Either way, players will ask for money. And the mouse can be thristy from a dry cookie, and needs a drink, you offered the cookie and drink can come along, it's how the cookies made, and nice soft cookie might not need milk, a dry hard cookie will, but you made the mouse thirsty by offering a cookie so he's entitled to the right of some milk. Had nothing really to do with anything but i've always hated a metaphor like that.

 

What would happen if someone was scammed and the person who got the loan spent all the money? The scammed person who feel like its unfair that other people get their money back for the balance of the person who took out the loan, but never re-payed it. Either way, most of the time the person who scammed someone doesn't have the money in their inventory.

 

I myself say +1, as for knears, there can be a warning and action policy. (Ex. Begging for more money:a warning, and then a balance wipe)

 

I will add this much -- this would be extraordinarily time-consuming for staff. I did the Willclo fundraiser when I was not on staff, and it still took basically all of my time on the server for a week. Honestly, I probably wouldn't do it again, because it was so exhausting. For one thing, what to do when a player has scammed more than one other player, but there isn't enough money to pay them both back.... is a nightmare. I was still trying to figure it out at the point the Willclo Fund went over the top, and I still don't know how I would have dealt with it.

 

Gosh, I don't get why people don't want this. I personally have never been scammed, but that's because I never make big transactions.
After all it is simply repossessing. As well as the money is better back in people's balances rather than just be cleared with the banned player's .dat file.
+1

 

That's actually quite inaccurate. The U.S. Goverment does have the scammer pay back the victims via restitution.(https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2259)

 

That's under Chapter 110, titled "18 U.S. Code Chapter 110 - SEXUAL EXPLOITATION AND OTHER ABUSE OF CHILDREN"
don't think it counts for debts

 

It links differently for me.

 

I have no idea where it's linking you. Here's where it's going for me.

 

you linked us to the 3rd to last link

 

This link work? https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3663A

 

-100000000000

 

You misinterpreted what I said. The government itself doesn't pay you is what I said, not it doesn't require the scammer to pay you back.

 

Then why exactly did you say that here. He is suggesting that money would taken out of the scammers bals, and given to the victims. Nothing having to do with the server (Or the goverment in this analogy.).

 

Can the lay user do that? No, therefore making this suggestion reliant upon the server's administration therefore creating an economic dependency which furthers the risk of a problematic deal.

-1