* as for setting of the terrible precedent ("breaking the rules of the game to release an item from over six years ago is a fix, if anything, it would be a huge problem if we did do that") if this particular event were to be completed, just to mention (surely there were many more)
- for multiple events where MA screwed up on organization/rules, additional prizes were issued after the event - I don't remember the game broke even with that
- when special armors were left without lootable feet, the issue was fixed as of people complaining
= looks to me the issue is not that of precedent but because not a lot of people are complaining and here it is only me, and I still assume because it is the inconvenient me even then I am a customer who paid ~80k peds to acquire an incomplete armor set which MA promised to complete
To my knowledge this type of circumstance has only happened a few times and happened a very short period of time after an event came to a close but ran into some issues. In the case of a missing TEN event item I would actually agree with you and push for a resolution if we were in 2013, but we're in 2019, and it's not even my choice either way.
With regards to the missing feet, to my knowledge this happened an extremely long time ago due to those armor sets being released prior to the introduction of footguards to the game and is in no way comparable.
Also, I can't seem to find literally anywhere that your armor set was promised to be completed, the thing you keep on quoting is just the announcement to an event that happened six years ago which states the premise of the event.
* the thread was actively bumped by me for ~2 months and you were a moderator for that whole time before joining MA, me bumping that thread was reasonable back then, the week you joined MA and they said that they don't intend to deliver their promise - at that point my thread become unreasonable? How is this you helping communications outside of your new job responsibilities? It seems to me like stopping a reasonable request to complete something with an abrupt "NO we won't, period" and closing the thread is something else than communication
= is it fair / according to rules to close the thread because a moderator because MA says "NO" on fulfilling their promise? or is it moderation to avoid negative publicity regardless that it is true?
I felt the thread was excessively spammy before I had anything to do with MA, actually, and it was reported multiple times by other users back then as well, however, I had no way of resolving it and decided it was best to just ignore. Upon joining MA I decided I would put an effort into opening up more communication by, for example, resolving your issue instead of leaving you to continue being ignored until you got bored and stopped bumping your thread with no answer. I do think, as a moderator, when an official answer is given it's appropriate to then close the thread if you decide to completely ignore the response and continue spam bumping the thread. Also, again, I don't see anywhere that such a promise was made.
* me quitting the forum / not posting any more is not a threat, I just cannot support a forum where inconvenient truth is moderated out / closed down
This isn't an inconvenient truth being closed down, it's you literally spamming PCF about an event that was slightly botched over six years ago, being gracefully given a conclusive answer to your complaint, and then refusing to accept that answer and continuing to spam. If you look around for a few moments you'll quickly realize lots of people are freely being critical towards the game while abiding by the forum rules every day here.
* the fact that the event was "a long time ago" does not mean that it is obsolete especially as MA continues to run 5 year anniversary events as if nothing happened, this is in fact just the next event in the series where we are right now - in that sense it is as recent as it gets
These two events are not connected and, again, although it's not even my call, I would personally say that, yes, the fact that it's been over six years does mean that it is not recent at all.
* the difference between "not dropped in loot" and "not given out as a promised event prize" is not an issue of semantics by a long shot
It is an issue of semantics because it was known by me, as well as the people who gave me the judgement and has nothing to do with the official response to your complaint.
* in my opening thread I was not asking for the issuing of the armor piece to me, just that the promise gets delivered
It was never a question of whether or not it would be given to you directly, it's creating the item at all in any way that would be problematic regardless of how it's done because the event ended long ago and the decision has already been made and communicated.