It's to solve the same problem. We pay back scam victims with server money, and if the scammer doesn't appeal within 1 month of the ban, their assets are liquidated. Do I like it better than the current suggestion? Yes. Do I like it overall? No. The bottom line of all of this is that scam victims should not be "refunded" with server money. It encourages reckless trade and other problems (fighting amongst people who win server money).
- Thread Status:
- Not open for further replies.
Thread Tools
Thread Tools
Page 20 of 30
-
knears2000 BuilderBuilder ⛰️ Ex-President ⚒️⚒️
-
silencedterror BuilderBuilder ⛰️ Ex-Mayor ⚒️⚒️
-
Agree x 1 - List
-
-
silencedterror BuilderBuilder ⛰️ Ex-Mayor ⚒️⚒️
-
greg45865734 BuilderBuilder ⛰️ Ex-Mayor ⚒️⚒️
-
so what happens to those banned players will they ever be able to appeal again? or once they get banned and that player has already gotten paid back will the banned players ever be able to join the server again?
-
-
Like x 1 - List
-
-
knears2000 BuilderBuilder ⛰️ Ex-President ⚒️⚒️
-
silencedterror BuilderBuilder ⛰️ Ex-Mayor ⚒️⚒️
-
knears2000 BuilderBuilder ⛰️ Ex-President ⚒️⚒️
-
silencedterror BuilderBuilder ⛰️ Ex-Mayor ⚒️⚒️
-
knears2000 BuilderBuilder ⛰️ Ex-President ⚒️⚒️
-
Now, we have had 31 people like/agree/winner this thread (excluding you), many of which have also replied with a +1. So there are at least a good portion of players who have stated that they will be "fine and dandy" with it. On the other hand, we have had less than 10 (I counted 4 in the first 10 pages of this thread) players that have stated that they do not like this idea. No one has stated that they would leave the server if this suggestion is implemented.
I have also explained many times the 3 options on how we would decide who gets reimbursed. Not explaining again. Until the suggestion is added, there is no need to further discuss how we would decide who is picked. I assume there would be a second suggestion, perhaps with a poll so players could give their input.
The people that don't get picked have had nothing change. It would be as it is now, they either wait for the felon to appeal and repay them, or they lose out. They would leave or stay the same if this suggestion was accepted as if someone else (right now) had been scammed and then repaid because the person appealed and they hadn't been repaid because their scammer has either been perma'd or has simply found somewhere else to play. Only difference is who is doing the repaying. If they are not chosen to be repaid by the server, there is still a chance that the scammer will appeal.
Not sure what you mean about who the scam victim would pay... I think you may have meant to put felon instead of victim, so I will answer that question. I have already answered several times saying that when the felon appeals, they would pay the reimbursement account if their victim has already been paid by the server. Eventually this would be a self-sustaining fund with scammers paying the account and the account paying victims. We would only need to use lotto funds to get it started.
Seriously. Everyone needs to stop talking about money being taken out of the economy. We are not taking money out of the economy with the suggestion, or putting it in. We are shuffling it around. When a scammer is banned, money is taken out of the economy (because they can now not use the money they scammed). This would not change that. When a player wins lotto, a small amount of money is taken out of the economy from taxes. This would not change the amount that is taken out. Instead, a small amount of what would have been lotto winnings will instead go to a scammed player. This would be the same as if someone who won lotto gave some money they won to a friend. I have explained this before. There is literally no change in the amount of money in the economy with this suggestion than without this suggestion.
I honestly do not know how I can keep explaining this suggestion. I have answered every one of your questions (not just knears, but others), multiple times and in multiple ways. If you do not understand what I am suggesting at this point, I honestly do not know how to further explain it.-
Agree x 1 - List
-
-
What if we target loan businesses? After all, they're usually the ones scammed the most.
I know myself have been scammed quite a large amount back when I operated my loan business. I did eventually close it because I allowed something large loans, which after being scammed those loans, depleted my "loan bank" (still havent been paid these loans for 6months+). I'm not just agreeing with this because I've been scammed, but I think it would be more fair to help the ones that help the most. (I.e. someone gives one loan and is scammed vs someone who gives multiple loans and is scammed). Helping those who help more would be nice. And yes, keep people here. -
Jacob43365 EcoLeaderEcoLeader ⛰️⛰️⛰️ Ex-President ⚒️⚒️
Well a user just went all out and mass scammed like 6 people! (Check user complaint section). Ugh. Why do people do this?
-
-
UnitedStates2 BuilderBuilder ⛰️ Ex-President ⚒️⚒️ Gameplay Architect Premium Upgrade
@clou44
I have a question,
Why can't we just liquidate the scammers assets? -
Unfortunate as it seems, scamming is integral to the successful ECC economy - probably even removing more money than lottery - especially here lately.
I have to ask - is there a contest going on right now to see who will be the biggest scammer on ECC of all time? I want to let everyone know that I refuse to compete if there is.
Be thoughtful in your answers as this was not meant as flame bait, I just really can't figure out why this is such an issue currently.-
Agree x 1 - List
-
Page 20 of 30
- Thread Status:
- Not open for further replies.