Do you mean what I personally see as right and wrong, or what I feel is right or wrong by other people in terms of the impact it has on them? That's a bit of a "when did you last beat your wife" question.

What I mean is, does your personal conscience make decsions that take into account the feelings, well-being and welfare of others?

Given my occupation, yes. I would find it very difficult if I made decisions which only served myself, wouldn't I?

 

Take the Palestianian conflict, for example. Do I see the way Palestinians feel they've been trodden on throughout the course of human history as "right"--yes. Do I feel they have a right to kill people over that--no. Killing in the name of that cause may be morally right, if you're Palestinian or support Palestine, but it's not ethically right because purposefully setting out to kill someone any context is wrong, unless there's very extreme mitigating circumstances (eg, a last resort in self-defence).

 

You need to separate, and clearly define, morality from ethics if you want continue anywhere in this discussion. What is right in one will never be necessarily right in the other.

 

Hence, both you and LDZ can have differing opinions on the morality of RWT.

Given my occupation, yes. I would find it very difficult if I made decisions which only served myself, wouldn't I?

 

I am deleting the political reference, although I find your comment fascinating and would happily engage it in another thread or at another time, but this isn't the place for it because I feel it's going too far off on a tangent, if you don't mind.

 

Also, I am about to run out of time on here today, as I usually dally with this forum from work and it's late in the work day and I want to go home, but let me ask you this:

 

 

Why does your personal conscience take the effects that your choices have upon others into context? Why should it matter?

 

Ciao for now folks, I will be back some other time ...

It doesn't matter if I personally condone RWT or not.

 

Actually, it makes all the difference in the world …

 

I've not openly stated either.

 

A childish evasion but your answer will be most telling:

 

Do you or do you not support rule breaking within the game of Runescape?

 

Yes or no?

 

------------------- ===== --------------------

 

How interesting. Tell me, when you signed up to play the game itself, you were asked to agree to the terms and the conditions thereof, were you not? And you did agree to the terms and conditions, did you not?

Correct, I did, and I have abided by these said rules, apart from possibly the occasional swearing in game that got me in trouble.

 

However, just because I agree to these rules does not mean I agree WITH them.

 

If I were in a position to makes thousands of dollars a month doing relatively no harm to others (except maybe spoiling little Billy's time on some MMO), I would, though.

 

I see, and in real life, did you formally agree to any terms and conditions -- you know -- to abide by the laws/rules of your country of residence?

 

Probably not, but I simply want to ask this question for the purposes of clarification ...

 

 

 

As far as rule breaking in the game, I can tell you right now that a large majority of Runescapians do it, and why, simply because they can. As far a social contracts go in your argument and what we all signed up for, well that went out the window a long time ago.

 

Examples are quite simple, among them are these few that come to mind effortlessly, the use of inappropriate language is one, when I initially joined it was a no no but instead of muting players for indecent language, Jagex brought in the profanity filter, I swear on game not to a huge extent and I do have my own personal intolerances to language used in game but if you don't want to hear it , then use the filter, if you don't want to then don't complain about the language, So using your argument of social contract with Jagex, Jagex changed the terms. Another one was that Jagex wanted to remove gambling from Runescape, so they bring in SOF, which is laughable, but also it generates more income for Jagex, so technically Jagex is using that desire or need in someone to who has a weakness and profiting off it. I think your term 'social contract' just diminished further in your argument. The list does not end there, broken promises on the side of Jagex has left many players disillusioned on this game, I being one, I love to play it, I am now at the point that when Jagex says they will remove something from the game which is more harmful that a player selling gold to a company, they just simply TALK it up, there will not be any real changes, much like when they removed Wildy and Free trade, the moment they did it, it was back on the drawing board to bring it back when they needed the advertising push to place the Jagex company back onto the public forum to promote their games much like the 200m player countdown. Lets face it, we are all being manipulated and the contract I signed up for was voided within a few months, so I look at it totally differently now.

 

Lets face it, we are just pawns in their game play and as long as we keep paying the membership, buying coins and spinning that wheel, you can talk about social contracts and nit picking about rule breakages and social contracts until the end of time. Attacking one persons view on rwt is more childish than the initial comment, throwing in social contracts and rule breaking doesn't mean anything. The problem is not someone's personal view on rules on a game, everyone is entitled to their own personal opinion, I have mine and I wouldn't mind at all if Jagex brought into their Solomon store some kind of gp transfer. And if it personally does not bother you in the slightest what anyone does on the game, why argue a point which will not receive and answer

Why does your personal conscience take the effects that your choices have upon others into context? Why should it matter?

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"

 

I'm not religious to any degree, but without that rule, interpersonal relationships on every level fall apart. Whether they're business contracts, or society as a whole.

 

You mentioned this was leading to a point... what is it?

It doesn't matter if I personally condone RWT or not.

 

Actually, it makes all the difference in the world …

 

I've not openly stated either.

 

A childish evasion but your answer will be most telling:

 

Do you or do you not support rule breaking within the game of Runescape?

 

Yes or no?

Get your copy and paste ready!

 

Jumping back to if the player needed the IRL cash - or even if I did - I most certainly would not discourage it. I would not expect anyone to try to live off of $400 in welfare cheques each month when they have billions in the RuneScape bank when selling, as I believe, has no negative impact on the game or the people that play it. Still waiting on your proof and examples that it does. Or are you, as you say, "talking out of your 'you know what'"?

 

I do not care if people sell their gold. It doesn't affect me or the people around me at all. People buying gold do contribute to ruining my game as they directly support the bots in-game - however, I'm not going to judge someone for buying their way ahead in a game when Jagex directly offers the same benefits. Jagex created that rule because they wanted the game to be fair for all players - so poor people IRL had the same benefits as the rich IRL. Now the rich can max in a matter of days with the Squeal of Fortune.

 

Do I encourage it? No. Do I understand why people do it? Yes. Do I care if people do it? No. Would I report any of my friends who do it? Not a chance in the world. Even if I was a Jagex moderator, I would never expect someone to put their in-game well-being over that of their real life.

Could somebody explain what you have been talking about in the pst 2 pages? Because I don't get it.

Since your post was liked by someone who shops at Lidl, and Lidl is a fantastic supermarket when you're a student like me, go on then...

 

Logdotzip (LDZ) claimed that real world trading (RWT)--by this we're talking about players buying off the big gold-selling websites rather than trading directly to each other--is only bad because Jagex say it's bad, and that if RWT was allowed to happen under RuneScape's rules, there wouldn't be any negative effect on other RuneScape players in reality. When it occurs against the rules currently, LDZ implies there are no real victims (see: victimless crime). Therefore, nobody can really claim that RWT is necessarily bad in all cases, if any at all.

 

Blyaunte has countered that by claiming that when LDZ ticked the box to say he agreed with RS's terms and conditions, he agreed in principle to follow those rules.

 

LDZ replied that just because he follows rules does not mean he agrees with them.

 

Logically, and for the sake of the natural flow in this argument, Blyaunte now needs to prove why RWT has a negative impact on other players and therefore why it shouldn't be allowed. Instead we've been talking about social contracts and personal conscience which most of us are struggling to understand the meaning of in relation to the original topic.

Oh, ok , ty :)

 

Well, a bad thing is that because of the increased amount of RWT'ing, nobody can really say if someone's achievements are really his achievements (= Has he bought the cash to get that buyable to 99 or not).

 

And of course we shouldn't do it, because rules are rules, no matter how retarded they are.

Instead we've been talking about social contracts and personal conscience which most of us are struggling to understand the meaning of in relation to the original topic.

 

Let us change that or change the title of this thread.

Making billions on runescape doesn't require computer skills, it requires you to click a seed. WAD was terrible with computers, he couldn't even figure out how to livestream with people guiding him through it.

 

There's also the fact that beyond top level executive jobs, banking, medicine and other lucrative careers, very few jobs pay as well as RS does for some of these people. For an fc owner for instance, they'd collect about $2k a week (6b or so) in weekly payments from their ranks without even hosting themselves.

 

If you had the choice between working 9-5 all week, and making triple that in an hour, which would you pick?

 

Who even cares if they're in poverty or not. It'd just be silly to turn that much money down.

Victimless crime or not, can't we say RWT ruins the integrity of the game? I wouldn't support it even if it wasn't against Jagex rules.

 

And don't bring up stupid shit like $400 a week welfare or making triple an hour. I'm talking strictly about Runescape.

I thought I already supplied the whole 'this effects people' point already.

 

Buying gold for real money messes up the supply by allowing people pay prices that they would not otherwise be willing to pay (above the reservation point). By removing the price barrier and allowing people to pay over the natural market price that would be defined by the economy operating as a closed system (ie, the RuneScape market as it would be without real world trading, with the bots or without, doesn't actually matter for my point) prices will rise to meet the price being offered, and will find a new point of balance higher than than what it should be.

 

This has an effect on every other player buying items in the affected markets by costing them more of their game money, and potentially forcing them to either buy gold themselves (costing them real money), or preventing them from being able to buy goods they would be able to afford if the market were the closed system it is supposed to be.

 

 

The long and the short of it is that the gold selling causes inflation in the high end markets, but leaves other markets unaffected. Prices go up, but proffits to not. Inflation is not harmful if income and expense rise at similar rates because one compensates for the other (and the being slightly out of sync is why low levels of inflation drive growth in real world economies), but when you have prices going up and income being the same as before, it makes the affected markets more relatively expensive.

 

This is (one of the reasons) why it affects other people.

[hide=Quote]

I thought I already supplied the whole 'this effects people' point already.

 

Buying gold for real money messes up the supply by allowing people pay prices that they would not otherwise be willing to pay (above the reservation point). By removing the price barrier and allowing people to pay over the natural market price that would be defined by the economy operating as a closed system (ie, the RuneScape market as it would be without real world trading, with the bots or without, doesn't actually matter for my point) prices will rise to meet the price being offered, and will find a new point of balance higher than than what it should be.

 

This has an effect on every other player buying items in the affected markets by costing them more of their game money, and potentially forcing them to either buy gold themselves (costing them real money), or preventing them from being able to buy goods they would be able to afford if the market were the closed system it is supposed to be.

 

 

The long and the short of it is that the gold selling causes inflation in the high end markets, but leaves other markets unaffected. Prices go up, but proffits to not. Inflation is not harmful if income and expense rise at similar rates because one compensates for the other (and the being slightly out of sync is why low levels of inflation drive growth in real world economies), but when you have prices going up and income being the same as before, it makes the affected markets more relatively expensive.

 

This is (one of the reasons) why it affects other people.[/hide]

I'm glad someone eventually got round to moving this argument forward. Thank-you.

I thought I already supplied the whole 'this effects people' point already.

 

Buying gold for real money messes up the supply by allowing people pay prices that they would not otherwise be willing to pay (above the reservation point). By removing the price barrier and allowing people to pay over the natural market price that would be defined by the economy operating as a closed system (ie, the RuneScape market as it would be without real world trading, with the bots or without, doesn't actually matter for my point) prices will rise to meet the price being offered, and will find a new point of balance higher than than what it should be.

 

This has an effect on every other player buying items in the affected markets by costing them more of their game money, and potentially forcing them to either buy gold themselves (costing them real money), or preventing them from being able to buy goods they would be able to afford if the market were the closed system it is supposed to be.

 

 

The long and the short of it is that the gold selling causes inflation in the high end markets, but leaves other markets unaffected. Prices go up, but proffits to not. Inflation is not harmful if income and expense rise at similar rates because one compensates for the other (and the being slightly out of sync is why low levels of inflation drive growth in real world economies), but when you have prices going up and income being the same as before, it makes the affected markets more relatively expensive.

 

This is (one of the reasons) why it affects other people.

 

As I've previously said though, players selling gold do not affect prices. You can assume demand is arbitrarily high. If 140B doesn't change the price per M by a single cent, what exactly will?

As I've previously said though, players selling gold do not affect prices. You can assume demand is arbitrarily high. If 140B doesn't change the price per M by a single cent, what exactly will?

 

What price are you referring to? price of gold per million? or prices of items? Price of gold is not what randox is talking about. He is talking about cost of goods.

 

Selling gold, whether by players or by bot-companies increases the cost of goods due to enabling more people to buy stuff they otherwise would not (since they can spend real world money) and therefor causes prices to rice to meet this increased demand. This demand would not exist if gold could not be bought, since a player wouldn't be able to infuse their character with more gp via buying.

 

Some people are arguing that it is "ok" ethically for a player to sell gold, because they aren't impacting the economy on as large a scale as other gold selling is (from large companies). Plenty of people here disagree with this viewpoint.

It's all a balancing act, as you have previously said. I don't want to get into hypotheticals, but since I don't know the inner-workings of a gold-selling I can only hypothesise. You may be right, and 140B is only a drop in an ocean, but you could also argue that it would be in the websites best interest to not drop the price.

 

A business would be trying to maximise profit. So if 140B was a large amount the company would have to balance: chance of getting banned (time to move the gold) and other gold companies dropping price, to maximise not only initial profit, but also future profit. The company may have decided bleeding off the gold was a better decision rather than trying to dump it. Although this is all just speculation.

 

I'm curious, how many players do you think sell gold to gold-selling sites? Now this is all just speculation but 6B/week is equivalent to ~71 bots earning 500k/hr running 24/7. Even if the company has a ten thousand bots running 24/7, 10 players earning 6b/week is still ~7% of their gold supplies, which isn't an negligble amount. I guess what I'm saying is do you really think players are only contributing a non-negligible amount to gold sellers?

 

I understand that 6B is an upper-limit, but I haven't taken into account banned bots and mules, and bot downtime.

As I've previously said though, players selling gold do not affect prices. You can assume demand is arbitrarily high. If 140B doesn't change the price per M by a single cent, what exactly will?

 

What price are you referring to? price of gold per million? or prices of items? Price of gold is not what randox is talking about. He is talking about cost of goods.

 

Selling gold, whether by players or by bot-companies increases the cost of goods due to enabling more people to buy stuff they otherwise would not (since they can spend real world money) and therefor causes prices to rice to meet this increased demand. This demand would not exist if gold could not be bought, since a player wouldn't be able to infuse their character with more gp via buying.

 

Some people are arguing that it is "ok" ethically for a player to sell gold, because they aren't impacting the economy on as large a scale as other gold selling is (from large companies). Plenty of people here disagree with this viewpoint.

 

If players selling gold to gold buying companies do not affect the price of the GP on that site, then they do not affect how much gold is bought.

 

Whilst RWT does lead to what you suggest, that is from botted gold. The largest ever player-website transaction did not cause prices to move, so it is safe to assume that transactions under that won't cause prices to move either.

If the price of gold on the site does not change, how can players selling gold lead to more gold being bought?

Since your post was liked by someone who shops at Lidl, and Lidl is a fantastic supermarket when you're a student like me, go on then...

 

Logdotzip (LDZ) claimed that real world trading (RWT)--by this we're talking about players buying off the big gold-selling websites rather than trading directly to each other--is only bad because Jagex say it's bad, and that if RWT was allowed to happen under RuneScape's rules, there wouldn't be any negative effect on other RuneScape players in reality. When it occurs against the rules currently, LDZ implies there are no real victims (see: victimless crime). Therefore, nobody can really claim that RWT is necessarily bad in all cases, if any at all.

 

Blyaunte has countered that by claiming that when LDZ ticked the box to say he agreed with RS's terms and conditions, he agreed in principle to follow those rules.

 

LDZ replied that just because he follows rules does not mean he agrees with them.

 

Logically, and for the sake of the natural flow in this argument, Blyaunte now needs to prove why RWT has a negative impact on other players and therefore why it shouldn't be allowed. Instead we've been talking about social contracts and personal conscience which most of us are struggling to understand the meaning of in relation to the original topic.

 

Wow! Can I hire you as a personal assistant? I have been reading through the last 6 pages trying to figure out what tangent this thread is currently on.

 

I think it is a ridiculous claim that buying/selling gold have any sort of substantial effect on the price of items in runescape. Are these the same people who feel that staking is a valid form of making money?

 

Selling/Buying gold for IRL money is a zero-loss transaction. Gold is merely shifted around from player to player. As far as negating personal achievement, I think this is another ridiculous statement as Jagex has already destroyed that aspect of their own game. If you play the game for that reason, you should quit.

 

What I understand, and my opinion on all the changes to runescape and the whole RWT matter, is that Jagex should embrace it. RWT actually stimulates the game as it gives more people the opportunity to play the content in which they want to play. I'm sure there are reasons Jagex hasn't introduced their own marketplace to the game (the buying and selling of virtual currency between players), but I assure the reason is not because they care about the players who value their achievement.

 

Virtual currency is a very new thing, and at some point it is going to be as popular as cash. As soon as governments find out the proper way to regulate and tax virtual currency, it will become something that is widely available.

 

What will Jagex do at that point?

Ah I see, your saying that the selling gold doesn't do anything.

 

But your also invoking a fallacy that what is true for the individual must be true for the whole. Think about something for a second. What would happen if players all stopped selling any gold to the sellers? To help with that, ask why the sellers would buy gold from the players in the first place. How many people stop to think about that. Gold farmer gold isn't free. It's not free to run the bots, and it's not free to have people take care of them. Even if most of the operators are in a sweatshop in China, someone has to be making real money or it wouldn't be happening (probably a few someones, since you would need more than 1 boss and a whole whack of workers). They probably set their buying price a bit under what the bot gold costs them.

 

From that, it follows that if the player supply were to dry up completely, the price of gold sold would have to rise by some amount to compensate for the higher costs. This is turn would lead to less gold being sold, which would require fewer bots. If demand is constant, than the increased price will reduce quantity demanded. There will be fewer bots needed to meet demand, and less gold flowing into the high end item and training markets, which reduces the impact on the game itself.

 

 

No, one person doesn't make any significant difference. It's hundreds or thousands of people who think that, or simply don't care, that make a difference.

(Always like to make these posts of their own...)

 

A reminder to keep things on topic please. Individuals and clan's are not on trial here. Please keep discussion to the RWT, in particular such topics as the effect on the game, as well as the morals and ethics regarding this issue.

 

Most of you are doing a great job of keeping discussion of such a hot topic civil, and it is much appreciated. It is a pleasure to be able to host these kinds of debates without it turning into a bar brawl :)

 

So please, everyone remember that this is what makes this place great, and remember to keep a cool head, and do not make things personal. People are entitled to believe what they want to believe, and as long as what they believe doesn't break our rules, they are free to share.

If 140B does nothing, then 100 people doing the same, and another 10,000 bots earning 0.5M/h running nearly on 24 hours a day, would.

Ah I see, your saying that the selling gold doesn't do anything.

 

But your also invoking a fallacy that what is true for the individual must be true for the whole. Think about something for a second. What would happen if players all stopped selling any gold to the sellers? To help with that, ask why the sellers would buy gold from the players in the first place. How many people stop to think about that. Gold farmer gold isn't free. It's not free to run the bots, and it's not free to have people take care of them. Even if most of the operators are in a sweatshop in China, someone has to be making real money or it wouldn't be happening (probably a few someones, since you would need more than 1 boss and a whole whack of workers). They probably set their buying price a bit under what the bot gold costs them.

 

From that, it follows that if the player supply were to dry up completely, the price of gold sold would have to rise by some amount to compensate for the higher costs. This is turn would lead to less gold being sold, which would require fewer bots. If demand is constant, than the increased price will reduce quantity demanded. There will be fewer bots needed to meet demand, and less gold flowing into the high end item and training markets, which reduces the impact on the game itself.

 

 

No, one person doesn't make any significant difference. It's hundreds or thousands of people who think that, or simply don't care, that make a difference.

 

My argument is that Jagex needs to stop bots and not worry about RWT between these dicing clans. I have never once said that gold farming bots don't ruin the game. My argument is that Joe Schmoe, who has played runescape since 2001, has accumulated 50b in wealth and wants to sell it so he can put a down payment on his house. Good for Joe.

 

Edit: To sum up, bots are a product of RWTing, not the other way around. What this means is that you will have a lot more difficult time stopping RWTing from existing from the game. Stop the bots, however, and you will solve most of the issues with this game.

 

People don't really care how others get rich. What is the difference between someone spending $100 to buy a 99 versus playing in 2001 and hoarding party hats?

My argument is that Jagex needs to stop bots and not worry about RWT between these dicing clans. I have never once said that gold farming bots don't ruin the game. My argument is that Joe Schmoe, who has played runescape since 2001, has accumulated 50b in wealth and wants to sell it so he can put a down payment on his house. Good for Joe.

 

Edit: To sum up, bots are a product of RWTing, not the other way around. What this means is that you will have a lot more difficult time stopping RWTing from existing from the game. Stop the bots, however, and you will solve most of the issues with this game.

 

People don't really care how others get rich. What is the difference between someone spending $100 to buy a 99 versus playing in 2001 and hoarding party hats?

 

If the guy hoarding phats is the same guy you spoke about selling gp, there is no difference. Both the guy buying and the guy selling ruin the integrity of the game.

 

I guess it doesn't matter putting any time or effort into doing something if you can just drop $100 on it. That is why there is such a huge amount of backlash against SoF. Real life is already dominated by whoever has the most money. People play Runescape because it is a GAME, not real life, but the more you bring real life principles like money into it the less it becomes a game. Life isn't fair, no need to take something that can be fair and make it unfair.

 

I have well over max cash on Runescape, only because I worked for it. I never staked or scammed, only put in time and effort. Is it fair that someone could just spend real money to get what I worked honestly for?

 

Also, it is true stopping bots won't stop all RWT, but it is a huge source of the money influx. If no one bought gp for cash, there would be no profit in botting for gp meant to be sold. Same goes for buying/selling accounts, but that's another discussion.

 

In addition, dicing clans make their money off deceiving people. It is like how merch clans used to operate when there were trade restrictions. It's funny how people are mad at Jagex for getting rid of trade restrictions when the same crap was happening only a bit differently. You are buying gp that was created/gotten using dirty means.

 

EVE Online saw huge problems associated with using money to pay for in game items in the form of tradeable membership vouchers. Now it is run like a business where new players are excluded because the top players are so wealthy, a lot having to do with rwt. Of course that gap could be traversed if you had, you guessed it, irl money. Do we really want RS being run by dice clans? Funny thing is, it nearly is if you look at rare prices.

Stopping bots is a nice idea, but in practice is very much not trivial. Jagex can't just "stop bots" like everyone claims/wants. They can break bots for a period of time (we've seen this) they can attempt new detections and so forth. However none of this will ever stop bots, because fundamentally all of these can be worked around.