Kid gets robbed over RSGP

[pulli23]

defended property from predatorial animals?

 

Say what??? Those animals have all the right to be there, you don't shoot them simply because they come to your "property". Wild animals are scared from humans, they only go to humans if it is their last option to survive & find food. You ought to blame your neighbourhood for YOU destroying their hunting grounds.

 

hunting on its own for "fun" isn't humane at all & should actually be a crime (which in civilized countries it is), same for ANYTHING real gun related. Only professionals should work with weaponry; and they should be constantly screened & only use the weaponry in their professional environment. (And never should act alone to always keep a peer reviewing actions).

 

 

You're calling me "crazy" for actually wishing other countries became as sensible as most european countries finally did in the last 30 years? I guess you're still gloryfying the cowboys as bringers of freedom?

[Blake]

A gun is bad, and anyone owning one should be put in jail immediatelly. The only reason people have it is for hurting others: so by owning one you immediatelly show that you aim to hurt others & attempt murder/dangerous wounds. As such the gun always be prosecuted for that. Simply for owning a gun.

One of the stupidest things I've heard. My dad has a 9mm pistol and a .22 rifle, and we went up to the desert and shot some pop cans and boxes the other day. You really think that because he has a gun, he "immediately shows that he aims to hurt others & attempt murder/dangerous wounds"??

 

 

About overcharging for the GP, if I was going to buy some, I think I'd be more comfortable buying off craigslist in person than from some gold seller. In-person and craigslist seems like they'd charge more for that.

[Kimberly]

It seems some people misread "General Discussion" as "Off Topic."

 

This is not the place to debate gun laws. If you want to do that, there are several topics currently in Off Topic doing just that. I will remove any post that continues this asinine branch of discussion. Stay on topic.

[stonewall337]

Well "the community" are idiots. If you asked everyone in the country if they'd like to pay tax yes or no, the majority would say no. But the country can't survive with noone paying tax.

 

For the record: I was one of the 9% saying no to free trade.

 

That is an excellent point. Steve Jobs said something along the lines of "It's really hard to design products by focus groups. A lot of times, people don't know what they want until you show it to them."

 

Oh and let us not forget this

 

"“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.”

 

That being said, I prefer free trade over the system we had before. People being scammed is normally a result of their own stupidity. Same for being hacked. That and the fact that Jagex doesn't have a system to restore stolen items (like other games have) and their report system is a joke, coupled with the fact that their CS is shit are the real roots of the problem.

 

Scamming is far less common in WOW for that reason. If I trade someone 50 herbs to make me flasks, they'll give them back, because they know I can report them, and get them back anyway. I've NEVER ONCE had a "trust" transaction go bad in WOW, when paying for goods or services. The one time there was a dispute about a "grey" part, a GM moderated and fixed it.

 

So really, the problem is more on Jagex than anyone else IMO.

[Warlover]

 

Scamming is far less common in WOW for that reason. If I trade someone 50 herbs to make me flasks, they'll give them back, because they know I can report them, and get them back anyway. I've NEVER ONCE had a "trust" transaction go bad in WOW, when paying for goods or services. The one time there was a dispute about a "grey" part, a GM moderated and fixed it.

 

 

I think that says more about the communities of WoW and RS than the respective companies policies on returning items.

[Kimberly]

 

Scamming is far less common in WOW for that reason. If I trade someone 50 herbs to make me flasks, they'll give them back, because they know I can report them, and get them back anyway. I've NEVER ONCE had a "trust" transaction go bad in WOW, when paying for goods or services. The one time there was a dispute about a "grey" part, a GM moderated and fixed it.

 

 

I think that says more about the communities of WoW and RS than the respective companies policies on returning items.

 

Not in this case. This aspect of the community is shaped (or controlled) by the policies of the company.

[Yoko Kurama]

With regards to OT, it's somewhat disheartening but not exactly surprising.

 

 

-------

Scamming is far less common in WOW for that reason. If I trade someone 50 herbs to make me flasks, they'll give them back, because they know I can report them, and get them back anyway. I've NEVER ONCE had a "trust" transaction go bad in WOW, when paying for goods or services. The one time there was a dispute about a "grey" part, a GM moderated and fixed it.

 

 

I think that says more about the communities of WoW and RS than the respective companies policies on returning items.

 

Not in this case. This aspect of the community is shaped (or controlled) by the policies of the company.

 

Correct. Jagex has a bullshit no-refund policy which is strictly enforced. You do not get items back even if you manage to prove that the perpetrator was guilty, and even if he gets banned, the items leave the game, rather than be returned to their rightful owners. In fact, in the past, even when glitches have caused item loss, including particularly egregious ones that were Jagex's fault, Jagex has still maintained this policy. So it depends completely on the company.

 

--------

 

Mercifull wrote:

 

Well "the community" are idiots. If you asked everyone in the country if they'd like to pay tax yes or no, the majority would say no. But the country can't survive with noone paying tax.

For the record: I was one of the 9% saying no to free trade.

 

WTF do taxes have to do with any of this? Taxes are a necessity to maintain the modern standard of living and various services and functions of the modern state; most sane people recognize this and support it. The Grand Exchange and the various draconian controls that Jagex placed on RS, and their general laziness in adjusting prices(something they promised but never actually did) are not necessary to maintain RS. Scamming and hacking are horrible, but the solution is not to coddle us to the point where people can't even trade on their own terms, all for the sake of preventing some people from getting scammed.

 

----

 

With regards to RWT bring immoral: I say nonsense. There's nothing immoral in deciding to sell off the product of the time/energy/effort you have invested into the game, regardless of the bullshit disclaimer you sign which hands Jagex ownership. I have never RWTed and don't ever intend to, but I see nothing immoral about it. It's unfair in a sense, but not immoral. Besides, since Jagex itself RWTs, I am not going to blame the players for selling off what is rightfully theirs any ways.

[Alg]

^ Would it be better if he did actual burglary for that money? Theft is theft.

 

Besides, since Jagex itself RWTs, I am not going to blame the players for selling off what is rightfully theirs any ways.

Not even when the side effects spoil the game for the rest of us? Like scamming/hacking, the fact that gambling clans are omnipresent, the fact that it's has led to bots monopolizing every money making method that isn't staking, and so on? RWT typically isn't some honest enterprise where a poor college student sells off items he worked hard for.

 

The biggest problem with the game right now is that everyone is so damn self-centered. There's no community, there's a collection of greedy individuals justifying their actions by saying that the host is worse.

[Logdotzip]

Gambling clans shouldn't really bother you like the way they do, they are for the most part only on world 2, or exist in small varying amounts on other worlds. You basically have to go out of your way to be bothered by a gambling clan. Who cares what they're making, doesn't, or at least shouldn't, really affect your gameplay. It's emergent gameplay, let them do what the f*** they want.

 

But that's neither here nor there.

[Fallstar]

If you don't bet, how are gambling clans ruining anything for you?

W67 had just as many spam bots advertising various floor selling fcs, but people don't seem to complain about that.

 

If you do bet, go learn percentages again and read the part where you have to be 13+ to play this game.

[Syd]

If you don't bet, how are gambling clans ruining anything for you?

W67 had just as many spam bots advertising various floor selling fcs, but people don't seem to complain about that.

 

If you do bet, go learn percentages again and read the part where you have to be 13+ to play this game.

 

Well the gambling clans in long run transfer the cash from poor to the rich. Which makes rich people able to afford items with higher and higher price, while the gap between poor and rich grow and grow. Of course this is somewhat negated by gambling hosts real world trading the cash back to the poor. Which creates a circle. However, as the gap between rich and poor grows bigger, it gets harder and harder for legitimate players to obtain many items (see: rares). That leads people to buying cash from RWT or gambling. Which just eventually makes things worse and worse.

[Yoko Kurama]

^ Would it be better if he did actual burglary for that money? Theft is theft.

 

If that is referring to me, I don't support theft, in-game or outside of it. I don't regard RWT as necessarily theft, do you always consider it thus? My comment on the matter was in response to the claim that RWT is immoral, which I don't think is *always* the case.

 

 

 

Not even when the side effects spoil the game for the rest of us? Like scamming/hacking, the fact that gambling clans are omnipresent, the fact that it's has led to bots monopolizing every money making method that isn't staking, and so on? RWT typically isn't some honest enterprise where a poor college student sells off items he worked hard for.

 

 

I should make clear that I don't support the wholesale type of RWT that bots, and gold sites engage in. What I had in mind(but did not make clear) is the scenario where a long time player decides to quit and tries to get a little bit of money for their investment in the game. I have always begrudged Jagex's "we own your account" line on the matter. I don't think this sort of RWT harms the game and it's a sort of autonomy that people should have. It's the same thing with giving your account away when you quit, I think players should be able to do that much. As for the people who run gold sites, bots farm and so far, they are indeed scum because their activities have a very negative effect on the community.

 

The biggest problem with the game right now is that everyone is so damn self-centered. There's no community, there's a collection of greedy individuals justifying their actions by saying that the host is worse.

 

I would agree with this. When the law enforcers themselves become corrupt, it leads to all sorts of decadence.

[Alg]

If that is referring to me, I don't support theft, in-game or outside of it. I don't regard RWT as necessarily theft, do you always consider it thus? My comment on the matter was in response to the claim that RWT is immoral, which I don't think is *always* the case.

Not referring to you. The post I was actually responding to got removed :razz: .

Either way, it was about how the RSGP being involved doesn't change the fact that he robbed someone at gunpoint for the equivalent of a few thousand dollars.

 

I should make clear that I don't support the wholesale type of RWT that bots, and gold sites engage in. What I had in mind(but did not make clear) is the scenario where a long time player decides to quit and tries to get a little bit of money for their investment in the game. I have always begrudged Jagex's "we own your account" line on the matter. I don't think this sort of RWT harms the game and it's a sort of autonomy that people should have. It's the same thing with giving your account away when you quit, I think players should be able to do that much. As for the people who run gold sites, bots farm and so far, they are indeed scum because their activities have a very negative effect on the community.

I'd agree there, it's just that so few players seem to do that. Instead, you have guys like Smoking Mils, who essentially ran a Ponzi scheme and sold the profits, and you have people that could easily be called gambling addicts that are buying back their virtual losses with real money. It comes back to the change in the community; everyone wants to win, and the shortcuts are there. It's a problem when it cuts into the game for players that don't want to use a shortcut - which has been the case for something like six years now.

 

If there was some way to legalize RWT for the honest players and remove the dishonest ones, I'd be all for it. I'm just not sure if that's possible without some heavy changes to the game itself.

[Blyaunte]

I wonder though if the gun was even real. Why call it "realistic looking"?

 

You'd be surprised as to how "real" BB guns look these days:

 

 

http://http://www.replicaairguns.com/posts/tag/hk-usp

[Sir_Squab]

If you don't bet, how are gambling clans ruining anything for you?

W67 had just as many spam bots advertising various floor selling fcs, but people don't seem to complain about that.

 

If you do bet, go learn percentages again and read the part where you have to be 13+ to play this game.

 

Well the gambling clans in long run transfer the cash from poor to the rich. Which makes rich people able to afford items with higher and higher price, while the gap between poor and rich grow and grow. Of course this is somewhat negated by gambling hosts real world trading the cash back to the poor. Which creates a circle. However, as the gap between rich and poor grows bigger, it gets harder and harder for legitimate players to obtain many items (see: rares). That leads people to buying cash from RWT or gambling. Which just eventually makes things worse and worse.

Come up with an example other then rares. Rares don't have any impact on gameplay* and really are for players to either invest in and hope they go up in price, or for the snobbyness factor.

 

*By gameplay I mean they don't help in any combat or skilling scenarios.

[Cheefoo]

So badass.

[Lord Paul]

I wonder though if the gun was even real. Why call it "realistic looking"?

 

You'd be surprised as to how "real" BB guns look these days:

 

 

http://www.replicaai...osts/tag/hk-usp

 

I am indeed surprised. :o

I usually picture BB guns as a pellet gun (i.e., a pump action rifle). Never really thought of them as a pistol, ironically enough.

 

When I first read the passage, I was under the impression that the gun was a realistic looking toy. Not anymore.

[Platinum_Myr]

If you don't bet, how are gambling clans ruining anything for you?

W67 had just as many spam bots advertising various floor selling fcs, but people don't seem to complain about that.

 

If you do bet, go learn percentages again and read the part where you have to be 13+ to play this game.

 

Well the gambling clans in long run transfer the cash from poor to the rich. Which makes rich people able to afford items with higher and higher price, while the gap between poor and rich grow and grow. Of course this is somewhat negated by gambling hosts real world trading the cash back to the poor. Which creates a circle. However, as the gap between rich and poor grows bigger, it gets harder and harder for legitimate players to obtain many items (see: rares). That leads people to buying cash from RWT or gambling. Which just eventually makes things worse and worse.

Come up with an example other then rares. Rares don't have any impact on gameplay* and really are for players to either invest in and hope they go up in price, or for the snobbyness factor.

 

*By gameplay I mean they don't help in any combat or skilling scenarios.

 

Top of the line armor (nex, elysian/divine spirit shields). Not everyone has hundreds of millions of gp. Even with the "standard" gp rates of things like farming and mtk, it still takes a long time to get that much gp. Sure you can save up over a long period of time but that is an easy way to buy advantage. Also several of the fastest skilling methods are very expensive as well.

[jasignhagj]

Am I the only one that's annoyed that the kid who was selling the gp (Dokler) got away scot-free?

 

He even goes as far as to casually discuss what he uses the profit for. How bloody arrogant can you get. He's as much at fault as the "robber".

 

He did nothing illegal. As much as RWT might annoy you, it isn't a crime.

[Low C]

I had one of those bb gun pistols and mine was powered off co2 and it shot through metal siding no problems. I bet it would hurt like a son of a [bleep] to be shot with it point-blank especially over some gp, that would hurt your feelings that's for sure.

[stonewall337]

Regulating the theft of virtual goods.

 

http://www.law.emory.../57.5/Arias.pdf

 

[hide=Article]

"Despite the daily occurrence of theft within MMORPGs, this type of theft

remains unregulated in the United States.This Comment takes the position

that not only should the United States prosecute the theft of virtual goods under

current theft penal statutes but also that such an approach is desperately

needed, given the economic prominence of virtual goods and the increasing

rise of virtual good thefts"

 

"Property is defined in the MPC (Model Penal Code) as “anything of value, including . . .

tangible or intangible personal property.”

The MPC Commentary, clarifying

this definition, characterizes property as “anything that is part of one person’s

wealth and that another person can appropriate.”Under this definition,

virtual goods in online video games are protectable property because they

possess value (as determined by external markets such as eBay), are intangible

personal property, and can be appropriated by another person.

Originally, only tangible property was subject to criminal theft under the

common law.

But recent state criminal statutes, modeled after the MPC,

define property as “anything of value,” including both tangible and intangible

property"

 

 

In interpreting these statues, courts, for the most part, have found that

computer code, although intangible, is of value and thus subject to theft

statutes. In Hancock v. State, for example, a Texas appellate court held that

codes of computer programs were subject to theft because, under the Texas

theft statute, “‘property,’ as used in relation to the crime of theft, includes . . .

all writings of every description, provided such property possesses any

ascertainable value.” Intangible virtual goods fit nicely within the Hancock

classification of property because they consist of computer code. Thus, under

that premise, intangible virtual goods should be protected

 

 

Most scholars assume that virtual goods are the subject of intellectual

property, rather than personal property. Yet, as this Comment demonstrates:

(1) virtual goods more closely resemble chattels than intellectual property; and

(2) only rights inherent to chattels can properly protect virtual goods from

theft.

 

ALSO

http://scholarship.l...06&context=dltr

 

 

These EULAs all state

that the virtual items created by the game are exclusively the property of the

game operators, and that the game operators can take away the virtual items

without any explanation or reason.

A more definitive property regime to regulate the trade of virtual

items and protect the rights of players and game operators would solve these

emerging problems. This iBrief will discuss what regime is best suited for

virtual items by analyzing the different property-regime models that might

apply to virtual items in Part I. Then, in Part II, this iBrief will present

some policy arguments for granting property rights. In looking at these

arguments, this iBrief makes the implicit assumption that society would

want virtual markets to exist, and that the production of virtual items adds

value to society.

The EULAs seem to clearly suggest

that the game operators have exclusive control over the game itself. These

form contracts, however, have never been unbreakable, and there is a great

policy argument that the virtual items would have never existed without the

players either. The game operators cannot generate a thriving marketplace

for virtual items without players to populate the game and create the

demand that gives the virtual items a monetary value.

 

 

A more definitive property regime to regulate the trade of virtual

items and protect the rights of players and game operators would solve these

emerging problems. This iBrief will discuss what regime is best suited for

virtual items by analyzing the different property-regime models that might

apply to virtual items in Part I

 

 

Under a labor theory, even if the game operators created the

original virtual world where the coveted item is created, it would be strange

not to grant the player who spent a year finding the virtual item any rights in

the virtual item.

 

The player’s amount of effort and labor is certainly not negligible.

Many question whether the gamer contributes any “labor” as they are, after

all, playing a game.

However, professional athletes are also paid to “play”

a game, and no one questions whether their efforts constitute labor.

Furthermore, recognizing a succinct virtual property rights for the

players would benefit the game operators. If virtual items had no real-life

monetary value to me, presumably many gamers would choose to do

something else with their time since people are always incurring an opportunity cost by choosing one thing over another.

If the players are

never able to recognize the monetary value of the virtual items they farm,

this creates an incentive to stop producing the virtual items, which is to say

that this produces an incentive for players to stop playing the game.If

gamers are not allowed to claim that time spent to produce items worth real

money simply because they take pleasure in playing their games, then

anyone who enjoys what they do for a living should relinquish their

paychecks.

 

 

Scholarly sources to present a case. As I am friends with the author of the first article, she expressly stated her opinion that virtual goods SHOULD both be viewed as property, and that neither is any EULA 100% binding, nor does everything virtual in a game belong only to the creator of that game, however, there is a lack of firm common law to set this precedent.

 

Oh and here: http://www.abc.net.a...12/s3466221.htm

 

JAS PUREWAL: One individual had taken without authorisation some poker chips from a Zynga poker game and had attempted to sell that for profit to third parties.

 

TIMOTHY MCDONALD: Jas Purewal is an interactive entertainment lawyer with the firm Osborne Clarke in London.

 

JAS PUREWAL: The criminal judge effectively found that those poker chips were property and therefore they were capable of being stolen.

 

Even though the terms and conditions said they are not property, the judge found that because people put value in them they must have some sort of legal status. [/hide]

 

So in light of a lack of clear legal precedent, I will continue to view all my accounts, and all my virtual items, as my property, to do with as I please.

Edited August 14, 2012 by Kimberly
Added hide tags

[Teddmn]

I'm waiting on the after-school special on the dangers of playing Runescape now.

[Yoko Kurama]

Not referring to you. The post I was actually responding to got removed :razz: .

 

Ah, ok, misunderstanding on my part.

 

 

 

Either way, it was about how the RSGP being involved doesn't change the fact that he robbed someone at gunpoint for the equivalent of a few thousand dollars.

 

 

Agreed, this should be treated very seriously. There's just no excuse for it. Particularly with regards to doing it at gunpoint(feigned or not), and doing so for essentially thousands of dollars worth. I would be inclined to just lock up the kid(the robber), but that's just me. He's not that far from actually robbing someone at (a real) gunpoint; he seems like a jerk with a problems.

 

 

 

I'd agree there, it's just that so few players seem to do that. Instead, you have guys like Smoking Mils, who essentially ran a Ponzi scheme and sold the profits, and you have people that could easily be called gambling addicts that are buying back their virtual losses with real money. It comes back to the change in the community; everyone wants to win, and the shortcuts are there. It's a problem when it cuts into the game for players that don't want to use a shortcut - which has been the case for something like six years now.

 

 

Agreed. Not to get too off-topic, but I always thought that Jagex would have been well justified in handing out massive bans to merching clan leaders, like Smoking Mils and just shutting down their operations. It's just a crooked con game, those sorts of things, there's just nothing more to it.

 

 

If there was some way to legalize RWT for the honest players and remove the dishonest ones, I'd be all for it. I'm just not sure if that's possible without some heavy changes to the game itself.

 

Yes, implementation is a significant concern, and I am not sure it's really all that practical. I was thinking about it theoretically.

[Donnie]

Even if its decided that you dont own virtual items the perpetrator still commited a crime.

 

For example it obviously isn't legal to get a gun and go up to someone and tell them to smile or you will shoot.

[Yoko Kurama]

Even if its decided that you dont own virtual items the perpetrator still commited a crime.

 

For example it obviously isn't legal to get a gun and go up to someone and tell them to smile or you will shoot.

 

I don't think anyone who understands MMORPGs or plays them feels that such activities aren't a crime(and this isn't the first time this has happened either). It's usually the people or commentators in the popular media that whenever something like happens lose their collective shit and go "Aww' shucks! I dun get it, it's just a game, it's not reealll dammit!"Dem nerds, they's gotta get a life!".