Scamming - What's your take on it?

[alleryn]

Regardless of whether or not it should be bannable, there must be consequences for bad behaviors. If there were a system for dealing with in game "crimes" other than reporting and getting the person banned, that would be one thing, but as it stands right now, there is no such system, so banning/suspending is currently the only way to get through to people that such things are not permitted.

But there's as much a system in the game for dealing with such scamming as there is in the real world. Unless you contend with my point above that no one in the real world is going to get jail time for the type of scam outlined in this thread (take mats, give promise of crafted item in return, return nothing), the real world analagous punishment is the thief earns a bad reputation in his community.

That would be the same punishment that would occur in the game, as anyone who repeats this action would earn a bad reputation.

Creating alts is similar to a criminal moving to a new town and changing his name.

As i stated above, since this is a computer game, there is the possiblility of stricter enforcement of the law than in the real world. But there is very little incentive in the real world to become a scam artist (unless you count becoming a corporate attorney/CEO/stock trader being a scam artist..), and i don't see why there would be any more incentive in-game, so i'm not sure why people think bans would become necessary to dissuade this type of thing.

[Easylivin]

I don't want to derail the thread but while we are on the subject of bad ideas and raising our post count has anyone thought about characters getting terminal illnesses?

Maybe once a character is level 50+ or the player has spent at least a month in the game the RNG rolls and the player can get a terminal illness which results in the character being deleted within 10 days.

Thoughts? I wouldn't want my character to get an terminal illness but I think it could add to the game.

[Elenoe]

...

if you are in suicidal mood, just give gaming a break

Anyway, if you want something like that just write a macro that put an insult in the chat occasionally.

[Tsugumori]

I don't want to derail the thread but while we are on the subject of bad ideas and raising our post count has anyone thought about characters getting terminal illnesses?

Maybe once a character is level 50+ or the player has spent at least a month in the game the RNG rolls and the player can get a terminal illness which results in the character being deleted within 10 days.

Thoughts? I wouldn't want my character to get an terminal illness but I think it could add to the game.

Something tells me your days of easy living would be over, @Easylivin.

[Hood]

I don't want to derail the thread but while we are on the subject of bad ideas and raising our post count has anyone thought about characters getting terminal illnesses?

Maybe once a character is level 50+ or the player has spent at least a month in the game the RNG rolls and the player can get a terminal illness which results in the character being deleted within 10 days.

Thoughts? I wouldn't want my character to get an terminal illness but I think it could add to the game.

I've actually thought a lot about this as well. I think terminal illnesses could bring a rich playstyle to the game. I love the idea that after a month of gameplay and hard work of reaching level 50+, a doom dice rolls and I have a chance to receive something deadly to my character. I do, however, think it needs some improvement.

Why wait until level 50? Many players would complain that this great feature has been hidden behind "gated content", Easy. It should be made available after Character Creation. I can imagine it in my mind. I create a character named HopeOfAlharth and appear on Anagoge Island. As I swing my blade at that second or third Dilapidated Skeleton, I gain a level in Sword and 1 in Unarmed (because I also slapped him first). The Doom Dice rolls, my screen flashes red, and the boss warnings scroll through HopeOfAlharth's skull. *You have Stage 3 Pancreatic Cancer*. Just as I'm about to Recall Circle to Serbule, my character grasps his side painfully and dies.

Hope.....

Yes, this could really add a lot to the game

[Umber]

If it has value in the game, it has value.

Regardless of whether or not it should be bannable, there must be consequences for bad behaviors. If there were a system for dealing with in game "crimes" other than reporting and getting the person banned, that would be one thing, but as it stands right now, there is no such system, so banning/suspending is currently the only way to get through to people that such things are not permitted.

In the anime Log Horizon, the council they set up dealt with crimes by locking criminals out of vital services. The game world also had a system in place to deal with players attacking players inside towns. The later is not a problem for this game, because there is no random pvp.

As far as I know, there hasn't been a huge scammer/thief problem in PG yet, and I sincerely hope that we never get to that point... but as I stated, unless they want to program in systems to deal with such things, I am a firm believer that it cannot be allowed to happen.

I think this comes down to belief and opinion rather than what is truely correct/incorrect.

From a legal stand point, a virtual item in a game that does not allow selling of items for real life cash does have zero value; tort requires harm done, generally in a financial sense. Losing something of 'zero value' (even if it has value to the owner/victim) will not hold up in a court of law, unfortunately.

That aside, I would agree that it is rude, mean, and aggravating. However, just because it is those things does not give me the right to scream, "BAN HAMMER!!!!1!". It's a different play style; one I don't condone, but just different. It does add a facet to the community that makes it more complex and interesting.

It is easy to protect yourself against scammers. It shouldn't be a problem if you pay attention to what you're doing.

It's all conjecture though since, as you stated, we haven't had a huge issue of it in game.

[Umber]

I don't want to derail the thread but while we are on the subject of bad ideas and raising our post count has anyone thought about characters getting terminal illnesses?

Maybe once a character is level 50+ or the player has spent at least a month in the game the RNG rolls and the player can get a terminal illness which results in the character being deleted within 10 days.

Thoughts? I wouldn't want my character to get an terminal illness but I think it could add to the game.

I get your point, virulently passive aggressive, but I get it.

Point is, it's your choice as a player to hand someone else your stuff on a promise or on good-will alone. A "terminal illness", as you put it, is not a players choice. While both have to do with losing something you worked for in game, they are not the same thing. A square is a rectangle; a rectangle is not a square.

[alleryn]

From a legal stand point, a virtual item in a game that does not allow selling of items for real life cash does have zero value; tort requires harm done, generally in a financial sense. Losing something of 'zero value' (even if it has value to the owner/victim) will not hold up in a court of law, unfortunately.

What are you basing this on? There seems to be a lot of precedent in U.S. Law that disagrees with this.

See, for example, https://casetext.com/case/national-un-v-harrington

"Mrs. LeBlanc cannot be restored to the position she was in before her home was destroyed. Monetarily, most of her property had depreciated. However, for her the value of her personal items appreciated more and more as time progressed. Such items like family photographs, her family Bible, the rosary she received when she made her First Communion, a teacup collection, items her husband had given her or built for her, are irreplaceable. "

[Umber]

What are you basing this on? There seems to be a lot of precedent in U.S. Law that disagrees with this.

See, for example, https://casetext.com/case/national-un-v-harrington

"Mrs. LeBlanc cannot be restored to the position she was in before her home was destroyed. Monetarily, most of her property had depreciated. However, for her the value of her personal items appreciated more and more as time progressed. Such items like family photographs, her family Bible, the rosary she received when she made her First Communion, a teacup collection, items her husband had given her or built for her, are irreplaceable. "

Trying not to get too off topic, but this is relating to Sentimental Values damages of personal property within the state of Louisiana. As a general rule, most courts throughout the United States hold that the proper measure of damages for lost or destroyed personal property is its market value, the theory being that the injured party should be made whole, by being able to buy items to replace the others in the current marketplace. That being said, these items are owned wholly by Elder Game LLC. and the Project: Gorgon team, making them, not a player's personal property.

Precedent always changes though. I do believe there have been court cases in Germany and the Netherlands that treat virtual items like real life items based on spending time and money to get them. Add to it that the game currently doesn't have a subscription fee and it's hard to make a case. That being said, don't wanna derail the thread on legal minutia.

It's about the merits of RPing of scamming/item thievery. Does it have a place or not? I think it's a good discussion so far anyway.

[alleryn]

Trying not to get too off topic, but this is relating to Sentimental Values damages of personal property within the state of Louisiana. As a general rule, most courts throughout the United States hold that the proper measure of damages for lost or destroyed personal property is its market value, the theory being that the injured party should be made whole, by being able to buy items to replace the others in the current marketplace. That being said, these items are owned wholly by Elder Game LLC. and the Project: Gorgon team, making them, not a player's personal property.

Precedent always changes though. I do believe there have been court cases in Germany and the Netherlands that treat virtual items like real life items based on spending time and money to get them. Add to it that the game currently doesn't have a subscription fee and it's hard to make a case. That being said, don't wanna derail the thread on legal minutia.

It's about the merits of RPing of scamming/item thievery. Does it have a place or not? I think it's a good discussion so far anyway.

Agreed, let's not derail it. But that doesn't mean i'm about to let you just have the last word because you said let's not derail it -- lol!

All of this "most courts" stuff is a pretty broad stroke. I took that link from some law firm's article that lists a number of other cases where the value to the owner was given precedence over an item's "market value":

http://www.butler.legal/something-ol...-united-states