The enforcement of the rules might be inconsistent and spotty, but that has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion. We are veering substantially away from the topic, trying to convince you – and perhaps a couple of other holdouts – that stacking isn’t an exploit.
And honestly, this reply is as far as I’m willing to go. Either you’re capable of recognizing you were wrong and changing your opinion, or no amount of evidence and rational discourse will do it.
When it comes to @Kholdenn’s case, I am not going to take sides, because it’s his word against theirs and none of us here have the actual data or even the means to get it.
However, whether it was a mistake or not is entirely beside the point of this discussion. The discussion is about stacking as a technique and whether it should be made easier, or removed, or left as it is. As part of that discussion, there was some conversation about whether stacking is an exploit or not.
There is irrefutable evidence that Funcom considers stacking not to be an exploit. You’ve cast doubt on whether that claim should be believed and based that doubt on a minor detail of how a particular word was positioned in a particular sentence. Despite that, most other people in this discussion seem inclined to accept the same shared interpretation of what Hugo was saying.
Then you decided to dredge up @Kholdenn’s ban as some kind of implication that stacking is against the rules. Several people in this discussion explained how a particular use of stacking can be considered against the rules without stacking in general being an exploit or against the rules.
The evidence presented so far was enough to change @DaVice’s mind. What is stopping you from doing the same? Over the course of the last few posts, you have simply restated the same arguments over and over again, without actually responding to any counterarguments.
Yes, it is. It’s not just “far out”, it’s wrong. I’ve already explained why and so have others. If you have an actual reason to believe otherwise, you might want to state it. Otherwise you’re just derailing the topic.