Rares prices.... (27,000+ views)

[EugenyG]

Can people stop to state this? Wanting to believe it being true, doesn't make it so. It's a false assumption and yet non-merchants are stating it all over while they have clearly have no clue what is even possible right now. Furthermore on the whole discussion of how much merchants make - innovative and creative ones will always be able to make millions if you have any 'acceptable' and effective real form of an economy anyway.

 

 

 

I don't personally think it's necessarily true. In fact, I don't CARE if it's true. All I say is that what was the motivation, be it true or pretended, for Jagex to do the changes they do.

 

 

 

I don't really give a crap about how much a person is making, but Jagex obviously does. If merchants still thrive now, that means that they are still able to offer some liquidity that the GE does not offer. In other words, merchants wouldn't thrive if the GE solved absolutely all merchanting issues in a perfect way, but that's obviously not the case.

 

 

 

The bottom line is that if merchants are doing a service people are willing to pay for, they deserve the money. If their service is no longer needed, they won't be getting the money for that service. If they get rich by providing a service that the game should provide but does a bad job at it, Jagex should find a way for a game to provide that service better, rather than restrict the merchants. Refer above to my "acceptable" vs "unacceptable" restrictions.

[Sly_Wizard]

*Some* merchants made money this way. Others made it through deception, dishonesty, taking advantage of others' ignorance, price manipulation and worse.

 

 

 

*Bangs his head against the wall*

 

 

 

1.) It's not the sellers job to inform the buyer of "Fair market value". That's the job of the buyer. People should be allowed to sell at any price they choose. Buyers don't have to pay those prices if they believe they're unfair or if they believe they can find the same item for cheaper elsewhere. The same principles govern every day transactions. Sometimes I wonder what kind of world you live in because it's most assuredly not a capitalistic one.

 

 

 

2.) There's no such thing as price manipulation within Runescape, as it's impossible to corner any given market (Minus, maybe, the rare market). Infinite supply sees as much. Infinite supply means no single group is able to corner a market, and if no single group is able to corner a market than price manipulation cannot occur, as another group will willingly undercut your prices. It's simple economic theory, which I'm sure will be ignored (As per usual).

 

 

 

Anywho, no one ever has to rely on merchants. As their is an infinite supply of materials within Runescape, excluding rares, you could very easily go out and get whatever you needed/wanted for free. However, this involved a serious investment of time. All merchants did was provide you those items, minus the time needed to harvest them yourself plus mark-up (Merchants have to make money, after all).

 

 

 

*Shrugs*

[Sly_Wizard]

The bottom line is that if merchants are doing a service people are willing to pay for, they deserve the money.

 

 

 

100% true. People never had to buy from merchants; They did so because it was easier and much faster than the alternatives. If someone was unhappy with the prices merchants charged, then they could have either gone and gotten the item themselves or tried to find it for cheaper.

 

 

 

*Shrugs*

[lord_british]

*Some* merchants made money this way. Others made it through deception, dishonesty, taking advantage of others' ignorance, price manipulation and worse.

 

 

 

*Bangs his head against the wall*

 

 

 

1.) It's not the sellers job to inform the buyer of "Fair market value". That's the job of the buyer. People should be allowed to sell at any price they choose. Buyers don't have to pay those prices if they believe they're unfair or if they believe they can find the same item for cheaper elsewhere. The same principles govern every day transactions. Sometimes I wonder what kind of world you live in because it's most assuredly not a capitalistic one.

 

 

 

2.) There's no such thing as price manipulation within Runescape, as it's impossible to corner any given market (Minus, maybe, the rare market). Infinite supply sees as much. Infinite supply means no single group is able to corner a market, and if no single group is able to corner a market than price manipulation cannot occur, as another group will willingly undercut your prices. It's simple economic theory, which I'm sure will be ignored (As per usual).

 

 

 

Anywho, no one ever has to rely on merchants. As their is an infinite supply of materials within Runescape, excluding rares, you could very easily go out and get whatever you needed/wanted for free. However, this involved a serious investment of time. All merchants did was provide you those items, minus the time needed to harvest them yourself plus mark-up (Merchants have to make money, after all).

 

 

 

*Shrugs*

 

 

 

nor is it incumbent upon the seller to actively go out of his/her way to sell items at vastly inflated prices in an attempt to deceive honest players out of their money...as MANY (not ALL) merchanters are wont to do ;)

[Sly_Wizard]

Sellers sell for at the prices buyers buy for. Don't like the prices merchants charge? Then don't buy from them. However, as much as I said that in the past, people continued to ignore that piece of advice. Merchants weren't required to sell their items for fair market value, just like you weren't required to buy from merchants. See how simple that is?

 

 

 

Apparently not, as people continued to complain about prices they willingly paid.

[lord_british]

Sellers sell for at the prices buyers buy for. Don't like the prices merchants charge? Then don't buy from them. However, as much as I said that in the past, people continued to ignore that piece of advice. Merchants weren't required to sell their items for fair market value, just like you weren't required to buy from merchants. See how simple that is?

 

 

 

Apparently not, as people continued to complain about prices they willingly paid.

 

 

 

no. sellers tried to sell it at whatever they felt they could get away with. some buyers knew the prices and were willing to try to negotiate. others didn't and either refused to buy, or fell for the scam.

 

 

 

there is a difference. no matter how people try to sugar-coat it and place the blame in the ignorant.

[qeltar]

And I read your article about the scammer mentality and fully agree that the wishes of those people should not be catered to. The statement "if you got scammed it is your own fault" (aka blaming the victim rather than the perpetrator) is fully invalid.

 

 

Glad to hear it. Pretty much all decent people would agree.

 

 

However, the minute Jagex's measures against scammers started resulting in heavy fallout for the honest people, my support for Jagex stops dead.

 

 

But the actions that you are upset about weren't really taken to stop scammers. They were created because Jagex has implemented features to stop RWT that require stable market prices. That's the real underlying reason for the price limits and caps.

 

 

But please don't ever say that their opinion is "heavier" than anyone elses, because it is not.

 

 

Well, we can have a difference of opinion on this. :D

 

 

 

I'm not saying that your opinion doesn't matter. I'm just pointing out that some others seem to think that Jagex isn't entitled to have their own wants and desires about how their game is played. Just because we and others like us enjoy a free market, that doesn't mean Jagex necessarily does.

 

 

So? I fully admit some merchants did bad things. I'm not opposed to the update because I like the dishonest merchants. I'm opposed to the update because, in my opinion, it is absolutely not justified to restrict the honest merchants so the dishonest ones get caught in the process.

 

 

I see your reasoning, and I agree with it in part. I am simply saying that while merchants on the whole are complaining about these restrictions, they are largely the reason they were put into place. And I don't think that in this particular group that the dishonest ones -- or at least, "ethically questionable ones" -- were a small minority; they may not have been a minority at all.

 

 

Now, if I really wanted to get down and dirty, I'd argue about the primary target audience of young children who are too young to realize the way Jagex itself is exploiting their client-provider relationship, which most comparable rational adults would not find nearly as acceptable. In this way, I could say that Jagex advertising to young children is very very similar to those "exploitation" merchants you described, who exploit a player's gullibility to get them to pay you money. :twisted:

 

Very true. And part of the reason I've been one of those leading the fight against Jagex marketing the game to kids -- with some recent success, too, I might add. But it's a separate issue. And to Jagex's credit, perhaps they are finally realizing that they should stop pretending this should be a "wild wild West" game environment for adults when most of their customers are kids.

[gonpost]

I have a question which current rare owners might be interested in...

 

 

 

Will jagex change any of the GE prices when january comes? The reason i ask is that the minimum prices for rares are much higher (ie the min price for purp phat on GE is 168,150,000). Would there be any long-lasting implications, or would the price of the rares just fall again from that level to how they are falling now?

 

 

 

Will people buy up a ton of rares just a few days before the january update, or will people not have a clue if jagex will change the ge price and therefore nothing exciting will happen...?

 

 

 

Input please. :)

[qeltar]

 

And until recently, it too was very low risk, if there was any risk at all.

 

 

 

That's such a rubbish statement that it surprises me you even back it up. Risk doesn't 'suddenly' arise when prices are actually dropping - that risk was in there forever already then, as so many other risks.

 

 

I may have been a bit less than careful with my terminology, but I think you know full well what I meant there. Yes, the risk was there.. but people THOUGHT there wasn't any. Very much as in all bubbles, people started to think that because the prices had always gone up before that they would continue to do so forever.

 

 

 

Corrections in such unrealistic, overheated markets are good things, as far as I am concerned. Especially given how many of the people who participated in that market earned their "wealth".

[Sly_Wizard]

no. sellers tried to sell it at whatever they felt they could get away with. some buyers knew the prices and were willing to try to negotiate. others didn't and either refused to buy, or fell for the scam.

 

 

 

there is a difference. no matter how people try to sugar-coat it and place the blame in the ignorant.

 

 

 

Thank you for repeating what I already said. People can sell for whatever they want to sell for. You're not forced to pay those prices. You do so because you want to. Sellers aren't obligated to tell you what the going price for an item is. That's the buyers job. You think the price they're charging is too high? Don't buy what they're selling. You think you can find the items cheaper elsewhere? Don't buy what they're selling and go elsewhere. You think you're getting a great deal? Then you buy, buy, buy. Welcome to what's known as a capitalistic market. A couple of hundred of years behind, but glad you finally caught on :thumbsup:

 

 

 

Boy... I wonder how some of you people get through every day life. You act as if you're forced to purchase anything.

[lord_british]

sorry, but i get the feeling from your posts that you're on the side of "it's the scammee's fault for being scammed" rather then the scammer's fault for being greedy and opportunistic.

 

 

 

as for the rest, i'm currently on a LOT of pain-killers, and my mind is perhaps not as sharp as it should be under normal conditions.

 

 

 

I apologise if that interpretation is wrong.

[qeltar]

sorry, but i get the feeling from your posts that you're on the side of "it's the scammee's fault for being scammed" rather then the scammer's fault for being greedy and opportunistic.

 

 

 

That would be because he is.

 

 

 

He also thinks there's "nothing wrong" with luring, and was one of about, oh, 8 people in the entire game to disapprove when Jagex changed the chat interface to block someone from saying his own password, claiming it would be good for "stupid" people to get hacked and quit the game.

 

 

 

This is the sort of sick, twisted mentality that results in the rest of us being saddled with limits and restrictions. :(

[lord_british]

ahhh :( asshats rule, unfortunately :(

 

 

 

in that case, i withdraw the apology. it is definitely unwarranted.

[quitthegame]

1.) It's not the sellers job to inform the buyer of "Fair market value". That's the job of the buyer. People should be allowed to sell at any price they choose. Buyers don't have to pay those prices if they believe they're unfair or if they believe they can find the same item for cheaper elsewhere. The same principles govern every day transactions. Sometimes I wonder what kind of world you live in because it's most assuredly not a capitalistic one.

 

 

 

You are making a category error Sly. Qeltar is arguing that activity A is immoral. You are saying that activity A is natural, and then that activity A is moral, and then you say it's natural again. If natural implied moral, then you would be making a reasoned and supported argument. But it doesn't necessarily do so, so the only sentence above that's directly relevant to Qeltar's point is "People should be allowed to sell at any price they choose." which although relevant, being in fact a straight denial of Qeltar's point, is never supported. Your argument, paraphrased for brevity, is "you are wrong, that is people should try to screw each other, because people naturally screw each other". But Qeltar's argument was "people naturally screw each other, and that is bad for reasons 1,2,3", which makes your reply somewhat of a non sequitur. This is why many people doubt your reading comprehension, nearly every one of your posts is a giant non sequitur. I will illustrate with a chart, in the hopes that you will finally understand this.

 

 

 

Qeltar's point:

 

 

 

A: people naturally screw each other

 

B: people screwing each other has bad consequences 1, 2, 3.

 

 

 

A + B therefore C = people shouldn't screw each other.

 

 

 

Sly's 'rebuttal'

 

 

 

A: people naturally screw each other

 

D: people should do what they naturally do (This is never stated, so I list it as an implied premise)

 

E: people should try to screw each other.

 

 

 

E = not © , so Qeltar is proved wrong.

 

 

 

 

 

Do you see how illogical that is? The crucial point in the logical structure (D, the only premise unique to your argument) is not only nutty, but you don't even bother to write it down. This is a classical feature of false arguments, hiding the obvious falsehood by never making it definite, just using it as an implied premise. What makes your reply seem like a non sequitur is that in this case, you neglect to do three things. First, you don't address any of Qeltar's arguments, you just proceed to argue as if all of your ideology is necessarily correct, and you can just analyze his position using your ideological notions with no regard to how well your ideology fits the actual situation we're facing (which doesn't come off remarkably well as your ideology doesn't translate to a virtual economy very well), secondly you don't explain or motivate your ideology with the result that the crux of your argument is left in a merely implied premise, and thirdly the elements of your argument that are not only implied work out to be a proper subset of Qeltar's premises, which makes it look like you didn't understand his post at all.

 

 

 

2.) There's no such thing as price manipulation within Runescape, as it's impossible to corner any given market (Minus, maybe, the rare market). Infinite supply sees as much. Infinite supply means no single group is able to corner a market, and if no single group is able to corner a market than price manipulation cannot occur, as another group will willingly undercut your prices. It's simple economic theory, which I'm sure will be ignored (As per usual).

 

 

 

There's a problem with your theory here Sly, and it's something we call Reality. Price manipulation, on items that are not discontinued, is not a theory, it's an observed fact. In this forums we've seen someone boast of price manipulating pure essence, and making many hundreds of millions of gp, in the past few weeks. You saying "there's no such thing as price manipulation" is analogous to you claiming that the sky isn't blue. There's no theoretical argument you can make that will convince anyone that a repeated emprical observation is false, that's not how it works. BTW, there's not an infinite supply in RS, just because scarcity is different than it is in real life, doesn't mean scarcity doesn't exist. Time is not infinite, everything in RS takes time, which means any resource is practically finite. Like I've told you before, this is a good thing for you, because without scarcity all of your economics analogies would be a priori absurd, as economics is the study of scarcity. Unluckily for you, although your analogies are not a priori absurd, they always end up being absurd anyway.

 

 

 

Anywho, no one ever has to rely on merchants....

 

 

 

This paragraph of yours, although not relevant directly to Qeltar's post, is the one paragraph of yours that I agree with. One can exist in RS without trading with others much more easily than one can in the real world. That is one reason why I wish Jagex wasn't so draconian in cracking down on merchanting. The other reason is that while I agree with Qeltar that merchanting is about screwing other people, it still added a certain challenge and dimension to the game. That's part of the point of a fantasy game, isn't it, to do things one can't in real life?

 

 

 

This is, I think, why it never seems like you understand the posts you reply to, Sly. Capitalism and socialism are not found in the real world in unmixed form, and the arguments about their twisted RS equivalents are never so black and white either. Capitalism's virtues are also its vices, exploitation, misinformation, political corruption by the wielders of concentrated capital-- heralded as faults by socialists, are also the keys to its success. Competition means some businesses fail, some people lose their jobs, but the failure of the inefficient is exactly where the efficiency of capitalism comes from. Socialism's benefits-- reductions in externalities, ability to plan farther into the future, are minor when compared with the overblown rhetoric used to compare the two, because socialist and capitalist economies in the real world are all mixed.

[Sly_Wizard]

I'm not sure where you got scamming from. There's nothing innately wrong with charging exorbitant prices for any item you own, as you're not forcing anyone to buy.

 

 

 

And, I'd be willing to bet that Qeltar will show up with his "Because his is!" patented speech :lol:

[Sly_Wizard]

That would be because he is.

 

 

 

Ah. Right on time. Can I call them or what? :mrgreen:

 

 

 

This is the sort of sick, twisted mentality that results in the rest of us being saddled with limits and restrictions. :(

 

 

 

Backwards logic. You called for the changes. I did. Therefore I fail to see how it's "My fault" :lol:

[qeltar]

That would be because he is.

 

 

 

Ah. Right on time. Can I call them or what? :mrgreen:

 

 

 

 

Yes, you're the unqualified master of predicting things four minutes after they've been posted. Take another trolling star out of petty cash.

[lord_british]

I'm not sure where you got scamming from. There's nothing innately wrong with charging exorbitant prices for any item you own, as you're not forcing anyone to buy.

 

 

 

And, I'd be willing to bet that Qeltar will show up with his "Because his is!" patented speech :lol:

 

 

 

sorry, but most people (in real life) have these little things called "morals" and "ethics"...something that is sadly lacking in more than a few RS players...and you from all appearances of your posts :(

 

 

 

There's nothing wrong with looking out for oneself, per se. but doing so at the expense or outright deceiving of others makes most normal people think at least twice and decide it's not something they can in all conscience do.

 

 

 

there's a name for people that behave otherwise : sociopaths.

[quitthegame]

This is the sort of sick, twisted mentality that results in the rest of us being saddled with limits and restrictions. :(

 

 

 

Backwards logic. You called for the changes. I did. Therefore I fail to see how it's "My fault" :lol:

 

 

 

Assuming you meant to say "I didn't", his point is that the limits are put in by Jagex to protect the innocent against people like you. The funny thing is that I actually agree with you, not Qeltar, on this point, if I could just get you to quit making logical mistakes and stop phrasing your opinion in such an asshat-ish way we could make a united front in favor of price manipulation. If I could get you to admit that price manipulation is possible. None of which is likely.

 

 

 

It's not the sellers job to inform the buyer of "Fair market value". That's the job of the buyer.

 

 

 

This boils down to a conflict between naked self-interest, and altruism. The problem I have with Qeltar on this issue is a matter of degree, he thinks the game should be very fair, I think it would be more fun with less constraints on player behavior, more Wild West-ish. The problem I have with you, Sly, is that you act like there's some kind of "bright line", where self-interest up to a certain point is always deserving of approbation, and then there are self-evident limits past which self-interest must be restricted by laws. But there is no such bright line, only degrees. If no line is drawn, then murder is acceptable. If you draw the line at overt physical harm, then death by starvation is fine and dandy, even on an island where one person owns 100% of the farmland and no one else owns any source of food, there's no obligation to feed the hungry. Would you say that they deserve to die, just as you said those scammed of their accounts deserved to lose them? Perhaps they do, but it's rather inhuman to advocate it, all the same.

[lord_british]

This is the sort of sick, twisted mentality that results in the rest of us being saddled with limits and restrictions. :(

 

 

 

Backwards logic. You called for the changes. I did. Therefore I fail to see how it's "My fault" :lol:

 

 

 

Assuming you meant to say "I didn't", his point is that the limits are put in by Jagex to protect the innocent against people like you. The funny thing is that I actually agree with you, not Qeltar, on this point, if I could just get you to quit making logical mistakes and stop phrasing your opinion in such an asshat-ish way we could make a united front in favor of price manipulation. If I could get you to admit that price manipulation is possible. None of which is likely.

 

 

 

ummm??? you're not serious? are you??? :shock: :evil:

[quitthegame]

 

However, the minute Jagex's measures against scammers started resulting in heavy fallout for the honest people, my support for Jagex stops dead. For exactly the same reason, by the way, that I supported them originally - punish the guilty, not the innocent, and punishing the guilty does not justify you in collateral damage to the innocent in the process.

 

 

 

This is ridiculous. Taken literally, this prohibits any punishment or preventative action, anywhere, ever. There is always uncertainty, there is always collateral damage. Putting that aside, none of the changes Jagex has made recently really justifies terms like fallout and collateral damage, do they? The worst off someone can be is that they no longer have fun playing RS, and unsubscribe. No matter what Jagex's motives are, it's their game, if you don't like it don't play it. [Yes I'm aware you already quit, now if you'd only also quit comparing changing an online game to actual warfare with guns and missiles, we'd all be happy] If their only reason were that they just didn't like staking and pking and merchanting, and scammers weren't even involved, your language would still be unjustified. They are under no obligation to provide you with those things.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jagex does not have the highest weighted opinion. It's opinion does not outweigh you, me, or a level 3 noob. Everyone has an equal right to an opinion.

 

 

 

You don't have a RIGHT to an opinion. You have an opinion. Since you don't have a right to an opinion, everyone's right to an opinion cannot be equal. Well, it can be equally zero I guess, but let's move on. I will explain in more detail. Do you have a right to be human? No, because the statement doesn't make sense. A human is human, to additionally say you have a right to be human means nothing at all. Do you have a right to be sentient? Well, since you're reading this, you are sentient, but it just doesn't make sense to call it a right. Rights are actions that people agree should be legally required to allow, but having an opinion is not an action that could be legally forbidden, as it's not something that one can control. "I have the right to be made of matter, and to be above absolute zero." Both conditions that will certainly be true, but not a very useful enumeration of rights, to be sure. Anyway, now that we've settled that, I'll just state that although everyone has an opinion, some opinions are better than other opinions, and some opinions are backed by more force than others. If you disagree, there would be no reason to reply, since if all opinions are equal than discussion is pointless. So, I'll expect you not to waste words replying.

 

 

 

 

 

Jagex has legal and physical options to do certain things, we have legal and physical options to do other things. Their opinion is not "heavier" than ours in any way - rather, the fact we play RS (and pay them if we are P2P) connotes that we both voluntary accept each others positions, or, alternatively, if either side does not accept the other (such as us disagreeing with the rules, or Jagex disagreeing with our behavior), the contract is terminated by either us or Jagex.

 

 

 

This is nutty. They have many more options than we do. They could change millions of things about the game. They could change the terms of the membership agreement. They set the price. This is how and why their opinion is "heavier"-- because it's their game.

 

 

 

But please don't ever say that their opinion is "heavier" than anyone elses, because it is not.

 

 

 

If you don't think your opinion is superior, why are you asking others to abide by it? Ridiculous.

 

 

 

Now, if I really wanted to get down and dirty, I'd argue about the primary target audience of young children who are too young to realize the way Jagex itself is exploiting their client-provider relationship, which most comparable rational adults would not find nearly as acceptable. In this way, I could say that Jagex advertising to young children is very very similar to those "exploitation" merchants you described, who exploit a player's gullibility to get them to pay you money. :twisted:

 

 

 

Yea, of this world's many evils, Jagex cracking down on RWT is definitely up there... :boohoo: Let's write the UN, see what they can do.

 

 

 

 

 

ummm??? you're not serious? are you??? :shock: :evil:

 

 

 

kinda :P

[anonymouse_]

Damn, so many long posts, so much to read lol

 

Time to stock up on some hats 8-)

 

 

 

That's exactly what NOT to do right now. :roll:

Alright :wink:

[Sly_Wizard]

I can't be bothered trying to quote Flammacor's entire post :lol:

 

 

 

1.) Amazing how you woefully misinterpret my post while accusing me of misinterpreting someone else's post :lol:

 

 

 

Anyway, I'd like to point out how irrelevent these talks about 'morality' that you so frequently bring up are, as they're completely subjective and often times have no basis in fact other than "It's not the way I play, therefore it's wrong". Plus they're usually used to try to make me seen as immoral and therefore inherently wrong, also known as an ad hominem. Just saying, since you're sooo big on Latin terms and logical fallacies.

 

 

 

The irony here is that you call my arguments non-sequitur while ignoring the arguments you so blindly defend. Generally I try to avoid arguments such as these but, since you started, most-- Scratch that-- All of Qeltar's arguments are post hoc. That is, they suffer from a faulty cause and effect relationship. He commonly assumes that because A occurs that B must logically follow A (Or, put another way, if A then B) which is fine so long as:

 

 

 

1.) Both A and B are true (Sound).

 

2.) A is false and B is true (Unsound).

 

3.) Both A and B are false (Unsound).

 

 

 

Typically one only needs to point out why either A, B or both A and B are untrue to prove these types of arguments wrong, but it's pretty hard to argue against Qeltar when all you get in response is something like "Nuh-uh!" or "You're wrong" or "Everyone knows it" in response :wall:.

 

 

 

*Shrugs*

 

 

 

Oh well... Just one of those things you've gotta' live with :)

 

 

 

...But I digress.

 

 

 

Here is Qeltar's argument taken from a few posts above---> *Some* merchants made money this way. Others made it through deception, dishonesty, taking advantage of others' ignorance, price manipulation and worse.

 

 

 

I pointed out two things wrong with this argument:

 

 

 

1.) The misappropriation of blame which I explained and

 

2.) The concept of price manipulation within Runescape, which I also explained.

 

 

 

You then turned that rebuttal around into this:

 

 

 

A: people naturally screw each other

 

D: people should do what they naturally do (This is never stated, so I list it as an implied premise)

 

E: people should try to screw each other.

 

 

 

You then proceeded to refute your own constructed argument and then claimed to have refuted my initial argument even though you never quite touched on the things I initially stated. Ugh... Yeah. Since you're big on logical fallacies, I'll let you figure out which one you just committed there.

 

 

 

2.) Oi vey. It seems to be as if you're a bit confused, so lemme' help you out. Price manipulation, as defined by Jagex, is collaberating with other players in order to raise the market price of a good or goods. Within the confines on Runescape, it's impossible to do this for the reasons I've thus pointed out (No group of people are able to effectively 'corner' the market because any and all players are capable of getting a particular resource by themselves and thusly are able to undercut players who try to sell for higher than market equilibrium). Selling your item for higher than market value is not price manipulation, as A.) It occurs in the absence of collaberation and B.) Has no overall effect on market prices. That's what we call effective merchanting (Buy low/sell high) and is the premise upon which all mercantile practices are based. Understand? Probably not, so let me give you a real life example of price manipulation. Look up Archer Daniels Midland in regards to lysine oil-- That would be a textbook definition of price fixing. Collaberation between producers followed by a simulataneous rise in prices. Or, to summarize:

 

 

 

No collaberation = No rise in market prices = No price manipulation.

 

 

 

Hence why price manipulation doesn't happen in Runescape. It's simple! :D

 

 

 

Oh, and the sky isn't blue. It's violet. Just pointing that out to you ;)

 

 

 

Anywho, congratulations on being able to cite the textbook definition of economics. As you once said to me, everyone knows that and is therefore an irrelevency. You know... Didn't Qeltar write an article based solely on economic principles applied to the Runescape? What happened to your "You can't apply economics to Runescape" speak? Despite your best efforts to prove otherwise, economics can be applied to different venues, whether they be a game or a real life. Unless, of course, you're operating under the assumption that Runescape's economy-- Which Jagex has alluded to as being conscious of multiple times-- Doesn't exist.

 

 

 

...But I'm just saying.

 

 

 

(Sorry for the delayed response. Had to take care of something.)

[Sly_Wizard]

Yes, you're the unqualified master of predicting things four minutes after they've been posted. Take another trolling star out of petty cash.

 

 

 

Get real, Qeltar. When I started typing out my response, your response wasn't there. You just happened to finish typing before I did. Even so, I don't know why this comes as a total shock to you. There hasn't been a single thread in which you haven't called me amoral, immoral, sadistic, psychopathic etc. etc. etc.

 

 

 

It's to the point where I fully expect it at one time or another :thumbsup:

[quitthegame]

 

1.) Amazing how you woefully misinterpret my post while accusing me of misinterpreting someone else's post :lol:

 

 

 

No, if you misinterpret every one of my posts then it's to be expected that you'd think that.

 

 

 

Anyway, I'd like to point out how irrelevent these talks about 'morality' that you so frequently bring up are, as they're completely subjective and often times have no basis in fact other than "It's not the way I play, therefore it's wrong". Plus they're usually used to try to make me seen as immoral and therefore inherently wrong, also known as an ad hominem. Just saying, since you're sooo big on Latin terms and logical fallacies.

 

 

 

How am I the one that brought up the subject of morality in this thread? Anyway, I challenge you to quote one ad hominem argument I've made. Just one.

 

 

 

The irony here is that you call my arguments non-sequitur while ignoring the arguments you so blindly defend.

 

 

 

How am I blindly defending them? I pointed out in my last post that my viewpoint is closer to yours on Qeltar in this discussion, but I end up arguing with you instead because you include nonsensical arguments and phrase things callously.

 

 

 

 

 

Here is Qeltar's argument taken from a few posts above---> *Some* merchants made money this way. Others made it through deception, dishonesty, taking advantage of others' ignorance, price manipulation and worse.

 

 

 

WTF! That's not an argument at all! That's merely a categorization of types of merchants. How can anyone even talk to you, if you can't even understand that?!? An argument leads from a collection of premises, to a conclusion. There's no conclusion in the quote above, it's just an isolated premise. ... :XD:

 

 

 

I pointed out two things wrong with this argument:

 

 

 

1.) The misappropriation of blame which I explained and

 

2.) The concept of price manipulation within Runescape, which I also explained.

 

 

 

You then turned that rebuttal around into this:

 

 

 

[rebuttal of #1 here]

 

 

 

You then proceeded to refute your own constructed argument and then claimed to have refuted my initial argument even though you never quite touched on the things I initially stated. Ugh... Yeah. Since you're big on logical fallacies, I'll let you figure out which one you just committed there.

 

 

 

huh? Are you daft? I was very clear, I quoted your response #1, I responded to it, then I quoted your response #2, and then responded to it. Now you are apparently under the belief that my rebuttal to your point #1 should include a representation of your point #2, or I'm committing a logical fallacy. :XD: It's not that I expect an intelligent reply from you at this point, but I must admit I'm surprised that you couldn't even keep that straight.

 

 

 

2.) Oi vey. It seems to be as if you're a bit confused, so lemme' help you out. Price manipulation, as defined by Jagex, is collaberating with other players in order to raise the market price of a good or goods. Within the confines on Runescape, it's impossible to do this for the reasons I've thus pointed out (No group of people are able to effectively 'corner' the market because any and all players are capable of getting a particular resource by themselves and thusly are able to undercut players who try to sell for higher than market equilibrium).

 

 

 

You are wrong. I already told you why. I'm sorry that you aren't smarter but I'm not explaining it again. People come on these forums and explain how they successfully engaged in price manipulation every few months, if your theories disagree with the facts then your theories are wrong. Live with it.

 

 

 

 

 

Oh, and the sky isn't blue. It's violet. Just pointing that out to you ;)

 

 

 

Here's a quote from the local science museum on why the sky isn't violet: "Violet light has an even shorter wavelength than blue light: It scatters even more than blue light does. So why isn't the sky violet? Because there is just not enough of it. The sun puts out much more blue light than violet light, so most of the scattered light in the sky is blue. " Another source I read has an additional and more complicated explanation involving the different photoreceptivities of the three different kinds of cones, it's kinda involved look it up yourself :P

 

 

 

Anywho, congratulations on being able to cite the textbook definition of economics. As you once said to me, everyone knows that and is therefore an irrelevency. You know... Didn't Qeltar write an article based solely on economic principles applied to the Runescape? What happened to your "You can't apply economics to Runescape" speak?

 

 

 

Perhaps I never said it. Maybe you should look it up, then you could misunderstand it AGAIN! :D