The rule on this subject must be vague in order for it to mean anything at all as a rule. Whilst this seems counterintuitive - think about the purpose of the rule in the first place. It justifies locking / deleting posts when the moderators can clearly see the post encourages or aids someone doing something somewhere that may be interpreted as a bad thing by one big company or another who may or may not try to take efforts against Bungie for discussing such things. To detail every possible scenario would be impossible. Xbox modding? No. iPhone jailbreaking? Nope. Kinect hacking? Not sure... Windows Phone 7 modding? Well, it is actively encouraged... but can we encourage it too? How to fix a broken Xbox? Well, I guess we use our judgement here. Let's let the thread roll until some fool starts talking about modchips. You see? Why detail every scenario when a vague rule does the job more accurately! 0_o

[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Stacker [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ArchAssain But great points I hope Achronos takes this into consideration. I [i]think[/i] it would be a simple fix and with it being fixed many more of the members will grasp the concept of the rule conduct that he is trying to present. Very well brought up points stacker, Primum and Elm![/quote]This is the reason why I participate in these discussions despite the fact that we could piss off the wrong guy. It's intellectual and helps with understanding. Not only that, but while we're arguing over the rule other users who may be new might see it and come to see what bungie is actually after and figure out that the rule is supposed to be more broad, so it's beneficial in a couple ways. [quote]PS Stacker holy -blam!- how quick do you type 2000 word/minute lol? [/quote]I wish I was honestly that fast, but mostly it's just that I don't have much to do once I get off work and even at work I am generally on a computer so..yeah.[/quote] Amen to that man! And yeah I know what you mean about being utterly bored after and during work which is why I am going back to school strictly for game devel.

[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ArchAssain But great points I hope Achronos takes this into consideration. I [i]think[/i] it would be a simple fix and with it being fixed many more of the members will grasp the concept of the rule conduct that he is trying to present. Very well brought up points stacker, Primum and Elm![/quote]This is the reason why I participate in these discussions despite the fact that we could piss off the wrong guy. It's intellectual and helps with understanding. Not only that, but while we're arguing over the rule other users who may be new might see it and come to see what bungie is actually after and figure out that the rule is supposed to be more broad, so it's beneficial in a couple ways. [quote]PS Stacker holy -blam!- how quick do you type 2000 word/minute lol? [/quote]I wish I was honestly that fast, but mostly it's just that I don't have much to do once I get off work and even at work I am generally on a computer so..yeah.

[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Stacker I think I'm repeating myself so I'm done with this post.[/quote] But great points I hope Achronos takes this into consideration. I [i]think[/i] it would be a simple fix and with it being fixed many more of the members will grasp the concept of the rule conduct that he is trying to present. Very well brought up points stacker, Primum and Elm! PS Stacker holy -blam!- how quick do you type 2000 word/minute lol? [Edited on 01.26.2011 1:49 PM PST]

[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ArchAssain [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Stacker[/quote] I agree, just as I agree with Primum and Elm. But as you stated it falls under the interpretation of the members of this site. the rule should be taken as, Do not post anything to do with hardware or software modification here on Bungie.net.[/quote]Glad you agree. And yes, I agree it [i]should[/i] be taken that way. But will it? No, not always. That's why there's an issue. [quote]Yes I agree some people will Misinterpret that rule and post anyways but that's life, Live and learn. Its shows a sense of logical thinking if you never break this rule. If you do and you get caught tough. You learn. As a whole the rule is flimsy IMO but it is not up to us the members to decide the terminology used. The way I would word it is: "Any Discussion in regards to modified hardware or software, cheating or self gain is strictly prohibited here on bungie.net." Or "You are here by unauthorized as a member of B.net to participate in any discussion of modified hardware or software, cheating or tampering here on bungie.net... All your opinions are correct but just because they are, dose not mean the terminology will change. [/quote]Again, I agree. It doesn't mean the terminology [i]will[/i] change. The issue is that it [i]should[/i] change. Perhaps Bungie wants to be rid of threads like this concerning the terminology of their rules that show a different intent than the one they want. So why not make their intent 100% clear and just be rid of that term? No more misinterpretations. Yes, people may argue "why not?" but there will most likely be decidedly fewer times in which that issue arises because it's just something bungie purely wants upheld and is clear. Members of the community come out together [i]because[/i] the rule isn't actually as clear as it could or should be. But if you have it written clearly, there's no real group of people coming out going "Why have the rule? It shouldn't exist" purely because of how the rule is written. I think I'm repeating myself so I'm done with this post.

[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Stacker[/quote] I agree, just as I agree with Primum and Elm. But as you stated it falls under the interpretation of the members of this site. the rule should be taken as, Do not post anything to do with hardware or software modification here on Bungie.net. Yes I agree some people will Misinterpret that rule and post anyways but that's life, Live and learn. Its shows a sense of logical thinking if you never break this rule. If you do and you get caught tough. You learn. As a whole the rule is flimsy IMO but it is not up to us the members to decide the terminology used. The way I would word it is: "Any Discussion in regards to modified hardware or software, cheating or self gain is strictly prohibited here on bungie.net." Or "You are here by unauthorized as a member of B.net to participate in any discussion of modified hardware or software, cheating or tampering here on bungie.net... All your opinions are correct but just because they are, dose not mean the terminology will change.

[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ArchAssain [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] elmicker [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ArchAssain Unauthorized: Not having [b]official[/b] permission.[/quote]The only person capable of giving that official permission is the owner of the product in question. The rule doesn't talk about unauthorised discussion, it talks about discussion of unauthorised modifications. Markedly different; you've seriously misread the sentence.[/quote] Hmmm good point, as a logical thinker I would [i]assume[/i] that any modification discussion is prohibited. Seeing how we do not have the permission to modify anything in regards to cheating and or self gain. Not physical or artistic modification. [/quote]Actually, we technically do have permission. It's not illegal, and no body (except Bungie, who cannot decide if we are allowed to modify anything that comes through Microsoft because it is legally owned by them) has said that you cannot modify software or hardware. What they do say is essentially "If you do this, we will remove you from being able to play online with other people because you may have created an unfair advantage and to be fair to other players who may not know even how to make these modifications, we're going to keep you from playing unevenly matched games with them." The only other thing outside of that is "You mess with it, we're not gonna be the ones paying for your repairs because you were the one who probably caused the issue in the first place, unlike the overheating that constantly happened in the original versions of the 360, which was a manufacturing issue." The reason for the arguement is simple: Some people will read it and take it as "If the people who own the rights to this have said we are not authorized to do this, then I won't talk about it. But the things that I have not been told I am not allowed to do I can talk about", which results in issues including someone being banned because they didn't realize that for some reason bungie seems to believe that nothing is authorized in terms of modifications of hardware and software. By no means is that actually analyzing the details in it. That's just reading it and taking the rule for what it says, which really is "don't talk about something that the people who own this (ie. Microsoft) say you cannot do to their stuff." This rule is only clear that, yeah, we're not to talk about things that people say we are not allowed to do. But this rule establishes [i]only[/i] that. Not that we aren't allowed to talk about [i]any[/i] modifications what-so-ever. To interperet a rule that literally says we can't talk about something we're told we can't do as not talking about anything is foolishness. If you want to interpret(i never know how to spell that...) this rule like that, then you must interperet every rule like that. Essentially, that'd mean we're not allowed to do anything on these forums. At all. Because then we could take things like "Do not be a jerk" as "I am not allowed to say anything to anyone because someone could interpret anything I say as being a jerk." The ones who are saying that "unauthorized" means nothing whether we have been told we can do it or not are foolish. Whether in ignorance of the terminology, in being too lazy to really care what it means, or are too afraid of getting in trouble for something that isn't actually against the rules just because of the general subject. The term "unauthorized" really should be removed from the rules if Bungie does not want us talking about modifications at all. That way, what the rule says is "You are not allowed to talk about mods" instead of "You are not allowed to talk about mods that the owners of the things you are modding have said you are not allowed to do." There's very little analysis done in that line of thought. It's literal. Just, literal. If there is an issue it's because the literal people don't understand the underlying meaning and get in trouble because the literal rule states something different than the intended idea. That's it. Why not just make the simple change and leave it at that? If Bungie wants people in trouble for talking about all mods, they should say that. Not say that they want people in trouble for talking about things that Microsoft says you are not allowed to do to their Xbox 360 under penalty of law and then ban people for even mentioning the pencil sketch they made on their 360 case because it's a modification. EDIT: And as has been said over and over, there is nothing "legal" to the point of the whether it's authorized or not in this discussion. It's about whether it's allowed according to these companies. It may make it so you can't play online, but it definitely doesn't make it so you can't play at all, whether or not that's because you're in jail or because the peice of equipment had this magic kill switch that Microsoft hits on their Xbox that makes it inoperable, or just because of whatever. The legality of the issue is not in question. It's the terminology. EDIT AGAIN: Also, I saw someone said something about how bungie hasn't authorized the discussion of modding on their forums. Well, the rule doesn't state "no unauthorized discussion", it states "no discussion of unauthorized mods..." And one more thing I didn't touch on, Arch. You've just proved elmicker's point. We cannot talk about modifications that assist in cheating because it's "unauthorized". the rule says "No discussion of unauthorized mods...even if not for the intention of cheating and self-gain" which would imply even the things that are not for cheating that are also not authorized. Again, the wording is enough to change the entire idea. Once more. "No discussion of modifications, period." That's a clear rule that shows that bungie doesn't want us talking about any modification what-so-ever. The rule they have says something different. [Edited on 01.26.2011 1:36 PM PST]

[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] elmicker [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ArchAssain Unauthorized: Not having [b]official[/b] permission.[/quote]The only person capable of giving that official permission is the owner of the product in question. The rule doesn't talk about unauthorised discussion, it talks about discussion of unauthorised modifications. Markedly different; you've seriously misread the sentence.[/quote] Hmmm good point, as a logical thinker I would [i]assume[/i] that any modification discussion is prohibited. Seeing how we do not have the permission to modify anything in regards to cheating and or self gain. Not physical or artistic modification.

I don't see why the wording of the rule matters so much. The intent is clear, so who cares if the use of the word "unauthorized" isn't legally correct? That's seems like a pretty trivial thing to dispute over.

[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ArchAssain Unauthorized: Not having [b]official[/b] permission.[/quote]The only person capable of giving that official permission is the owner of the product in question. The rule doesn't talk about unauthorised discussion, it talks about discussion of unauthorised modifications. Markedly different; you've seriously misread the sentence.

[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Telec yes, but you are being remarkably obtuse.[/quote]How?

The "unauthorized" part worries me. Technically, isn't that up to legal precdent? Somone recently won a case after he was banned and charged for modding his xbox, so now, it could be said that the mod he did is not considred "unauthorized" due to the courts saying that he was allowed to do this. I think there needs to be a more sepfic rule for this. EDIT: Ah, never-mind, thank you arachnos for clearing that up. [Edited on 01.26.2011 12:18 PM PST]

Ha so my cousin (that I am currently living with) is a IP Lawyer fresh out of university and this is her legal definition of unauthorized. Unauthorized: Not having [b]official[/b] permission. Bungie being the official, they have not authorized that type of discussion here on bungie.net. There fore we do not have the rights or permissions to post that content here. Do it where ever you please but not here. [quote]- Do not discuss unauthorized modification of console game hardware or software, even if you're not trying to cheat or pirate.[/quote] With that being said and interpreted to the best of my abilities means: [b]ANY[/b] Modification talk, threads or subjects should be left out of bungie.net as a whole as we are not authorized by the authority here (Bungie) to discuss any means of modification to your game, system or online experience. Make more sense when it comes from a credible and licensed lawyers mouth. I simply wrote down what she had to say as she was vocalizing it. Don't worry Achronos I'll take care of the bill :P [Edited on 01.26.2011 12:20 PM PST]

[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Goalie Master 8 Wait, so we're not allowed to talk about community mods for a game like...let's say Oblivion...where the developer shows support and appreciation for them? Edit: Oh, never mind. "[u]Unauthorized[/u]" mods.[/quote] I think it's safe to assume that "unauthorized" means "unapproved by the manufacturer."

[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Primum Agmen [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Skibur Yawn, Primum, yawn.[/quote]There's nothing wrong with asking for internally coherent rules, Skibur.[/quote]yes, but you are being remarkably obtuse.

[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Goalie Master 8 Wait, so we're not allowed to talk about community mods for a game like...let's say Oblivion...where the developer shows support and appreciation for them? Edit: Oh, never mind. "[u]Unauthorized[/u]" mods.[/quote] Yeahh.....also keep in mind that it's for PC too, not the 360 version. Microsoft would wring Bethesda's neck if they encouraged modding on the 360.

Wait, so we're not allowed to talk about community mods for a game like...let's say Oblivion...where the developer shows support and appreciation for them? Edit: Oh, never mind. "[u]Unauthorized[/u]" mods. [Edited on 01.25.2011 11:05 PM PST]

Jesus Christ. It was only one word. This isn't law school. It's the internet.

HOW DO YOU GET THE RANK OF BUNGIE.NET OVERLORD?????????

So claiming that I modified my NES by adding an internal speaker and making it RCA compatible would constitue a ban? Saying I flashed the "Halo 2600" ROM onto a [b]mod[/b]ified Asteroids cartridge would also constitute a ban?[url=http://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x242/Tactical777/halo2600.jpg]...and it works![/url] Or consoles not in production or consoles made by companies that are no longer in business? I think if you just put "current consoles" (Wii, Xbox 360, PS3, Kinect, PS3 motion thingy, DS family, PSP) it would make the rule clear. A little specificity. (not expecting you to cover everything exactly) I am not trying to be a smart ass, it is honest curiosity...and slightly confused. I collect old game systems and sometimes modify them. I don't want to get banned because I am discussing how to modify an Intellivision. [u]EDIT[/u]: A mod was able to answer my question! [Edited on 01.25.2011 10:27 PM PST]

[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Achronos Legally authorized (assuming no intent to pirate), but no, you shouldn't be discussing that here. Sorry, but that is just a minefield we'd prefer to stay away from. [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Reykjavik I think the problem with the rule is that the intent is to ban discussion about modifications that are not approved of by the hardware/software company. The rule says that it bans discussion of unauthorized modification. I am authorized to jailbreak an ipad, but Apple does not approve. Would I be allowed to discuss that topic on this website? Should I be allowed to? Under the current rules, it would seem like I do have the authority to talk about it on Bnet, because in the rules it specifies that discussion of unauthorized modifications are against the rules. If the rule actually were to allow discussion of authorized mods, that would be great. However, if you only want to allow approved mods, then that should be made clear (and I won't like it very much). [/quote][/quote]OK, you want to avoid that minefield. Then make it clear in the rules. Simply writing [quote]- Do not discuss modification of console game hardware or software, even if you're not trying to cheat or pirate (except for modifications specifically approved by the manufacturere).[/quote] would avoid the problem entirely. I want to broaden our discussion topics as much as possible, so I would prefer it to say discussions of unauthorized mods are banned, and mean it. But if you don't want to do that, then at least make it clear in the rules.

[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Skibur Yawn, Primum, yawn.[/quote]There's nothing wrong with asking for internally coherent rules, Skibur.

[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Pelicän Piräte [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ArchAssain [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Pelicän Piräte [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ArchAssain I don't care what anyone says urk's paragraph wins. It had nothing to do with the photo... [/quote] What? I came here for an argument![/quote] He diverted the attention away from the argument shhh let the septagonians settle. [/quote] You failed to complete the quote :([/quote] I did no such thing... did I? Anyways back on topic. Some may agree that the terminology is incorrect in the form that it is used. But its up to the simpler part of your mind to elaborate and understand the boundaries of what Achronos point was that he was trying to get across. Just don't brag or post about any modification or cheating here on B.net or you will be hurt real bad.. [Edited on 01.25.2011 5:11 PM PST]

Yawn, Primum, yawn.

[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Achronos For example, we claim often that "You have no rights" here. Well that's kind of tongue in cheek, right? You have rights in your legal jurisdiction. But we're talking about our ability to control what you say and access our systems. We grant that authority. I think we're talking about two different kinds of authority, here. Arguing "legal authority" is entirely different from "authority on bungie.net". I am trying to walk through this with you and engage in this discussion, but in the interests of full disclosure - you are trying my patience, as you are quibbling over one word in a rule you know damn well the purpose of and one which you aren't confused about its enforcement. On top of all of that, it is a minor rule and nobody but three of you have expressed any concern about it. That's not a threat to ban you or anything, but I'm just saying I'm not going to entertain this mostly academic discussion much longer.[/quote]See, now we're getting somewhere. So, instead of "unauthorised" you mean either "unapproved by Bungie" or "unauthorised by the web team". This is quite a different story, and it'd be a far more sensible rule. For instance, it would allow discussion of homebrew games, so long as discussion of how to hack consoles never happened. Or, at least, so long as you folks cared for such discussion. Basically, you brought up the bollocks. I dismissed the legal reasons for it pages ago, and ultimately it does come down to "we control everything that goes on here", you were just justifying some rather poor wording for daft reasons. If you'd just said "we authorise discussion" in the first place you wouldn't have us trying your patience, would you? You really do need to remember to play the "tyrant!" card more often. Take a leaf out of Vetinari's book, perhaps. Saying "we choose the policies", then backing that up with obfuscation rather than straight out "Bungie doesn't authorise discussion on its forums of x" was just a poor move on your part. Still, at least your wording stands up to criticism with that single little change, or the general acknowledgement that all authorisation to do anything on Bungie.net comes, ultimately, from Bungie and that (quite clearly, let's be honest) no law other than Bungie's rules on this forum. It's good to be coherent, isn't it? Though, I'll be honest, that your patience was being tried is generally a good thing.

2 hours at practice and look what's happened... Anyway, I didn't make this thread to discuss law. In my OP, I used an example from my philosophy of law class applied to the rules on this site. I made this thread to discuss this one rule, because I think it's too vague. A good way to write rules is to first think of the end goal of the rule, and then write that. For example, instead of "discussion of unauthorized modifications is prohibited", it should be either (if trying to prevent cheating) "detailing of methods of cheating, including mods, is prohibited" or "discussion of unapproved mods is prohibited".