To anyone from SE or the Developer Team I need your help in a theft situation

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Masamune1004

Also Matsume, I find it interesting how you were against people being called out on the forums in another thread, but you have no problem with this thread, which is calling out Nick Zealot as a thief.

---

I am against the forums being used to resolve an issue that can be dealt with purely in game, such as denouncing some loser for spamming chatlog with racist comments - which can be dealt with a simple /blacklist as was suggested. This is an entirely different scenario Masamune, and when the facts change so does my opinion.

The OP tried to resolve the issue in person with Nick Zealot which resulted in Nick asking him to publicly apologize... for what? calling a GM on him 15 minutes AFTER he asked so kindly? I would have done the same. I would have asked kindly and waited for a response (which is what the OP did), but when that player is bragging to his ls for 15minutes rather than responding to personal tell, there is a serious show of disrespect. And since nothing could be done in game, then the forums become a necessity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Masamune1004

Family Guy is a fictional show, you need to provide a case in real life for it to be valid. Saying that this should be held as fact is like saying that someone can buy a space shuttle and fly it into space from their front yard and come back to earth with no problems (remember that episode? :D)

---

Why are you focussing on the Family Guy metaphor as unrealistic when the first metaphor given was a real life example that perfectly fits the scenario? You should focus on the good, not the bad; and give credit where credit is due. So I will reiterate the example because you probably didn't read Norack's OP either:

An old, senial woman goes to the grocery store to purchase $9.50 worth of merchandise. At the counter she hands the cashier a $100 dollar bill muttering the words "here's a 10 spot, keep the change, youngster" honestly thinking she handed him a $10 bill. The boy pockets the hundie and replaces it with a $10 bill he had in his pocket. He profits from the ignorance of another individual.

To think that people on this forum think this is "right" in any way just makes me sick!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matsume

Why are you focussing on the Family Guy metaphor as unrealistic when the first metaphor given was a real life example that perfectly fits the scenario? You should focus on the good, not the bad; and give credit where credit is due. So I will reiterate the example because you probably didn't read Norack's OP either:

An old, senial woman goes to the grocery store to purchase $9.50 worth of merchandise. At the counter she hands the cashier a $100 dollar bill muttering the words "here's a 10 spot, keep the change, youngster" honestly thinking she handed him a $10 bill. The boy pockets the hundie and replaces it with a $10 bill he had in his pocket. He profits from the ignorance of another individual.

To think that people on this forum think this is "right" in any way just makes me sick!

---

The shield repair was worth 13mil+ so there was no change to give.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matsume

I am against the forums being used to resolve an issue that can be dealt with purely in game, such as denouncing some loser for spamming chatlog with racist comments - which can be dealt with a simple /blacklist as was suggested. This is an entirely different scenario Masamune, and when the facts change so does my opinion.

The OP tried to resolve the issue in person with Nick Zealot which resulted in Nick asking him to publicly apologize... for what? calling a GM on him 15 minutes AFTER he asked so kindly? I would have done the same. I would have asked kindly and waited for a response (which is what the OP did), but when that player is bragging to his ls for 15minutes rather than responding to personal tell, there is a serious show of disrespect. And since nothing could be done in game, then the forums become a necessity.




Why are you focussing on the Family Guy metaphor as unrealistic when the first metaphor given was a real life example that perfectly fits the scenario? You should focus on the good, not the bad; and give credit where credit is due. So I will reiterate the example because you probably didn't read Norack's OP either:

An old, senial woman goes to the grocery store to purchase $9.50 worth of merchandise. At the counter she hands the cashier a $100 dollar bill muttering the words "here's a 10 spot, keep the change, youngster" honestly thinking she handed him a $10 bill. The boy pockets the hundie and replaces it with a $10 bill he had in his pocket. He profits from the ignorance of another individual.

To think that people on this forum think this is "right" in any way just makes me sick!

---

Then he is stealing money from the store not the old lady. Either way the money the old lady gave legally would belong to the store. That is a thief. The problem is this is not what happened. The guy offered to give most of the money back. But the idiot refused it and decided to start calling him names instead. Is the guy an asshole? yes. Does the guy owe him the money back legally? no. Morally? Yes he should give it back but there is nothing SE or anyone else can do about it. Call me w/e you want but that doesn't make me heartless for speaking the truth.

This is what happened he foolishly and mistaking put up the repair for 13mil. There for the PRICE of the repair was w/e he put up. There is no change involved So stop using your "change examples" it does not work in this situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matsume

I am against the forums being used to resolve an issue that can be dealt with purely in game, such as denouncing some loser for spamming chatlog with racist comments - which can be dealt with a simple /blacklist as was suggested. This is an entirely different scenario Masamune, and when the facts change so does my opinion.

The OP tried to resolve the issue in person with Nick Zealot which resulted in Nick asking him to publicly apologize... for what? calling a GM on him 15 minutes AFTER he asked so kindly? I would have done the same. I would have asked kindly and waited for a response (which is what the OP did), but when that player is bragging to his ls for 15minutes rather than responding to personal tell, there is a serious show of disrespect. And since nothing could be done in game, then the forums become a necessity.

---

So basically, follow the rules only when they're convenient to you? Nice. And how do you know that the OP is telling the truth anyway? He could've made the whole story up and photoshopped all of the pics just to get some free money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matsume

Why are you focussing on the Family Guy metaphor as unrealistic when the first metaphor given was a real life example that perfectly fits the scenario? You should focus on the good, not the bad; and give credit where credit is due. So I will reiterate the example because you probably didn't read Norack's OP either:

An old, senial woman goes to the grocery store to purchase $9.50 worth of merchandise. At the counter she hands the cashier a $100 dollar bill muttering the words "here's a 10 spot, keep the change, youngster" honestly thinking she handed him a $10 bill. The boy pockets the hundie and replaces it with a $10 bill he had in his pocket. He profits from the ignorance of another individual.

To think that people on this forum think this is "right" in any way just makes me sick!

---

I never said it was right of Nick to do what he did. Just because something is wrong does not make it illegal. The woman in the example gave her consent to giving the 100 to the cashier and told him to keep the change. Him taking the 100 was not a crime, although switching it with a ten from his pocket was stealing from the company. What if the cashier hadn't noticed it was a 100? Should he go to jail for that? I only focused on the family guy one because the other one had been replied to already.

To clarify: I do not think what Nick did was right, but it also wasn't illegal. Wrong =/= Illegal.

Let's imagine this in real life: I get real drunk one night and offer someone $100 for something obviously not worth $100. This person agrees and we trade. The next morning I realize what i did and go back to the guy and ask for a tradeback. He says no. Is he a total dick? Yes. Can I call the police and get him arrested? No.

Another example, closer to the old lady one: The old senial lady goes to the grocery store and gets a loaf of bread priced at $100 and other things priced at $50. She goes to the cashier and he says the total is $150 dollars. The old lady pays. The store did not do anything illegal because the bread was advertised at $100 and she gave her consent to buying it. Very wrong, but not illegal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Masamune1004

So basically, follow the rules only when they're convenient to you? Nice. And how do you know that the OP is telling the truth anyway? He could've made the whole story up and photoshopped all of the pics just to get some free money.



I never said it was right of Nick to do what he did. Just because something is wrong does not make it illegal. The woman in the example gave her consent to giving the 100 to the cashier and told him to keep the change. Him taking the 100 was not a crime, although switching it with a ten from his pocket was stealing from the company. What if the cashier hadn't noticed it was a 100? Should he go to jail for that? I only focused on the family guy one because the other one had been replied to already.

To clarify: I do not think what Nick did was right, but it also wasn't illegal. Wrong =/= Illegal.

Let's imagine this in real life: I get real drunk one night and offer someone $100 for something obviously not worth $100. This person agrees and we trade. The next morning I realize what i did and go back to the guy and ask for a tradeback. He says no. Is he a total dick? Yes. Can I call the police and get him arrested? No.

---

THIS is a real example of the situation read and learn Matsume. Stop going around judging and calling people heartless for speaking the truth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xianghua

Then he is stealing money from the store not the old lady. Either way the money the old lady gave legally would belong to the store.

---

If you paid a store $10, and I rang you up and ended with $90 of your dollars in my pocket, I don't think there's any doubt who is guilty. It's arguable that the store stole from you and I stole from the store, but I don't think that would hold. The store, as it were, would try to distance itself, putting my head on the chopping block instead of theirs. If you'd like to test this theory, I will happily come through a checkout line you're working. :)

Quote:

---

That is a thief. The problem is this is not what happened. The guy offered to give most of the money back. But the idiot refused it and decided to start calling him names instead. Is the guy an asshole? yes. Does the guy owe him the money back legally? no. Morally? Yes he should give it back but there is nothing SE or anyone else can do about it. Call me w/e you want but that doesn't make me heartless for speaking the truth. Nonetheless, that is not exactly the scenario.

---

You're mostly right, but since we're arguing the finer points of legality--which often come down to a jury rather than a spelled-out precedent for a crime--I have to point out a few more details. Nick removed his legal advantage in the chat log. First we'd need to decide whether or not the "friends" were actually speaking on behalf of Nick. In either case, please note the number of times they say "Give your money back"--in most cases, "ur money," etc. At the very least, we can conclude that the involved parties (most likely including Nick) have admitted that the money rightfully belongs to the OP. And because it seems that Nick is bragging about it, we can conclude that he does NOT view this as a normal, everyday fair trade. All of you who are saying that Nick didn't do anything wrong--he just innocently repaired some guys item at what could have very well passed for the average market price--just more-or-less lost your point from a legal standpoint. Next, check out the quote I mentioned in my last post--I don't feel like fishing it out or retyping the hideous grammar. He said something to the effect of "shout an apology and I will give you 11m back." This is blackmail, because it's already established that it is the OP's money. I also do not feel like finding and linking to laws in many countries regarding blackmail, because you are all more than welcome to use Google for such things. If you are still set on defending Nick, check out bribery while you're at it, since Nick is offering a disproportionate amount of money to get his name shouted. I'm sure that a team of professional lawyers would have no problem explaining how many ways this was criminal, and the defense would have a hard time.

I think that if Nick were smart he would have kept this a secret, because he's basically incriminated himself here. Gloating about it basically ruined his shot at a defense of "I just did a normal, right thing!" However, what SE will do (or won't do) is up to them. Do I want players like this Nick character on a game I pay for to have fun? No. But I'm sure he was having a blast, and who am I to take that from him? I hope that SE does something for you, but chances are they're going to default to "It was your mistake, so we can't help you." And in the end, that's true, and it would be absurd to hold a full jury trial in-game for gil. In this case, it would we best to submit a report to the GMs, get your copy/pasted response, facepalm, and start farming moar gilz.

You are correct. I and others have already said its morally wrong and the guy is a jerk. I have and always will give the money back in this situation. But I don't expect everyone to follow that same moral code. I'd be an idiot if I did. I'm not gonna stand here and lie to the dude and baby him. That's not going to help him. The problem with this situation. is SE doesn't take screen-shots as evidence due to Photoshop. So They are most likely not going to help him or give him the money back regardless of what was said in the convo. The entire thing is messed up. I'm sorry it happened and just telling him the truth instead of giving him false hope and pointless words for comfort. I don't see how that makes me heartless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xianghua

You are correct. I and others have already said its morally wrong and the guy is a jerk. I have and always will give the money back in this situation. But I don't expect everyone to follow that same moral code. I'd be an idiot if I did. I'm not gonna stand here and lie to the dude and baby him. That's not going to help him. The problem with this situation. is SE doesn't take screen-shots as evidence due to Photoshop. So They are most likely not going to help him or give him the money back regardless of what was said in the convo. The entire thing is messed up. I'm sorry it happened and just telling him the truth instead of giving him false hope and pointless words for comfort. I don't see how that makes me heartless.

---

I would assume it would be possible for GMs (probably only higher-ranking ones) to review chat logs on their servers. I would presume that they would at least use it to prosecute RMT players. But who knows.

EDIT: Since you mentioned photoshop, though, I did notice that on that very last screenshot the log starts RIGHT on that line, and that opening statement--"Hey, I know Nick..." makes me think that OP was /shouting "DOES ANYONE KNOW NICK ZELOT[sp?]" in Ul'dah. Not trying to say the OP has a solid case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mychael

You're mostly right, but since we're arguing the finer points of legality--which often come down to a jury rather than a spelled-out precedent for a crime--I have to point out a few more details. Nick removed his legal advantage in the chat log. First we'd need to decide whether or not the "friends" were actually speaking on behalf of Nick. In either case, please note the number of times they say "Give your money back"--in most cases, "ur money," etc. At the very least, we can conclude that the involved parties (most likely including Nick) have admitted that the money rightfully belongs to the OP. And because it seems that Nick is bragging about it, we can conclude that he does NOT view this as a normal, everyday fair trade.

---

We don't know for sure if it was actually said though. The whole things could have been shopped easily.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mychael

All of you who are saying that Nick didn't do anything wrong--he just innocently repaired some guys item at what could have very well passed for the average market price--just more-or-less lost your point from a legal standpoint.

---

Once again: Wrong =/= Illegal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mychael

Next, check out the quote I mentioned in my last post--I don't feel like fishing it out or retyping the hideous grammar. He said something to the effect of "shout an apology and I will give you 11m back." This is blackmail, because it's already established that it is the OP's money. I also do not feel like finding and linking to laws in many countries regarding blackmail, because you are all more than welcome to use Google for such things. If you are still set on defending Nick, check out bribery while you're at it, since Nick is offering a disproportionate amount of money to get his name shouted. I'm sure that a team of professional lawyers would have no problem explaining how many ways this was criminal, and the defense would have a hard time.

---

Invalid due to photoshop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xianghua

You are correct. I and others have already said its morally wrong and the guy is a jerk. I have and always will give the money back in this situation. But I don't expect everyone to follow that same moral code. I'd be an idiot if I did. I'm not gonna stand here and lie to the dude and baby him. That's not going to help him. The problem with this situation. is SE doesn't take screen-shots as evidence due to Photoshop. So They are most likely not going to help him or give him the money back regardless of what was said in the convo. The entire thing is messed up. I'm sorry it happened and just telling him the truth instead of giving him false hope and pointless words for comfort. I don't see how that makes me heartless.

---

This.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Masamune1004

We don't know for sure if it was actually said though. The whole things could have been shopped easily.

Once again: Wrong =/= Illegal

Invalid due to photoshop.

This.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mychael

I would assume it would be possible for GMs (probably only higher-ranking ones) to review chat logs on their servers. I would presume that they would at least use it to prosecute RMT players. But who knows.

---

This.
/10char