RMT and Banning Buyers

[Jpec07]

So I was reading the recent post about actions taken against RMT, and I couldn't help but notice something: accounts that advertised RMT were perma-banned, while accounts that bought Gil through RMT were only temp-banned.

It strikes me: wouldn't perma-banning the buyers be a greater incentive to get people to stop buying Gil? A temp-ban is a slap on the wrist, and is usually because the individual involved was careless--so there isn't much incentive to keep them from trying again and being more careful when the ban runs out. In this case, because it's temporary, the reward outweighs the risk.

If accounts confirmed as participating in RMT were instead perma-banned, though, it would knock the legs out of the industry. People wouldn't buy, because it would mean they would be banned from the game for life if they were caught.

Thoughts?

[Gunspec]

Punishments are probably as light as they are for BOTH sides of RMT, because SE values money.

The RMT get a month to screw around before their accounts are banned, since we have NO immediate account locks or action taken against known RMT agents. When these monthly bans occur, the companies use the cash they earned to buy new accounts. You can bet every one of those 7000 accounts recently terminated will be turned into a new account sale. I think the cheapest realm reborn accounts are about $15 (steam sale). That's 100 thousand dollars FFXIV will make from this wave of banning RMT, and over a million dollars a year. Even if they can get accounts cheaper, its still a lot of money. Getting new accounts each month is just a work expense of these RMT companies.

As for the average player, a permanent ban might be enough to get them to quit the game for good. Banning thousand of players who buy from RMT wouldn't necessarily create new sales, and would likely result in a net loss of money from subscription charges.

[ElHeggunte]

I don't think it would change anything. The people who cheat in the first place don't care about the consequences because they assume they wont be getting caught in the first place. SE displaying a more swift and reliable way to catch buyers would be a better deterrent than stricter punishment. Kind of how a shoplifter might be less inclined to taken an item off the shelf and stick it in his pocket if there's a CCTV camera pointed right at him and he knows security can be on his faster than Chris Bosh in dildo factory. Of course you're always still going to have people who will risk it anyway, but the most effective way to deter cheating/crime is to show people they likely wont get away with it as opposed to just telling them what kind of harsh punishment they'll face if they get caught.

[MilesSaintboroguh]

words

I don't know why people keep insisting that Square makes money off RMT and RMT "buys" new accounts. Most of the time, RMT are using stolen accounts and stolen credit card info. Anyone with any lick of sense on them are going to block unknown charges and issue chargebacks, which costs Square money.

[Catwho]

IIRC, it's only a temp ban the first time they get caught. (Plus their gil is confiscated.) The second time they get caught, they're booted for good.

[Gunspec]

I don't know why people keep insisting that Square makes money off RMT and RMT "buys" new accounts. Most of the time, RMT are using stolen accounts and stolen credit card info. Anyone with any lick of sense on them are going to block unknown charges and issue chargebacks, which costs Square money.

So you think they have a problem where 7000 accounts were hacked just this month... and yet their reaction to it is the lazy approach they have been taking for the past two years? You think they are LOSING a million dollars a year to account fraud, and yet only have 3 people on their anti-RMT task force?

I've known of people, indirectly, on several college campuses who operated as RMT. They were exploiters and botters, but they sure as hell weren't dumb enough to do something actually illegal, such as credit card fraud. Consider the amount of money a single RMT sale is worth, then consider that it only takes $15 of that to run an account for a month. No need to commit crimes, no need to raise attention. And that amounts to some serious money running both ways.

[abzoluut]

It's the first time I read about buyers getting banned. It's usually RMT advertisers/bots since people can't really varify that. They just tell us and "we" believe.

How long did buyers get banned for and when exactly did this happen?

[Gunspec]

It's the first time I read about buyers getting banned. It's usually RMT advertisers/bots since people can't really varify that. They just tell us and "we" believe.

How long did buyers get banned for and when exactly did this happen?

They've been giving temp-bans to buyers for as long as they've been posting about their ban waves. It's usually no more than a few dozen people per month that are caught. I have no idea how long the temp-bans are for, though. SE doesn't talk opening about specific punishments in general, and I highly doubt anyone here knows the 7 people who were temp-banned this month in order to ask them.

[Catwho]

It's the first time I read about buyers getting banned. It's usually RMT advertisers/bots since people can't really varify that. They just tell us and "we" believe.

How long did buyers get banned for and when exactly did this happen?

Back in FFXI, my second HNM's leaders were accused of "botting" and got banned. (It was the Fifth Element on Seraph.) It was like our group had been beheaded. They appealed to SE but the decision was final. To this day I'm not sure if I believe SE or if I believe them when they screamed they were innocent. They claimed they were accused of botting, but it's just as likely they were buying gil and got smacked for that. I'll never know the real story.

[Rath]

They've been giving temp-bans to buyers for as long as they've been posting about their ban waves. It's usually no more than a few dozen people per month that are caught. I have no idea how long the temp-bans are for, though. SE doesn't talk opening about specific punishments in general, and I highly doubt anyone here knows the 7 people who were temp-banned this month in order to ask them.

The numbers they post are for a week not a month. This recent topic was for Dec 10-16. The 7 people this time can be for any illicit reason though, not just RMT.