Where do I complain about Scammers like [Removed by Support]

"

鬼殺し wrote:

"

k1rage wrote:

[Removed by Support] is my new hero

he is everywhere these days

Sometimes so is she.

[Removed by Support]

is all things and in all places

"

鬼殺し wrote:

Eve had and has the tools to support very fair cut throat behaviour.

POE is extremely amateur in comparison when it comes to acceptable skulduggery. I genuinely think GGG need to completely reverse their thinking in this regard. They need to make portals more private. Hideouts should not be the go-to for trade, since they're hideouts, not fucking shop fronts. The game desperately needs a marketplace *in game*, a neutral space where people go to trade and do nothing else.

As for shit like "buying" non concrete items like boss kills or strongboxes, I'm sorry but that's just greedy. OP was greedy and got burned. I can't even say it was worthy of the word scam, it was that simple. Even in real life we'd consider an action like that to be gullible and without legal recourse. All GGG can do there is MAYBE cut back on the challenges that can be circumvented by "buying" them...but I'd say that runs a risk of baby/bathwater.

So while of course trade is a fucking mess, there's only so much hand-holding GGG can do. And in this case, I do believe the majority of the blame lies with someone not being responsible with their pretend money and trying to buy their way around what is designed to be a challenge, albeit a typically RNG-laced one.

+1

If you get scammed you only have yourself to blame.

Dumb question ,Just curious, if i scam someone will i be flamed here in the forums?

Unfortunately there are good reasons why you can't name and shame people who scam. It would turn into an unending mess of mostly false or fabricated accusations ...

"

Where do I complain about Scammers like [Removed by Support]

in front of a mirror

"

Vaydra wrote:

Unfortunately there are good reasons why you can't name and shame people who scam. It would turn into an unending mess of mostly false or fabricated accusations ...

+1
/thread

This is why I never do Challenge Trades with any Player below Lv 90. At Lv 90+, Any Player possible has enough currency and 100c isn't much for him to risk a ban.

I remember the first time i was scammed, 5 Exalts for a Rare 5 Link Weapon.. If you thought 100c was bad, Imagine that. And back then I was new and 5 Exalts was all i had. Later I got to know the Item was worth less than 15 chaos.. I ragequit for a month :x

"

Shagsbeard wrote:

This isn't real life. It's a game. You want justice for something that happened in a game. Disproportionate. You feel harmed, but you're really not. Read up on "displacement".

What justice have I asked for that you feel is "disproportionate?"

"

DamageIncorporated wrote:

"

Walrusky wrote:

It's a cycle of people getting scammed then becoming the scammer because they find out there is little if not no punishment for scamming.

Only dysfunctional socially inept losers with no conscience would follow this logic.

Well, no. You should read what I wrote about this very problem in game theory: It's also how organisms function and are modeled in behavioral and evolutionary studies.

I'm not saying I have any inclination to become a scammer, but it does seem like many here feel it is the rational response. And, behavioral studies would back up their logic in that conclusion.

"

Phrazz wrote:

Of course you can't name and shame people on the forums. You can say whatever you want here, with no need of proof. That's as unfair as it gets.

As I said before on this thread (but I guess I should reiterate because many people are like you) I DO have evidence.

I posted said evidence on reddit. I could not post it here because it has the person in question's name in it (since otherwise is not evidence), so is against this forum's rules.

"

鬼殺し wrote:

Frankly I've encountered bytes with more empathy than some PoE players.

Well, my understanding of behavioral studies + the way this game is currently setup, empathy should be bred out of the community given enough iterations.

With different starting assumptions and rules, the reverse would happen.

"

鬼殺し wrote:

As for shit like "buying" non concrete items like boss kills or strongboxes, I'm sorry but that's just greedy. OP was greedy and got burned.

What % of people playing this game get to 40 challenges without "getting greedy" as you say? 1%? 0.1% How could I do otherwise when I have a RL job?

Why do you feel buying challenges is fundamentally different -in principle if not in practice- from buying items? Or do you feel the safeguards in buying items should be removed as well? Or, do you feel the current system is "prefect" and any discussion of how it could improved is fundamentally flawed?

"

鬼殺し wrote:

Even in real life we'd consider an action like that to be gullible and without legal recourse.

If you put your money in a vending machine and it didn't give you anything, that would be you acting "gullible?" If you walked into a store and asked for something behind the counter and they say "$5 please" then proceeded to take your money and then stare at you blankly when you asked for the product, that would be you acting "gullible?" And, you feel you would have no legal recourse? 0.o

If you're making that claim, I'm not sure you understand how RL society works.

"

Johnny1981 wrote:

If you get scammed you only have yourself to blame.

Well, if I see you and punch you in the face, you can know it's because you didn't block it right.


I mean, honestly, who doesn't know how to block a punch to the face? Some people!

"

鬼殺し wrote:

Wow, did you just compare PoE players to vending machines and paid store employees?

Did I misread you, Okonro Ishi? I thought you, for that instance, brought real life into it:

"

鬼殺し wrote:

Even in real life we'd consider an action like that to be gullible and without legal recourse.

If you feel my analogy of vending machines and paid store employees was false, could you explain what real life analogy you feel would be appropriate? One where I would have no legal recourse, as you said. (keeping in mind I have pictures of the written agreement)

I'm just looking for clarification, since I guess I got it wrong.