3 accounts: DDO Transparency, Munk, Vault Troll.

• I'm going to rule out Munk being a Strake sock, and Vault Troll being a Munk sock. DDO T could conceivably be a sock of either, but three players seems to make more sense.

• Definitely a sock of someone who has access to PC, or access to leaks. So whose is it?

• Why did Munk get banned as soon as DDO T leaked, but before Vault Troll leaked? The "incriminating" evidence was in the Vault Troll leaks.

• No malice needed. Whoever is behind DDO T could have simply seen Turbine's trigger-happy ban, and hastily modified the files he was sending to Strake, so as to appear "case closed."
• This doesn't rule out malice.

Revaulting wrote on May 23^rd, 2015 at 8:03pm:

The official abbreviation for DDO Transparency is DDO TP. Because, TP.

higgildypiggildy wrote on May 23^rd, 2015 at 12:37pm:


Yes, agree with your facts up to this point.
How did you then make the connection to Munk?
If you had the read the threads, it is anything but clear.  There are conflicting facts. 
There is not enough evidence to either endict or clear him.
I guess if more come out, we know it definitely wasn't Munk.

Just surprised that your view is so black and white on this issue.

Ah Pook wrote on May 24^th, 2015 at 12:23am:

I figured it out after reading all those leak threads listed. Sasha gave all the clues to narrow it down and figure it out who. Also, somebody else did give a hint, but I'm too lazy to go back to page 2 or 3 I think and see who wrote that post.

higgildypiggildy wrote on May 23^rd, 2015 at 1:48am:


FACT RANT

Factually speaking, when someone lies in one context it does not mean they are going to lie in another. People are not universally truthful. People are (generally) truthful in the manner that servers them.

Confirmation bias is a major problem in the sciences. Sectarian bias leads someone into assuming truth from which they have no experience.

Intentional lies (in the case of an NDA) mean that the liar did not respect the institution the NDA was protecting. There are various whistleblower scenarios in corporations: all of those people "lied" on their NDAs.

While breaking turbine's NDA might be (morally) wrong in this case, I don't think that the decision has any harm to other people when you do break it.

If a lawyer lies to protect someone he believes to be a murderer, he is valuing money over a potential threat to society. There is harm in this scenario.

If a vaultie leaked NDA info, they forwent any personal benefit of that info (for playing, or selling optics etc). Maybe turbine has some genuine detriment in sharing development info.

Vendui wrote on May 23^rd, 2015 at 6:55pm:


They would have saved themselves a whole lot of trouble by saving the pages as (edited) images or pdf instead of html... that way there would have been a lot less of evidence for us to find. Not saying this hasn't been fun, just saying you could have hidden the culprit's identity properly, or hung him out to dry for us to laugh at.. instead you did a shitty edit job with a lot of mistakes in it.

Oh, hell yeah I'm picking on the person doing it. I'm far from impressed.

what I want to know is why the fuck are they still talking about 10k stars and many shots after 10 fucking years that they have worked the same goddamn way.
- then were altered to be on the same timer - then who the fuck knows.

Top reason I stopped or sporadically play this goddamn game anyways is the fact that they couldn't even fix the goddamn ladder bugs after 10 years, the fact they break it every update a little more,
And that the graphics utterly and entirely suck - Not to mention that they don't really support 4k at all.

They can shove their bannable offenses straight in the weasel stick hole.  These are not even NDA worthy notes.  It's not their code or admin shortcuts or some crap.  Just a bunch of gibber jabber over a +11 here or a +12 there.

The time and energy they spend on policing this is embarrassing.  This is also why you can't half allow people in like a council.  Either allow all to see or just keep it in house.  Amateurs.

HairyO wrote on May 24^th, 2015 at 9:55pm:


I'd rather people that don't play certain classes and whatnot not comment on them TBH, the moneyshot thread was really bad for that kinda thing.

Yeah you would think there is at least new thing they would have an opinion on.

They didnt need 12,000 posts like angelus_dead but something would be good.

I laughed at the mention of an IRC channel. There was one in ML which was active. Quite a lot of on topic discussions but mostly it was all the friends chatting to eachother.

I was surprised at how many on ML not only knew eachother but were in the same guilds.

Then again its a small game so maybe its hard to get a bunch of independent thinkers.

Meat-Head wrote on May 23^rd, 2015 at 9:15pm:

Yes.

DropBear wrote on May 25^th, 2015 at 3:34am:


Not if the focus group is in name only and many of the threads go unread...