Business And Economy Archive
Thread: Buyers and resellers beware . . .
Giamai wrote:
at this point, with all his efforts, you actually owe him an apology imo
Giamai wrote:
basically you reported him AFTER he bent over backwards to right his own wrong and you just threw his apology in his face out of some moral self-righteousness... how obnoxious of you.
Pawlin wrote:
Tarallian wrote:
...The thing is, I shared a couple of tells with him and he wouldn't fess up to the fact that what he had done was wrong. He just couldn't seem to get, or admit, that his naming wind harvester deeds as large house deeds, and selling them for 50k, was intentionally deceptive and wrong. His point of view, plainly and simply, was that anyone that does not work hard and earn what they get is deceptive.
...
QFE
Misnaming deeds like that is simple griefing and fraud. All the guy apologized for was accidentally griefing the wrong person. He still did not understand that his griefing was wrong in the first place.
In real life if a con man sold you a fake item then said "oops I'm sorry, I really meant to scam your neighbor instead", then the right thing to do would be to tell your neighbors and the police.
after this is when he agreed to remove the vendor and recompense those he felt were wronged. from this it can be concluded that the orginal writer did get the point across. he saw how it was wrong and removed it whether out of fear of being reported or just because, as stated above, he didn't realize innocent people would be harmed. either way, he obviously took some pains to stop the scam.
and despite that, the original poster goes out of his way to report him and slap him down some more. great way to reward correct behavior.
if anyone did not receive the same deal, they have the right to report him. from your point of view it is presumptious of you to think that with all these efforts, he wouldn't have done the same for everyone.
because it is a true violation, if he didn't make amends to everyone, there will be a banning in his future but he would be very stupid to not have learned from this single interaction and make it end. removing the vendor was a huge step in that direction. if any one else is an uncompensated victim, he will simply be warned because of his efforts to fix it.
Tarallian wrote:
...The thing is, I shared a couple of tells with him and he wouldn't fess up to the fact that what he had done was wrong. He just couldn't seem to get, or admit, that his naming wind harvester deeds as large house deeds, and selling them for 50k, was intentionally deceptive and wrong. His point of view, plainly and simply, was that anyone that does not work hard and earn what they get is deceptive.
...
4. You may not defraud other players.
Fraud is defined as falsely representing one's intentions to make a gain at another's expense. Examples of this activity include but are not limited to - offering to "slice" a weapon or container belonging to another player and then keeping the items and/or credits - as well as using flaws in a secure trade window to deprive someone of one or more of their items or credits. Other examples include selling disabled vehicles, renaming items and selling them as a different item, or violating any trade agreement (such as agreeing to craft an item for resources, but keeping the resources/item instead).. These examples are not all inclusive, other violations will be reviewed by Customer Service on a case by case basis.
Defrauding other customers will result in the removal of earnings or equivalent goods from your accounts, and may result in disciplinary action being taken against the account that may include official warnings, account suspensions, or account terminations depending on the severity of the incident which will be determined by a CSR and a CSR Supervisor. Multiple suspensions or account termination will result in the termination of all SOE game accounts.
Pawlin wrote:
Tarallian wrote:
...The thing is, I shared a couple of tells with him and he wouldn't fess up to the fact that what he had done was wrong. He just couldn't seem to get, or admit, that his naming wind harvester deeds as large house deeds, and selling them for 50k, was intentionally deceptive and wrong. His point of view, plainly and simply, was that anyone that does not work hard and earn what they get is deceptive.
...
QFE
Misnaming deeds like that is simple griefing and fraud. All the guy apologized for was accidentally griefing the wrong person. He still did not understand that his griefing was wrong in the first place.
In real life if a con man sold you a fake item then said "oops I'm sorry, I really meant to scam your neighbor instead", then the right thing to do would be to tell your neighbors and the police.
after this is when he agreed to remove the vendor and recompense those he felt were wronged. from this it can be concluded that the orginal writer did get the point across. he saw how it was wrong and removed it whether out of fear of being reported or just because, as stated above, he didn't realize innocent people would be harmed. either way, he obviously took some pains to stop the scam.
and despite that, the original poster goes out of his way to report him and slap him down some more. great way to reward correct behavior.
if anyone did not receive the same deal, they have the right to report him. from your point of view it is presumptious of you to think that with all these efforts, he wouldn't have done the same for everyone.
because it is a true violation, if he didn't make amends to everyone, there will be a banning in his future but he would be very stupid to not have learned from this single interaction and make it end. removing the vendor was a huge step in that direction. if any one else is an uncompensated victim, he will simply be warned because of his efforts to fix it.
The original poster indicated the scammer did not seem to see what was wrong with his attempt to defraud the intended targets (resellers). You have no reason to believe that is not factual. Just because he didn't want to hurt the "innocent bystanders" does not mean he realizes that scamming the resellers is wrong and very much against the rules.
I'm assuming he did not make amends with his intended targets (resellers). You are assuming the scammer did make ammends with everyone. We canonly speculate on this.
You want to give the known scammer the benefit of the doubt cause he apologized. I do not. Difference of opinion.
But when it comes down to it, we're just bystanders. The CSRs can sort it out.