1. What Clou said
2. All you are doing is readdressing points that have already been discussed multiple times ignoring what you said and pretending that the point hasn't already been addressed and discussed.

 

@dork1877
I made this point earlier in the thread albeit I did use it in reference to a surge of scams going on at the time however my comments were simply ignored.
I Couldn't agree more with what your are saying and as I said before it is almost like people are encouraged to scam others. If these players are to be unbanned time and time again can we at least have some sort of black mark or icon against their name in game to warn others that they have been banned previously for scamming. I appreciate this information is all available here on the forums but a number of new players either don't have a forum account or have no idea where to look for such information.
I still like the idea of finding a way to compensate those scammed but without rewarding those who scammed in the first place with lengthy time to repay debts and I am also strongly against users who have been unbanned in order to pay debts being allowed to buy 1 lottery ticket never mind 100.

 

I also mentioned something about a way to mark scammers in this or another suggestion and people lost their minds. Its like I said we should execute people. I agree with your idea but no one will do it because of stupid reasons they will make up.

 

Finally! Me and @Dr_Dragon_Slayer have been saying this, yet it's gone quite silent.

 

Nothing will be done against scammers and thats the sad truth. Why? I don't know, maybe because staff is scared to perma ban scammers or mark them as such. If someone makes a suggestion to have more severe punishments for scammers I will back it up, but since this isn't going to happen we must help the victims somehow so less people leave because of scams.

 

I've done these soo many times... many different suggestions to make better rules... I might try again.

 

I think the problem with that idea is that you simply cannot prevent people from scamming other people, no matter what you do.

I do agree with the naysayers of this suggestion to a point.
Its your choice to trade with people, a bit like if you are scammed for donation fraud, these players dont get there features backs, what happens then?
They get there moneys worth back for the feature they paid? how much did they pay? did they pay when a sale was going on. etc.

Theres just too many grey areas and situations which cannot be explained.

Personally
I would edit the Guidelines to include collateral.
This mean that if the player is scammed then you dont lose out as you have something written down! concrete.
If people want to risk doing in game contracts with screenshots, your free to do that, but you run the risk of being scammed.

We can only suggest what people should do and personally, collateral is the only way of Definitely getting your money back or part of your money back that you were originally happy with. :p

 

This thread should be locked. I don't see why it still exists. Too many grey areas and many other reasons were installed against this. Why in the world is it still up?

 

Because its a suggestion and suggestion threads aren't locked unless they are implemented.
Just because there is grey area does not mean it should locked, discussion is healthy in trying to sort out and improve suggestions.

 

+1... I may be willing to donate to this.

 

+1 a lotto tax increase would be a good idea since lotto really does nothing for the economy and a paying back scammed people would help the economy

 

The intention of this suggestion is to create a fund for the victims of scamming to help ease the stress of being scammed and help keep users on the server.

This suggestion is not about stopping the scammers. I don'at see scamming being solved with the current ways the rules are, therefore if you want to make a suggestion about changing the rules go ahead. Even if the rules change in whatever ways you suggest I am almost certian people will still scam. People will always break the rules of they believe they are either above the rules or can get away with it. We can not stop people from thinking that. That being said scamming will always be an issue here which is plenty of reason to do this suggestion because as long as there are scammers there are the scammed and the scammed need help.

 

This suggestion is still up because there is no reason to take it down. It hasn't been implimented or rejected and it hasn't been requested to be locked. Unless I missed something just about every legitimate, relevant point brought up by a negator has been well defended and almost none of the points brought up by the affirmers has been answered.

 

Fine, you want some questions you can't answer?

Why is it that I have to pay someone back if I don't want to?
To what extent will this "benefit" the economy?
Why are we putting our time and effort into helping to create a solution, rather than trying to fix the problem?

Is this what you wanted?

 

First off I never asked for questions or questions I can't answer in what you quoted and idk where you got that from but hey whatever here it goes.
1. You don't HAVE to pay anyone and how much this affects you is barely noticeable.
2. You can't measure how much something will affect the economy.
3. We are putting our time and effort into helping people that are a victim of something that cannot be solved. No matter what we do people will still scam and people will still break the rules. This means there will always be victims that need help and we are offering to give it to them.

 

your efforts are noble but misguided /opinion

following this, there is a pseudo-incentive to actually get scammed, or at the very least not care about getting scammed, as you "could" get recompensed for the occurrence of scamming.

 

ive never said that people that get scammed don't deserve help.
only that the efforts spent helping them out would better spent preventing the scammers from scamming in the first place.

I will go so far as to say that putting a 'safety net' as it were, would actaully DISCOURAGE (however slightly) people from taking due diligence in their dealings, as they would have something like this to fall back on.

Not to mention those that aren't chosen, or fully compensation might be frustrated by the seemingly lack of fairness.

Frankly, its just an all around bad idea, in its current form. It shouldn't be staff/server sanctioned. If you want to do it, do it with private donations. Not with server funds.

The "server" should be stopping people from getting scammed. Not paying back the people that got scammed. If you are going to start doing that, then you should do it for ALL people that get scammed, not just some, and not some arbitrary person.

This whole idea is delightfully altruistic, but is also frankly ridiculous.