Large quantity of gil disappeared.

[DragoAskani]

Show me the rule were a player is not allowed to post an Animal Hide for 999M gil and have to conform to community predetermined prices.

Don't look for it. There isn't.

You are free to post any item for whatever price you want. If it's overpriced it won't sell. People will decide not to click the 3 times required to buy it.

Unless you are cheating. In which case you decided to trust the decision making for clicking to a 3rd party program.

Would think it falls under profiteering off other players cheating. That is a thing you know, and this could fall under such a scope when its clearly done with clearly malicious intent. When they should have reported the cheater. So no, they are both in the wrong. You will not change my mind.

[lezard21]

Would think it falls under profiteering off other players cheating.

You'd think, but you'd be wrong. There is no such rule. The closest there is is this rule:

Fraud occurs most often as a result of breaching in-game agreements between players regarding trading, loot, or betting.

In this situation there is no fraud since there is no breaching of in-game agreements. Both players agreed to the trade and price of the item. The auto clicker agreed when asked "Purchase Coke for 1 million gil?" and clicked "Yes"

You don't call the police when you "accidentally" bought a sandwich for 20$ and are refused any refund.

It's really sad that we have to resort to this level of analogy and some people still don't get it. Though truth be told, those people probably WOULD throw a tantrum in the store and call the police because they didn't get a refund.

[CKNovel]

Would think it falls under profiteering off other players cheating. That is a thing you know, and this could fall under such a scope when its clearly done with clearly malicious intent. When they should have reported the cheater. So no, they are both in the wrong. You will not change my mind.

There IS a malicious intend.
But that "exploit" is only possible if someone is using a bot.

This bot shouldn't exist and therefore shouldn't be taken in account. The rule always has been "use it at your own risks".
If you remove the bot then there is no exploit, no reason for the GM to ban the one who acquired the gils.

Imagine you're driving. You don't give priority to someone and you crash (and survive unscathed, few).
Turns out the other driver involved was driving triple the speed limit and you couldn't possibly know he was coming at full speed. Is he able to say that it's also your fault for not giving them the priority, even if you actually saw them?

[Chekopacheko]

Imagine feeling bad for auto clickers

[lezard21]

The rule always has been "use it at your own risks".

Nope the rule has always been don't use them because they are prohibited.

[CKNovel]

Nope the rule has always been don't use them because they are prohibited.

Oh yes, the rule from TOS is "don't use them"
But the rules from the creator of the bot to the user is "Use it at your own risks".

Should've been a bit more precise about that. But in any cases, the bot shouldn't be taken in account since it's against TOS, the user had full control over his character actions.

[Wolwosh]

Imagine feeling bad for auto clickers

Lots of special cuddle snowflakes

[Rein_eon_Osborne]

Would think it falls under profiteering off other players cheating. That is a thing you know, and this could fall under such a scope when its clearly done with clearly malicious intent. When they should have reported the cheater. So no, they are both in the wrong. You will not change my mind.

How can you be certain that they didn't report the cheater?