FC Chest Looting

[SinisterJointss]

Again, it's still disruption and griefing.

Im suprised this is STILL happening. Its simple, it's your FC leaderships fault (if you're the leader, its your fault) for not looking at and setting the permission of the ranks correctly. Was it a crappy move on the person that robbed your fc? Of course, nobody is debating that. But its still... your FC leaderships fault

[SaitoHikari]

Again, it's still disruption and griefing.

You're actually replying to a FC leader (Ashkendor) who actually had the same thing happen roughly 3 weeks ago, and the person that took everything from our chest did it in a way/for a reason that pretty much made them 100% guilty. Not only did they take everything from our chest, they rearranged all the furnishings in the FC house into the bottom floor + spent all the company credits on ceruleum tanks before leaving with a giant middle finger. And what was it for? Hunt salt. How did they get in the FC in the first place? They made an alt and pretended to be a new player for the sole purpose of screwing with the FC.

Despite the overwhelming evidence, we didn't get anything back. All we could do in the end was suck it up and rebuild. And put tighter restrictions on the chest, and pretty much close FC recruitment.

[Ashkendor]

Despite the overwhelming evidence, we didn't get anything back. All we could do in the end was suck it up and rebuild. And put tighter restrictions on the chest

^ 100% this. The funny part is all it really did was spur me to fix the permissions and grind my tail off for a solid points base to get us started again. 3 weeks later, we now have almost double the points they took from us along with a fully restocked FC chest and a shiny new Recruit rank that has zero permissions to anything except entering the FC house and using the chocobo stables. So, kudos to them for accomplishing basically nothing whatsoever with the possible exception of getting themselves in trouble. :3

[Anethum]

No, but I can request these services be added to the game, and state that consequences for these actions are not severe enough for the effect done to other users and the scale at which is happens. And this person was not a newcomer. They had been in our FC well beyond an introductory period.

[DawnRyins]

Just so you're aware, the FC in question had a very publicly known set of rules governing the FC chest: take only if you are going to put to personal use (e.g. melding onto your own gear, planting in your own garden). The culprit clearly did not fit these requirements and so was not qualified to take them, which means that what he did constitutes theft, conversion of stolen property, fraud, and most importantly a breach of duty and of the confidence everyone else in FC had in him. All of these would be legally punishable offenses in the real world, and yes, even oral informal agreements such as these are considered valid and enforceable contracts. OP is suggesting that GMs have the power to judge and penalize griefers in situations like these.

Public property is meant to be used by those who need it, not abused by those with malicious intent. Instead of victim-shaming, perhaps the focus should return to OP's original question as it was intended.

[FaileExperiment]

Just so you're aware, the FC in question had a very publicly known set of rules governing the FC chest: take only if you are going to put to personal use (e.g. melding onto your own gear, planting in your own garden). The culprit clearly did not fit these requirements and so was not qualified to take them, which means that what he did constitutes theft, conversion of stolen property, fraud, and most importantly a breach of duty and of the confidence everyone else in FC had in him. All of these would be legally punishable offenses in the real world, and yes, even oral informal agreements such as these are considered valid and enforceable contracts. OP is suggesting that GMs have the power to judge and penalize griefers in situations like these.

Public property is meant to be used by those who need it, not abused by those with malicious intent. Instead of victim-shaming, perhaps the focus should return to OP's original question as it was intended.

Then in this case the FC's house rules did not match the permissions set on the FC chest. If he had permission to loot, then he had permission to loot. You can call it theft if you want to, but it isn't theft, or conversion of stolen property or whatever else you want to make up. At worst, he only broke the FC's house rules. Other than that, he was indeed fully qualified to take the items, as evidenced by the fact that he had in-game permission to... you know... take the items. That's the only qualification that is relevant, after all. The reason that GMs don't have the power to enforce your "oral informal agreements" is because the permissions already cover this ground. It's there so SE doesn't need to be.

There's no victim shaming going on here, primarily because there is no victim. People are just stating the obvious: the FC master messed up, and someone took advantage of it. The focus is right where is belongs.

[Kosmos992k]

Just so you're aware, the FC in question had a very publicly known set of rules governing the FC chest:
**snip**
Public property is meant to be used by those who need it, not abused by those with malicious intent. Instead of victim-shaming, perhaps the focus should return to OP's original question as it was intended.

It doesn't matter how publicly available the rules of this FC were, they do not amount to the law of the land or terms of service, they are a social construct within that FC only.

The contents of a FC chest are *NOT* public property, they are company property that is made available for individual use by authorized company members. There's no victim shaming in pointing these things out, nor is there any reason to return to the OPs flawed question. It's very frustrating when someone abuses their company chest privileges, you're certainly in your rights to report that player for griefing and disrupting your play, as are the other members of your FC. Other than that, there is nothing you can do because the player was in fact authorized to access the chest.

The GMs are not repo men, they are not going to recover the property that you believe was stolen, because it was taken by someone with authority to do so. They might discipline the player for the disruption of other players and griefing, but that's an entirely different matter.

The one thing that would 'help' this type of situation, would be the ability to set a maximum number of items, amount of gil, number of shards, crystals or clusters, that can be withdrawn by rank in the span of a day or week. That would slow down such abuse, but it would still be up to the FC master to set appropriate permissions and limits.

[TheCurls]

Then the lesson was learned. Maybe the FC master needs to make it Read-Only and distribute items to the people that need them, instead. There are tools available. This is not SE's problem.

There's also the situation where someone did this and was fine, but then the FC master and the player had a falling out and the FC master reported them just to get back at them. There's opportunity for abuse on both sides. So, again. Next time, set the permissions properly.

[UltimateAoe2]

Imo, both sides.

A) You didn't correct your permissions. Your fault on that.
B) GMs aren't allowed to tell you what they do to punish said player, or even if they got banned. It's against their policy.


but then again its really your fault, like how can you oversee your perms? >_>;

[Anethum]

The rationality that there could be abuse ignores the abuses currently happening.

B) GMs aren't allowed to tell you what they do to punish said player, or even if they got banned. It's against their policy.

They aren't, no. I asked what the common resolution to this scenario would entail. Due to their privacy policy, they could not tell me what the specific resolution to my report would be.