moral choices for our visitors.
I think most of us objected to you using the cheat as a promotional gimmick
more than actually putting it up at your site, although I'm not happy about
that, either. Believe me, if you had just added the cheat to your site
without shouting about it, none of this would have happened. You
advertised. We didn't like your ad. We voted with our wallets, so to speak.
What would you have us do?
A lot of us really like Diablo, and quite frankly, townkill and other
cheats keep us from enjoying the game in the way we would like. How did you
expect us to respond?
> It is a sad day in this country when sites like ours get boycotted
> because of offering information that is already available in the public
> domain.
I'm not part of a boycott. I just decided to remove your bookmark because I
disagreed with your editorial decision to trumpet the cheat in these
newsgroups. If I'm not happy with the way you run your site, what would you
have me do? If someone comes up with a cheat for UOL that allows you to
kill other players, will you happily offer that as well? If someone comes
up with a cheat for *any* multiplayer game that lets one player destroy the
other player easily, will you happily post those cheats as well? Would you
want to play against someone using those cheats? Think about it.
> For those of you that will no longer visit our site, I recommend that
> you visit Gamespot, OGR, Games Domain, Gamecenter or GamesMania. These
> sites are all very professional and updated daily.
Why don't you just apologize for encouraging people to use townkill and
rethink your policy. We gamers are sympathetic to an extent to sites like
yours. We realize you have to hustle a bit to keep them going, and cashing
in on Diablo seems like a natural. You just exercised very poor judgement
in this case. BTW, are the sites you listed carrying the cheat?
I think a site that wants to be professional would try to discourage
utilities that disrupt multiplayer games, not promote them. What do you
think?
Mark Asher
Brian
On 25 Mar 1997 22:05:00 GMT, "Mark Asher" <ma...@impacttech.com>
wrote:
<snip>
>I'm not part of a boycott. I just decided to remove your bookmark because I
>disagreed with your editorial decision to trumpet the cheat in these
>newsgroups. If I'm not happy with the way you run your site, what would you
>have me do? If someone comes up with a cheat for UOL that allows you to
>kill other players, will you happily offer that as well? If someone comes
>up with a cheat for *any* multiplayer game that lets one player destroy the
>other player easily, will you happily post those cheats as well? Would you
>want to play against someone using those cheats? Think about it.
>
I would like to make a comment on your position here, Mark. Let me ask
you a question. If you're reading the local newspaper and find the
daily editorial to be something you don't like or don't agree with,
are you going to cancel your subscription and throw away everything
else you liked? I doubt it, that would be pretty lame (not our fault
if you are lame btw). In terms of UOL, why would anyone need a cheat
for that? You can kill players anyway in that game (or rather, you
will be able to when it comes out) no matter where you are.
Also, to answer your question, will WILL post any and all cheats that
are in the public domain that come our way. Why? It's called freedom
of information, something you apparently don't agree with or believe
in. If you find someone who is playing with a cheat you don't like,
don't bitch to us about it, bitch to the company who makes the game.
As someone stated in another thread about this issue, that people
should be pissed at and complaining to Blizzard because if they coded
Diablo right the first time, this wouldn't have been possible at all.
Here's another novel idea, why don't you get your friends together and
play private games on battle.net? Or, if you find someone who is using
the Townkill cheat another novel idea is to spam it in a usenet thread
and just ask everyone to attack that person on sight. I doubt he'll be
using the cheat for too much longer once the fun is gone.
>Why don't you just apologize for encouraging people to use townkill and
>rethink your policy. We gamers are sympathetic to an extent to sites like
>yours. We realize you have to hustle a bit to keep them going, and cashing
>in on Diablo seems like a natural. You just exercised very poor judgement
>in this case. BTW, are the sites you listed carrying the cheat?
>
Why should we apologize for providing information? We haven't
encouraged anyone to start using the Townkill cheat, we merely told
you it was available. How people decide to use that information is
their concern. We see no reason to act like parents to the Net gaming
community. We operate on the belief that people can take care of
themselves and are capable of making intelligent, rational decisions.
Who would have thought so many of you would want to be controlled like
mindless robots and have everyone else act the same way? Look
elsewhere for a Net government, it will be a cold day in Hell (no pun
intended) before we become "The Man" of the Internet.
>I think a site that wants to be professional would try to discourage
>utilities that disrupt multiplayer games, not promote them. What do you
>think?
>
Obviously, we don't see it that way. We provide information, that's
all. Do we use the Townkill cheat? Nope. Would we? Nope. Should we
censor information we don't like? Nope.
- Brian
Mark Asher
> Brian <br...@avault.com> wrote in article
<3338545a...@newstand.syr.edu>...
> you a question. If you're reading the local newspaper and find the
> daily editorial to be something you don't like or don't agree with,
> are you going to cancel your subscription and throw away everything
> else you liked? I doubt it, that would be pretty lame (not our fault
> if you are lame btw). In terms of UOL, why would anyone need a cheat
> for that? You can kill players anyway in that game (or rather, you
> will be able to when it comes out) no matter where you are.
If I can choose between 5 or 6 newspapers, I'll patronize the ones that
reflect my views and ignore the ones that are opposed to my views. I think
most people choose their papers this way. Unfortunately, most of us only
have one paper in our cities, so your question doesn't really correspond to
game sites on the web. Think of a better analogy.
Or let me think of one for you: Time, Newsweek, and U.S. News and World
Report. If I only have time for two, it will be Time and Newsweek because I
think their editorial bias is more middle of the road and U.S. News tends
to be more conservative.
> Also, to answer your question, will WILL post any and all cheats that
> are in the public domain that come our way. Why? It's called freedom
> of information, something you apparently don't agree with or believe
> in. If you find someone who is playing with a cheat you don't like,
> don't bitch to us about it, bitch to the company who makes the game.
> As someone stated in another thread about this issue, that people
> should be pissed at and complaining to Blizzard because if they coded
> Diablo right the first time, this wouldn't have been possible at all.
Time out. I never said you had no right to post the cheat. I just don't
*like* you doing so. What I really didn't like, however, was the way in
which you publicized it. It's got nothing to do with any freedom, other
than my freedom to choose which sites I'll frequent. Personally, I think
it's bad policy of you to promote hacks that have a negative effect on
games and players in those games. You think otherwise. Fine. Now, since I
find your policy objectionable, why does my decision to not bookmark your
site interfere with your freedom to post cheats? It doesn't. What it might
do, however, is hurt your profits. That's what this is about, not free
speech.
>
> Why should we apologize for providing information? We haven't
> encouraged anyone to start using the Townkill cheat, we merely told
> you it was available. How people decide to use that information is
> their concern. We see no reason to act like parents to the Net gaming
> community. We operate on the belief that people can take care of
> themselves and are capable of making intelligent, rational decisions.
> Who would have thought so many of you would want to be controlled like
> mindless robots and have everyone else act the same way? Look
> elsewhere for a Net government, it will be a cold day in Hell (no pun
> intended) before we become "The Man" of the Internet.
Now you're just getting goofy. First off, you promoted the cheat. Read your
original post and then compare it to "The latest townkill cheat is
available at AV" or something like that. Secondly, I don't feel like a
mindless robot. Rather, I think I'm making a cognitive decision to not
support a commercial site that is posting messages on usenet encouraging
people to download a hack I don't like.
Again, do what you like. A number of us are telling you we're not happy
with your site.
Tim McBride
Angel L. Munoz wrote:
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> First a background explanation on where this controversy started and
> then our official position on this matter.
>
> After a careful analysis of the posts on this "Boycott AVault" thread,
> we have concluded that the instigators behind this dilemma are several
> game sites that I'm sure have ulterior reasons for their actions.
>
> One of the offending sites is none less than eXscape.com. Interesting
> that Phil and Anish have such high morals and ethical values to
> criticize our site and stage a boycott. Specially after we had to
> threaten them, a few months back, with legal action to get them to
> remove, what they admitted to in writing, was the misappropriation of
> copyright material from AVault. But then posting a cheat is so much
> worse than engaging in theft of copyright material.
>
> on our site. If that offends you enough that you decide not to visit
> our site, I am truly sorry. But we believe in freedom of speech and
> equal access to information to all, and we will not be forced to make
> moral choices for our visitors.
>
> because of offering information that is already available in the public
> domain.
>
> you visit Gamespot, OGR, Games Domain, Gamecenter or GamesMania. These
> sites are all very professional and updated daily.
what they do not Like, and many of the folks are not game site people.
CHEATERS-Burn in Hell.
Regards,
Tim McBride
--
Tim McBride
Editor-In-Chief, The Age of Rifles NewsLetter
AZ-801st, Arizona's AFJROTC Honor unit 4 years running
E-Mail: mi...@swlink.net
Tims AOR Web Page http://www.swlink.net/~milo/aor/
---I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me
liberty or give me death! 猶atrick Henry
degreeAbsolute
"Angel L. Munoz" <an...@avault.com> wrote:
>One of the offending sites is none less than eXscape.com. Interesting
>that Phil and Anish have such high morals and ethical values to
>criticize our site and stage a boycott. Specially after we had to
>threaten them, a few months back, with legal action to get them to
>remove, what they admitted to in writing, was the misappropriation of
>copyright material from AVault. But then posting a cheat is so much
>worse than engaging in theft of copyright material.
I could care less about squabbles between web pages. It is clear to
see that Townkill is wrong, plain and simple. Therefore I will never
visit your page.
>It is a sad day in this country when sites like ours get boycotted
>because of offering information that is already available in the public
>domain.
If by "public domain" you mean "available freely on the Internet",
then would you post nude pictures of young children on your site? Why
not, they are "available freely on the Internet"!
It is a matter of making a choice about what is right and what is
wrong. Clearly, Townkill is not as much of a problem as child
pornography. But I am just trying to illustrate the decision you have
to make when you post something, even if it *is* available somewhere
else.
degreeAbsolute
Mike Herauf
> > >> > > Game NOT Over! @ The Adrenaline Vault
> > >> > > http://www.avault.com/cheat
> > >> > > PC Hints & Cheats
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Game NOT Over is proud to bring you the new Diablo TOWNKILL cheat that
> > >> > > bypasses the anti-cheat update 1.02. It works with battle.net (but
> > >> > > only flame wave and fire wall will cause damage). So, get in there and
> > >> > > do sum killing!
> > >> >
> > >> > Delete one bookmark..................
> > >>
> > >> Also deleting the bookmark...townkill added no enhancement to
> > >> the game or the fun in playing it multiplayer whatsoever. Pretty sad
> > >> AVault. I hope your advertisers are taking note.
> > >
> > >And I used to like the AVault....BUT I'm never gonna use it
> > >again.Support AVault boycott!!!
> >
> > Me too....bookmark gone.
>
> important to me in a game. Piss off with you pathetic cheats!
Another one here.
Lost Dragon
>Again, do what you like. A number of us are telling you we're not happy
>with your site.
The longer this thread lasts, the more advertisement The Adrenaline
Vault gets. I'd never heard of the place and went to check it
out just because of this thread. Runs sort of counter to your
whole boycott I'd think...
Prowler
br...@avault.com (Brian) wrote:
>I would like to make a comment on your position here, Mark. Let me ask
>you a question. If you're reading the local newspaper and find the
>daily editorial to be something you don't like or don't agree with,
>are you going to cancel your subscription and throw away everything
>else you liked? I doubt it, that would be pretty lame (not our fault
>if you are lame btw). In terms of UOL, why would anyone need a cheat
>for that? You can kill players anyway in that game (or rather, you
>will be able to when it comes out) no matter where you are.
You might want to try making hypothetical arguments that actually make
sense. If I was reading a local paper that explained in detail how to
shut down all ATM machines, or make all gas pumps not work or
otherwise made my life less enjoyable I would be sure not to give them
another cent. The point here is not that we disagre with your
opinion, as we disagre with you using what ruins a game for honest
people as an adolecent publicity stunt. How would you feel if all of
a sudden someone advertised something that caused you distress (oh I
duno..maybe if a boycott or something was organised)...wouldnt make
you happy would it.....you'd be whining and bitching wouldn't (arn't)
you.
While I would never support any censorship of content, (for example I
think it is perfectly legal to know how to shut down an ATM machine or
gas pumps), I refuse to support those who would use such knowledge as
a way to generate interest in their site.
You messed up....so learn from the experience, and it will blow over.
>Also, to answer your question, will WILL post any and all cheats that
>are in the public domain that come our way. Why? It's called freedom
>of information, something you apparently don't agree with or believe
>in. If you find someone who is playing with a cheat you don't like,
>don't bitch to us about it, bitch to the company who makes the game.
>As someone stated in another thread about this issue, that people
>should be pissed at and complaining to Blizzard because if they coded
>Diablo right the first time, this wouldn't have been possible at all.
>Here's another novel idea, why don't you get your friends together and
>play private games on battle.net? Or, if you find someone who is using
>the Townkill cheat another novel idea is to spam it in a usenet thread
>and just ask everyone to attack that person on sight. I doubt he'll be
>using the cheat for too much longer once the fun is gone.
>>Why don't you just apologize for encouraging people to use townkill and
>>rethink your policy. We gamers are sympathetic to an extent to sites like
>>yours. We realize you have to hustle a bit to keep them going, and cashing
>>in on Diablo seems like a natural. You just exercised very poor judgement
>>in this case. BTW, are the sites you listed carrying the cheat?
>>
>Why should we apologize for providing information? We haven't
>encouraged anyone to start using the Townkill cheat, we merely told
>you it was available. How people decide to use that information is
>their concern. We see no reason to act like parents to the Net gaming
>community. We operate on the belief that people can take care of
>themselves and are capable of making intelligent, rational decisions.
>Who would have thought so many of you would want to be controlled like
>mindless robots and have everyone else act the same way? Look
>elsewhere for a Net government, it will be a cold day in Hell (no pun
>intended) before we become "The Man" of the Internet.
>>I think a site that wants to be professional would try to discourage
>>utilities that disrupt multiplayer games, not promote them. What do you
>>think?
>>
>Obviously, we don't see it that way. We provide information, that's
>all. Do we use the Townkill cheat? Nope. Would we? Nope. Should we
>censor information we don't like? Nope.
>- Brian
>Editor - The Adrenaline Vault
>http://avault.com
mbaldispam@ix*netcom*com <---of course you know I want NO SPAM...so take out the SPAM!
DO NOT SEND JUNK E-MAIL:
"By US Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer meets
the definition of a telephone fax machine. By Sec.227(b)(1)(C), it is
unlawful to send any unsolicited advertisement to such equipment. By
Sec.227(b)(3)(C), a violation of the aforementioned Section is
punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or $500, whichever
is greater, for each violation."
Joel Mathis
Angel L. Munoz <an...@avault.com> wrote in article
<333838...@avault.com>...
> Our position on the TownKill cheat is plain and simple. We will keep it
> on our site. If that offends you enough that you decide not to visit
> our site, I am truly sorry. But we believe in freedom of speech and
> equal access to information to all, and we will not be forced to make
> moral choices for our visitors.
>
> It is a sad day in this country when sites like ours get boycotted
> because of offering information that is already available in the public
> domain.
Could someone please explain to me where freedom of speech comes into this?
No one is stopping you from posting the cheat. We just exercise our right
to not deal with a site that supports cheating.
I really hate people who throw the Constitution around without
understanding it.
Mark Asher
Why does everyone think I'm organizing a boycott? I just said I deleted
their bookmark because I was unhappy with them. They can post whatever they
want. But, taking your advice, I deleted their name from this post. Thanks.
There's no mention of them anywhere in this message now.
Mark Asher
Lost Dragon <lost...@cris.com> wrote in article
<33387398...@news.concentric.net>...
> >Again, do what you like. A number of us are telling you we're not happy
> >with your site.
>
> The longer this thread lasts, the more advertisement the [name of site
deleted] gets. I'd never heard of the place and went to check it
Prowler
Joel Mathis
Brian <br...@avault.com> wrote in article
<3338545a...@newstand.syr.edu>...
> Also, to answer your question, will WILL post any and all cheats that
> are in the public domain that come our way. Why? It's called freedom
> of information, something you apparently don't agree with or believe
> in.
Fine, you're free to distribute cheats and we're free to not go to your
site and encourage other people not to. Sounds fair to me!
Twin Ion Engine
In article <5h9tfh$n...@dfw-ixnews4.ix.netcom.com>, nos...@ix.netcom.com (Prowler) wrote:
>br...@avault.com (Brian) wrote:
>
>>I would like to make a comment on your position here, Mark. Let me ask
>>you a question. If you're reading the local newspaper and find the
>>daily editorial to be something you don't like or don't agree with,
>>are you going to cancel your subscription and throw away everything
>>else you liked? I doubt it, that would be pretty lame (not our fault
>>if you are lame btw). In terms of UOL, why would anyone need a cheat
>>for that? You can kill players anyway in that game (or rather, you
>>will be able to when it comes out) no matter where you are.
>
>>are in the public domain that come our way. Why? It's called freedom
>>of information, something you apparently don't agree with or believe
Freedom of Speech and Information does not mean freedom to spoil other's
enjoyment. If I enjoy killing people does that mean I can do that because it
is my Freedom?? Huh? Huh?
Please do not abuse the "Freedom of..." phrase. True freedom is to do
something that you like while at the same time not intrusive to other's
freedom. Other's freedom-to-cheat translate to many other's
NON-freedom-to-play!
By your same argument, since some countries has nuclear weapons, ALL the
countries should have nuclear weapons to "defend" themselves, right?? WRONG!
WiL :)
Visit the S'pore X-wing vs TIE-Fighter Club at :-
http://www.valuserve.com/~tblw/XvT/XvTHome.htm
Only the best Rebel or Imperial pilots need apply.
Desslock
> >disagreed with your editorial decision to trumpet the cheat in these
> >newsgroups.
snip
> I would like to make a comment on your position here, Mark. Let me ask
> you a question. If you're reading the local newspaper and find the
> daily editorial to be something you don't like or don't agree with,
> are you going to cancel your subscription and throw away everything
> else you liked? I doubt it, that would be pretty lame (not our fault
> if you are lame btw).
Poor, poor analogy. Your site ain't exactly the only "newspaper" in
town. There's plenty of other gaming sites where people can get more
current information (OGR), more thorough articles and features
(Gamespot), and more information which caters to newgroup readers in
particular (Gamepen), than your site. Why would anyone -want- to
continue to support a site which caters to the type of gamer who cheats
in multiplayer gaming.
> Also, to answer your question, will WILL post any and all cheats that
> are in the public domain that come our way. Why? It's called freedom
> of information, something you apparently don't agree with or believe
> in.
Post whatever information you want - you miss the point - the original
poster didn't say that you shouldn't be allowed to post cheats, he
merely stated that he wasn't going to continue to support your site
because you made an editorial decision to advocate a certain style of
play. After all, you weren't exactly objectively reporting on the
availability of "new" information - your post stated:
X is proud to bring you the new Diablo TOWNKILL cheat that
>>> > > bypasses the anti-cheat update 1.02. snip. So, get in there and
>>> > > do sum killing!
Er, because someone doesn't want to support a site that posts: "get in
there and do 'sum' killing", and advocates a multiplayer cheat program -
suddenly that person is against free speech? Seems to me that he's
merely exercising his freedom of choice to not support a site with an
editorial policy he disagrees with, and that he's exercising his freedom
of speech to publicly post to criticize that policy. Democracy at its
finest.
> Or, if you find someone who is using
> the Townkill cheat another novel idea is to spam it in a usenet thread
> and just ask everyone to attack that person on sight. I doubt he'll be
> using the cheat for too much longer once the fun is gone.
Or another "novel" idea is to not support sites which advocate this
style of gaming.
> >I think a site that wants to be professional would try to discourage
> >utilities that disrupt multiplayer games, not promote them. What do you
> >think?
> >
>
> Obviously, we don't see it that way. We provide information, that's
> all. Do we use the Townkill cheat? Nope. Would we? Nope. Should we
> censor information we don't like? Nope.
Should we support a site encouraging a style of play which hurts
multiplayer gaming. Nope.
Desslock
Ichabod Kagass
>After a careful analysis of the posts on this "Boycott AVault" thread,
>we have concluded that the instigators behind this dilemma are several
>game sites that I'm sure have ulterior reasons for their actions.
Pretty inflammatory stuff there, Angel. I'd like to hear how you
figure this. Sounds to me like people without ulterior motives are
genuinely pissed.
-Ichabod Kagass (not pissed, but enjoying the ruckus)
*** ***
*** No .sig for me, thank you. ***
*** ***
Ben
Brian wrote:
> Also, to answer your question, will WILL post any and all cheats that
> are in the public domain that come our way. Why? It's called freedom
> of information, something you apparently don't agree with or believe
> in. If you find someone who is playing with a cheat you don't like,
> don't bitch to us about it, bitch to the company who makes the game.
> As someone stated in another thread about this issue, that people
> should be pissed at and complaining to Blizzard because if they coded
> Diablo right the first time, this wouldn't have been possible at all.
There is a difference between opposing freedom of information and
choosing which information you want to view. I do not think anyone
disagrees with your right to post any cheat you want to on your site-
people just disagree with the cheats, and do not appreciate the fact
that you support them. That is their right. Nowhere in the constitution
does it say that people are obligated to view information they do not
want to view.
Major newspapers do not run the same sorts of news items as tabloids,
depite the fact that it is their constitutional right to do so. Are they
depriving their readers of information? Yes. And they are doing so
because their readers find the information presented in the tabloids to
be unprofessional and un-newsworthy. All periodicals tailor the
information they present to their reader's needs. A large majority of
online gamers dislike cheating, and find that it disrupts their
enjoyment of Diablo. In that light, they find your decision to post the
Diablo cheats to be an act of distasteful sensationalism. They choose to
avoid your site. So what?
What is really at issue here is that *you* have to decide what kind of
readership you are writing for. If you want to drive off your readers,
that is your choice, but do not paint them as being unethical for
exercising their right *not* to visit your site.
Regards,
Benjamin E. Sones
feld...@sprynet.com
Matthias Watermann
>Dave M. wrote:
>> Robert Music wrote:
>> > Chris O'Rorke wrote:
>> > > Game NOT Over! @ The Adrenaline Vault
>> > > http://www.avault.com/cheat
>> > > PC Hints & Cheats
>> > >
>> > > Game NOT Over is proud to bring you the new Diablo TOWNKILL cheat that
>> > > bypasses the anti-cheat update 1.02. It works with battle.net (but
>> > > only flame wave and fire wall will cause damage). So, get in there and
>> > > do sum killing!
>> > Delete one bookmark..................
>> Also deleting the bookmark...townkill added no enhancement to
>> the game or the fun in playing it multiplayer whatsoever. Pretty sad
>> AVault. I hope your advertisers are taking note.
>And I used to like the AVault....BUT I'm never gonna use it
>again.Support AVault boycott!!!
TownKill is for suckers and wannabe pkillers who don't even dare go to
the dungeon: They fear they could die.
As for AVault: I didn't know them before but now I know which page
I'll NEVER visit.
F* them up!!!
If anyone knows, how to f* up a web server or how to kick their ass,
please do it on them!!!
I HATE townkill: Short time ago on b.net I was in the town, waiting
for others to join. Then some mage wanders up and casts five(!) flame
waves on me. After the 3rd I had clicked New Game in the Options menu.
luckily I had a ruby shield that moment or I would not have lived long
enough.
+----------------------------------------------------+
| Matthias Watermann |
| mailto: wate...@cww.de |
| http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Alley/6348/ |
+----------------------------------------------------+
Adam K Rixey
br...@avault.com (Brian) writes:
> I would like to make a comment on your position here, Mark. Let me ask
> you a question. If you're reading the local newspaper and find the
> daily editorial to be something you don't like or don't agree with,
> are you going to cancel your subscription and throw away everything
> else you liked? I doubt it, that would be pretty lame (not our fault
I'm not Mark, but I'm answering anyway...
No, I wouldn't. HOWEVER, if there were 80 free newspapers in my
town, all avaible easily, I probably would. Or, more likely, if some
local merchant bought an annoying ad and placed it on the front page
of every newspaper in town, you can bet I'd start avoiding them. And
I do.
> Here's another novel idea, why don't you get your friends together and
> play private games on battle.net? Or, if you find someone who is using
> the Townkill cheat another novel idea is to spam it in a usenet thread
> and just ask everyone to attack that person on sight. I doubt he'll be
> using the cheat for too much longer once the fun is gone.
Before I was just indifferent because I don't play Diablo and I've
never visited your site, but now I _REALLY_ hate you guys. First you
spam the net with useless cheating crap, then you urge others to spam
the net more when people use it? Good god, is your site run by
monkeys?
> Obviously, we don't see it that way. We provide information, that's
> all. Do we use the Townkill cheat? Nope. Would we? Nope. Should we
> censor information we don't like? Nope.
You provide useless information that serves no productive purpose.
That's not a crime, but dammit, it should be.
AkR nya...@andrew.cmu.edu http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/~nyarl/
sing while you may, though it's hard to sing underwater
D. B. Brown
Angel L. Munoz wrote:
> After a careful analysis of the posts on this "Boycott AVault" thread,
> we have concluded that the instigators behind this dilemma are several
> game sites that I'm sure have ulterior reasons for their actions.
Of course. You can do no wrong; everyone is out to get you. Isn't
that called paranoia?
> It is a sad day in this country when sites like ours get boycotted
> because of offering information that is already available in the public
> domain.
What, its sad because people object to your practices and boycott?
You talk about free speech et al, but isn't that just another use
of it?
Sheesh. Some people don't like the propagation of cheating in
multiplayer games, and are actually going to do something, even if
it is as minor as publicly posted their boycott of the site.
That isn't sad, that's free market.
--
+=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=-+=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=-+
|Do you ever get the feeling that the story's|D.B. Brown |
|too damned real and in the present tense? |da...@bme1.image.uky.edu|
| -Ian Anderson | "..." |
+=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=-+=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=-+
Silverlock
>Angel L. Munoz wrote:
>> After a careful analysis of the posts on this "Boycott AVault" thread,
>> we have concluded that the instigators behind this dilemma are several
>> game sites that I'm sure have ulterior reasons for their actions.
>
>Of course. You can do no wrong; everyone is out to get you. Isn't
>that called paranoia?
>
>> It is a sad day in this country when sites like ours get boycotted
>> because of offering information that is already available in the public
>> domain.
>
yah no it alwasy gets me when ppl refer to 'our country' like the US
was/is all of the internet or usenet. Just funny kind of.
>What, its sad because people object to your practices and boycott?
>You talk about free speech et al, but isn't that just another use
>of it?
>
>Sheesh. Some people don't like the propagation of cheating in
>multiplayer games, and are actually going to do something, even if
>it is as minor as publicly posted their boycott of the site.
>
>That isn't sad, that's free market.
>
>--
>+=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=-+=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=-+
>|Do you ever get the feeling that the story's|D.B. Brown |
>|too damned real and in the present tense? |da...@bme1.image.uky.edu|
>| -Ian Anderson | "..." |
>+=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=-+=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=-+
--
Silverlock, UIN 474725
Household Pests? The SW-404 'SpitFire' APRL cleansing system
will remove them, we Guarantee IT! Not responsible for damage
to persons or structures from use of this product.
Dial 1-800-FRY-THEM for info and a home demonstration.
Silverlock
On Tue, 25 Mar 1997 22:53:16 GMT, br...@avault.com (Brian) wrote:
>On 25 Mar 1997 22:05:00 GMT, "Mark Asher" <ma...@impacttech.com>
>wrote:
>
><snip>
>>I'm not part of a boycott. I just decided to remove your bookmark because I
>>disagreed with your editorial decision to trumpet the cheat in these
>>newsgroups. If I'm not happy with the way you run your site, what would you
>>have me do? If someone comes up with a cheat for UOL that allows you to
>>kill other players, will you happily offer that as well? If someone comes
>>up with a cheat for *any* multiplayer game that lets one player destroy the
>>other player easily, will you happily post those cheats as well? Would you
>>want to play against someone using those cheats? Think about it.
>>
>>
>
>I would like to make a comment on your position here, Mark. Let me ask
>you a question. If you're reading the local newspaper and find the
>daily editorial to be something you don't like or don't agree with,
>are you going to cancel your subscription and throw away everything
>else you liked? I doubt it, that would be pretty lame (not our fault
>if you are lame btw). In terms of UOL, why would anyone need a cheat
>for that? You can kill players anyway in that game (or rather, you
>will be able to when it comes out) no matter where you are.
>
Ok lets hypothetically say that someone comes up witha cheat for UOL
which allows your chars HP and skills to go to the maximum possible
and decreases their chances of a hit. Hypothetically of course, this
would be the equivalent of a nontk VS tk battle in town since one
person would be unable to defend themselves. Would you post that
cheat? or how about a hypothetical cheat that stopped the town guards
from attacking you so that you could kill newbies in cities (safe
zones)? Are you benefitting the public now?
><
>Also, to answer your question, will WILL post any and all cheats that
>are in the public domain that come our way. Why? It's called freedom
>of information, something you apparently don't agree with or believe
>in. If you find someone who is playing with a cheat you don't like,
Why don't you call Mark a NAZI while your at it? geez!
>don't bitch to us about it, bitch to the company who makes the game.
>As someone stated in another thread about this issue, that people
>should be pissed at and complaining to Blizzard because if they coded
>Diablo right the first time, this wouldn't have been possible at all.
>
>Here's another novel idea, why don't you get your friends together and
>play private games on battle.net? Or, if you find someone who is using
that is a good idea but it shouldn't be required.
>the Townkill cheat another novel idea is to spam it in a usenet thread
>and just ask everyone to attack that person on sight. I doubt he'll be
If you had their BNet Id this is a good idea except the spam part, one
polite mssage would do it.
>using the cheat for too much longer once the fun is gone.
>
>>Why don't you just apologize for encouraging people to use townkill and
>>rethink your policy. We gamers are sympathetic to an extent to sites like
>>yours. We realize you have to hustle a bit to keep them going, and cashing
>>in on Diablo seems like a natural. You just exercised very poor judgement
>>in this case. BTW, are the sites you listed carrying the cheat?
>>
>
>Why should we apologize for providing information? We haven't
>encouraged anyone to start using the Townkill cheat, we merely told
>you it was available. How people decide to use that information is
>their concern. We see no reason to act like parents to the Net gaming
>community. We operate on the belief that people can take care of
>themselves and are capable of making intelligent, rational decisions.
I and many other gamers CAN make rational decisions but the decision
not to die when tkilled is not one of them. You refuse to understand
the distinction between cheats which only help a player beat an AI and
those which 'harm' another person via damage to their character..
Whats so hard to understand? you are promoting a hack that harms
others, thats all. I as one of those others simply am excercising my
right to not visit your site anymore.
>Who would have thought so many of you would want to be controlled like
>mindless robots and have everyone else act the same way? Look
Now where does anyone say anything remotely like that??? Please don't
attempt to put words inot ppl's mouths, no one wants to be helpless
and under the power of another, sort of like a person who doesn't have
tk versus one who does.
>elsewhere for a Net government, it will be a cold day in Hell (no pun
>intended) before we become "The Man" of the Internet.
>
True unless you intend to take over the internet. This is such an
obviously ludicous statement I can't believe you said it.
>>I think a site that wants to be professional would try to discourage
>>utilities that disrupt multiplayer games, not promote them. What do you
>>think?
>>
>
>Obviously, we don't see it that way. We provide information, that's
>all. Do we use the Townkill cheat? Nope. Would we? Nope. Should we
>censor information we don't like? Nope.
>
>- Brian
>Editor - The Adrenaline Vault
>http://avault.com
--
David Thompson
Nice argument, up until you justified keeping it there by referring
to freedom of speech. That's a bit of a stretch for a software
program, isn't it? The same justification could be made for putting
virii (viruses...however the plural of virus is spelled) up for anyone
to download.
Battle.Net cheating ruins the fun of everyone else involved. I
enjoyed it for the first few weeks, but the cheating got so bad that
it became pointless. The Townkill cheat is a deliberate disruption of
how the game was supposed to work. It was never meant to be a part of
the game, and it wrecks the fun of many other people.
By putting this cheat up on your site, you are aiding and abetting
cheaters in using this program to destroy other people's enjoyment of
Battle.Net. No facile reference to the Constitution or your rights
changes this fact.
On Tue, 25 Mar 1997 14:42:02 -0600, "Angel L. Munoz"
<an...@avault.com> wrote:
>Hi Everyone,
>
>First a background explanation on where this controversy started and
>then our official position on this matter.
>
>After a careful analysis of the posts on this "Boycott AVault" thread,
>we have concluded that the instigators behind this dilemma are several
>game sites that I'm sure have ulterior reasons for their actions.
>
>One of the offending sites is none less than eXscape.com. Interesting
>that Phil and Anish have such high morals and ethical values to
>criticize our site and stage a boycott. Specially after we had to
>threaten them, a few months back, with legal action to get them to
>remove, what they admitted to in writing, was the misappropriation of
>copyright material from AVault. But then posting a cheat is so much
>worse than engaging in theft of copyright material.
>
>Our position on the TownKill cheat is plain and simple. We will keep it
>on our site. If that offends you enough that you decide not to visit
>our site, I am truly sorry. But we believe in freedom of speech and
>equal access to information to all, and we will not be forced to make
>moral choices for our visitors.
>
>It is a sad day in this country when sites like ours get boycotted
>because of offering information that is already available in the public
>domain.
>
>For those of you that will no longer visit our site, I recommend that
>you visit Gamespot, OGR, Games Domain, Gamecenter or GamesMania. These
>sites are all very professional and updated daily.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Some women wait for Jesus, and some women wait for Cain.
So I hang upon my altar, and I hoist my axe again.
- Leonard Cohen, "Last Year's Man"
Dave Glue
br...@avault.com wrote in article <8592265...@dejanews.com>...
> I would ask you all to consider this before you make hasty decisions.
> If you wish to stop visiting our site, that's your right. However, I
> would ask that you stop visiting for the right reason and not because of
> some public domain cheat which is readily available everywhere. Should
> any of you wish to play with myself or another AVault member on
> battle.net, we would be more than happy to take on the denizens of Hell
> with you - without cheating. :)
Why is proudly advertising a file that disrupts the enjoyment of internet
gaming to a large section of the public not a valid excuse? Sounds good to
me, you're advertising a service which many people abhor. So they won't
visit their sight. Sounds like free speech to me- you have your right to
shout from the rooftops what you believe, I have the right to plug my ears.
And please, you almost sound like a Scientology lawyer invoking everything
but the 1st amendment in defence of this. You have full right to post
whatever you want on your web site, and we have full right not to vist it
as a protest. This has _nothing_ to do with free speech, don't even
attempt to link this somehow with the CDA matter in the Supreme Courts,
it's a blatantly obvious tactic and it's insulting to think you believe
people will even fall for it.
Ron Humphrey
Mike Herauf wrote:
>
> > > >> > > Game NOT Over! @ The Adrenaline Vault
> > > >> > > http://www.avault.com/cheat
> > > >> > > PC Hints & Cheats
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Game NOT Over is proud to bring you the new Diablo TOWNKILL cheat that
> > > >> > > bypasses the anti-cheat update 1.02. It works with battle.net (but
> > > >> > > only flame wave and fire wall will cause damage). So, get in there and
> > > >> > > do sum killing!
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Delete one bookmark..................
> > > >>
> > > >> Also deleting the bookmark...townkill added no enhancement to
> > > >> the game or the fun in playing it multiplayer whatsoever. Pretty sad
> > > >> AVault. I hope your advertisers are taking note.
> > > >
> > > >And I used to like the AVault....BUT I'm never gonna use it
> > > >again.Support AVault boycott!!!
> > >
> >
> > And another bookmark gone! I now know why multiplayer is not that
> > important to me in a game. Piss off with you pathetic cheats!
>
> Another one here.
cogn...@rocketmail.com
In article <333925...@bme1.image.uky.edu>,
"D. B. Brown" <da...@bme1.image.uky.edu> wrote:
>
> Of course. You can do no wrong; everyone is out to get you. Isn't
> that called paranoia?
Sorry pal on this one I have to come in on their defense. You call it
paranoia but it seems to me that everyone IS after AVault right now.
Just read all the threads (wasted bandwidth) about AVault. You have one
about boycotting their site, another about them using cookies (big deal),
another about TownKill. Makes me wonder if Angel is right and this really
is a tactic from some other sites to tarnish their image.
>
> What, its sad because people object to your practices and boycott?
> You talk about free speech et al, but isn't that just another use
> of it?
>
> Sheesh. Some people don't like the propagation of cheating in
> multiplayer games, and are actually going to do something, even if
> it is as minor as publicly posted their boycott of the site.
>
> That isn't sad, that's free market.
>
Yes it's the free market but if people are now advocating that their web
server be broken into I think the entire situation is being blown out of
proportion. And it's now maybe even getting into the realm of the illegal
by first staging a boycott and now demanding a webserver break-in.
I think the point has been made and it is time to get back to playing
games!
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
cogn...@rocketmail.com
I think the point he was making is that as a publication he has a right
and freedom to publish whatever he wants but on another thread they
clearly stated that they would not publish anything illegal. So your
virus analogy does not apply.
In article <3339f278...@nntp.netcruiser>,
meph...@netcom.ca (David Thompson) wrote:
>
>
> Nice argument, up until you justified keeping it there by referring
> to freedom of speech. That's a bit of a stretch for a software
> program, isn't it? The same justification could be made for putting
> virii (viruses...however the plural of virus is spelled) up for anyone
> to download.
> Battle.Net cheating ruins the fun of everyone else involved. I
> enjoyed it for the first few weeks, but the cheating got so bad that
> it became pointless. The Townkill cheat is a deliberate disruption of
> how the game was supposed to work. It was never meant to be a part of
> the game, and it wrecks the fun of many other people.
> By putting this cheat up on your site, you are aiding and abetting
> cheaters in using this program to destroy other people's enjoyment of
> Battle.Net. No facile reference to the Constitution or your rights
> changes this fact.
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
Patrick Deupree
ch...@avault.com (Chris O'Rorke) wrote:
>Game NOT Over! @ The Adrenaline Vault
>http://www.avault.com/cheat
>PC Hints & Cheats
>
>Game NOT Over is proud to bring you the new Diablo TOWNKILL cheat that
>bypasses the anti-cheat update 1.02. It works with battle.net (but
>only flame wave and fire wall will cause damage). So, get in there and
>do sum killing!
>
After reading the replies to this, um, promotion I figured I'd throw in my
2 cents. To me the problem here is not even so much that this software
exists on avault, it's the shameless promotion of this software.
I've got Diablo, and I enjoyed playing it for a while. However, I have
not gotten on battle.net at all because of the fact that, within days of
the game coming out, people were already finding ways to cheat. No
offense, but it's the worst type of gamer that cheats in a multiplayer
game. Ok, actually it was meant as an offense. It's also the worst type
of gamer that promotes other people cheating as well (though in a bizarre
way it even's the playing ground a bit).
So, I have definatly lost respect for avault in terms of their being a
true "gamer" resource. However, as has been pointed out, it's their right
to play games the way they want, and it's our right to play games we want.
In my case, it's my right not to play on battle.net.
To be honest the people that are losing the most in this deal are the real
game players that want a challenge rather than just wasting everything in
sight with ease.
Ben
Ron Humphrey wrote:
>
> Mike Herauf wrote:
> >
> > > > >> > > Game NOT Over! @ The Adrenaline Vault
> > > > >> > > http://www.avault.com/cheat
> > > > >> > > PC Hints & Cheats
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > Game NOT Over is proud to bring you the new Diablo TOWNKILL cheat that
> > > > >> > > bypasses the anti-cheat update 1.02. It works with battle.net (but
> > > > >> > > only flame wave and fire wall will cause damage). So, get in there and
> > > > >> > > do sum killing!
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Also deleting the bookmark...townkill added no enhancement to
> > > > >> the game or the fun in playing it multiplayer whatsoever. Pretty sad
> > > > >> AVault. I hope your advertisers are taking note.
> > > > >
> > > > >And I used to like the AVault....BUT I'm never gonna use it
> > > > >again.Support AVault boycott!!!
> > > >
> > > > Me too....bookmark gone.
> > >
> > > And another bookmark gone! I now know why multiplayer is not that
> > > important to me in a game. Piss off with you pathetic cheats!
> >
> > Another one here.
> I will also not go to or support this page.
Nor I. I visit game sites which strive to *enhance* my enjoyment of
gaming, not erode it. I will not be visiting AVault...
Devil
<very good statements snipped>
>> >I think a site that wants to be professional would try to discourage
>> >utilities that disrupt multiplayer games, not promote them. What do you
>> >think?
>> >
>>
>> Obviously, we don't see it that way. We provide information, that's
>> all. Do we use the Townkill cheat? Nope. Would we? Nope. Should we
>> censor information we don't like? Nope.
>
>Should we support a site encouraging a style of play which hurts
>multiplayer gaming. Nope.
>
>Desslock
Is it obvious that all this page wants is more hits, without caring
about the means to get them or the consequences? Yup.
Skeksis
Angel L. Munoz wrote:
> It is a sad day in this country when sites like ours get boycotted
> because of offering information that is already available in the public
> domain.
It is also a sad day when one wraps themselves in the American flag and
the Constitution to defend an action that people find reprehensible.
This threadbare argument that 'someone else is doing it we will too'
gets old fast. Have you ever heard about *not* sinking to someone
else's levle???
Skeksis
Brian
Greetings everyone,
I am very happy to announce that we've found a new trainer which
TOTALLY NEGATES Townkill AND Player Killers.
The program isn't perfect though, you must run it exactly has it tells
you to in the help files and it will usually make the defending
character invisible to the Tkiller after he/she gets hit with a spell.
Still, it's MUCH better than becoming helpless prey to those that
would use the Tkill cheat.
For more info, go to: http://www.gametools.com/prod01.htm
Or you can download it from: ftp://ftp.avault.com/win95/gy-diabl.exe
We hope that this helps to alleviate some of the concerns that many of
you have voiced in this forum.
Brian
David Thompson
Why would this alleviate my concern? ANY cheat for Battle.Net is a
bad thing. PKilling is as much a part of the game as anything else.
Blizzard intended it to be that way. Having cheats that negate that
along with the Townkill simply distorts another part of Diablo.
If you want to restore your site's reputation, have the courage to
pull all the multiplayer cheats you have up for Diablo. While you're
undoubtedly correct in saying that that will have no effect on
cheating in Battle.Net, it would go along way towards clearing up the
mess you've made.
On Sat, 29 Mar 1997 01:04:41 GMT, br...@avault.com (Brian) wrote:
>Greetings everyone,
>
>I am very happy to announce that we've found a new trainer which
>TOTALLY NEGATES Townkill AND Player Killers.
>
>The program isn't perfect though, you must run it exactly has it tells
>you to in the help files and it will usually make the defending
>character invisible to the Tkiller after he/she gets hit with a spell.
>
>Still, it's MUCH better than becoming helpless prey to those that
>would use the Tkill cheat.
>
>We hope that this helps to alleviate some of the concerns that many of
>you have voiced in this forum.
>
>- Brian
Angel L. Munoz
David Thompson wrote:
>
> Why would this alleviate my concern? ANY cheat for Battle.Net is a
> bad thing. PKilling is as much a part of the game as anything else.
> Blizzard intended it to be that way. Having cheats that negate that
> along with the Townkill simply distorts another part of Diablo.
> If you want to restore your site's reputation, have the courage to
> pull all the multiplayer cheats you have up for Diablo. While you're
> undoubtedly correct in saying that that will have no effect on
> cheating in Battle.Net, it would go along way towards clearing up the
> mess you've made.
>
This will be my last post on this issue.
The Adrenaline Vault Game Site has a very popular Cheat Section (Game
NOT Over) and it will continue to carry all types of cheats. We have
now made the Anti-TK cheat available at our site. If you see it fit to
critize us for that, we can't do anything about that. If you choose not
to visit our site, that too is your right.
The Adrenaline Vault has always been controversial, irreverent and
bold. That is our publishing style and people that are attracted to the
site find that to be our number one asset. I am sorry that we have
offended a few people with our editorial choices and promotional
assertions, it was never our intention to offend.
I hope we can all get back to playing, which is what this is all about
after all.
Regards to all,
Angel L. Munoz
President
The Adrenaline Vault Game Site
http://www.avault.com
Ron
Angel L. Munoz wrote:
> This will be my last post on this issue.
You promise?
> The Adrenaline Vault Game Site has a very popular Cheat Section (Game
> NOT Over) and it will continue to carry all types of cheats.
Yep, AV will the hangout of choice for multiplayer cheatin' losers.
<SNIP>
> The Adrenaline Vault has always been controversial, irreverent and
> bold. That is our publishing style and people that are attracted to the
> site find that to be our number one asset. I am sorry that we have
> offended a few people with our editorial choices and promotional
> assertions, it was never our intention to offend.
What a bunch of bovine droppings. AV spammed the net with such come ons
as "do some killing" with the new TK hack, and got more then a "few"
gamers disgusted with their antics. Their continued insistance that
they will post all hacks and cheats for all multiplayer games leaves
little doubt what crowd they are trying to appeal to.
Cage
Spikitty
>We hope that this helps to alleviate some of the concerns that many of
>you have voiced in this forum.
>- Brian
>http://avault.com
You mean after all those posts, and everything that has been said, you
*still* don't get it? I would like to know the age of the people that run
Avault.
Brian, you are the guy that would sell the photos of Jon Benet Ramsey for
a few bucks. Disappear will you.
Jonathan Normington
FearNo1 recently wrote:
>I was not going to boycott your site because of the diablo thing
>(I didnt know nething about it) *HOWEVER*, your site *suX*
>for downloads, downloads are slow, then they *freeze*. Furthermore
>it seems like you guyZ got some monopolistic powers in terms of
>having "exclusive" and first hand access to demoZ. Now if U want this
>"exclusivity", then the *least* U guyZ can do is make your site decent
>for downloads. Gamespot isnt the gr8st, but atleast the downloadZ
>are phast.
Are you having some sort of problem with your keyboard..?
--
Jonathan Normington
Devil
If it wasn't so completely obvious that all you want is more hits to
your page, and don't really care WHAT you put or don't put on it to get
them as long as it gets you those hits, I would have to agree.
But since anyone can see that all you're doing is firing up controversy
to get some sort of publicity, you can go wash your mother's socks for
all I care.
Angel L. Munoz wrote:
>
> David Thompson wrote:
> >
> > Why would this alleviate my concern? ANY cheat for Battle.Net is a
> > bad thing. PKilling is as much a part of the game as anything else.
> > Blizzard intended it to be that way. Having cheats that negate that
> > along with the Townkill simply distorts another part of Diablo.
> > If you want to restore your site's reputation, have the courage to
> > pull all the multiplayer cheats you have up for Diablo. While you're
> > undoubtedly correct in saying that that will have no effect on
> > cheating in Battle.Net, it would go along way towards clearing up the
> > mess you've made.
> >
>
> This will be my last post on this issue.
>
> The Adrenaline Vault Game Site has a very popular Cheat Section (Game
> NOT Over) and it will continue to carry all types of cheats. We have
> now made the Anti-TK cheat available at our site. If you see it fit to
> critize us for that, we can't do anything about that. If you choose not
> to visit our site, that too is your right.
>
> The Adrenaline Vault has always been controversial, irreverent and
> bold. That is our publishing style and people that are attracted to the
> site find that to be our number one asset. I am sorry that we have
> offended a few people with our editorial choices and promotional
> assertions, it was never our intention to offend.
>
> I hope we can all get back to playing, which is what this is all about
> after all.
>
> Regards to all,
>
> Angel L. Munoz
> President
> The Adrenaline Vault Game Site
Steve Bonnot
There is no pleasing some people. You guys publish a good attempt at
nullifying Townkill and people still bitch. I personally think this is
a good thing. Good job guys.
Steve
Phaedrus
In article <33401F...@cisco.com>, Steve Bonnot <ste...@cisco.com> wrote:
>There is no pleasing some people. You guys publish a good attempt at
>nullifying Townkill and people still bitch. I personally think this is
>a good thing. Good job guys.
Well, there's a reason why "people still bitch". To use a violent
real-world analogy (always popular on Usenet), if I'm a gun dealer, and
there's a civil war going on, and I aggressively market guns to the the
government (telling them how they can restore order and bring down the
terrorists), and I aggressively market guns to the rebels (telling them how
they can bring death to their oppressors), people are unlikely to think of
me as a principled gentleman helping people exercise their right to bear
arms. They're more likely to think of me as a money-grubbing thug with
no principles who'll take money from whoever offers it and who doesn't give
a damn about the consequences.
Likewise, if I run a web site, and aggressively market townkill cheats
to the cheaters (telling them to "go and do sum killing"), while simultaneously
marketing anti-cheat programs to the non-cheaters, people are unlikely to
think of me as a courageous defender of free speech; they're more likely to
think of me as a rather weak individual who doesn't care about anything but
generating more hits for my site and who'll say anything to anyone to get them.
--
\o\ If you're interested in books/stories with transformation themes, \o\
/o/ try <URL:http://www.halcyon.com/phaedrus/translist/translist.html>. /o/
\o\ New list entries always appreciated. FC1.21:FC(W/C)p6arw A- C->++ D>++ \o\
/o/ H+ M>+ P R T++++ W** Z+ Sm RLCT a cmn++++$ d e++ f+++ h- i++wf p-- sm# /o/
David Thompson
Posting a cheat that ruins other people's enjoyment of a game is
not "controversial", "irreverent" or "bold". You act like people here
are the Moral Majority trying to shut down PlayBoy magazine. I am not
offended, I am just annoyed that your site is contributing to the
destruction of a game that I used to enjoy.
Put up all the single player cheats that you want, but multiplayer
cheating affects other people's enjoyment of the game. If you want to
be bold, then remove them. Otherwise, you're just another site for the
12-year-old "kEwL" Diablo cheaters to link to.
On Sun, 30 Mar 1997 12:49:32 -0600, "Angel L. Munoz"
<an...@avault.com> wrote:
>
>This will be my last post on this issue.
>
>The Adrenaline Vault Game Site has a very popular Cheat Section (Game
>NOT Over) and it will continue to carry all types of cheats. We have
>now made the Anti-TK cheat available at our site. If you see it fit to
>critize us for that, we can't do anything about that. If you choose not
>to visit our site, that too is your right.
>
>The Adrenaline Vault has always been controversial, irreverent and
>bold. That is our publishing style and people that are attracted to the
>site find that to be our number one asset. I am sorry that we have
>offended a few people with our editorial choices and promotional
>assertions, it was never our intention to offend.
>
>I hope we can all get back to playing, which is what this is all about
>after all.
>
>Regards to all,
>
>
>Angel L. Munoz
>President
>The Adrenaline Vault Game Site
>http://www.avault.com
MacCorMac
Angel L. Munoz wrote:
snip
> The Adrenaline Vault has always been controversial, irreverent and
> bold.
You forgot to add irresponsible. Anyone who uses the townkilling cheat
is a gutless jerk; anyone who provides the TK cheat, like you do, is no
better; and anyone who profits from providing the TK cheat, like you do,
is worse.
Look up the word "responsibility".
> If you choose not to visit our site, that too is your right.
Gee, thanks...
MacCorMac
rend
vagab0nd
>> > >> <snip> Pretty sad
>> > >> AVault. I hope your advertisers are taking note.
Is there a way, other than visiting AV's site, to get a list of their
adversisers, so that we may express our opinions to them?
It is obvious that AV isn't going to budge for us. I was going to
word that differently to say, "AV cares more about the advertisers
than the customer. I believe the customer existed before the
adversiters.", but I decided not to word it that way.
Didn't cheaters and old-time hackers use to have secret warez, cheat,
and anarchy sites that you had to be "KEWL" to gain access to? It is
sad that today you can get the same information from a commercial
site.
vagab0nd
>I am very happy to announce that we've found a new trainer which
>TOTALLY NEGATES Townkill AND Player Killers.
>We hope that this helps to alleviate some of the concerns that many of
>you have voiced in this forum.
Umm....., don't think so. This makes everything ok now? If I
distibuted a virus, then distributed the anti-virus, I am cleared now?
vagab0nd
>I hope we can all get back to playing, which is what this is all about
>after all.
>
Don't you mean, "I hope we can all get back to fumbling back and forth
with Diablo's Eye in an attempt to spot cheaters, or waste twenty
minutes talking them to death to see if they sound honest.
This post isn't another attack on AV's decision; it's just another
airing of anti-cheat frustration.
Robin Sequira
I guess you don't care if no one comes to your site. You probably lost
every gamer who plays Diablo without cheating. And that is a *LARGE*
number.
--
<<Phoenix>>
Phugee at MindSpring dot com
(with grappling hook) "Dog pile on the shambler!!"
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Vista/3236
> >
> >The Adrenaline Vault Game Site has a very popular Cheat Section (Game
> >NOT Over) and it will continue to carry all types of cheats. We have
> >now made the Anti-TK cheat available at our site. If you see it fit to
> >to visit our site, that too is your right.
> >
> >site find that to be our number one asset. I am sorry that we have
> >offended a few people with our editorial choices and promotional
> >assertions, it was never our intention to offend.
> >
> >after all.
> >
Terry Haynes
David Thompson (meph...@netcom.ca) wrote:
: Posting a cheat that ruins other people's enjoyment of a game is
: not "controversial", "irreverent" or "bold". You act like people here
: are the Moral Majority trying to shut down PlayBoy magazine. I am not
: offended, I am just annoyed that your site is contributing to the
: destruction of a game that I used to enjoy.
: Put up all the single player cheats that you want, but multiplayer
: cheating affects other people's enjoyment of the game. If you want to
: be bold, then remove them. Otherwise, you're just another site for the
: 12-year-old "kEwL" Diablo cheaters to link to.
Hear! Hear!
I was originally just going to leave this alone and join
the boycott of AV. after seeing the new post about
yet another MP cheat I definitely see no reason to
patronize this site.
MP cheats just aren't needed.
-Terry
Ps I will probly be avoinding pc release list also
since its hosted on AV.
-------
David Thompson
Jonathan,
It's called "net speak". When I was playing Warcraft 2 a lot on
Kali, I used to encounter it all the time. People would make fun of me
because I was a "brainiac". In other words, because I wrote complete
sentences and used proper grammar. Most people online are either too
lazy or too stupid to express themselves in proper English, I guess.
The moronic capitalization is an IRC thing, from all the "WaReZ"
hounds who spend their days downloading programs they'll never touch
just because they're there. The IRC is home to legions of these
semi-literate twits.
cogn...@rocketmail.com
In article <01bb210a$6e10b980$57ac45cf@dad---robin>,
"Robin Sequira" <phu...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> I guess you don't care if no one comes to your site. You probably lost
> every gamer who plays Diablo without cheating. And that is a *LARGE*
> number.
Phugee,
It seems that the common belief that AVault's traffic has declined based
on the boycott is not true. Yesterday the site announced an increase in
'unique visits' of 43% for the month of March and that visits exceeded
one million.
Has anyone talked to them to find out if their traffic has declined or
increased since the boycott?
Cognizant
DeDanaan
Diablo Version 1.03 was just released. Present versions of Townkill are
now useless. AVAULT will have to find a new cash cow.
DeDanaan
Terry Haynes <ter...@Sun.COM> wrote in article
<5htunc$j...@engnews1.Eng.Sun.COM>...
Robin Sequira
David Anderson
David Thompson wrote:
>
> Jonathan,
> It's called "net speak". When I was playing Warcraft 2 a lot on
> Kali, I used to encounter it all the time. People would make fun of me
> because I was a "brainiac". In other words, because I wrote complete
> sentences and used proper grammar. Most people online are either too
> lazy or too stupid to express themselves in proper English, I guess.
> The moronic capitalization is an IRC thing, from all the "WaReZ"
> hounds who spend their days downloading programs they'll never touch
> just because they're there. The IRC is home to legions of these
> semi-literate twits.
I've seen it spelled "WaReZ" all the way back in the late 1980's when i
was a pirate on local BBS's, so that means that it did not start with
IRC.
James Thompson
In article <01bb210a$6e10b980$57ac45cf@dad---robin>, "Robin Sequira" <phu...@mindspring.com> writes:
> I guess you don't care if no one comes to your site. You probably lost
> every gamer who plays Diablo without cheating. And that is a *LARGE*
> number.
> --
> <<Phoenix>>
> Phugee at MindSpring dot com
> (with grappling hook) "Dog pile on the shambler!!"
> http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Vista/3236
Not only is that a large number of gamers, I would also assume that the
ones that don't cheat in multi-player games are also the ones that don't
use pirated software. Now if I was an advertiser on the nameless website
and realized that they were targeting an audience of cheats and pirates
then it wouldn't make much sense to advertise there anymore.
Jim Thompson
Ben Blackford
David Thompson <meph...@netcom.ca> wrote in article
<33438cdf...@nntp.netcruiser>...
>
> Jonathan,
> It's called "net speak". When I was playing Warcraft 2 a lot on
> Kali, I used to encounter it all the time. People would make fun of me
> because I was a "brainiac". In other words, because I wrote complete
> sentences and used proper grammar. Most people online are either too
> lazy or too stupid to express themselves in proper English, I guess.
> The moronic capitalization is an IRC thing, from all the "WaReZ"
> hounds who spend their days downloading programs they'll never touch
> just because they're there. The IRC is home to legions of these
> semi-literate twits.
And then some of them write that way because they feel it's cooler to talk
like idiots and throw 8's, z's, 1's, 3's and 0's all over the place...
generally the same kind of people who get a kick out of townkilling.
At any rate, the whole PK business with Diablo is just a bunch of kids
getting their jollies, since all that is EVER lost in a pkill is gold,
which these same twirps could hack into unlimited amounts of if they
desired... pkilling does no harm or good in general, just pisses off the
person who's dead. Those who disapprove of pkilling need to keep the old
advice in their head of never going into dark alleys with a big wallet: if
you don't have any gold to steal, the 1/2 of your gold that they get will
probably just depress them, even if they resurrect and kill you repeatedly
just to get the rest of the gold (yes, i've seen it done). I never quite
figured out the WareZ morons though, probably because my HD is too full of
QUALITY games that I paid for to have space for older games that everybody
pirates but nobody likes anyway.
OK, enough prattle, if you can add something to that, go ahead, but I think
I've managed to sum it up pretty neatly ;)
----
_________ .__ _________ __
\_ ___ \____________ _____| |__ \_ ___ \_____ _/ |_
/ \ \/\_ __ \__ \ / ___/ | \/ \ \/\__ \\ __\
\ \____| | \// __ \_\___ \| Y \ \____/ __ \| |
\______ /|__| (____ /____ >___| /\______ (____ /__|
\/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/
(http://members.aol.com/crashcat2/crashcat.htm)
Lester
what's all this about?