WTB: Screenshot from Cokken

ForteTeppo said:
There was a post in General Discussions where WOW sue'd RMTs for selling "Gold" for real money. Sadly the judge ruled in RMT's favor because of some BS like, it wasnt actually selling. God I hate RMT's with a passion. - .-"
Click to expand...

judge's fault.
 
The fact of the matter is it's simply not cost effective to sue every RMT company out there. How long you figure it would take to litigate? Why spend the money when on the occasion you can put a dent in it through your own means as a company and avoid paying more lawyers than you already do?

Shaunessy you're fucking stupid for even asking.
 
Valoran said:
Although RMT is against their {SE's} ToS, they can choose not to exercise their rights.
Click to expand...
In which case, by your previsouly stated logic, it is ok for players to take rights they do not have in the first place, into their own hands.

Your argument is that if someone does something wrong, then it is ok to do something wrong to them, because it will in fact the revenge will not be wrong.

I don't know in which society you live in, but such stance has long since abandoned by developed societies. You could of course say that your point only applies to the game, and not real life. To which my reply would be that you are the person you choose to be. Either you have a set of values, or you don't, values are not situational, they are a pillar of everyone's life. Most people don't realize that per se, but everyone has a set of rules they live by, and that they made for themselves.

Valoran said:
Someone who thinks that Cokken did something wrong, please make an argument that 1) gilsellers should be in our game and 2) gilsellers don't change the game environment.
Click to expand...
It's unnecessary to make those arguments, as the issue is not about gil sellers, but about the character of a person.

It all comes back to giving your word. Two people meet, and they both give their word to complete a transaction in a certain way, while one of them already knows that he will break his word. A promise was made from one person to another. Then one person breaks that promise. Regardless of what anyone else says, to me that is unacceptable. If you can't trust a person to keep their word, you got nothing.
 
I think the point made here is that most of us don't live by the code of hamurabi when it comes to video games, entertainment, life, etc. and some of us do on certain subject matter.

Eye for an eye is something i'm comfortable with, some people may not be, that i can dig. What i don't understand is the indignation at someone with a different set of moral values than you (in the general sense) might have. Do i have sand in my vagina because you view things differently? certainly not. It gets itchy when you're a dumbass about it but the fact remains it's not someone's views that make me feel not so fresh but the way they present them.

So again i'll ask to the morally upright crowd: being a seller means practiced moral ambiguity when it comes to in game ethics, that in mind what's wrong with the morally ambiguous feeding off the morally ambiguous? You still maintain the high ground but in my version you don't look like the proverbial indian with a tear streaming down his face over a gilseller getting screwed.

It's not hard to disagree and move on or at least defend your point when it comes under attack personally but those of you out to convert people are off your nut, and that doesn't just apply in this argument.
 
The problem with "an eye for an eye" is that it leaves everyone blind.

I am not really out to convert people (I know it was a general "you"), I am just saying that if I did come across as preachy, it wasn't my intention. People can live their lives as they please for the most part, it's not my place to tell them what to do.

Re: gil sellers and morals
I personally have no problem with them, I can honestly say that I never bought any currency in any MMO I played, and I always managed to generate plenty of currency using the game mechanics available to me. I pay whatever the prices are for the items I want, and I do not fret over things getting more expensive. I am content with inflation, no matter the rate really. I have seen thousands of percent inflation over the years in EQ and also in the just over one year I played WoW.

Stuff gets more expensive, so what, money is easy to make, and I do consider whether I really need something. If I decide that I really need it, then I will just buy it, no matter what the price. I pay, and I move on, I don't spend the rest of my game life bitching about how expensive stuff is.

I choose to believe that the influx of currency generated by RMT players is minor in comparison to the influx of currency regular players generate every second the game runs.

To me the far greater problem are the people who believe that their are entitled to purchasing an item for the same price the item had years ago. Those people are disconnected from reality, there is really no better way to say that.
 
Sculli said:
The problem with "an eye for an eye" is that it leaves everyone blind.
Click to expand...

I don't know how accurate a statement that is to most of the morally upright people who came in to this thread. As i stated earlier to hold such a hard opinion on this action means you probably sided with the RIAA over music/software/etc distribution, it is essentially the same thing, yet i don't here any of those people addressing that fact at all .. hits too close to home.

The point is everyone has questionable morals and motives subjectively from irl to in game, the moral zealotry contained in this thread is of the most hypocritical nature when considering the subject matter it approaches comedy.

And that's really all i have to say/repeat. This thread's dead and over with. The cape sold, the crowd went wild, AND the band played on ... all in all a good show, i commend you all.
 
Mokk said:
Sculli said:
The problem with "an eye for an eye" is that it leaves everyone blind.
Click to expand...
I don't know how accurate a statement that is to most of the morally upright people who came in to this thread.
Click to expand...
The beauty of my statement is that it applies to everyone, regardless of whether they believe in it or not.

A pokes B's eye out. A has now two eyes, B has one.
B pokes A's eye out in return. A has one, B has one.
A pokes B's eye out in return. A has one, B has none.
B pokes A's eye out in return. A has none, B has none.
Done.

An eye for an eye would only work if A would realize that his eye was poked out in return for him poking out B's eye. However, that will never be the way A will see it. A just lost an eye, and by God, B will lose an eye for it!
 
but that's wrong.. A pokes B's eye out, in fairness B poke's A's eye out. They stop cause it's equal and they are realizing it's retarded to go on :3
 
If we went by the original code A would have been a judge, lord, etc tho and would've been exempt from the yin-yang complex that you proposed. In a perfect world as hamurabi would've had it A was not at fault for bringing the people's justice, as it is not a perfect world i do see your point.

punishment for a crime can be viewed just as barbaricly intollerable as the crime itself. That's solid, i like it, i think it's a subjective thing but that's just me.
 
Mokk said:
punishment for a crime can be viewed just as barbaricly intollerable as the crime itself. That's solid, i like it, i think it's a subjective thing but that's just me.
Click to expand...
That wasn't my argument though. There is nothing wrong with punishment for crimes. The reason we have a process for that is for B to realize that his eye was poked out for a reason, a reason he can comprehend, even if he doesn't agree. That way B knows that A poked B's eye out because it was A's duty to do that based on the rules A and B have set for themselves.

However, when C and D take matters into their own hands, and go wild poking eyes out, then they will in fact end up blind.
 
Mokk said:
The fact of the matter is it's simply not cost effective to sue every RMT company out there. How long you figure it would take to litigate? Why spend the money when on the occasion you can put a dent in it through your own means as a company and avoid paying more lawyers than you already do?

Shaunessy you're fucking stupid for even asking.
Click to expand...

See you obviously don't know how the law works if you are going to make a statement like that. All you have to do is win one case then if the ruling stands through all the appeals of that one case, all other RMT sites would be shut down also following the litigant from the original case. To bring up your referance to downloading music. They didn't go after all of the sites that allowed you to share music. They hit the biggest one and won. Now you see all kinds of ads saying the downloading of copywritten material is illegal. So Mokk your fucking stupid for thinking that you have to sue everyone.

Like I said before though, if they have a means of dealing with the problem in the EULA then no judge will prosecute someone who RMT. SOE is about the only company I can see who could possibly start a case and win. Since they actually have a specific place that you can sell/purchase in game items they might be able to come up with some tactic of them not having a license agreement to be able to sell their product. But I doubt it.
 
Shaunessy said:
See you obviously don't know how the law works if you are going to make a statement like that. All you have to do is win one case then if the ruling stands through all the appeals of that one case, all other RMT sites would be shut down also following the litigant from the original case. To bring up your referance to downloading music. They didn't go after all of the sites that allowed you to share music. They hit the biggest one and won. Now you see all kinds of ads saying the downloading of copywritten material is illegal. So Mokk your fucking stupid for thinking that you have to sue everyone.

Like I said before though, if they have a means of dealing with the problem in the EULA then no judge will prosecute someone who RMT. SOE is about the only company I can see who could possibly start a case and win. Since they actually have a specific place that you can sell/purchase in game items they might be able to come up with some tactic of them not having a license agreement to be able to sell their product. But I doubt it.
Click to expand...


You obviously don't know how business works, watch fight club and apply the formula. Even if you don't have to sue everyone you have to win that one case and then make sure your lawyers stay on top of everyone to comply with the litegation, thanks for playing the exit's to the left...

My reference to downloading music was with the issue of the morality of stealing digital content, dipshit, go back to school and learn to read. Even with your terrible undereducated grasp of the subject they did manage to take down the largest, by your reasoning i can't be downloading the song i am right now, good job.

Btw, where's your response for the issues raised on the first page?
 
Ok, well tell me Mokk. If I'm a troll, what do you consider someone, well like yourself, that does the same thing as me but doesn't even play this game anymore?

So what is your point I never said that they were all directed at the OP of that thread. You can take my words with a grain of salt, or put them on your open wounds I don't care. To be honest though I said what I said and I feel no need to explain myself. I read it though because it seems to me that is the least I could do considering it looks like it took you awhile to put all that together. So you're welcome.
 
Sculli said:
To which my reply would be that you are the person you choose to be. Either you have a set of values, or you don't, values are not situational, they are a pillar of everyone's life. Most people don't realize that per se, but everyone has a set of rules they live by, and that they made for themselves.
Click to expand...


Of course values are situational. Many people believe it is wrong to kill a person, however they do not believe that it is wrong to kill and eat a plant. You end life in either case.

A less extreme version: some people may not believe in killing other people, however if someone attacks them with a knife on the street, they would try to defend themselves, possibly harming or killing their attacker.



As for "Everyone has a set of rules they live by," you might want to consider not imposing yours on other people, especially as regards a game.

Sculli said:
If the goal was to screw RMT over, then the item needs to be removed from the game, otherwise it was just regular theft and deceit and there is nothing noble about that.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, "I would consider it theft and decent and not noble?"

Sculli said:
I posted this in the Good Times thread, but it fits here as well, all I can say to in reply to the above is: Buy this book and read it!

There's No Such Thing As "Business" Ethics: There's Only One Rule For Making Decisions by John Maxwell. Very fitting to the subject, and can be had for a few bucks used.
Click to expand...

Perhaps giving a brief summary of whatever point you want to make, rather than demanding that people read what you read to think what you think?

Sculli said:
I think you guys are missing the point. If the screwing was done to target RMT, then the goal can only be achieved by dropping the cape. If the screwing was done just to screw someone over, then the goal was already achieved, though the thread should not have been in Good Times as it is nothing to be proud of.

Or to put it in a different way: Motive matters!
Click to expand...

Perhaps, "I feel that motive matters?"


The above quotes are Sculli's thoughts from the first two pages, within an hour of the topic's creation. These are not replies in a debate, but opening statements.

If everyone's code of honor is so different, please allow for the contingency that perhaps someone else has one as good as yours which is different and possibly even in direct conflict with yours occasionally. If you want anyone to consider that you might be right, you need to consider that they might. The above language is not conversational but didactic; it makes no provision for listening, only declaration.

Finally, consider that perhaps the economic circumstances which have developed in the game distract from the enjoyable content, and that if you were still involved in it on an everyday basis, perhaps you too would be glad to hear about a blow, even a tiny one, struck against the RMT crowd.
 
Shaunessy said:
Ok, well tell me Mokk. If I'm a troll, what do you consider someone, well like yourself, that does the same thing as me but doesn't even play this game anymore?

So what is your point I never said that they were all directed at the OP of that thread. You can take my words with a grain of salt, or put them on your open wounds I don't care. To be honest though I said what I said and I feel no need to explain myself. I read it though because it seems to me that is the least I could do considering it looks like it took you awhile to put all that together. So you're welcome.
Click to expand...

A member of the community, what would you call sculli who runs the site and doesn't play?

And by the way...

Shaunessy said:
All of my posts in the good times thread, other than the ones about my SAM, were directed toward the OP about his boasting and thinking that it's ok to steal.
Click to expand...

You suck at this, find a better hobby. If you didn't need to explain yourself why did you?
 
Sculli is in a different class than you. Running a site and being a member of it are like comparing apples and oranges. Maybe you should take your own advice, or is it you wish you could still play and just can't afford too?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top