Forum:Respecting classified information

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Respecting classified information
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 17 January 2009 by Dtm142.

InformationThis is a policy discussion, which has been split off from the main Yew Grove page due to its substantial length. This started with an initial suggested policy which is posted immediately below, and then a subsequent policy suggestion with a differently worded policy suggestion that is currently listed below. Before "voting", please read most of this discussion and understand what policy is actually being debated here.


I don't think we have a policy on this sort of thing, but if we do, I am thus calling it into question. If we don't, we should get such a policy made at the end of this discussion.

Jagex has a lot of classified information, and a selected few from the player base (like me lulz) are granted access to a lot of the information. You should know that I'm primarily talking about:

  • The Player moderator centre and private moderator forums
  • The private high level forums
  • The private clan leader forums

If we get information and/or pictures of/from these classified areas of the RuneScape website (which he have in the past and ended up rejecting), would we embrace the normally classified information, or would we reject to publicly tell of the information?

Of the bit I can say about the Mod centre, there is a rule that anyone who leaks information (i.e. like someone who tells us classified info) would get their modship revoked, and possibly even receive a ban. Relatively the same goes for the private clan forums.

Will we respect Jagex's request to keep classified information just that, or will we spread the word of what should be secretive? Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 22:55, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that much information (especially if it's classified) is really necessary. WWTDD? 22:58, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

This stuff is classified for a reason. Jagex DOES NOT want the general RS community to see it. If it's only meant for a certain group of players, than so be it. We shouldn't post info Jagex doesn't want certain people to see. Besides, we could get some nasty repercussions from them if we do. Kevin-020 23:11, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I say we should disclose all information possible. We are not Jagex and we don't need to follow Jagex's rules. Take the Player dictionary for example. We do not censor instances of what the words mean, therefore we should not "censor" what appears in the player mod centre or anything else for that matter. What "nasty repercussions" do you mean, Kevin? Rollback crown.svg Kudos 2 U Talk! Edit count! Contribs! 23:13, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
The "nasty repercussions" could come in the form of Jagex aggressively enforcing their copyright on much of the content we are presuming to be "fair use" on this website. We, as fans, could try to fight that on a legal basis, but it could be ugly and costly both in terms of time spent and some substantial monetary losses. We also depend on some good faith from Jagex in terms of general cooperation with fan sites.
Still, I'd have to agree that Jagex doesn't do much here other than provide the game website, and they would be fighting an uphill battle legally speaking if they did try to hit us hard... where I think we would have a great many allies to join us if it broke out into a RS-Wiki users vs. Jagex legal fight. I don't think they even advertise with Wikia. --Robert Horning 01:02, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Spread the word. As long as the information follows verifability guidelines and does not break other Jagex rules (privacy, encouraging players to break rules, etc) and it benefits the article, it should be fine. Because we are not a Jagex run site, their policies on secrecy should not prevent us from adding encyclopedic information. The RuneScape Wiki should not encourage censorship based on an an offsite organization's policies. Although some potentially harmful information should be removed, we don't need a policy about it. It's better to discuss each individual case when it arrives and decide as a community whether the information is necessary. Dtm142 23:20, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Per Dtm. Reveal the info if it's useful in an article, etc. If we don't need it however, leave it unknown. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk 
When it comes to classified information such as the PMod centre, that classified info should not be allowed in my opinion. We are not controlled by Jagex, but RuneScape is, and RuneScape is run by Jagex. We should respect their views, and if certain information is only intended for a certain group of people, it should stay that way unless Jagex says otherwise. Andrew talk 23:47, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Information should be removed based on whether it is dangerous. I think that the judgement of the editors should override Jagex's decisions not to release it. Dtm142 00:58, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Dangerous? How? I was somewhat recently involved with an individual who was plotting and seeking assistance in-game (at the Grand Exchange BTW) to help assassinate a certain candidate for U.S. President that I'm sure you are quite familiar with at the moment. I also contacted the U.S. Secret Service when I saw what the idiot was saying. Far be it to hide this stuff, you need to let others know it is happening and shine a light into idiotic behavior. A kid in New Jersey just got arrested because he was plotting a school shooting rampage and posted that info on the RSOF. Perhaps the actual drivel that is advocating this sort of garbage should be removed, but it should be made available to folks who need this information. I think it would be useful for players and parents of players to know that some of this stuff is happening and not sweep information like this under the rug. --Robert Horning 02:10, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
I was referring to information that could violate users' privacy or aid rulebreaking. For example, publishing the list of player moderators should not be allowed because it would make the users on the list vulnerable to harrassment and account theft. However, I think that we should be allowed to mention that a list of player moderators exists in the player moderator centre. Dtm142 02:16, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I think we should publish confidential info. We are not JaGeX. However, disclosing Pmod stuff could get you demodded or banned, but I don't think that should be against the rules either. Any pmods here should be allowed to leak the info at the expense of their own account. The pmod centre info is the only thing I wouldn't fully support leaked info of - the private forums I'd give a full support.

InstantWinstonDragon 2h sword old.pngold edits | new edits

00:10, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I have access to the Clan Leaders Forum, and I can tell you for a fact that they have specifically told us not to share the information or screenshots with anyone outside of our clan. They don't mind clan members of a leader with access knowing some of the info, but they specifically stated that posting information/screenshots on a public website is crossing the line. Andrew talk 00:37, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
You don't have to contribute the information if you don't want to. If someone does decide to risk their account to add to the wiki however, we shouldn't stop them. I suggest adding to RuneScape:General disclaimer that while we encourage our editors to contribute in order to help us become the best RuneScape resource on the internet, we are not responsible for any action taken against their account or any physical or mental harm that can occur from using our site. Dtm142 00:54, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't want to be openly encouraging users to deliberately break any sort of agreements that they have made with Jagex, and certainly I would strongly discourage such disclosure unless you are willing to risk legal action against you (account banning, removing account status of various types, and even formal lawsuits). I can imagine a few very limit cases where somebody might just be willing to "break silence", but it would be incredibly rare.
As for details that may be found in these "classified" forums but have otherwise been reported on fan websites and are "in the public domain".... I consider that information to be fair game. I don't care one little bit what Jagex thinks about trying to "stuff the genie back into the bottle" once the information is disclosed. I would encourage any articles that use such information to clearly cite the source of the information (aka what fan website, blog, or news article talks about the detail).
I've seen some "screw-ups" even on the "official" Runescape website from time to time that sometimes reveal a little more than should have been disclosed (from the viewpoint of Jagex). Screen captures of what ought to be publicly accessible pages IMHO are fair-game here as well, even if Jagex later changes the content. You can have a jaundiced view at some of the information "revealed" like this (such as the controversy about the Sailing skill), but it certainly can be shared... again especially if it is something noteworthy and being discussed in several other places.
Jagex may complain about disclosure of "trade secrets", but their paranoia can go just a little too far. Don't get worried about getting destroyed (literally or figuratively) by Jagex, but I would still maintain some sense of ethics about this if you have access to this sort of information. Once it is published on this wiki, however, it is fair game as this is posting the information in a public forum. I really don't think any actions should be taken *here* on the wiki against a user that somehow gets this information, nor should such information disclosure be aggressively taken down. Those with access to this sort of information simply ought to be careful, just as anybody with access to confidential or private information ought to be. --Robert Horning 00:54, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Due to the fact that we aren't Jagex I see no reason why we should censor any information that could be on an encylopedic nature. I say we any mods or players with access to private forums should feel free to post any information they want, while taking any precautions to prevent their accounts from being banned. Such as not revealing your rs usernames. Prayer-icon.png Sir Lenehan File:Smite old.png|25px 00:50, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

What kind of information are we talking about here? This is the first I have heard of selectivly available inside information and without some examples it is hard to create an opinion. Severedsyn

*The Player moderator centre and private moderator forums
*The private high level forums
*The private clan leader forums Dtm142 01:11, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
I read that part, I mean what specific information: future updates, glitch issues, etc. Severedsyn
"I say we any mods or players with access to private forums should feel free to post any information they want, while taking any precautions to prevent their accounts from being banned." - wow.
There is some information of a more personal nature that doesn't really need to be widely discussed, such as a problem user or clan really doesn't need to be discussed outside of the moderator forums, or issues related directly to their moderator tools. There is some gossip and some "preview hints" that might apply as well... which is what players "on the outside" would realistically be more interested in anyway. The "high level forums" are meant for just what they sound: high level players who have some experience in the game. I can't imagine much that would be disclosed there by Jagex that shouldn't be public anyway, but avoids dealing with new player garbage and has a higher S/N ratio. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong here! --Robert Horning 01:39, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Confidentiality was one of the things I did and still uphold vigilantly, even after all the crap I've taken from Jagex. I tossed my crown, but I'm keeping the promise I made when I accepted it concerning this. Things like where Jagex put a picture of a right-click report option in an update, I don't necessarily care about. Things like the mod center, and Especially the forums (10x important imo) shouldn't be discussed beyond what Jagex has stated. We don't need to know any of this stuff to function for better or for worse; I see it the same as I see gossip. And, like I've said in various talk pages, almost all of the stuff I've found via google in my own little searches has either been outdated or complete bs. This isn't a fight I want to resume. Why can't we just respect their wishes? Rendova 01:24, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Am I asking you to disclose anything you may know? I hope you don't feel that pressure, as I'm not trying to make you do anything you aren't comfortable doing... nor is anybody else suggesting otherwise. The question here is if something from one of these sources is "revealed" and posted on the wiki... should it be deleted and aggressively fought against? I think not. If Jagex has a problem with some content on this website, they can have their legal counsel contact Wikia officially and have it removed... if there is a legal basis under the DMCA for its removal (the valid reason for legally requiring removal of information from a server located in the USA). As users, we can fight back and demand this information be restored if it is removed as well, so there is a formal legal process if Jagex really wants to fight this. Mostly, I don't think they would bother. --Robert Horning 01:39, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
The only thing I'm feeling is disregard for Jagex and their request. I know they don't really deserve much respect after all they've put us through, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't give it to them. I wouldn't divulge any of this information and I've deleted it as it's been posted, along with a few other active/ex pmods on these forums. And I don't think they would bother to remove it through legal process, but is that a reason to do it anyway? Rendova 01:48, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Jagex doesn't nor shouldn't have editorial control over the content of this wiki. Are you suggesting here that you have explicitly removed content from this wiki due to a violation of Jagex's editorial policies and not something agreed upon by community consensus? Again, I agree neither you nor anybody who has agreed to restrictions from Jagex should disclose stuff you aren't comfortable at revealing to anybody, but why should you be the "police" to stop anybody else from discussing these matters? That is what I don't get, nor do I understand why Jagex's policies should apply here to this wiki if the content is added... for whatever reason that content is placed here. --Robert Horning 02:01, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Acknowledge, but don't go into detail: Things that would potentially get a player banned, ie, showing exactly what goes on in the high level forums or moderator centre, should not be allowed. However, we are not Jagex nor are we bound by their rules on this site, so the existence of such things should be freely discussed -- It is information pertaining to runescape, after all. It's a similar situation with bots or game-breaking glitches, we talk about them and even go into detail about how some things work, but we don't give links to bots or tell people how to abuse glitches. Should be a same policy with sensitive information. Also, Jagex frowns on non-official quest spoilers and step-by-step walkthroughs, but we have those anyway, so we can't be expected to kiss up to them in every possible way. Same thing with some potentially offensive language, it's against Jagex's rules but a few of our articles have some solely for informational purposes. Dark cavalier.png Regabuh (talk) (contribs) 03:21, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Leave it out! – There is a reason why information in the moderator centre and forums are confidential. If the information was leaked, then it would make the jobs of all moderators much harder. I have already seen information ranging from the forum mod interface to our guidelines posted here on multiple occasions. None of this information helps anyone anyway, and in the end we only get players with knowledge on how to evade mutes and bans. Quest map icon.png Laser Dragon Task map icon.png 04:09, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm with Dr5ag2on1, and the other's on this one. If Jagex wanted something to be confidential then we should respect their wishes. I mean we aren't a tabloid now are we? Because like Drag said, if some of this got out, players could avoid punishment and Mods would be hard pressed to do thier jobs more effectively. Quest map icon.pngBilly Bomb7Stories!Locked diary.png 04:36, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Having been a moderator on this and other wikis, as well as on other non-wiki websites, I couldn't disagree more. The problem here is that it is very difficult to draw the line in terms of what is acceptable and isn't if we have to be using Jagex's standards here. I also really don't understand why revealing knowledge of the mechanics of the process is necessarily going to make somebody evade easier, and indeed keeping quite on this stuff is likely to make it all that much more of a game for those that are interested.
I strongly disagree with Jagex's standards as being hyper paranoid and overly legalistic. There are some very legitimate issues that sometimes need to be brought up that can include discussions of what tools are available to moderators to fight abuse. Knowledge is power, and the folks who are a real pain in the behind to moderators already know all of the tricks and things to do to make the life of a moderator hard. Often they are former moderators or are working with rouge moderators who don't care. Yes, I'm familiar with the dark underground of RS fans, and there are some hard-core folks who are pure idiots... and quite well organized as well.
This is a question of censorship, and removing content from websites (like this wiki) which are not operated under Jagex standards nor paid for with any money from Jagex. I really don't see why content needs to be removed just because it might have been removed on the official website.
Information of a personal nature... aka discussions about specific individuals and groups... that I do understand for reasons of privacy and even purely legal reasons why you would want to keep that information from being discussed. Potential slander and libel lawsuits are just the tip of the iceberg here. But I do believe far too much is being censored by Jagex than needs to be, and this wiki doesn't need to participate in such draconian restrictions on information either. --Robert Horning 05:27, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Being a moderator on the wiki and being a moderator on RuneScape is significantly different. Unlike the wiki, Moderators on RuneScape have strict guidelines, and if such information was revealed, it would cause severe problems. The mechanics of the tools we have is not as much of a problem, but I still do not support revealing confidential information. Quest map icon.png Laser Dragon Task map icon.png 05:40, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
I've deleted information according to consensus reached on the talk pages of the articles. "Knowledge is power, and the folks who are a real pain in the behind to moderators already know all of the tricks and things to do to make the life of a moderator hard." - Again speaking as the moderator I was, this isn't true. The only legitimate information I've seen out in public has been released by hackers; rogue moderators are usually weeded out very quickly, and most ex moderators are like me, still respecting the excellent job the jmods in charge of us pmods have done and still honoring our promises to them. Again I just don't understand why the wiki as a whole can't respect their simple request. We get nothing out of it other than "Lindsey Lohan did WHAT?" (simply, pleasure of knowing something that's none of our business) and a bunch of extremely agitated mods like myself. Rendova 05:59, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Look, I understand disclosing of personal information, but most of what you are talking about is not personal information disclosure here. I really don't get it. I also strongly disagree that disclosing such information would cause severe problem. The problem here is Jagex clamping down on information to such a degree that it is absurd, and a damn lousy Quality Assurance program within the Jagex development team (please, don't get me started.... Jagex has embarrassed themselves time and time again here) that they are hiding bugs under the guise of "confidentiality" rather than shining the light of truth on it. I feel sorry, sometimes, for moderators on Runescape because they often can't really do much about real problems anyway, but that is an issue Jagex needs to deal with.
BTW, the number of "real" hackers that can access information like you are talking about here? Maybe a dozen folks in the whole stinking world are even capable. I'm not talking "script kiddies" that run "hacks" on Jagex servers, but the folks with real capabilities here. Or again, does Jagex have such incredibly lax network security standards and gaping holes to openly encourage hackers into their systems? That is just sloppy software engineering (or a lack thereof). My biggest source of annoyance (for me) in the game is players asserting their accounts have been "hacked" when I know for a fact it is players who have been stupid with their password security and nothing more.
The difference that I see between being a moderator here and with Jagex (either a forum moderator or a player moderator) is that the software isn't propritary and bugs about the system are openly discussed with candor... and legitimate attempts are made to resolve those issues. I guess it is a difference in attitude here, and this attitude of secrecy is one that I strongly disagree with in general. Noting that Zezima has 4 black marks (to make up something here that isn't true...but merely an example) is inappropriate. Disclosing that player mods can find out about how many blackmarks a player has (or can't find out) should be appropriate here on this wiki. Perhaps my attitude stems from working with quite a bit of open source software and trusting that disclosure is better than hiding it under the rug. It certainly disturbs me significantly that information is being removed from this wiki even now under the rubric that "Jagex doesn't want this stuff disclosed". --Robert Horning 11:19, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, wow. Did this get long! :D

There are some things that won't hurt, like mentioning- and only mentioning -that the Player moderator centre contains guidelines for mods, and even a list of mods. Anything more specific than that should be long removed. Heck, even deleting the article and restoring all the non-leak edits would even be a legitimate action (which I have even done before).

To all non-mods; you will probably never understand how important this is to Jagex and moderators. If what moderators can and can't mute for was leaked, word would spread like wildfire. Though I shall not say anything specifically, mods can't mute someone for calling someone else a "noob". There is a thin line between something mutable, and something not mutable. If that line was posted, people could break rules freely without punishment. Absolute chaos.

By the love of Guthix, we shouldn't support such leaks. It's like RWIT. I'm not even joking. It's that bad. You get caught RWITing once, you're banned. Get caught leaking something, you're banned. We remove RWIT ads on sight. What makes this different?

This site has one thing high above the rest: We're civil, we're mature, and we abide by the company that makes our beloved game. We do NOT want to turn into a Zybez. Heck, two-thirds of their ads are either RWIT, a scam, or something like "make billions on a level 3 acc!".

People get banned for this. Endorsing it would go against what we stand for--what makes us who we are. Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 07:29, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

In fairness, I think Jagex doesn't give player moderators enough authority to actually act on problems within the game. While the authority to act here shouldn't be given away like candy, the power to boot players from the game, institute temporary bans (subject to review), and monitoring "private" conversations are things IMHO player-mods ought to have available as tools.
The biggest problem that Jagex faces is that they don't trust their moderators, and they are taking a centralized top-down approach to resolving issues that need a more distributed approach... and that those folks with real authority are simply overwhelmed in dealing with the problem individuals. That is a systemic issue that needs to be dealt with by Jagex management.
As for a list of things that can and can't be muted for... I don't get why disclosure is such a big deal. Much of what you can be muted for is already spelled out quite clearly with the "terms of service" agreements (aka the public "rules"), and the rest is merely quibbling over minor details. Again, it is because the moderators aren't trusted by Jagex that there is a problem here, not to mention the utter contempt against players that seems to come from at least some Jagex staff members. --Robert Horning 11:46, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Thinking this through even more, I think it is utterly absurd that players can't know what will get them muted or not. This is like going onto a highway and driving your vehicle without knowing any of the laws that govern how you drive there, and hoping that the police officers sitting on the side of the highway simply let you pass, but occasionally pulling over people for reasons you simply don't understand. Even worse, if the laws change and there is no way for you to know that suddenly what you are being stopped for (or in this case muted for) was "against the rules".
Ditto for "RWIT" enforcement. We should know what is legitimate and what isn't in terms of trading limits and giving items to other players. I do know for a fact that there are some work arounds to player trade limits... and these I believe to be simply sloppy programming on the part of the Jagex dev team. Again, these need to be shown the light of day and not buried some place in a back corner of a moderator forum. At the very least, I think it would help with enforcement if informed players could legitimate report (and know their reports mean something) about strongly suspicious actions and get somebody else to check out what was going on.--Robert Horning 23:02, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Don't Publish It - This information is classified for a reason and should not be published. It is for the good of JaGex. Why would a site dedicated to RuneScape publish something it doesn't want us knowing. How is that for the good of the game. It gives information to players on how to avoid specifications of the game and it's not fair to the player mods who follow JaGex's protocol. JaGex releases information based on a what to know and when bases. It's okay to predict and theorize on information, but to release real info that is normally classified is a violation. We protect other information, ex: Crystal Ball, yet we are discussing the publication on this? It makes no sense. Don't publish, as per this and Dr5ag2on1.

Bonziiznob Talk
I am for this, but under strict guideline. Because this site is not owned or operated by Jagex, it has freedom in what it can publish, and its publications are protected under the GFDL. However, this is not license for player moderators to post any kind of confidential information on this wikia unless Jagex themselves leaked it in a public place. By US law, if Jagex had leaked it, even if it was just for a nanosecond, that information becomes public if it was observed by an outside party.
Allowing player moderators to post confidential and undisclosed information here encourages breaking the rules. Both this wikia and Jagex have a rule that states this is a punishable offense. By proxy, those who encourage breaking Jagex's rules therefore break this wikia's rules, hence the need for strict guideline. Of course, it would be far easier on everyone to just not allow the information to be posted here in the first place. In any case, I'm certain that with or without this information, this site will still become (if it isn't already) the best RuneScape information site available due to the efforts of its community. --Taeadon--
I think it all depends on what's being posted. If it IS what's mutable and what isn't, I agree that it shouldn't be posted, but if it's something more minor, I don't see why not. If someone wants to upload it, they can cop the flak from Jagex. We are not them and do not have to abide by their rules. Period. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk 
There shouldn't be a policy, but people who have classified information should know better than to break their contract with Jagex in order to reveal it. It was given to them in confidence and they should keep it that way. It's only a game, there's no larger moral imperative to override the person's agreement with Jagex that allowed them access to the secret information. On the other hand, if you want to break your confidence and you're not worried about it, go ahead and post away.--Gunslnger42 13:07, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
I think its pretty pathetic that people are actually scared of Jagex. A company that hides behind their website for nearly all issues pertaining to marketing and customer support, and that have zero legal battles under their belt is not exactly very intimidating. I also think that the people telling us that information Jagex does not offer publicly should not be shown on the wiki need to take a look at combat calculators, quest guides, skill guides, the GE market watch, our page about Jagex Ingame Mods, and other features/information on this wiki that provide distinct advantages using information Jagex does not publicly offer. I dont believe I am the only one who wishes to know the details of the player moderator center/clan forums, and I would bet a sum that it wont change a dang thing if we had an official page on the subject with actual information. Its not like information regarding Jagex super secret activites have never been posted on the internet before. I personally wish Jagex would stop keeping every little detail under wraps. All in all, its not our place to restrict what an editor may choose to upload when it comes to relevant and useful information. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 13:15, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Zero legal battles? They recently sued the creator of FrugooScape (a private server).

InstantWinstonDragon 2h sword old.pngold edits | new edits

14:10, 14 December 2008 (UTC) EDIT: I think they actually lost the lawsuit, as well, with the creator getting away saying that he is using the private servers to teach people to code. Just if anyone was interested how their first lawsuit turned out...

Taken from Rule 11: Advertising Websites (

"5. Do you have any conditions that you would like Fan Sites to abide by?

Yes we do. Please see the below: The site should abide by our Terms and Conditions.

The site should not promote any activity that is against our Rules of Conduct.

The site should not publish an article, text or images taken from any of our websites without permission. If we do give you permission, you must acknowledge the relevant site as the source, and link back to the site.

The site should not link to or promote any adult sites, or sites that conflict with Jagex interests.

The site should not promote any sites or information that provide or support hacking, software piracy or other illegal activities."

We have to have their permission to publish images/information regarding the subjects mentioned. Andrew talk 16:05, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I say we respect Jagex's rules and not post them here. They've given people the game to enjoy, but classified information is too far. It's similar to, say (albiet this example being a weaker version of the situation), going to a birthday party with the celebratee's present in hand, having them unwrap it and be overjoyed about getting it, only to tell them that they can't use it in certain situations, or else you'll take it back and never talk to them again. By giving the present (the game) to the celebratee (the player populace), telling them that there's rules for using it (the information that you can't access), and, if they abuse the gift (making the info public) you'll ignore them for eternity (banning)...well, you get the picture. 7kyt1iT.gif --WINE OF GOOD HEALTH (Actually Stinko)
Actually, we don't have to have their permission to "copy" stuff... as long as it is used under fair-use principles. This applies not just to "classified" stuff, but nearly anything including screen shots and duplication of graphical images even on the "public" side. If your argument here is that we should only post those images and content that Jagex has explicitly granted permission to use, at least be consistent here and demand that 95% of all of the images on this site be removed and not just the "classified" stuff you are suggesting... or study up on what fair-use actually means. We don't "have" permission from Jagex to do anything... unless you can find something somewhere that Jagex has explicitly granted the "Runescape Wiki" permission to copy some of these images. BTW, stuff from the "classified" pages can also be used under fair-use... indeed fair-use rationale is likely to fly much better for stuff that is "classified" than for the stuff on the "public" pages.
The rest of these terms are pretty much lawyer boilerplate stuff that should be common sense. BTW, there are some of the "terms and conditions" that Jagex spells out that are blatantly illegal for them to even enforce, and are just lawyerese for "don't piss us off". Jagex can't ascribe "rights" to themselves that aren't already spelled out in copyright law. I am not saying that Jagex is out of line to boot people off of its equipment when you don't follow their rules, but that isn't the same thing.
The real problem here is what was stated at the beginning of this discussion: What should the "Runescape Wiki" policy (not Jagex's policy) be for displaying or otherwise discussing information that may be typically found only on the "restricted" parts of Jagex websites. To give a concrete example, Talk:Assist_System#Right_Click_Reporting is one of those "grey areas" that I'm thinking about... where IMHO it should be fair game to talk about "classified" information. I can point to other examples, but I find it unreasonable that such material is being censored from this wiki on what is a very weak rationale. --Robert Horning 17:59, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Right click reporting is not considered confidential by Jagex, especially since they leaked it in the kbase. Quest map icon.png Laser Dragon Task map icon.png 19:18, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
If it was not confidential, it wouldn't be called a "leak". 19:42, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
This still doesn't explain away the fact that the article was "cleansed" of "confidential information" due to the attitude being expressed here to remove anything that Jagex doesn't want revealed. I haven't reverted this edit precisely because I don't want to get into an edit war with a p-mod over this issue in one article, but it is a systemic issue that does need to be addressed in terms of the wiki as a whole. And yes, this "issue" of right click reporting was removed from the main article space. I don't think it was correct to happen there, nor should it happen on other pages of similar types of content either. --Robert Horning 22:34, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
I didn't have much of a problem with the right clicking thing because Jagex put up a picture of it in the kbase at one point. So they themselves published it on their site. I prefer to remain neutral, though. Rendova 22:58, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Here's the truth of the matter: The information is already out there on other fan sites. If people want it, it's not that hard to find on other sites, but it would really benefit the wiki to have information here. I'm a player mod in-game, and like I said before, I agree with posting the information here. There's no way Jagex is going to find out that someone on this wiki posted some information about the pmod centre and ban them. For one, most users on here don't use their actual RS names, or at least if they were a pmod they wouldn't use their pmod name (however, I know some users here are pmods and DO use their name, but they're not required to publish the information). However, like others have said we should not post the actual list of player mods (which is odd to think anyone actually would do that as it gets changed all the time and it has thousands of people). But we should say that there IS a list of player moderators and include some of the "extra powers" pmods have (besides the reporting thing and the mutes, obviously). I think player mods will know what I mean (Jagex denies player mods have any extra powers besides giving mutes and priority reports, which is flat out lying). We should also include at least something about the in-game get togethers of Jagex mods and Pmods. Now, Jagex says fan sites should comply with all of the rules of conduct. However, "should" is not a rule, just a guideline. Jagex really has no power over this wiki. They can't shut us down for not complying with their rules, or sue the wiki, or really do anything. Take or They're still there (as far as I know...) and they both heavily break the rules of conduct. I made a wall of text...whoops :P Rollback crown.svg Kudos 2 U Talk! Edit count! Contribs! 06:45, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

This is a waste of time. If Jagex does not want confidential information disclosed, than so be it. Would you want this sites reputation to be ruined? Would you want this site to have a reputation of being some sort of database that contains classified information that SHOULD NOT be posted? If that is your wish, then this site will be shut in a mattter of days. Before you post information that you know you shouldn't be posting, just stop for a sec think about the consequences. Thank you. €MØŠwô®L[) 07:35, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

As I said earlier, there is a lot of information on this wiki that Jagex does not want the public to know about. As said by kudos, the information is available anywhere else. I googled player moderator center download and one of the first links was a rar containing the html files so you could navigate the center like a pmod and read the guides/howtos etc. Why should we not host what the public already knows about pmods because of some fake loyalty to Jagex? I also think you are mistaken to think Jagex has any power over this wikis operation. We are not special, Jagex does not even recognize the fact that we exist, and as such we should take it upon ourselves to post anything we please. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 08:10, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Again and again, people keep posting "beware of the consequences", "think of the consequences", "what about the bad consequences?", ect. There are no bad consequences for this. How would it "ruin the reputation" of the site? The site is an encyclopedia FOR ALL THINGS RUNESCAPE. That means that even confidential information should be posted. It's not going to hurt anyone, but it will help people become informed, which is the purpose of these wikis. I can understand some player mods not wanting their accounts banned or demodded. That's fine. But as it's been said again and again, they don't have to add information to the articles if they don't want to. This simply releases information that's harmless to the public that's already available, however it's not available here. We are not run by Jagex, and as Tebuddy said, Jagex doesn't recognize that we even exist. They can't shut us down, we're not posting anything illegal. We're posting informative information. How would informing people ruin the reputation of the website? Rollback crown.svg Kudos 2 U Talk! Edit count! Contribs! 08:36, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
"There's no way Jagex is going to find out that someone on this wiki posted some information about the pmod centre and ban them." - They aren't stupid.
If you really were a mod, you would know a little something about the existence.. or rather nonexistence (for the last 1 1/2 years), of a certain list of people. You'd also know that beyond a special right click option, there really are no "powers". I wouldn't have retired if they'd have given us a shiny new toy :P.
They also Could take action against mods who disclose this information by checking their IP addresses. They take these leaks very seriously and this is one of the things that keeps their investigations team busy. Rendova 09:23, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm trying to understand what exactly the boundary is here.... and I don't buy the argument that we should not put up information that Jagex doesn't want disclosed... as we do that already in boatloads. Detailed "hint guides" for doing the Achievement diaries... on the very day they were released as well as step-by-step guides for completing quests, detailed reverse engineering on how the combat level is calculated, "money making guides", discussions of RWT loopholes.... all of these have been discussed before in articles. Some of these can be found by players in-game without being at the mod center, others simply by word of mouth. The problem here is the source of the information... and I'm not exactly sure what reputation we are talking about here. Nearly everything I've mentioned above would be a reason for a forum ban if you posted it in the RSOF. I've given a concrete example of something that has been removed from this wiki by an over-zealous p-mod or at least player who didn't want "leaked information" disclosed, so there certainly is an inconsistent policy at the very least on what is "acceptable" and what isn't.
Again, and I'll keep saying it, disclosing information about individual players is flat out inappropriate, but I don't get why there is something unique or special about more general information that may or may not have originated in the moderator centers or why that sort of stuff ought to be censored from the wiki. It certainly is a very, very few things that would be revealed at the mod center (or the high-level forums) that can't be discovered independently by ordinary players simply playing the game. --Robert Horning 09:15, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
I would also like to point out that there is no way anyone at Jagex who is not a wiki administrator could figure out someone is a player mod and directly leaked information. Even then, they wouldn't just start banning any suspicious names at random. Not to mention, THIS INFORMATION IS NOT NEW. If they had an investigation team worth anything, they would be busy working on other and more important matters. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 09:31, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
This IS important. Rendova 09:38, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Also, I looked up the mod center download you mentioned before, and it was extensively modified by whoever put it up for download or from wherever that guy got it from. And the pieces of information on there that were legitimate were extremely outdated. I've yet to find any real screenshots of more than the main menu of the center or to find a download of the current, untainted version. Rendova 09:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Rendova, I never said the list was still there, did I? I said we simply mention that it existed, I apologize for any confusion. And see, when I said "powers" you immediately denied it and said I wasn't a pmod...Anyway, I have to once again agree with Tebuddy. Jagex doesn't really care about this. We're one fan site. We're not even in the top five most popular fan sites. I don't even think the top 10. Jagex would care more if ones that everyone visits posted the information on their front pages, but they still couldn't shut them down, as the content is not illegal. Why should we respect Jagex's every wish? Once again, take the slang dictionary article for example. We don't censor out the curse words, so why "censor" out the confidential information? I'm not saying release information on the players, I'm saying say what a lot of people don't know but would like to be informed about and are "afraid" to visit other fan sites. Rollback crown.svg Kudos 2 U Talk! Edit count! Contribs! 10:05, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
I hate to sound skeptical, but how would a guide about being an effective player moderator have significantly changed since player mods were instated? Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 10:02, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
I said you probably weren't a mod when you alluded to there currently being a list of mods. And how would me denying any "extra powers" make you even more confident if you, supposedly as a mod, know yourself there aren't any beyond those stated?
Tebuddy, I'm sure you've seen the game itself change as much as anyone else, so I won't bother answering. Rendova 10:48, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

As far as a list of player mods is concerned.... I'm trying hard to understand what the problem is here. Player mods have the little white crown next to their name whenever they talk, and certainly an organized effort of players could create a list of player mods from this information alone. I'm not advocating such a list be created, but it doesn't have to be "revealed" from a mod center necessarily. This does go back to my point about disclosing information about individual players, and I think that is something we can agree upon should be removed from this wiki... particularly if being a player mod is the only thing notable about the player. For notability reasons alone, it isn't something worth publishing. Heck, we've had long arguments about even publishing information about players like Zezima who is notable... and people aggressively removing information about him.

Still, that doesn't get to the root of the argument here about content being deliberately removed when there isn't a policy violation here... at least a RS Wiki policy violation. On the one concrete example I gave where content was removed, several player mods agreed that it wasn't really "confidential". So is this the "fine line"... when something gets "past the barrier" and is public knowledge it is "safe" for inclusion on the wiki? What about general policies of moderators... is this something fair game to discuss and of course put on the appropriate page or is that considered "off-limits"? We really do need to get this nailed down in terms of a policy as stuff is getting deleted, and potential edit wars can result from the inconsistent application of this concept. I happen to agree that a policy needs to be implemented here, but I disagree that "confidential information" necessarily needs to be removed in all cases.

There are two huge philosophical camps here that don't seem to have middle ground, and that isn't a good thing in terms of deciding if a page, group of pages, or edits need to be kept or deleted. This has the potential for being incredibly disruptive to this wiki if both philosophical camps decided to duke it out over a particular article that is inevitably going to show up in the future. I think it is healthy to debate this issue a bit more abstractly now rather than get a raging VfD discussion going that drives participants off this wiki. We need these player-mods that want some of this content removed, just as we need the "let's publish all there is to Runescape" folks. There must be some middle ground we can agree upon even if we can't agree on the fringe stuff. And please, don't get hung up on the player-mod list... let's table the discussion about that (which may have some merit in terms of not publishing it on this wiki for multiple reasons) and move on. --Robert Horning 10:47, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I've said that if they slip up and publish something, like the right click report option, then go ahead and post it. Anything else that hasn't been released on a Jagex web site shouldn't be taken for fact and published. If there was nobody to say that downloadable mod center was inaccurate and confidentiality wasn't an issue, would it be published on here?
Something I've been trying to get at but nobody has answered yet is why do people want to know so badly? How many details do people so desperately want? Let's use the mod forums as an example. There is a forum. It may or may not contain a subsection dedicated to making ASCII cookies. Is that what people want to know? Why? What does it matter? That in itself isn't particularly sensitive, although I still respect Jagex's broad request not to mention it, why can't anyone else? And people mention how we shouldn't keep constantly honoring Jagex's every little request, but I can't think of any serious requests other than this that have come up. This isn't too much to ask, why is it such a big deal? Rendova 11:01, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
So why are edits that appear to be in good faith being reverted and content deleted from this wiki? Don't blow this argument up with stuff you know is patently false information here, and no, I don't think anybody is looking for "cheats" or "ASCII cookies" (even if http cookies are used by Jagex). The fact is that Jagex's rules don't apply here, although if you are ethical you shouldn't be breaking confidentiality or even confirming if something it true or not. But that doesn't mean that by being a player mod you should have to police content here under the same standards as you would on the RSOF or in-game.
The "rules" that Jagex mentions about "fan websites" is that we don't copy verbatium content that comes from their website without permission. Again I ask... where is the consistency in the argument here. This is simply copyright law and not something special or unique about just what is in the player mod center. I don't want to see the RS Wiki become a hacker haven going into details about the communications protocol between the Jagex servers and the client software, but I don't see why it is Jagex's business to even enforce that "rule" here on a website they aren't even paying for or helping to maintain.
I support the overall general policy that is already in place with this wiki that we shouldn't be encouraging rule breaking, but disclosing policies and general concepts about moderators isn't necessarily encouraging rule breaking. Yes, I do think it is too much to ask that we, here on this wiki, try to "push the genie back in the bottle" when information about moderators or other "senstive topics" is widely discussed on fan websites and then have the information deleted here on this wiki just because Jagex wants it gone. If you are a moderator on Runescape... moderate on the official website using Jagex's rules there. This is a different website and different rules can and do apply... it is important that distinction be made here. --Robert Horning 11:43, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I think editors should be able to write about classified information if they want. While we shouldn't encourage rulebreaking, if an editor wants to risk their account in order to contribute to an encyclopedic article, that's their choice. Jagex have no power to enforce their rules here.--Eyes2.gifPig HouseGuthix's Book of Balance.pngInane Ramblings 15:53, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I believe that it is a horrible idea to reveal classified information. Jagex owns the rights to all content on their site, and I can assure everyone if the information were to be put on the site that Jagex would contact main and have it removed. It's confidential for a reason, and if they needed to, they could and would pursue legal action against wikia. This is a much larger scale than what rules we have in our own little corner of the world, we are talking about breaching internation copyrights and breaking the law. I will no longer be able to support the wiki if it is decided to breach Jagex's confidentiality. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 17:56, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Robert, if you're talking about the analogy, what's the problem with it? I was asking a question with it. If you're talking about the other points I was making, then you're calling me a liar, and I'm extremely offended. You can ask Chia or Yanghua, and they'll tell you I have Not been bsing everyone on here. And my questions still haven't been answered.
And after thinking it over a bit, I think I'm with Karlis on this. Rendova 18:30, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Karlis, it seems to me like your completely ignoring the fact that we already publish hundreds of articles that contain ""classified"" information according to Jagex. If your going to censor information about player moderator powers, why allow quest guides and a GE? Not only that, but to think that Jagex has any legal leeway here is absolutely ridiculous. In a very small list of legitimate charges to be filed, international copyright violations? Thats like saying we are violating copyright for reverse engineering the combat formula when in reality all that was done was a little math. Jagex could not sue us, will not sue us, and cannot influence this wiki in any other way other than signing up and becoming active editors (which would be awesome). Really though, we are an information resource for all things Runescape. Why should our information be censored or less reliable because of some invisible boundry that some of us are afraid to cross. Since this page is getting somewhat long, I encourage people who are just entering the argument to re-read everything that has been said. Some of the issues are just being restated over and over. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 19:52, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
I assure you it will be removed. I've been playing MMO's for over 15 years, and I've seen many sites shut down for things similar to this. The Grand Exchange is not classified, in case you haven't noticed, it's available to the public. Go ahead and e-mail Jagex and ask them their thoughs on it. I'm not sure if you were around when a Moderator Center guide was posted on RuneHQ, but it was taken off within hours by the RuneHQ staff. If they post a confidentiality notice, they have every legal right to pursue anybody violating it. This isn't just posting pictures on a webpage, you're dealing with a multi-million dollar company. Please, send an e-mail to Jagex, I promise you they will tell you they will have it removed. You know, if you post their customer support e-mail (as I can't view at work) I will gladly do it now. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 20:04, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Furthermore, your analogy is horrible. Determining a mathematical forumla is much different than abusing rights given to you. You can't figure out the information in the Player Mod center unless you are given access to it. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 20:07, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
How is this "breaking the law"? What law? Verbatim copying of information without attribution or permission is a violation of copyright and that can and should be fought against. There is also fair-use that can apply here, but "classified" information is not given any other special protection than information posted on the "front page" of the Runescape website. Jagex's request for protecting "classified" information can at best be considered a trade secret, which can only be enforced as long as the information is kept confidential. Once the cat is out of the bag, trade secret privileges don't apply. That may set up a legal issue with the p-mod that spilled the beans, but it won't get the DMCA invoked to get the content removed. Jagex is not a government agency with special "national defense" related secrets that have extra legal protection above and beyond normal copyright laws.
Again, how is this different than the verbatim copying of the text for the updates (which is what I was quoting)? Or what about the highly extensive use of images lifted wholesale from the Jagex websites? Aren't these verbatim copies? Isn't this illegal as well? Please, let's be consistent here if you are going to use this as an argument. One sort of copying of information shouldn't be permitted when the other isn't. Trade secret laws don't apply once the information is in the "public domain" (regardless of how it got there). The only possible court ruling on this is with wikipedia:Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry, where complete copies of "confidential" information was published on a website and the courts ruled that it was illegal to have a complete posting like this without permission, as it was a copyright violation and trade secret laws simply didn't exist.
As far as the "cheats" analogy, Rendova, it is something that has been made abundantly clear that doesn't exist. If it did, everybody would know about them anyway and the cat would long be out of the bag. As for the posting of the list of player mods.... show me where that has happened here. On the other hand, I can give specific edits where information has been censored on this wiki by what I think are well meaning but mis-informed users trying to remove content that was added in good faith, improves the articles in question, and is not illegal nor even immoral to add to these articles. The only reason that I can find for this information to be removed is some sort of paranoia about Jagex staff pounding hard on player moderators that happen to also edit here on this wiki. THAT ISSUE is what I'm complaining about, and trying to find a reasonable common ground here. In none of these cases did copyright law really go into question, or at least the information could have been paraphrased to avoid copyright infringement. --Robert Horning 20:07, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
I don't know where you're getting this stuff about the player mod list from; it was discussed but not published, here at least, and I've never said it was. Someone pointed to a downloadable mod center which I mentioned earlier, but that's it. My argument has been very consistent. It's one purely of honor and respect, neither of which seem to exist anywhere else on here. I don't give a hoot about legality, and I already quit the game last October, so it's not like they can ban me.
And my questions from earlier still haven't been answered. Rendova 20:17, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Rendova, I thought I answered your questions in abundant detail, or perhaps I'm not even really sure at this point what question you really want to have answered here.
  • "Something I've been trying to get at but nobody has answered yet is why do people want to know so badly? How many details do people so desperately want?" Everybody is naturally curious, and by making it "classified" and hidden, it makes trying to find out what is there all that more interesting. It doesn't even matter if what is "classified" is meaningless or even nothing at all. For myself, I'm a little bit curious so far as rules moderators have to live under, but that is my full extent of curiosity.
  • "There is a forum. Is that what people want to know? Why? What does it matter?" I think this "fact" is well established, and even mentioned in a couple articles already on this website. As for content on that forum and its disclosure.... that is what we are debating here. What do you need answered?
  • "I still respect Jagex's broad request not to mention it, why can't anyone else? And people mention how we shouldn't keep constantly honoring Jagex's every little request, but I can't think of any serious requests other than this that have come up. This isn't too much to ask, why is it such a big deal?" I am arguing that Jagex doesn't have legal standing on this wiki to ask for this stuff to be removed... except so far as it is a copyright violation just as copying any content from anywhere on the Jagex websites is a copyright violation. And that copyright law alone is really the only huge factor.
The point is, you seem to be pushing hard for "anything that might have been classified should be removed from the wiki", with others including myself saying that there are some substantial exceptions where some "classified" information might be published here instead. Jagex's policies don't apply here. You are not willing to help find common ground here, and instead are pushing for the extreme examples and the worst possible abuses. A complete capitulation to Jagex and kissing their behind is not what a great many editors want to do here on this wiki, and I do believe that there should be independent editorial control that shouldn't care what Jagex thinks about anything in their game(s). Just "because" Jagex doesn't like some things posted elsewhere is not in my opinion sufficient reason to remove that content from this wiki. There needs to be something more substantial... which is why I kept bringing up personal information and copyright law. Those are concrete policy statements we can make here that don't depend on the current whims of whatever Jagex likes us or doesn't like us to be posting here in articles about the game.
No, I don't feel comfortable about a policy that states "we shouldn't publish any content that Jagex finds confidential" as that can change from one day to the next. Some, even much of the information found on the moderator forums might not be reasonable to put onto this website, but some of it might be reasonable as well. The logic here simply is lacking, nor is there justification for why such information needs to be removed from here. --Robert Horning 21:24, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
how is this different than the verbatim copying of the text for the updates Because you do not have permission to view it. Are you arguing that if you were to somehow stumble across a classified folder for the classified information about Bin Laden, that you would be able to spread it across the internet because there is no rule saying you can't? It's not public, keep it out of the public. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 20:14, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
I think we would have a great many allies to join us if it broke out into a RS-Wiki users vs. Jagex legal fight Let's see, a few volunteers vs a multi-million dollar company. Yeah, I'll retire if that day comes. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 20:27, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Jagex is not going to get into a lawsuit, this entire section has gone into idiotic fantasy scenarios.
Keeping this short: As previously mentioned throughout this long discussion, as long as it does not directly, or indirectly, violate rules, it should be acceptable. If it benefits the wiki and won't result in bans, then there is no reason not to put it on here. -Dsctatom 20:46, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Karlis, you haven't answered my question here, and the fact that the information is located on a folder, website sub-section, or otherwise kept from most typical users is not a legal citation here nor a legitimate difference in terms of copyright law. I'm not asking you to disclose this information, but I am pointing out that some of the information from the "classified" pages is available on a great many other websites other than the Jagex website or this wiki. If that information is freely available (aka doing a "google" search or some other means), what gives you the right to remove such "classified" content from this wiki as long as we aren't violating copyright? HAS Jagex asked you (or other p-mods) to remove the content? --Robert Horning 21:24, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
BTW, in regards to the folder of "classified information about (presumably Osama) Bin Laden", that would fall under "national security" laws and not trade secret laws that is Jagex's only defense here. Don't obfuscate the situation here with an absurd example as if Jagex does have some information about a terrorist incident, MI-6 would be on that so hard that it would make Jagex squirm and it would not be in a moderator center... it would be MI-6 and Scotland Yard that would be confiscating Jagex equipment and making a real mess of things. We are not talking about the same level of classification here. I presume that moderators have an NDA (non-disclosurer agreement), which does put legal liability for disclosing that information on the moderators. But this doesn't mean non-disclosure of Jagex "confidential information" has to be a site-wide policy here on a website that Jagex doesn't operate. --Robert Horning 21:34, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Then all you're trying to do is make a statement? Rendova 22:15, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
We are not subject to Jagex rules, we are under no threat of legal action, and the information is publicly available elsewhere. Aside from some twisted oath/loyalty to Jagex, there is no real reason why we should not post the information. Karlis if you want to provide me with a previous lawsuit filed by Jagex, or a similar situation in which another website was taken down or legally obliged to cooperate with Jagex rules then maybe you have a point. But you being around the gaming community for fifteen years, and citing a case where rhq made a personal decision to remove sensitive data proves nothing. The big thing for me is where you choose to draw the line on sensitive data. Why is information that Jagex chooses to keep under wraps like step by step quest guides and combat formulas openly posted here, but the second that we have information about how cheaters and spammers are kept in line everyone throws up a stop sign? Also, Karlis if your leaving or taking a wikibreak or whatever you want to call it because of this issue alone, I think you need to re-examine why you signed up in the first place.Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 22:36, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
So we should post "confidential" information just because they are unlikely to take action? Rendova 22:49, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Jagex would prefer that we use their own quest help system and manual, but still support fansites with guides. Jagex never supports fansites that reveal information that they have specifically told the few with access to it not to reveal. Do we want to be just another cheat website? Quest map icon.png Laser Dragon Task map icon.png 22:52, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
It's not cheating to reveal confidential information, it's informing people. I could understand if this was say a patient of a therapist. The information that is discussed in their room is obviously confidential, and could be potentially harmful to someone. However revealing this information and informing people (which, once again, is a purpose of a wiki) cannot hurt people, but will most certainly help people. I really don't understand the big argument about this. Jagex cannot take "legal action" against player moderators for revealing "confidential" information, as they might not even know their real names, where they live, or even if they are of age in their country which is required for any contractual obligations unless they have a parent or guardian sign on with them, but of course the "confidential" policy isn't legally official. It's like on fan fiction or on FAQs/Walkthroughs for games, they didn't actually legally copyright that stuff. But yes, of course, Jagex has copyrighted RuneScape and "all information on their site and reserve the right to ban any user for any reason" (although age, gender, race, ect. wouldn't be included), those "confidential agreements" aren't LEGALLY official, therefore Jagex can't take any legal action. They CAN ban the user, however that is extremely unlikely to happen as I've already explained in my previous posts. Rollback crown.svg Kudos 2 U Talk! Edit count! Contribs! 23:01, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually, they DO know where their mods live, as they mail you something for you to return to them, from what Chia told me before he was modded "'when are you being modded?' 'soon, it takes a long time to mail England from the US'" (sorry Chia, delete my revision if I wasn't supposed to say that).

InstantWinstonDragon 2h sword old.pngold edits | new edits

23:10, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Jagex has all moderators' contact details, read Moderator Registration. Like Chia said above, unless you are a moderator, you cannot fully understand why it is so important that the information in the mod centre/forum stays confidential. I would not be supporting this so much if I did not believe that it needs to stay confidential. You might think the information will be helpful; it's not public because it will have negative effects on the community. Quest map icon.png Laser Dragon Task map icon.png 23:15, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I sent them a fake address... Rollback crown.svg Kudos 2 U Talk! Edit count! Contribs! 23:17, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

If it benefits the wiki and won't result in bans, then there is no reason not to put it on here.


Oh, ho ho ho ho.

  1. People HAVE and WILL get banned for things like this. Jagex takes leaks seriously.
  2. Here's some great reasons not to put it here. Doing so is:
  • Immoral
  • In violatin of confidentiality
  • Unethical
  • Scummish
  • Something that gets people banned.

I'm getting a vibe from a bunch of people in this discussion, saying "We can't get hurt, they can't do anything, nothing's stopping us. We should tell everyone about confidential things and ignore Jagex's request not to. We aren't them, so we don't have to what they say!".




That is one of, if not the, most immature thing I have ever heard from someone on this site. Simply put, if they ask us not to, just be f***ing ethical and don't. Not being able to be hurt or punished is no reason to thus ignore their request. Let's look back on a true story...

Once upon a time, there was a small town. One boy was new to the town, and didn't know many people there. A fellow boy knew his family was going to be robbed, and temporarily gave the new boy his family's £4,000,000 of savings, in hopes that when the robber went to the rich boy's house, his family wouldn't lose the big sum of their property.
In actuality, the new boy didn't know the other boy. He had never even heard of him. The new boy was in the clear. He could have ran off with the huge lot, not have received a microgram of punishment, and live the rest of his life in luxory. But when the next day, when the rich boy went to the new boy's place of stay, the new boy gratefully gave back the sum, as the owner's request.

Learn anything from that? Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

One argument is that since we are "the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape", we should post confidential information about the game. That catchphrase only goes so far. Since we're "the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape", doesn't that mean we should have player articles? How-to guides on scamming? How-to guides on how to buy gold without getting caught? Articles about why Jagex sucks? Be an image host for every single RuneScape screenshot ever made? A host for every fan fiction story ever made?

This sort of goes in congruance with books. If you get a book, find one of the first pages with legal stuff on it, it'll say that unauthorized reproduction of the book, whether digital or mechanical, is strictly forbidden. Confidential information is just like that. Unauthorized leaks and telling of them are strictly forbidden.

Some people also say that if we allow (and only allow) people to risk their account to tell us classified things, that's not encouraging others to break rules. In fact, it is. *sigh* It's like saying "If you want to sell crack and meth here, we won't stop you.". Just allowing to take in information like that is encouraging people to break rules.

And yes, leaking does break rules.

It does break rules, it is unethical, it is disrespectful, and it can get you banned. Simply put: Don't. Why do you people want to be so disrespecful? Just respect the company that makes your beloved game. Seriously. Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 23:55, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Is it truly ethical to hide this information from the community? It seems to me like dictatorship and censorship. I find it ironic that you speak of ethics and morals when you were one of the main contributors to this. The subject of the article is the epitomy of "scummish" and "something that gets people banned". Jagex would certainly not tolerate this type of content on their official forums. However, it is allowed here. We are not writing the Bible/Koran/insert holy book here. The RuneScape Wiki is not a guide as to how players should behave in RuneScape according to the rules. We are writing an encyclopedia: A neutral reference work on a particular subject (RuneScape). An encyclopedia should not be censored based on ethical concerns - it should aim to be an accurate and reliable source. In addition, legitimatizing something is not the same as encouraging it. Jagex do not encourage players to visit fansites due to security issues. They do not encourage players to enter the wilderness with valuables. Yet these actions are still allowed - Jagex simply takes no responsibility for item losses. Similarly, we will not encourage players to risk their accounts in order to contribute information but we will still allow it.
I would also like to add that I never signed any type of agreement that required me to keep moderator information confidential. It is not included in the [ 15 rules], I have never been given player moderator status, and the version of the Terms and Conditions that I agreed to was the June 2002 edition. Player moderators were not a part of RuneScape then. Dtm142 00:23, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

(Edit conflict)

Apparently nobody here has ethics or believes they are immune because they can hide behind the Wikia.
  • ...taking a wikibreak or whatever you want to call it because of this issue alone, I think you need to re-examine why you signed up in the first place. You don't know why I am taking a wiki break, and you have no right or business to tell me to re-examine why I signed up, so back off!! I am not here to take lip from you at all.
  • This discussion is full of "we can because they can't touch us, and we have the right to blah blah blah, it's fair use, if it's there, we can abuse it. Get a clue. A lot of information is there available for your viewing, if you're authorized to view it. Find a login and password and view away.
  • It's disgusting that a group of fans and I now use that term loosely, will do whatever they can to see what's behind door number 3, only because somebody brings it up. If it's not your business, keep your nose out of it. Somebody go find another game wiki that has all of that games mod/admin info on a page, I want to see it.
  • I can farm RS gold and sell it. Jagex requests that I don't so much that they put the "don't sell RS gold" on their site. They also put "don't leak information about the player moderator center" on their site. Notice a resemblance at all?
Karlis (talk) (contribs) 00:08, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Karlis, I am accusing you of being ignorant of the law. That isn't necessarily a bad thing as we all have to learn some things that we don't know from time to time, and I'm also willing and open to somebody correcting me if I'm wrong here. So far every time you've invoked some sort of legal issue, it is either an extremist viewpoint including this last statement you've just issued here, or simply flat-out wrong. Study up on fair-use, copyright law, and trade secret law (at least read the Wikipedia pages on these topics) before you make yourself look even more ignorant and extreme on the subject.
Calm down. I am not trying to encourage a group of "hackers" to "break-in" to all of the "confidential" pages on any Jagex website, do full page dumps of that content, and then re-post that information here on RS Wiki. Please, pay attention to what I've said and help to draft this policy. I am also agreeing that we shouldn't encourage rule breaking, but that isn't the same thing here as what is being discussed. There is also a huge difference between encouraging rule breaking and discussing rule breaking with its consequences to the game, but I'll leave that alone for now.
To all of the RS Wiki community: Pay close attention to what is happening here. This is indeed a critical issue, and it is obvious that it has divisive and long term consequences to the project as a whole. We need more involved in this discussion than those who have been engaged in this flame-fest. I also pray to whatever God that you follow that we come to a consensus on this issue here, but unfortunately the last several posts seem more hell-bent to even more extremist viewpoints. If this were a VfD, I'd have to declare this discussion to be "no consensus", but it goes much deeper than this.
At the very least, thank goodness we aren't engaged in full-fledged edit and wheel warring here, which is the #1 thing I would like to avoid. Please, oh please don't let it get to that point! Discussion is good, and so far this is mostly abstractions even though I could comment about specific edits and content regarding this issue even beyond what I've already brought up. --Robert Horning 00:54, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
How is this not extreme. Directly violating what Jagex tells player moderators not to. Sounds pretty extreme, doesn't it? It seems that whatever moderator would do this is almost as corrupt as the people supporting it. I'm not in for an edit war, because quite frankly nobody here is really worth it. What I will not have is people telling me how or what to think. I will say now that if this information is put up t nthe site, I will do whatever I can to find out who did it and ensure Jagex is aware of it, so they may do whatever they deem necessary to correct it. And I love how you prance around and call me extremist when you support this radical idea. Call my opinions flaming, get a clue. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 01:14, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
The lack of formal protection, however, means that a third party is not prevented from independently duplicating and using the secret information once it is discovered. Wonderful, except one thing, it has not been discovered, it has been unlawfully (or is in the process and discussion of) given to the public. Is this an effort to get somebody a mod just to use them for information? I have access, as a material handler, to General Dynamics' plans for their new GD8000, as well as a military-contracted tablet pc. Are you arguing that if I walk in, pull the data off of our server, and print it out, that I can do whatever I wish with it because the secret information has been discovered? Something tells me that I'd lose my job and be sued for selling/distributing them. If not, and you want to support me for the rest of my life, I'll go ahead and grab them for you. Call it extreme, it's a situation that is possible for many people all over the world. (Different company or situation, of course.) Karlis (talk) (contribs) 01:24, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
If you are uncovering secrets that impact national security, that is a whole set of laws that could ultimately (depending on who you give the information to) lead up to and including the death penalty. Yes, you can get executed for revealing stuff like that, but that is not what we are talking about and you know it! We are not talking about government secrets or things that reveal secret information that is vital to the survival of a country.
This is more akin to having a website that covers automobiles and you just happen to have a tip from somebody that a picture of a new GM production model that nobody has ever seen before has just been put somewhere on the internet, together with some of the vehicle performance specs. You find that information and it really is a ground breaking vehicle. Do you copy the information (checking with a couple of close friends who are engineers at GM that it is indeed genuine) and publish it on your website or not? What about when competing websites/magazines are also running identical or similar photos?
This is precisely the situattion we are talking about here, and it is trade secret law that applies in terms of its legality. Furthermore, it is irresponsible for you to not discuss the information when nearly all of the other venues that carry similar information are also discussing the information. Here it doesn't matter if it is a photo of a new kind of vehicle or something about a rule change for player moderators originally discussed on the p-mod forums. Both are "trade secrets", but both are now in the "public domain".
Perhaps I don't understand what it is that you are trying to get at here, but I am asserting that it is inappropriate to block this information, and that not only is it ethical but irresponsible for us not to be at least having that information on one of the pages of this wiki. If you are an f-mod, it is certainly something that can and perhaps should be removed from the RSOF, but that doesn't mean it should be deleted on the wiki here. It is the removal of this sort of information that I'm aghast that folks are even thinking should be removed.
Talk about lawsuits and disclosing information about terrorist threats (or other national security stuff) is obfuscating the discussion here and getting us nowhere. Yes, I call this extreme-flaming and blowing stuff way out of proportion.
BTW, I can appreciate a difference in opinion on this as well, but that doesn't get us any closer to consensus.... certainly when "consensus" means you are right and I'm wrong and there is no compromise possible. --Robert Horning 03:41, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

With all the discussions of the morality and legality of including "classified info", there seems to have been an aphesis of one key fact which was mentioned once and subsequently ignored. Before that, let me clear up one thing: unless you're leaking their IPO or other private or proprietary information regarding the Jagex company, inserting classified information such as would actually be germain to this wiki would not be a violation of any laws unless that information was gained by cracking. Now the the main point: for information to be included, it has to be verifiable. If I were a player mod and it turns out that I had the ability to know the IP of every player, that would be notable information that could be included within an article but if no one else is capable of verifying it, I could very well be inserting complete fiction. And though I could provide a screenshot as proof, it would be exceedingly easy to photoshop such evidence. That is why verifiability is key. The right click option was included because many independent sources were able to confirm its veracity. Consequently, classified information may be added to the encyclopedia if it is verifiable and if it is verifiable, it is de facto not classified.--Diberville 01:52, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

The thing I'm most concerned about is the pages' copyright status. If Jagex has some copyright that says material can't be posted anywhere else, what I'm concerned about is that there is then some legal problem with Wikia and we get shut down/sued. Has anyone found a copyright notice yet? Butterman62 (talk) 01:58, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Well it is a separate issue from this but to answer your question of copyright rights, the very fact that we don't copy and paste information from their database avoids the biggest problem. The question is images. The UK has a fair dealings law (CDPA 1988) that allows the reasonable use of copyrighted material for research, study or criticism as long as it is not being used for profit. The one problem is that "reasonable" has never been quantified so this the one grey area of this wiki. Of course, Wikia is based in the US and US fair use laws are more generous and since this wiki is for ostensibly "educational" and definitely non-commercial purposes and it doesn't diminish the value of the original work, we seem fine on that side of the pond.

To Kudos below me, to whom are you adressing your post?--Diberville 02:17, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I know I'm a bit late in posting this but all of your reasons can be debunked:

  • Immoral - See "Unethical" below.

  • In violation of confidentiality - All right, this one is actually true, however breaking confidentiality in this case is not breaking the law, therefore it isn't really bad. It's not hurting anyone, and as I've said before, it only helps people.

  • Unethical - This implies there is a set code of ethics for every person, and that everyone must follow these ethics. Simply put, untrue.

  • Scummish -See above.

  • Something that gets people banned. - How would Jagex know who you are? Take for example myself. I am a pmod in-game. I don't use my RS screen name (although it is taken) for the wiki. How could Jagex ban or take away my moderator privileges if they have no idea who I am (The Kudos 2 U on RS is not a player mod, by the way)? How could they take legal action? I really would like to know. Rollback crown.svg Kudos 2 U Talk! Edit count! Contribs! 02:06, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
You yourself said you used a fake address for moderator registration. Thus, you're obviously not a moderator. Do you believe shooting albino midget AIDS orphans is unethical? Oh, and how does knowing confidential information help people? I know how to burp the alphabet, but it doesn't help me; in fact it's embarrassing, because people sometimes insist I do it after I make the mistake of mentioning it. A person could tell someone ingame they've learned moderator secrets and then they might be harassed to tell all they know. They're under no pressure to keep it secret; obviously you people aren't. So if this person gets reported for one thing or another, *boom*, they've got black marks and are possibly banned by disclosing information they've learned on our site. And supposing we put up the information with a banner advising people not to talk about this to anyone ingame... well, if we got to that point, then we would know very well that asking people not to disclose something doesn't work, wouldn't we. Rendova 02:33, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Im with Chia on this one relesase the information leak it through a different ip and username. If people can get away with taping movies and uploading them to the net. Getting copies of all the latest videogames a month before they are sold anywhere without any legal action take from some of the bigggest companies there is then th risk of ever getting caught leaking runescape information is close to none. What can they have that would hurt the company so much? they dont have personal details of users... im open minded though why should the confidential information be realeased then? because we respect jagex? they have screwed up so much lately that maybe this is what they had coming to them... God Of War 04:34, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Chia was against releasing the information :P. And, mods are the only people with access to this information. To be a moderator, you have to register (there's a link somewhere above about that), so Jagex literally "knows where you live". And showing respect to Jagex especially after all they've done to us demonstrates at least that there is still some good left in the world. :p Rendova 05:21, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
We sure don't want the [[w:c:unrunescape:Jagex Riot Squad|JRS]] to come smashing down my door, do we? Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 06:30, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Vote wise it looks like 5-4 in favor of revealing the information. Why dont we just hold a formal vote and let it be decided? Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 11:14, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
RuneScape Wiki is not a democracy. Butterman62 (talk) 12:08, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Well then, Consensus wise it looks like "we" are in favor of revealing the information. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 13:56, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
When opinion is nearly split as you yourself have noted above, it is the epitome of a lack of consensus.--Diberville 14:02, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Even if the vote was 9-1 or 99-1, that still doesn't mean that "consensus" has been achieved. More specifically, the discussion here clearly has two strong philosophical camps that have nearly diametrically opposed viewpoints... and viewpoints that involve drastically different actions that should be performed. There are administrators in both camps as well as "ordinary users", and frankly I see this more as a deadlock.

I don't think this issue is even remotely "resolved", and in fact I see the philosophical camps moving away from each other rather than trying to find a middle ground of content that may be found acceptable and ignoring the extreme examples. Strong and pretty well-reasoned arguments have been offered by both viewpoints, and it certainly has turned into a flame-fest.

Forcing a decision at this point (what a "vote" tends to do) would be counter-productive to the development of this wiki and would ultimately rip apart the community in a way that we don't need right now. We need every person who has been contributing in good faith to remain contributing in good faith, even if we don't necessarily agree on some of the issues like this one here. --Robert Horning 14:16, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

That's strange. I didn't bother reading everything above, but why would you want to reveal information that Jagex does not want revealed?  Tien  16:45, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Here is my take on it. What "Jagex does not want revealed" is arbitrary and changes from time to time. There is no clearly consistent metric that can be applied to this standard, and in addition is inviting an outside party to establish editorial guidelines for a website (this wiki) that can "force" (assuming this is the standard) us to remove content that many participants here don't want to have removed. Just where do you draw that line in terms of what Jagex "does not want revealed"? Frankly, Jagex would prefer that all fan websites go away, but that is something they can't stop legally.
Jagex isn't alone with this sentiment.... ask Paramount Pictures what they think of Star Trek related fan websites. Paramount has been aggressive over "leaks" and "disclosures of confidential information" to the point even using the word "Spock" gets a cease & desist letter from the Paramount legal office. Some fan sites are back, but the relationship between the fans and the company are hardly what could be good terms. --Robert Horning 17:13, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Everyone else seems to be referring to it as "what Jagex does not want revealed," even "secretive." So if people WANT to reveal it, which I still don't see the point of doing so, then it's not really considered secretive, is it? Why call this information secretive if it ain't? :S
You make a good point with Star Trek though.  Tien  17:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

In many ways this is like the episode of Star Trek with the giant Amoeba though... not really. I just want to reiterate what I stated earlier because this is where we can reach consensus: information in articles needs to be verifiable. Whether it's classified information or non-classified information, such info may only be inserted into an article if it's actually germane to the article and if it can be verified by other editors. Mods have a a right click report option? Was it germane to the article? Yes. Was it verifiable by several separate sources? Yes. And so, it's in the article. Mods have a check user IP option? Is it germane to the article? Yes. Is it verifiable by several separate sources? No. So it doesn't go in. To me, this seems simple enough and also seems to be something on which we can form a consensus.--Diberville 17:50, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

So, you're basically saying that some classified information can be put in articles while other classified information can't, depending on whether it is verifiable?  Tien  18:03, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Well, as I noted earlier, if it is verifiable, de facto, it isn't really classified. But regardless of the "classification" of the information, anything inserted into the encyclopedia has to be first and foremost verifiable, otherwise, several articles would be filled with spurious rumours. If somehow "classified" information is made public— that is it's authenticity can be ascertained by several independent editors— and it is actually notable to be included within an article, then it may be included within an article. If not, it can't be.
I think regardless of the issue at hand here everyone agrees that:
  1. for information to be put in an article, it has to be verifiable.
  2. Classified information is info that is not available to people outside a restricted group and consequently information that is verifiable by the editors, by definition, isn't classified.
If we all agree on these two premises than we can achieve consensus on this issue by stating that any information be it classified or not can be included if it is notable enough for inclusion and if it is verifiable.--Diberville 18:27, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
This is at least a piece of common ground that I would have to agree with... other than I do think you can find some "classified" information that is verifiable that Jagex doesn't really want the general player community be aware of. Yes, I can give examples, but it isn't worth pushing the point. I can give plenty of non-Jagex related examples of trade secrets that have become a part of the public domain.
Some rogue p-mod that wants to say "the heck with Jagex" and decides to post a bunch of stuff from the moderator center.... perhaps most if not all of that ought to be deleted due to the inability that the information can be verified. I can live with that as well. I just don't buy the argument that "it is classified, therefore it must be removed from the wiki". Just because Jagex doesn't want the information spread around is not a good enough reason, at least to me, for its removal.
This is also where citations can come in handy, where you say "according to RuneHQ, these are some guidelines moderators have for muting players....." THAT can be verified, and doesn't come directly from the Jagex website. --Robert Horning 18:55, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Diberville has got me convinced--if it's verifiable, and germane to the article, then it should be added. Logically, classified information should not be verifiable, so technically speaking, that would prevent any truly classified information--stuff that would be dangerous if leaked--from showing up on the wiki. By the same token, all other "classified" information would now be available, so theoretically, that policy should satisfy both ends of this argument. --Thunderbird346 23:06, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Why SHOULD we add this information to the Wiki? There's no "should." That makes it sound like it's imperative to have this stuff on the Wiki. It's not completely necessary to have this information, so I don't get what all these "shoulds" and "musts" are for.
I'm not against placing classified information on the Wiki. I just want to know what the purpose of doing so is.  Tien  00:26, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
To stick it up to The Man. Rendova 00:54, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Must is imperative, should is conditional expectation. A human being should eat healthy food but must eat. On this issue, any verifiable and relevant information should be inserted into an article as is the nature of this encyclopedia though none of it must. But this minutiae seems moot since I don't see anyone yet having any serious problems with my above declaration of principles.--Diberville 01:17, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
It looks like where I said that if Jagex ever publishes this information ingame or on any of their websites, then it doesn't matter. Like with the right click report option, which showed up within a picture in the knowledge base one day. If they put up a picture displaying the mod forums, go ahead and publish it, even though it was an accident they already released it to the public. But if it hasn't been released by Jagex and is thus unverifiable, then it shouldn't be put up. Rendova 01:36, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Ah, I see, Diber. And lol at Rendova. :P

I firmly oppose posting classified information on this site. With years of experience as a major MMORPG Jagex has put a great deal of time and careful thought into making certain information confidential. There are very important reasons for this. I can assure everyone there is nothing uber secret, no hidden features, no preview of game updates. Just information to help player moderators do their job better. To date I have been a big fan of this site and frankly am a bit disturbed this is even open to discussion. --Theanimalusa 03:25, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Whoa, there's a familiar name I haven't seen in a while. Nice to know Chia and I aren't alone here. And you're definitely not alone in, "To date I have been a big fan of this site and frankly am a bit disturbed this is even open to discussion." Rendova 03:59, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

"Rule 9 - Encouraging Others to break Rules You must not encourage others to break any of the RuneScape rules." Accepting "secret" information that Jagex has given to individuals who are under a promise of confidentiality is encouraging them to break the rules. I want nothing to do with it. Jagex gives us more than enough hints already through legitimate channels. Now, if a person who is NOT under a secrecy obligation finds pics or whatever in the public areas via clever guessing and web/url searching, that's fair game. Mamabear47 05:57, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Except that, as has been demonstrated here and in other talk pages before, most of the stuff out there is fake, and cannot be validated without leading back to the point you just made. An excellent point too, I might add :P Rendova 06:06, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Nobody is pressuring anyone here to accept or release confidential information. Nobody is being encouraged to break the rules. Releasing confidential information isn't explicitly mentioned in their rules anyways. I only support information being released that may be of a valuable encyclopedic nature. Some of this confidential information might actually be helpful to players. However, infomation should be validated through screenshots and images. Since we are not Jagex, we as a wiki are under no obligation to keep any information of an encyclopedic nature confidential. We shouldn't have to censor anything because a 3rd party says we should. Prayer-icon.png Sir Lenehan File:Smite old.png|25px 10:56, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

What, may I ask, is considered "helpful" classified information?  Tien  13:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
FUCKING HELL!! What is WRONG with you people?! Jagex does NOT want their private information disclosed AT ALL! PAY ATTENTION, PEOPLE! This is the WORST pointless arguement since the Tavvy crap! DECIDE SOMETHING BEFORE I GO NUTS!!!' 7kyt1iT.gif --WINE OF GOOD HEALTH (Actually Stinko)
" Stay cool, don't get frustrated with other users, and be polite." Hatchenator 15:35, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Amen Stinko, I couldn't have said it better. Isn't it sickening? Karlis (talk) (contribs) 15:41, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Alright...after calming down, I can tell you all that this is going nowhere. WE ARE UNDER THE SAME RULES AS ANYONE ELSE! When we see gold-seller ads on the wiki, we remove them, because THEY BREAK THE RULES. Jagex has EXPLICITLY stated that they don't want their private information disclosed; doing so BREAKS THE RULES. What part of "breaks the rules" don't you people understand? I'm tempted to report the wiki for breaching the P-Mod's Center's rules, because THEN you'll see what kind of legal action we can face - the site getting a permanent shut-down. In fact, here's something from our old favicon discussion:

Idea how about this one?[[File:RSW logo idea.jpg|16px]]

Btzkillerv 15:03, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

No. Btz, your logo is too large (minimum 16 x 16 pixels), and the logo is completely violating copyright laws, which close down RSW, and eventually close down Wikia themselves.

—Derilith (talk • contribs) forgot to sign this comment 11:38, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Hahaha, pathetic. As for those of you (like Karlis, Chia, and Rendova) who are disagreeing with the bunch of reckless fools who want our beautiful wiki shut down, you know what you're doing, at least. 7kyt1iT.gif --WINE OF GOOD HEALTH (Actually Stinko)

This is highly amusing.  Tien  16:05, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

It's controversial, though a bit obvious how it will end. I have to agree with Robert Horning, I really do believe that the decision to this will split the community, regardless of how much we try not to. I don't even know how to say what I want to, it's so... sad. We'll see how it turns out though, and what Jagex does when they find out. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 16:46, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
I know how you feel. :|  Tien  16:55, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Chill - Everyone here needs to take a step back and relax and not let a few instigators rev the problem back up. The fact that the two positions here are mutually exclusive makes it impossible to come to an accord which will fully satisfy both sides but there is an agreement in principle here that can be at the very least acceptable to both sides and everyone should be working to support this compromise.--Diberville 17:09, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Well i mostly avoid controversies like this as i'm not highly biased and tend to follow a neutral point of view (Guthix must be popular in Switzerland). However, the alarmist reaction that "the wiki will be shut down" is plain out inaccurate. First of all many, if not most or all, of the potentially controversial topics that will show up will show up from individuals on the fringes. Trust me one single incident will not shut down the wiki but will be dealt with quickly. I have absolutely no doubt that the first contact from any lawyer, attorney, solicitor, barrister, etc. will quickly result in a prompt removal of the questionable material. I guarantee this will be what would happen in such event. After removal of such content the wiki would go on as always. Spreading FUD(fear,uncertainty,doubt) in regards to the "end of the wiki" is nothing more than needless rhetoric and in my opinion should be refrained from at all costs.

That said, I'd like to point out that once things are agreed to here (you know, that consensus thingie) the outcome should likely be added to the RuneScape:Scope proposed policy which should thereafter go live and leave the nest of proposals. That's my two-claws worth. ~kytti khat 17:10, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

While I find a concensus unlikely any time soon, I have several questions when it is decided that we will add this content:
  • Who will be the pmod who the community risks being banned to supply the information?
  • How can any of the information be verified? It's obvious that a few minutes in photoshot can provide countless rumors. [[File:Sailing.PNG]]
  • How will anybody decide what is verified or not? If I (as well as the majority of the users) cannot verify its validity, why should I allow it to be uploaded? It would be very easy for somebody to claim to be a pmod and upload all sorts of BS, and none of you could prove it wrong.
Karlis (talk) (contribs) 17:33, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Please re-read the posts from the last few days. There is a consensus building and those very questions have already been dealt with.--Diberville 17:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
You'll have to excuse my horrible computer here. Due to the size of this article it is hard for my POS here at work to load the page, and when I scroll it jumps a lot. I was unable to find direct answers to my questions. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 17:45, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Ha, no worries. I actually almost did the same thing when I first posted. I was wondering why the topic of verifiability wasn't ever raised but it was once, hidden deep inside this epic length novel of a discussion.--Diberville 17:52, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
I know it's a lot to ask, but if you have the time, could you find it and post it on my talk? I'd greatly appreciate it, though if you haven't the time I'd understand. I need to get to a meeting. Thanks. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 18:01, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Thank you, I appreciate it. While I still strongly disagree with posting any information, I see where you are coming from. I still will stand by my initial statement that it will be removed. I thank you very much for your time in doing that. I will agree to disagree here and wait out the consequences. =D Karlis (talk) (contribs) 18:24, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
I am curious about what you think Jagex actually would do, if some "confidential" information was posted on this website and via VfD or some other community discussion it was "kept"? Assume here, for a moment, this is "confidential information" could not be traced to any single user on this wiki (aka it was added by a "throw-away account"... not even an IP account), that it could be compared to information on several other websites like RuneHQ,, and other popular fan websites for verification that yes, the information is factual and correct (perhaps by p-mods on those other sites confirming the information). What exactly would Jagex do here or to any of the major participants on this wiki like myself? --Robert Horning 20:41, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Not you, the wiki. It would be removed by central. And the p-mod would be banned, as stated by several of the p-mods on this post. Is it worth it to put their account in jeopardy, even if the chance of them being caught is very slim? I wouldn't wish that on anybody, knowing the time and work RuneScape takes. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 20:51, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Can you name any time even somewhat recently that "central" has even come in and asserted any kind of editorial control over any of the wikia wikis? I'll even go one step further with my analogy above: The information isn't even a verbatim copy as the "confidential information" is merely paraphrased and restated to avoid explicit copyright infringement. I seriously doubt that "Wikia Central" would have the "Janitors" come in and remove this content.... and again, that would only be done according to the terms of the DMCA. Editorial content is something Wikia doesn't want to get into as that opens a whole can of worms for them (Wikia) legally they don't want to get into. Also, Wikia wouldn't (via check-user scans) reveal the IP address as that is against their privacy standards except via explicit legal actions like a subpoena that has formal judicial review.... and subject Jagex to some interesting counter lawsuits if they acted inappropriately. I really don't think Jagex would do anything or even could do anything here. --Robert Horning 21:46, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps that's your flaw, you think we're immune. Only time will tell. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 21:51, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
We're just going in circles. It's best, I think, to just decide what we're going to do and take it from there. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 22:01, 17 December 2008 (UTC)


I'm just breaking this because it's ridiculously long. Anyways... JaGex does reserve the right too "withdraw our permission to use images if they feel we are misuing them." However other than that the T&C, PP, nor Customer Support specifically state whether or not you can use images or explain how these areas work. I would assume if we censor all names in accordance with their "cannot name other players" rule that we should be ok. The real question I believe is not can we use information/images for our articles it is to what degree of censorship do we use on them. --Whiplash 04:35, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Interesting.... [ this is actually a change in policy] from what Jagex had in the past where there was a specific group of images they "approved" and only allowed on fan sites. I still have the *.zip file of these images that Jagex authorized for use on fan sites (mostly banner ads for links to This wiki certainly pre-dates this policy change. It is nice to see that Jagex is being a little more pragmatic on this issue and showing they want to support fan websites. It turns the issue of screen captures from "fair-use" to "licensed and used under permission"... although the terms here are rather weak and not really in accordance with the GFDL. Does anybody know when this policy change took place? It certainly wasn't an "announced" policy change.
BTW, I tried to use the "wayback machine" from to see when this policy change happened, but apparently Jagex has blocked all web-crawling by from their website. That is unfortunate. Fair-use, however, does not require explicit permission of the copyright holder and Jagex's permission or lack thereof is mostly immaterial to the discussion at hand. --Robert Horning 13:29, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Just so that everyone is on the same page, here is a quote from Sannse of the community team: " unless there are copyright or other similar issues involved, then it looks like a matter between the game makers and the community -- sannse<staff /> (talk) 21:38, 18 December 2008 (UTC) " [1] Dtm142 23:00, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I'd suggest that we follow a line which:

  • Does not encourage breaking rules or confidences
  • Does not exclude information discovered / carelessly released

Yes to accidental leaks, no to "spying". Ace of Risk 22:47, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Exactly what we're voting on below Ace =] Rendova 00:04, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

PLEASE NOTEEvery other Runescape fansite, forum, clan forum, or clan website always, continually, talks of the RSWiki as distrustful and 99% wrong, that it's just a bunch of vandals pretending to be good Rs-ers. I joined this wiki to prove them wrong. I may do most of my RSWiki work on other people's talk pages, or pages in the Category Runescape (mainly due to signature making), but I like to think that everythign I do is another step towards proving the Runescape world wrong. This wiki should abide by the rules laid down by Jagex, If Jagex don't want it to be known to the general public, then we shouldn't. If we allow ourselves to break Jagex's rules for the "Good of the Encyclopedia" as mentioned above, then we doom what little reputation the wiki has. As soon as anyone notices that we have leaked Jagex information, the general runescape public will be given more ammunition to use when having ago at this wonderful library of Runescape.--SmithingZilenserztalk! FishingJoin the RSWP today! 19:57, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

The stereotypes that those spyware filled "fansites" like to spread about us will not go away whether or not we publish this information. You seem to be forgetting that all wikis (especially Wikipedia because it's the most well known) are criticized with this respect. The only way to truly get rid of this stereotype would be to sysop only protect every page on the site, which would be detrimental to the good of the wiki and is not going to happen, ever. Our site is not governed by the perceptions of other players or inferior RuneScape resources. Content should be added based on verifability, notability, and relevance to the game and not the opinions of biased third parties. Dtm142 21:20, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
Our beloved wiki? Distrustful and 99% wrong? Lulz. Major lulz of an epic proportion. Who says that? Zybez? *laughs to self and runs into the sunset...* Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 01:13, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Questions- I'm slightly confused. From the looks of RuneScape Wikia, all of the wikia is information that benifits players ingame. Everything does help the reader inside the game, like where I can find a free mind rune respawn. How does information about Player or Forum Moderators benifit the reader in the game? From what other players talk about in game, I've heard that finding out how Player Mods mute. Some say they have an option, well others say they click a button they have. I don't know which one is true, but how would knowing effect me? And how does this effect mods if we knew? Would people go up to them and ask or talk to them about it? Is it possible for them to followed by an even greater amount of people then they are now? I'm just confused, because people are wanting to know, but they don't need to know. What if this "Player Mod Center" really has nothing in it or is pretty much useless? Very confusing :/ --Monkey139 02:36, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, an up could be that whoever reads the supposed posted confidential information would know a bit more trivia.
A down would be that the person who knows this new trivia could easily use it to break rules if a certain something is posted. The poster could also easily receive punishment to their account. Another even bigger down is that Jagex staff would have to work to submit a DMCU (or whatever) thing to ask us to remove it, making it that much harder for both parties, and they would have to work to get it back to it's confidential status. Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 06:23, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
If a user is being punished and having action happen on their Runescape account due to activity on this wiki is likely going to get Jagex into a whole bunch of trouble legally speaking. Trust me, Jagex does not want to go down that road, as it open them up to liability lawsuits and all kinds of other things they don't even want to get started on. There are some actions Jagex could do if they were able to, somehow, prove that a particular p-mod did violate their vow of confidentiality, including formal legal action against that p-mod... although frankly I think Jagex would have an incredibly weak case even there. The most likely action Jagex would take is to remove the moderator status... at least if they are following a rational and logical course of action that stays well within the bounds legally. Removing moderator status of users merely because they participate on this wiki when "confidential content" is on occasion disclosed by other participants is likely going to cause some major heartburn for Jagex and won't hold water legally or in my opinion ethically either. That "official" moderators (p-mods and j-mods) even remotely feel pressure of any kind to remove this content on what is clearly a non-Jagex website is by itself rather disturbing to me. I sure hope that isn't any official pressure, even if it is merely implied or assumed. --Robert Horning 08:30, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Moral pressure. Rendova 23:56, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Know the Law

I have seen a whole bunch of replies below suggesting that Jagex is going to shut down the wiki if we disclose "confidential information" such as the ability for moderators to right click, detailed information about moderator registration, or even p-mod muting guidelines (all here to name some stuff that is mentioned on the "classified" pages).

As long as we aren't blatantly violating copyright, there is absolutely nothing, and I mean nothing that Jagex can do to shut down this wiki. This information certainly isn't illegal to post on this wiki. As long as it is factual this wiki will never be in danger of having an organization like Jagex legally shutting us down.

Please, oh please, don't change this discussion to something it is not. Or at the very least and you want to make an intelligent addition to this conversation, please note what law exactly makes this illegal. Cite the law or common law legal case (in either the UK or the USA... remember that Wikia is based in the USA) that would make this information illegal to share. I lay this challenge down as I believe there are a bunch of flat out ignorant and mis-informed individuals on this topic.

If you want to read the actual copyright law that applies to this wiki, you can click here. There are other laws that may apply, and perhaps I'm not familiar with those laws. If so, please enlighten me. Seriously. But don't go making up laws and telling out right lies that simply aren't true in order to get folks to agree with your point of view.

If you want to get into an ethical discussion about this content, that is something which doesn't appeal to the law either. I can accept that sort of discussion. But don't go fear mongering about how Jagex is going to shut us down in an ethical argument as it simply won't happen. That is attempting to suggest unethical behavior is automatically illegal, which it isn't, or that everybody's ethical standards are identical. --Robert Horning 13:42, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

On the other hand, Jagex does own RuneScape in its entirety. All of the content on this Wiki is ultimately controlled by Wikia.[2] According to the Wikia Terms of Use, "Wikia, Inc.'s designated agent will act to remove copyright violations in a timely manner following the receipt of a DMCA takedown request."[3] Should Jagex submit a DMCA takedown request, Wikia maintains the right to close, remove, rename, or otherwise modify the Runescape Wiki in compliance with Jagex' request.[4] Opinion: Based on Jagex' reputation, it is likely that a DMCA takedown request will be submitted, should the Runescape Wiki repeatedly release confidential information. Wikia, Inc. would be inclined to comply to the request, as a court case would be a rather unnecessary outcome.

While it is important to remember that the law is open for interpretation, we must also be aware that Jagex does have the right to request our content removed, and Wikia, Inc. does maintain the right to comply with Jagex' requests. Regardless of what Runescape Wiki members say, the final decision is ultimately up to Wikia, Inc.[5][6] Supertech1 18:34, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

No, the terms of use do not apply to Wikia at all. Wikia didn't sign any contract with Jagex, Wikia is not associated with Jagex, and to the best of my knowledge there are absolutely no employees of Jagex that have been working on the content of this wiki although I don't see any reason why they should be explicitly excluded from here. Jagex's terms of use simply don't apply. If there is a copyright violation, Jagex can file a DMCA takedown request, but users here can also protest that action and force the content to be brought back up again too under the same laws... forcing Jagex to take the issue to court if they feel so strongly. We don't have to capitulate to whatever whim Jagex thinks is information that is forbidden. This said, legitimate copyright violations (and unfortunately there are a few here on this wiki that aren't being taken seriously... even by those who advocate strong copyright enforcement for rationale on this issue) can and should be dealt with not just by Wikia, but also by us as a user/editor/wiki community. There is a reason why copyright issues are often a hot-button topic on Wikipedia... but that is because the participants of the Wikipedia community take copyright issues quite seriously. Discussion or disclosure of "confidential" information is not, and I repeat is not a violation of copyright. Trade secret laws, perhaps, but that is considerably much more limited in scope and can't be grounds for its removal under the DMCA. --Robert Horning 08:13, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Actually, the terms of use do apply to this wiki. See, all p-mods have agreed not to publicise any information deemed confidential, and are bound to that agreement by law. By posting it here, they would be violating that law. Wikia would undoubtedly agree with Jagex and remove the information. Supertech1 TCE 23:36, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Classified Information Policy

Before you give your input, please make sure you have read the above discussion so that you have all the information available and you do not ask any questions that have already been answered. To make this clear, this is not a vote. Like all other policy consensus, not a majority, is needed.

To both sides of this debate, I realize that this is far from the solution any of you would have liked to see but with two diametrically opposed positions firmly entrenched and dividing equally this site, this consensus is the only way to reach a solution that won't divide and destroy this Wiki's community. This policy respects the letter and spirit of preexisting policy and gives some accommodations to both ideologies.

And now to the policy:

On occasion, editors of the RuneScape Wiki may happen upon information that Jagex considers classified. Such information may be included in an article provided that:

  1. The information applies to the article.
  2. The information is notable enough for inclusion within the article.
  3. The information's truthfulness can be verified by other separate editors of the RuneScape Wiki.
  4. The information must be sourced

All four of these criteria must be met for any inclusion.


Please indicate if you support or oppose this policy. If you do support or oppose, please fully explain your reasoning.

Support --Diberville 22:42, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Support and add to RuneScape:General disclaimer that we are not responsible for any action taken against a user's account for any information they have provided to the RuneScape Wiki. Dtm142 22:44, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Undecided (for the moment) - Could you elaborate on what you mean by "verified"? Does it mean "I've seen this before, so it must be true"? Or does it mean "look at this picture from the knowledge base" or "check out this article from Jagex's main website"? Rendova 23:34, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I amiably refer you to my comment within the above discussion: Now the main point: for information to be included, it has to be verifiable. If I were a player mod and it turns out that I had the ability to know the IP of every player, that would be notable information that could be included within an article but if no one else is capable of verifying it, I could very well be inserting complete fiction. And though I could provide a screenshot as proof, it would be exceedingly easy to photoshop such evidence. That is why verifiability is key. The right click option was included because many independent sources were able to confirm its veracity. Consequently, classified information may be added to the encyclopedia if it is verifiable and if it is verifiable, it is de facto not classified.--Diberville 23:44, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Support I would prefer we have zero limitations on information Jagex deems "classified", but this is a step in the right direction. Rendova, I believe it means if we can show the information we are claiming as fact/factual needs to be backed up by another reputable published source such as Jagex KB or a reliable fansite/news site. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 23:39, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't really think this is a limitation on what is deemed to be classified. It is a limitation based on verifability, encyclopedic merit, and notability. These are the content standards that we have always strived for. Dtm142 00:24, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Oppose I may comment later, but at this time Im busy with things. Monkeyguy139 00:36, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Comment - I understood your comment, I was just asking what makes something verifiable. Is it the same definition I've given several times above? Rendova 00:38, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Conditional neutral leaning towards oppose, otherwise strong oppose - I like how all three criteria must be met. That's really laying down the line. But, criteria one and two are no-brainers. If I were to add to the Construction article that there are secret codes to spawning partyhats, that would be removed for irrelevance, rather obviously.

Criteria three can be faked. Let's say Hyenaste posted that Player moderators have access to a full list of other moderators that tells who's on and who isn't (similar to a friends list, but has several thousand names). If Megalodon (he's a mod, if you don't remember), Eucarya, Cool Spy, Rendy, Dragon and I all lied and verified it, it could thus be posted, right?

Which is why I propose to change criteria three to: "The information's truthfulness must be verified via links to authentic, trustworthy, and/or official Jagex website(s).". Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 01:35, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Support - I would have to agree that "verifiability" needs to be nailed down here. This should be the same for "classified" items or even things like Riots and Glitches. I agree with the intention here, and fully support that the information must be verified even if its origin is suspect... perhaps even more so. "Trustworthiness" is arguable and subjective, but there certainly are some fan sites that can be considered more reliable than others and generally are known for the quality of their content and the kind of typical participants on those websites.

To cite an example, suppose that Jagex is insisting that all moderators verify "real-world" identity by sending some notarized statement to Jagex HQ linking real-world contact information to their account together with signing some sort of NDA (non-disclosure agreement) covering what they see as moderators. If "rumors" about this are discussed widely on multiple fan websites and it can be verified that yes, moderators are required to send this kind of information into Jagex... this sort of information can be added to the Player Moderator article even if Jagex wants to keep knowledge of this "classified". This is notable, verifiable, and certainly applies to the article in question. It is stuff like this that would be covered and allowed to remain... or removed if this policy is rejected. Some of the terms of the NDA might also be notable enough to warrant some attention and publication... if some specific wording about those terms was somehow widely known as well.

BTW, I would add one more "proviso" to this "policy"..... never at any time should information about a specific user be disclosed. Generally, if there is information which is "classified" about a specific user or even a group of users (aka a certain clan) it is sensitive enough that privacy laws may also apply. We certainly shouldn't be spreading rumors about black marks of somebody or which players have been muted due to a riot... or whatever possible information p-mods may have about specific individuals. --Robert Horning 01:55, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Comment - Per the input here, I've added a fourth stipulation: that any information must be sourced. This will allow anyone who reads it an easy way to check the veracity of the info. As for info about specific players, should it be inserted within this policy or within the no player articles policy to make it more overreaching?--Diberville 02:05, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Changed to Support - Remember also that the moderator registration article on jagex's website has already been referenced, so if someone wants to add that to relevant article(s) by all means go ahead after this has passed (assuming it does, anyway) Rendova 03:20, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Support - However, I would highly suggest revising condition 3. Verifiability of information added to articles should not be limited to separate contributors to this wiki as being the only source. It should include as many trustworthy sources of information as is necessary to verify the information. Condition 4 does address this somewhat, but it is better to be safe than sorry. --Taeadon--

Oppose - What a too and fro all that was. I'm going to have side with the against camp, this just feels like encouraging rulebreaking to me (yes I have read the discussion, no need to comment). I also don't want to see Jagex starting to flex it's copyright muscles (again I have read the discussions). Administrator Hurston (T # C) 13:23, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Oppose - Per everything I said above. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 19:34, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Support - I also think that in the event that information cannot be verified by other users or by sources then images and screenshots should be used where necessary. Prayer-icon.png Sir Lenehan File:Smite old.png|25px 01:52, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

The problem with screenshots is that they can easily be faked. As mentioned earlier, we have some talented image editors here who could easily create a false image. While screenshots are helpful, they cannot be the sole verification for information. A consensus of editors and offsite sources are the only true ways to verify. Dtm142 02:03, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Support - Mods, you say that stuff isn't that great and interesting. Maybe if we can see it, we won't care anymore and we'll get off your backs ("we" as in those of us who desperately want to know the secrets of the Pmod center, including me, although I don't bother you mods about it).

InstantWinstonDragon 2h sword old.pngold edits | new edits

02:07, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

If only, if only :P. It really is all boring stuff. Basically everything you'd ever want to know times 10, and then some. And you've got to read and understand every inch of it. I'd prove it, except that I'm no hypocrite and I'm not a mod any moar XD Rendova 03:51, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I support the use of at least certain types of classified information as per the suggested policy. Though I'm not entirely certain what use the Wiki has for community-oriented information such as classified forums, I'm willing to concede that there is currently too much information on the game itself that isn't understood well enough to ensure an objective, factual viewpoint on some subjects that Jagex doesn't disclose. With respect to Jagex's rights but realizing that we aren't bound to their procedure, I feel we need to consider every option within our means to acquire additional knowledge of unknown factors if the Wiki is to have a grounding in fact over generalization. --Neo Garland 02:21, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Oppoose - this is what makes the wiki stand out from the rest of the rs websites. we are not jagex and do not have to follow their policies.Frogzz 03:55, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Keep it but not in so much detail- If the info is leaked, its Jagex's fault, but to respect everyone's wishes we should keep it but not in the detail its in.Rune crossbow.png Hess36talk Ancient staff.png 20:26, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

They are extremely careful. Their leaks almost entirely through rare cases of mislaid trust. At this point we're merely debating whether or not we should put up information that could be verified. Rendova 07:05, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Comment - Just so you two above know, an 'Oppose' means that you oppose releasing any classified info. Just so you know, because it doesn't sound like your are against posting that info even though you put 'Oppose'  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sir Lenehan (talk).

I think the issue here is the ambiguity between which "policy" is being discussed here... the one at the top of the one at the beginning of this section. --Robert Horning 11:45, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Support per my comments in the above discussion. Rollback crown.svg Kudos 2 U Talk! Edit count! Contribs! 07:56, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Semi-publish/publish the look Like we have taken out real names in friends lists, names and posts in forum pictures and so on. The picture should show what it looks like, not what infomation it gives. tobylaneTalk 12:17, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Support with some reservations. That wording is vague, and I hope if the "verified" "sourcing" is information received under a promise of confidentiality that the community would balk at its publication. Mamabear47 13:04, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I personally believe that if Jagex hasn't publicly released information, they dont want players going round spreading information that they asked to keep secret. Releasing information CLASSIFIED BY JAGEX is breaking a code that player moderators sign an agreement not to relase. We dont support using language or breaking any other rules, what makes this one so special. Do wtih this what you will. Jdogy15 22:42, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Tell it, I mean, nobody knows what moderators, clan leaders, etc. get until you tell 'em. Killr833 22:50, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Support If the information is necessary to the article, then by all means allow it. Shutdown56 01:06, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Support We need to show all relevant information, whether we or Jagex like it or not. That is the purpose of this Wiki.Mr.L Froslass 03:31, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Support If you know where to look this information can be found anywhere, all it takes is a bit of digging. However this is supposed to be an encyclopedia and should provide the best possible information while still keeping out of JaGEx's grasp. -[HAY]

Support We arre an encyclopedia; we have no reason to ignore the existance of any knowledge because Jagex would like us to. Once information is released in any way, there is no reason why it should be repressed. If players want to break the rules, that's their choice; if they want to help an encyclopedia by breaking the rules, that's also their choice.--Eyes2.gifPig HouseGuthix's Book of Balance.pngInane Ramblings 10:14, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Support Yeah, this is a good policy. A nice little compromise. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk 

Slightly oppose-I think that we should not submit classified information unless it has been released, either accidentally or on purpose. If Jagex finds out we have been submiting unreleased classified information, they can sue Wikia, and if they win, they could get RuneScape Wiki or even the entirety of Wikia to shut down. Fortis3 00:20, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Know the law if you think a law is broken. Lawsuits are much harder than you think, and the law isn't quite what you think it is. 'nuff said here that isn't already above. --Robert Horning

Strong Support I think everybody is overlooking something pretty important - just because the wikia allows this content (given that its verified) doesn't mean it will show up soon, or even ever. There has to be not just one mod, but enough to verify it. I personally see nothing wrong with having this information, Jagex has no real grounds to take legal action, as the wiki would be committing no crime. The only thing they could sue for is information, IPs and stuff, to attempt to find the source of the leak. The person posting the information might be required to keep the secret, the Wiki has taken no such pledge. 1diehard1 04:05, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Neutral – While I support the idea of adding information that is relevant to articles and can be verified by multiple users, I oppose because of the fact that releasing some of the information can be harmful to the community and the mod team (which is the reason it was confidential in the first place). I must insist that no matter where the information came from or how many members of the community can verify it, anything relating to the moderator guidelines, any problems that the moderator team comes across, or anything else harmful to the community should be removed immediately. Quest map icon.png Laser Dragon Task map icon.png 05:53, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Support - Proviso 1 and 2 should be standard for every article in this Wiki. Proviso 3 and 4 actually preclude publication of any confidential information. Only publically available information will be allowed, which should allay any fears from those opposed to this. Hatchenator 14:25, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Support this is a help website, and the info could be helpful. or interesting. Red chinchompa.png Ippy97 (Talk) Dragon 2h sword old.png14:56, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

OPPOSE Why rock the boat? If they start seeing secrets revealed here, they may try to shut us down. Why risk that after all the hard work done just to add relatively little more useful info? We use so many of their graphics on this site, it would be a simple matter for them to go after us. Yeah, I heard of "fair use," but that is subjective and not a guarrantee we are being "fair." TomSupergan 01:29, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Support It seems to me that if the info is leaked, its gonna spread whether the runescape wiki contributes or not. If Jagex doesn't want it spread, then they should take steps. Unless asked not to by Jagex, Spreading leaked info seems fine. Neoinr 07:06, 23 December 2008 (UTC)Neoinr

OPPOSE PUBLISHING OF CLASSIFIED INFO To all those who support publishing of classified info, please explain how do you plan to verify it? Just because an 'author' states thats its correct doesn't mean it is. I can jump 100m above the ground, would you buy that without proof? .. As a simple rule we should publish info which is available to the public by the party concerned.

Also don't live in the illusion that Jagex policies don't govern outside Runescape.. Here is a snippet of their rule and how Wikia could fall into trouble :-

[QUOTE from JAGEX WEBSITE ] 3. Can I use articles from the RuneScape or Jagex websites?

In all cases we retain copyright ownership and the right of approval in advance of you using any copyright material. We also retain the right to request anyone to remove the material.

All rights, including copyright and database right, in the RuneScape, FunOrb and Jagex websites and their contents, are owned by Jagex Ltd., or otherwise used by Jagex as permitted by applicable law.


--I R Legend 14:15, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

It is indicated in the policy proposal that information would have to be verified by offsite sources and consensus from editors. Unsourced content can immediately be removed. It may also interest you that there is another Wikia wiki out there that is worse than even the Dark RuneScape Wiki [7]. Pirated software is far more dangerous than anything "confidential" that could be in this sacred player moderator centre. Dtm142 23:05, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

This is a very worthy topic and I have mixed views on the subject. Since the RuneScape Wiki is supposed to be an encyclopedia, it should include such information in that sense. However, as a former player moderator, I personally believe that some information should be kept private. Also, Jagex could consider this wiki to be a cheat site if we published leaked information. I say that we should allow users to post such information, but at the same time, we should establish some sort of process that allows Jagex to easily request the removal of information.

However, I am willing to accept compromises, such as restricting leaked information to the Dark RuneScape Wiki. --Ixfd64 17:19, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Neutral - per Dr5ag2on1. Andrew talk 23:09, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

This is much more illegal than the RSCAngel wiki, and the content is BS.

InstantWinstonDragon 2h sword old.pngold edits | new edits

00:22, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Even better - A completely free copy of Jagex's full game. If they won't even get rid of full piracy of their software, I don't think we have anything to worry about. Dtm142 16:16, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

No - Do we want Jagex to try to remove this wiki, because they might try to find a way. Plus, they might decide to remove player Mods all together and that would not be good. As I have seen in Runescape, if players abuse a system it is either removed or changed into a less fun thing like the balanced trade updates, wilderness updates, ect.Hire888 5:09, 24 December 2008 (PST)

Removing player moderators completely wouldn't be such a bad thing. I've generally found them to be incompetent and unable to permanently rid RuneScape of spambots. It's the major game updates like balanced trade that actually prevent the crooks from coming back. Otherwise, they're always a step ahead of Jagex. Dtm142 16:16, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Support Although I don't see how this will affect the wiki because no moderator would have the "stuff" to post any classified information as they were the one opposing... Bandos godsword.pngJmoDragon platebody.png, 00:49, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

If you're going to insult us, just say it. Don't waste your time with innuendo. Rendova 00:52, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Again not worded like I meant it >.<. An eloquent speaker I am not lol. Btw its more Euphemistic than innuendo.Bandos godsword.pngJmoDragon platebody.png, 04:24, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Strong SupportI say do it. Post whatever we can, this is meant to be a site for encyclopedic knowledge, not what JaGex does and does not want us to know. It's not fair for players to know what they can or can't be muted for or what could or could not result in action being taken against them.. I've personally dealt with too much crap from them to care what they think or say, they obviously don't care about the player and they've never shown me they do; the second they do I will revise and reconsider my view on them but now they don't.

Back in 2006 I was perma banned from the forums, check this out;

Your user account ***** has been permanently banned from the Forums for breaking the forum rules.

Please refer to the Knowledge Base for more information: Forum Black Marks/Bans


And yet when I go to the appeals system it says;

Offence Date Offence Type Site Appeal Status 05-Jun-2006 Legacy Punishment RuneScape Not Appealable Why? No Evidence

WELL GEE, THAT SEEMS FAIR. They have absolutely NO evidence against me on file and for all they know I didn't do anything worth being banned for ( Which is in fact the case, the moderator abused his power ) and I'm perma banned for the forums forever with no hope of a second chance. All because JaGex does a crap job of customer support and doesn't give two craps about their customers.

They don't deserve the twisted oath/loyalty people are giving them. When people like me who have done nothing wrong are perma banned from something as important as the forums with no hope of redemption, they don't deserve anything aside from a backhand and a finger. JadeTora 10:10, 25 December 2008 (UTC) Jade

That's because they really don't give a crap about us. I got ALL of my black marks in one shot. I played for over a year and all my black marks accumulated and I got permanently muted from one day to the next. Its like you're in PvP and this guy comes out with 99 strength and Dragon Claw specs you out. You have no chance to change behavior, as opposed to a guy with a whip coming and giving you a fair chance to put protect melee or something. Instead of getting 1 offense at a time like everyone else I got 8 offenses and 15 black marks at once. As of the summoning update i now have 11.2 marks. They need to make it so that you get un-muted after a year.Bandos godsword.pngJmoDragon platebody.png, 08:32, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Weak support - Comment: Although I like the idea, points 3 and 4 will be quite hard to fulfill, I think. Second-abyssal-whip.pngPatheticcockroachGuthan's platebody.png(Talk) 10:57, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Changed to oppose as per kytti khat below. Second-abyssal-whip.pngPatheticcockroachGuthan's platebody.png(Talk) 12:04, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Weak oppose - Comment:My opposition is directly relevant to Patheticcockroach's Weak support. With points 3 and especially 4 it will make it possible to dismiss anything that cannot be publicly accessed directly from Jagex's website, thus effectively making this policy a round-about way to enforce Jagex's confidentiality wishes of what is and is not to be public. Again the support by multiple rogue pmod's would make this sort of information easy to spread to numerous fansites, yet to truly source this other fansites are not the ultimate source of information, as only Jagex themselves are the final authority as to what is and is not in the game. Perhaps I'm incorrect on some of this and if so please do inform (my talk page is always open), but this is the best my left-brain can make of this, my right-brain on the other hand can think on some really interesting imagery to go with this entire thread of debate. ~kytti khat 19:14, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Strong Support About damn time.Kevin-020 21:20, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Support I'm being slightly biased with this support because I've always been curious about this classified information. I see no reason not to add this classified information to the wiki, but I am slightly concerned as to what Jagex can do about this legally. C.ChiamTalk Calebchiam 08:57, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Don't be. Jagex are always trying to brainwash players into believing things that they don't like them doing (RWT, disclosing info they don't like, etc) are illegal. This is simply not true. The worst they can do about it legally is ban offenders accounts. Second-abyssal-whip.pngPatheticcockroachGuthan's platebody.png(Talk) 08:30, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
RWT is illegal. All items/accounts in the game belong to Jagex, and anyone besides Jagex that sells them outside of the game is selling something that they do not own, and therefore is illegal. Quest map icon.png Laser Dragon Task map icon.png 22:08, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
RWT isn't about selling items outside the game, it's about transferring them from an account to another inside the game. The items remain the "property" of Jagex, even after they are RWTed. Nothing's being stolen, it is legal, in most countries at least. Probably even in China. Second-abyssal-whip.pngPatheticcockroachGuthan's platebody.png(Talk) 15:40, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Strong Support I have to support this, the "legacy offense" thing is and has been an ongoing problem with players with old accounts. as it stands my main wich was stolen from me during a break [my fault easy password] is banned for something that they have no proof of and will not let you appeal, it was 1 offence too, supposedly botting. jagex has had craptastic CS since its beginning [ie when i started in 2002]. they know they can do whatever they want with people accounts and ban whoever they like saying as its THIER account and there letting you use it based on some vague rules. and if they dont like it they can make another or leave. that know that some other person will take you place and maybe go members. so after all my ranting i say we should post any and all information we can get our hands on, then if jagex wants it removed they can go through the proper channels, the sysops here, and have it removed; or more likely for jagex, threaten to sue [lol].

 Black mushroom ink.png:[talk]: xEmptySkies :[cont]:  08:43, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Comment - Is it just me or does anyone else see a string of future debates over the definition of points 3 and 4? I guess i should clarify, my opposition is only in regards to these two points being used as weapons against information dissemination. Would someone please clue me in as to why these two points with their current level of ambiguity aren't concern for anyone else? ~kytti khat 11:13, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually, we have a little problem: it's either we allow some unverified/unverifiable info, either we don't but then we probably won't ever have any classified info posted or kept... Second-abyssal-whip.pngPatheticcockroachGuthan's platebody.png(Talk) 12:04, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Comment As with others above, it seems that points 3 and 4 will be used to keep any of this formation off the wiki. This whole exercise seems pointless with those in play.--Degenret01 12:40, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

I guess that is a point that needs to be pounded home a little better in terms of consensus. I don't see that it will keep "any of this information off the wiki", but it will make removing something posted by a disgruntled p-mod to be carefully reviewed and possibly removed according to this policy. Stuff which has been mentioned time and again elsewhere such as p-mod registration and right-click reporting would be permitted according to this policy. This is a compromise, clearly, and doesn't give everybody everything that they want. It will likely result in splitting hairs over what is verifiable and inevitably lead to debates over that issue, but at least this is appealing to traditional logical and scholarly practices rather than absolute anarchy or kissing the behind of Jagex. --Robert Horning 19:46, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Oppose from a policy standpoint - As of the moment this policy is just not developed enough for me to support. I have a few issues with it:

The information applies to the article. - This is generally fine however I do think that we should be trying to release the minimal amount of classified information needed in order to make the article comprehensive.

The information is notable enough for inclusion within the article. - I have a problem with "notable". If we wanted to include notable we would need to find a defintion that is universally accepted on the wiki, and that is not going to happen. Instead it should be said that the information is crucial to understanding the subject at hand.

The information's truthfulness can be verified by other separate editors of the RuneScape Wiki. - The next line should cover this well enough. I understand that we want all information to be totally credible. But seriously now many of these classified places aren't even accessible to most of the wiki editors. Secondly it isn't unheard of for people to misinterpret something and then believe it is fact. So credibility of information from another editor is always going to be an issue so therefore I would much rather an image/source.

The information must be sourced. - Yes it must.

Anyways from a policy standpoint it just needs a bit of clarification/work. If you don't like what I've suggested above just feel free to start a discussion. Cheers. --Whiplash 00:19, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

As clarification and rebuttal of the above points may start a lengthy discussion, I would like to suggest that this get split out somehow and somewhere. Or if you want to leave it in place, so be it. I'll leave that up to you, but my response to what you've said above will be lengthy, as I'm not in 100% agreement with you. Unfortunately, I don't really see consensus building here either, other than a tyranny of the majority pushing their way on this issue. There is certainly some movement toward compromise, but a genuine compromise hasn't happened yet that legitimately satisfies all parties. --Robert Horning 00:40, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Not Sure - Wasn't 100% sure if the voting was still going on, but I'll put in my 2 Cents.

1) Jagex could sue this site Now, couldn't they? We have plenty of "classified" information already..

2) If it isn't a "trade secret", it isn't giving anyone an advantage over everyone else, why doesn't Jagex just RELEASE the information? --Vynergy 05:31, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Jagex sue? Under what law and for what reason? They can go after individuals who have disclosed this information, and perhaps demand legally the IP addresses of those who have added this content from a subpoena to Wikia, but I don't know of any basis that would "shut down" the website for disclosing this information. An appeal to the law is unjustified in this argument. Trade secret laws might be applicable, but even that is a real stretch of the imagination here. P-mods simply don't have access to trade secrets, and it would be stupid for Jagex to leak any to p-mods anyway. --Robert Horning 14:04, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
To be honest I wouldn't be surprised if they did. They aren't the smartest of people...Bandos godsword.pngJmoDragon platebody.png, 14:18, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm not totally opposed to the idea of releasing classified information myself Robert but I think that if we do it should be kept to a bare minimum. If it isn't needed to provide a core understanding than it really should be removed. --Whiplash 16:37, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
What, precisely, the "bare minimum" information that needs to be released can be debated. The point I'm trying to make is that disclosure of this certainly isn't illegal. Ethics is something that can be debated outside of discussing the legality of the situation, but suggesting that Jagex is going to take any sort of step from banning accounts of RS Wiki participants, shutting down the wiki, or demanding that Wikia Central will remove this information forcibly against the will of the participants on this wiki is completely unfounded. I am completely confident of this fact, from decades of experience in dealing with copyright law on a professional basis and extensive readings on this topic. No, I'm not a lawyer, but I'm well read on the subject and can certainly debate intellectual property law with the best "experts" that there are. As long as we are factual, it isn't really a problem.
I'm disappointed with some of the edits that have happened to this wiki assuming bad faith on the part of the contributors when legitimate information has been removed due to its supposition that it is classified and therefore can't be here. If you want me to give specific edits, I will, but I am talking about specific points that have already been removed with the assumption that the original policy listed at the top of this page (not what is being "voted on here") is in fact the actual policy on this wiki. This isn't future tense but rather past tense, and an assumption that an edit war will ensue without pointing out policies in place that govern this information.
Besides, there isn't really that much information which would be covered under this policy. I don't know to what extent that moderators, high level players on the "special forums", and clan leaders get spoilers and the "inside scoop" on upcoming changes to the game, but I would believe it to be minimal. Emphasizing the "minimal disclosure" is essentially saying there should be no disclosure. I do, however, agree that the information should be relevant to the article (aka the Dragon Slayer quest article shouldn't have a list of player moderator guideline rules) and it should be something about the article in question (like the Player Moderator article). With the possible exception of the article becoming a featured "Article of the Month", it would be information buried with the other 10k articles that are on this wiki. --Robert Horning 19:16, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
I think that it really depends on the info being released. Could a player mod on this wiki tell me what kind of information you have that is "classified"? I'm not asking you to reveal the info, but I am wondering what need JaGeX has of classifying it.


Oppose - Don't do anything that you wouldn't want done to you. --Adamchrome 10:39, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Huh? Dtm142 18:33, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Leave philosophy out of this unless its relevant lol.Bandos godsword.pngJmoDragon platebody.png, 18:36, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
He's saying that unless you want Jagex to publically post information about yourself ("Chiafriend12 is actuallly a morbitally obiese nine year old nerd who lives at 1 Main Street Dublin, Ireland!"), then don't do that to others. Remember the Golden Rule? Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 01:13, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Let me clarify. I DO WANT CLASSIFIED INFO TO BE POSTED. AGAINST JAGEX.18:21, 31 December 2008 (UTC)18:21, 31 December 2008 (UTC)~

Mild oppose Mainly because of the fact it truthfully can't be sourced which is a key ingredient for neutrality. Reason is because of the faxt that..well..companies change their mind at the drop of a hat. Guthix crozier.png Eternalseed Guthix's Book of Balance.png

Strong OpposeAs I have stated above, there is no need to make this wiki sink any lower in the eyes of the Runescape Public.--SmithingZilenserztalk! FishingJoin the RSWP today! 20:05, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Comment - I actually spoke with one of my Jagex buddies and asked them about this whole discussion back around the 15th. They said that even though we claim that "w3 hav teh rite 2 poast wutever w3 want" and that "ppl hav teh rite 2 kno", it is in violation of the fansite guidelines, in violation of the confidentiality agreement any person with this knowledge would have aggreed to, and that even allowing people to post confidential information is in heavy violation of the "Encouraging others to break rules" rule. Remember what happened to Zybez? They ignored Jagex's request to remove RWIT ads. Jagex censored their site name and put a total embargo on everything about them. So, yeah. ;) Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 01:13, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Wait, was that player moderator business? I thought that conversations between you and your "Jagex buddies" were to be kept confidential. From what I can recall, this isn't the first time this has happened either. Should you be demodded and banned from RuneScape for that? Even though Jagex did what they could to punish Zybez, Zybez is very much alive today and from what I saw in the corner of my screen, they still have RWIT banner ads on their site (some of which prevent proper navigation of the site). I really don't care if Jagex censors out the name of this site ingame. Players shouldn't be advertising fansites ingame anyway, this one is no different. Jagex can do whatever they want on their own website, but they cannot censor the whole internet. What you have done is proven that Jagex cannot and will not actually shut us down regardless of what we do. I don't think this was your intent, but regardless you have succeeded in proving our point that legal action will not be a result of posting this information. Dtm142 19:32, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

UPDATE - I'm going to split my position in two.

Oppose on a moral level, as indicated above.
Support on an encyclopaedic level, because if this classified information is gathered legitimately (not from hearsay or a few PMod pictures, etc) and sourced accordingly then there is no reason for it not to be entered on the wiki, unless expressly requested not to be by JaGex.
However, if you excuse another philosophy lesson, It's best not to bite the hand that feeds you!

--Adamchrome 14:05, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Comment The rules say that they will request for the non-currently-available information to be taken down. Even if they didn't do that, and told Wikia, the single page would be referred to, and Wikia would deal with that. There is no chance of the wiki going down because it is just one page. As before, I still semi support. tobylaneTalk 18:11, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

If Wikia received a cease and desist request under the terms of the DMCA to remove some content on this wiki due to a copyright violation, they would be obliged to remove that page. There are other provisions of that same law that allow people (like us ordinary users) to protest that action and call Jagex's bluff as well. Non-verbatim (in other words paraphrased), sourced, and "fair-use" quotes simply isn't a copyright violation at all. Abuse of this by Wikia damages their common-carrier status, and abuse of this by Jagex can also expose them to a counter lawsuit that they really don't want to even tempt. This is what is legal, and certainly "rules" on the official Jagex website don't apply to Wikia at all either. At best this is a case of what we as a community wish to do, and bringing in the law when it doesn't apply is making an absurd argument that simply doesn't apply. The policy under discussion would not permit an "anonymous" p-mod from posting all of the moderator muting guidelines as a new article, unsourced, and using this wiki as a "depository" of confidential documents. That would be grounds for deletion, and likely a speedy deletion at that. --Robert Horning 08:01, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

We shouldn't give out commercially sensitive information, but I think it is our duty to give out information that maybe JAG doesn't want released that is in the public interest. Of course, this information would have to be discussed. But it is vital that we make public anything that could have a negative impact on the RS community.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Angel's fire (talk).

Strong Support All of you who are whorried about "Jagex shutting down the Wiki", read the "Know the law" section. Jagex can in no way shut down the Wiki just because we're posting classified information. They can try, but it's unlikley theyll suceed. This information will definatly make this, of all RuneScape fansites, stand out. It will hype up a lot of the players, keep them excited. More people will join the Wiki and start contributing. I can give you a big list of good things that can come out of this but I'm sleepy so goodnight, and Zamorak bless it! --— Enigma 19:42, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Mostly oppose I do understand the whole classifyed thing, as I have held classifyed secrets in the past (and present), but if the information gets leaked out by an official source, then it should be fair for anyone to use. If JaGeX wants information to be kept a secret that they put in a high level forum (which in my opinion isn't a very good idea) then we should respect it. As much as I would like to know what the mods know, I respect their policy. Monkey525467
A.K.A. TwilightShadow
23:48, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - forget copyright violations, shutting down and the like; the biggest problem is with criteria 3 and 4.

One thing that makes Runescape different from the real world (and RuneScape Wiki from Wikipedia) is that things can often be easily verified. For example, if someone puts that magic trees require 75 woodcutting, many people could easily find that out by looking at the in-game woodcutting guide, or chopping a magic tree. Since this is information directly from the source, it is very reliable.

With classified information, you have one site to rely on; the people who say what they see in the Jagex/Runescape site itself. This is a very unreliable base. It's almost the same reason that people don't just accept someone saying "The government secretly has a base in who-knows-where", because it could have been made up by this bored loser on his computer.

Another problem is that criterion 3 says The information's truthfulness can be verified by other separate editors of the RuneScape Wiki. On one hand, if an IP or newly registered user suddenly claims to be a moderator and starts adding stuff, it might not be considered reliable, but on the other hand, discriminating against those editors would mean not all editors are equal.

Pretty much all of the information we have on the wiki is testable/verifiable (scientific method much?), such as the levels required for skill activities, quests, etc (except for the glitch articles, which should be removed IMO). However, classified information cannot be easily verified or be considered reliable because that is its nature. While this wiki is "for all things RuneScape", I don't want it to become "the wiki for all made-up crud about RuneScape". So, I oppose. Butterman62 (talk) 17:01, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - Not really worried about pmods posting info that Jagex knows will be leaked somewhat or any copyright issue, but say someone posts a detailed guide on how to mess with the java client, which can be verified by other wiki editors and sourced from another website, but it's still encouraging others to break the rules. Its available to people who google for it, but if you put that info on this wiki you expose it to a larger audience (linking from other pages and such).

If rulebreaking material is posted, eventually Jagex will request things to be taken off as they see fit. Fix up 3 & 4, and I guess I'd think this over again. Empty box.pngrriceCrabclaw and hook.png 09:26, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - A person supplying the wiki with confidential information is violating their agreement that gave them access to the info in the first place and can be banned. Our wiki should avoid the moral dilemma of encouraging people to do things that would get them banned. Given how public fan wikis work, the mere fact that the wiki would allow this info would be encouragement. Therefore, it should not take this info. Inelcirc 16:28, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

as many people has stated i think we should have "classifed" information on this wiki there is nothing jagex can do (without looking like the big guy picking on the little guy)and besides jagex is doing stuff wrong like over censoring i understand they dont want cybersmut on there site and i repect that but taking away the wild just went to far same with the trade limit im now changing my thing from nutal to agist jagex --Legaking 21:29, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

COMMENT the thing of jagex posting user RL information is actually illegal. while were posting classified info, it is extremely illegal to post personally identifiable info about any of its users without their consent!

 Black mushroom ink.png:[talk]: xEmptySkies :[cont]:  21:33, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

In none of this debate is there anybody advocating the publication of personally identifiable information (government ID numbers, contact information, or even actions link to specific user accounts). Indeed, that has nearly universal support to remove this sort of information. The policy under question is about what standards ought to apply when more general information like policies that govern moderators are published, or information about what happens on the "hidden" forums. For those in opposition to this proposed policy should be aware, the current policy is actually more lax than what is being proposed here, and previous attempt to remove "classified" information is actually contrary to current policies in place on this wiki. Ad hoc "consensus" was achieved (well sort of) on several individual pages, but no uniform policy currently exists site-wide over even this minimal set of standards. We are talking about raising the minimal standards for what is acceptable, and forcing attribution requirements when up until now this requirement simply doesn't exist for this sort of information. It is not a relaxation of current policy. --Robert Horning 00:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
I think he's referring to the hyperbolated example I used somewhere above to explain someone's philosophy. Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 01:48, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Support - Man can't believe I haven't contributed to this yet. Anywho, per everyone who is a supporter. --Rollback crown.svg Spencer (Talk | Edits | Contribs) 00:04, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Saying 'per everyone else' doesn't help the discussion at all. :P Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 01:48, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - Most of the infomation that is classified is so for a reson Jagex keeps it out of the public eye FOR A REASON, take for example he p-mod forms, they give us (mods) guidelines if these where public knowladge people could avoid breaking rules, surly this site dosn't what to encourge rule breakers by giving them the mean to escape detecion? It's also not like what we report is a mystery, The rules are written down on the site. Being a mod and being bound by the clkassified rules i can't give you anither example, but if it got out then mods would be reciving much less help from j-mods. In short there there for a reason, this wikia gives infomation to the runescape player but it dosn't mean we should tell them what we don't know. If you tell smmeon a secreat you don't expect them to tell do you, and you don't except nice people to force it out of them, shame on ya' all.Chao.master 19:20, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Neutral It may be fine within reason, but I'm not to sure about this one Rune full helm (Gilded).png Mitch247 Talk Rune platebody (Gilded).png 23:08, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Strong Oppose The main reason for opposing is that a support could lead to moderator information being leaked. There's a reason moderator information is private: if word got out about how the inner workings of the moderator world are run, it would defeat the purpose of player/forum moderators. Everyone would know exactly how far they could stretch the rules without crossing the line into an offense. Player moderators are what keep RuneScape as nice a community as it is. The last thing we need is a bunch of newbies running around spamming and cussing the heck out of everyone else. If these guidelines pass, it could mean the downfall of one of the best parts of RuneScape. Supertech1 TCE 23:43, 16 January 2009 (UTC)


There has been no consensus so far for any type of policy on this issue. Consensus seems unlikely at this point in time, so no policy will be created. It will be up to the editors to determine the merit of any content as soon as it arises. Dtm142 21:30, 17 January 2009 (UTC)