checked TOS for scamming

"

nait2k4 wrote:

"

RagnarokChu wrote:

"

nait2k4 wrote:

Servers are located in the good ol' US of ehhhhhh, so you can probably litigate through civil court. Fraud statutes are pretty open-ended, especially in some of the blue states.

Nobody is going to court unless they were scammed for multi mirror level gear in which it would be over 500 dollars.

Which would beg how you would be scammed to begin with but that's another story.

It's not the value of the pixels that matter, it's the emotional harm :)

Your post hurt my feelings, you'll be hearing from my Lawyer(s).

Threatening to sue someone is also against the law, fyi.

"

BerMalBerIst1_AKA_GrammerPolise wrote:

"

jarlaxelb wrote:

If you want to play a game full of rats and narcs that always have their way because the devs cater to their every little whim, go play blizzard games.

Gangsters and criminals use the terms "rats" and "narcs"

Just sayin :P

Happy new year all

If you knew me at all, you'd understand why I used those exact terms :P

"

GodlyMe wrote:

Threatening to sue someone is also against the law, fyi.

That particular ruling only applies if I am registered with FDCPA and am trying to reclaim a debt, and even then it's not applicable at a state level in most legislatures.

It's allowed in every game I've ever played.

Well, it's not restricted by ToS and the dealings between players are not the Developers responsibility outside of personal harassment or threats (etc).

I hate scammers with a passion, but that's because I'm here to have a good time with people and people that screw other players over are just scum.

Not much else to say about it.

Sucks, but it always be there.

Just try to play as smart as possible.

"

PoofGoof wrote:

It's allowed in every game I've ever played.

Well, it's not restricted by ToS and the dealings between players are not the Developers responsibility outside of personal harassment or threats (etc).

I hate scammers with a passion, but that's because I'm here to have a good time with people and people that screw other players over are just scum.

Not much else to say about it.

Sucks, but it always be there.

Just try to play as smart as possible.

Blizzard follows scams pretty harshly i was once banned for 3 days for scamming a couplf of scrubs in WoW i came straight from eve online though where scamming is basically encouraged imnot usually an asshole xd

"

Godhead_IV wrote:

"

mazul wrote:

"

EdgeVII wrote:

IF some1 is too stupid to get scammed, they deserve it,period..

also GGG is not your babysitter to look after you when you cry about scams etc..

How can someone be too stupid to get scammed? I.e. they are so stupid that they cannot get scammed.

He means someone stupid enough to get scammed. Not everyone has english as their native language.

But by his own logic, he deserves all blame and ridicule he receives for being too stupid to learn English better?

"

nait2k4 wrote:

"

GodlyMe wrote:

Threatening to sue someone is also against the law, fyi.

That particular ruling only applies if I am registered with FDCPA and am trying to reclaim a debt, and even then it's not applicable at a state level in most legislatures.

Intimidation is a crime. You're extorting someone, trying to bend their will with a threat.

It's against the law, like I said. :)

"

GodlyMe wrote:

"

nait2k4 wrote:

"

GodlyMe wrote:

Threatening to sue someone is also against the law, fyi.

That particular ruling only applies if I am registered with FDCPA and am trying to reclaim a debt, and even then it's not applicable at a state level in most legislatures.

Intimidation is a crime. You're extorting someone, trying to bend their will with a threat.

It's against the law, like I said. :)

Ahh, I get you now.

In this instance, you are incorrect. There is no implicit or explicit imperative within the comment made, so it doesn't meet the "current" legal litmus test for a threat. Have a look at Virginia v. Black for the main part of the application of the First Amendment regarding this.

Although, depending how the Supreme Court rules in Elonis v. United States, that may change.

It's quite a cool case, if you haven't been following it, Johnny Elwood is arguing on behalf - Supreme Court has narrowed it down to a hearing on this issue:

Whether, consistent with the First Amendment and Virginia v. Black, conviction of threatening another person under 18 U.S.C. § 875(c) requires proof of the defendant's subjective intent to threaten, as required by the Ninth Circuit and the supreme courts of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Vermont; or whether it is enough to show that a “reasonable person” would regard the statement as threatening, as held by other federal courts of appeals and state courts of last resort; and (2) whether, as a matter of statutory interpretation, conviction of threatening another person under 18 U.S.C. § 875(c) requires proof of the defendant's subjective intent to threaten.

"

1235 wrote:

lol @ comparing actual crimes to scamming people in a game for in game things which are not meant to be sold for real money, there is no comparison what so ever, and maybe you can learn a thing or two about being cautious in real life from these experiences

You really think there is not a comparison between scams in a game and scams in real life? Let me explain to you a psychological fact:
People that are scamming in games without feeling any remorse whatsoever would do the exact same thing in real life IF there were no consequences. The mindset is there and the excuses ("it's only a game broooo so I can rob whoever I want") are always there.
All it takes is an environment of anarchy in real life and thieves in games will become thieves in real life.
Lets hope there won't be any revolutions any time soon:P