Talk:Neopets controversy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Massively multiplayer online games, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of massively multiplayer online games. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. | ||
Contents |
[edit] Screenshot in 'Hacks and glitches' section
Is that really a screenshot of a board locked by a cracker? It looks to me far more likely that it has been legitimately locked by an actual board monitor, in which case the caption (and any refences in the article) need correcting. --Tim (talk), (contribs) 15:08, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- If a board is locked, the creator would probably get a warning. Why would you be warned for helping someone keep their account? Because the person who put the CG there is the one who locked the board, and they want it to look like the board creator was lying. Seems logical. -- ~PinkDeoxys~ 19:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
I am quite sure that this is real. I am a user on Neopets and I remember encountering several cookie grabbers and just barely managing to keep my account. A lot of people on the boards were talking about someone named "Kaos", so that seems genuine.
Most likely, like in most situations this was a board created by a user and locked by the moderaters, and as normally, all users name are gone, the creater is warned, and since the board cannot be deleted at that moment all posts become pink and the user gets changed to theneopetsteam. So the account was not hacked, the board was just locked in the normal way so "A screenshot of a locked board by a hacked moderator's account" would not be right since the account was not hacked, so it should say "A screenshot of a board locked by a moderator's account"~Tsears
Um, the screenshot was taken by a user. The sceenshot shows you Koas who cookie grabbed a mod's account. So it's real.
[edit] AntiNeopian
As this article is solely about the controversy and criticism surrounding Neopets, I believe a link to AntiNeopian.org (the largest anti-neopets site) would be beneficial to those reading this article. Currently, this article has no external links; the addition of AntiNeopian would provide Wikipedia readers who are interested in this topic with a website where they could easily learn more.
- Wiki still doesn't work. Right now, it's just a POV forum, and as far as I know, Wikipedia tries not to link to forums. Lmblackjack21 06:03, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Citation
How can a fan site forum be considered as citation for:
...On July 25, 2005 (now known as "Dupe Day"), a coding issue allowed items to be duplicated by users by sending specially modified requests to the server. The timing, and the duplication and release of cheap, common items (supposedly to implicate innocent users) fueled speculation of a concerted attack. Hundreds, possibly thousands of users were frozen, but accounts were not returned.[9]...
I have read the site and there is no evidence that no accounts were returned, it only goes on about how Dupe day existed and supports nothing further.
I believe that the citation 9 should be moved to after the first sentance, and a new citation be listed for the asty sentance, if there is one.
I am assuming however, that the article is referring to innocent users who had been caught up in the situation accidentally, and not the users who were creating the items. 202.72.163.179 08:37, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] HTML Filter Impossible? I think not
A very powerful HTML filter to stop cookie grabbers and other malicious scripts was implemented by Neopets on April 26, 2006. The filter ensures that HTML syntax is followed correctly by checking coding such as brackets and quotes, and makes it impossible to use any code that the staff has not allowed. [15]
While I understand they say it's impossible to use any code that staff don't allow, it's a contradiction in the fullest. If things were impossible to crack/hack, then I guess we wouldn't have a lot of the issues to deal with security on the web. I'm going to change this sentence based on:
1) My programming knowledge 2) Currently known loopholes in the system
If you have any objections, my discussion page is open.
If you want to discuss it with us, sign your posts.
Currently, there's absolutely no active XSS or MySQL injection areas on neopets, thus disproving your theory. My programming knowledge is probably far greater than yours.
Sod Aries 02:42, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Taboo
Neopets seems to have banned discussion of just about anything, making them easily the most tyrannical admins of all time, but one thing I found odd is, I swear one time Donna made a comment in an editorial to the effect that Legolas and Gimli kissing would be hot, or something.
If you could find that NT, then, post it:)
- That wasn't in the NT. It was on one of the New Features page. That day, they made the New Features look like it was a AIM chat log, and it had an exchange between to users about Gimli being hot. -- Jelly Soup 07:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Neopets Glitches, Cheating and Programs
I think it'd be good to note on how some users use bots and programs on neopets to gain advantage. I ran into www.neofreaks.info recently, and I think I'd be notable to add it under external links. They're also credited with finding the item dupe glitch back in July 2005.
[edit] Sound Clip
The sound clip with Infamous and the father of the girl (source 14) isn't working -- I get a 404 error when I try to access it. Does anyone have an archived version of it to put up or anything? Otherwise it should probably be removed. --Who else would it be? 01:12, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Greasemonkey
Please refrain from posting non-sourced information regarding the greasemonkey issue. Greasemonkey was blocked for very little time to begin with. Besides the fact that the only person who knows if the user "w3" or some other variation of it was frozen for using Greasemonkey is the staff admin, it should not be included. It sounded as if some fan had wrote it. Keep adding it and i'll seek a temp lock Sod Aries 08:24, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- He has stated on the Neodaq forums that the response recieved from the staff stated he was frozen for using Greasemonkey and the extension ImproveNeo, and I quote
I just wanted to let everyone know I have received a reply from a staff member of neopets concerning my frozen form submission. I will not go into the details of the reply at this point but I do want to let everyone know that I was told w3neo was frozen because I own improveneo.com. I was also informed in the note that Quote: However, because of your long standing and clean record, there is some sentiment here to return your account to you at the appropriate time. I have no idea what "the appropriate time" might be. There also seems to be some confusion about the active state of improveneo.com. It seems the neopets staff is under the impression improveneo is still a running site and it was stated that support towards returning my account is "dwindling".
Marrilpet 23:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Paedophilia?
I dont know whether this would be unappropriate to put on this page...I remember reading a while ago about someone meeting a girl via neopets a while ago, but predictably I forget who it was. It could have been Toby Studabaker - it is mentioned that he met her via neopets on telegraph.co.uk, as well as a few other sites. Hpmons 21:51, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Not biased
I think the article is perfectly fine and is totally neutral. It explains in depth the many issues on neopets.com without leaning either way, pro or con neopets. It's a very good article. ~kay
