Talk:Bank spam click glitch
If it's unfixed, why is it on here? He has knocked four times. 00:24, January 30, 2010 (UTC)
- I don't actually think that it's a glitch, as it has always happened to me, no matter how fast or slow I click. UAPY
rwojy 00:26, January 30, 2010 (UTC)
- Yep, happened to me a couple of months ago. --Captain Sciz 00:29, January 30, 2010 (UTC)
- Yep, happened to me a couple of months ago. --
This has been around since the RuneTek5 game engine was released. Prawny 01:56, January 30, 2010 (UTC)
i dont think any glitch should be removed because its unfixed. thats intentionally leaving part of the wiki uncompleat just to keep jagex happy. 
3rd age farcaster 
02:04, January 30, 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, we don't post glitches because someone else might abuse it. AXHQVIrwojy 02:13, January 30, 2010 (UTC)
- The official line here is don't add any bugs that have not been fixed yet, though the unnoficial line that people go by is that we only remove glitches a player who tries it could possibly be banned for bug abuse. We have that rule not to please Jagex, so much as to remove temptation that might result in players geting banned. I moved the glitch to its respective glitch page.
Evil Yanks talk 02:15, January 30, 2010 (UTC)
- Also, if we were doing this for Jagex then we wouldn't have any glitch pages at all since we would be framing the mistakes that Jagex make for everyone to see. Evil Yanks talk 02:16, January 30, 2010 (UTC)
- Also, if we were doing this for Jagex then we wouldn't have any glitch pages at all since we would be framing the mistakes that Jagex make for everyone to see.
- The official line here is don't add any bugs that have not been fixed yet, though the unnoficial line that people go by is that we only remove glitches a player who tries it could possibly be banned for bug abuse. We have that rule not to please Jagex, so much as to remove temptation that might result in players geting banned. I moved the glitch to its respective glitch page.
if that was the case, why dont you warn the players? if you still abuse when you known full well that you could be banned, its your problem, not ours. 3rd age farcaster 02:29, January 30, 2010 (UTC)
- Warnings don't always work, simple as that. It also goes against one of the most major policies that we have, RS:NOT#SCAM. Evil Yanks talk 02:35, January 30, 2010 (UTC)
- Warnings don't always work, simple as that. It also goes against one of the most major policies that we have, RS:NOT#SCAM.
if we give a warning, we have done all we should do. and theres a difference between telling people to break rules and giving information on rulebreaking. 3rd age farcaster 02:50, January 30, 2010 (UTC)
- From the policy I mentioned above. While it is talking about scams, it is the same circumstances: "As such, pages that describe in detail how to scam, hack, macro, and the like are forbidden. It has been put forward in the past that descriptions of scams may prevent others from being scammed themselves, however this idea has been rejected by the community at large. " Evil Yanks talk 02:55, January 30, 2010 (UTC)
just because it is our current policy, does not make it right. however im not looking to start trouble, and certainly not here, so unless you want something else i will end this discussion. 3rd age farcaster 03:03, January 30, 2010 (UTC)