Mick i am 100% ur opinion.... correct...when i think back at the beret and bull situation that was Holako that made the trade and after all know it was minds bull and he wanted his bull back.... i am very sad about what happens and my respect and trusting to you Mind deadly is at 0% and also i am happy about the gift (christmas elf hat) that show me i am not the lier here and a good person and i am much embarrassed but also proud to wear the christmas elf as a sign i have good will ... i hope and i am sure the feeling of wearing the scammed funky it not good and i dont saw yet you wear it!
☯☯☯ty to the community❤❤❤
I was scammed by Holako, and need help please!
-
Amarynthus
- Novice
- Posts: 51
- Joined: 26 Mar 2014, 19:29
- Location: Hurnscald
Re: I was scammed by Holako, and need help please!
I'm so glad this worked out well. I do think WildX is right in how this was handled.
To be clear I despise the scammer MinD.deadly and all of his alts - I had a fair distaste for him well before this incident. And I also agree that Dusty is an awesome, helpful, and caring player.
But I do think it is necessary to separate personal friendships or grievances from the ways in which we enforce any form of law and order. GMs should not try to deal with issues like these. That is not to say that the community can't. We as a community can be sure that scammers are known, and be sure that they know how we feel about them - we can make this an unpleasant environment in which to be unethical. They will (eventually) leave.
But GMs moderating such things would set a horrible precident of formally judging based essentially on a popularity contest. Dusty is popular and well liked for very good reason. MinD.deadly is (at least now) disliked by most and also for very good reason. But anytime we allow *official* regulation of our society based on such metrics of being liked or disliked by others, we set up a very slippery slope to allow in ugly forms of corruption and tyranny of the majority.
To be clear I despise the scammer MinD.deadly and all of his alts - I had a fair distaste for him well before this incident. And I also agree that Dusty is an awesome, helpful, and caring player.
But I do think it is necessary to separate personal friendships or grievances from the ways in which we enforce any form of law and order. GMs should not try to deal with issues like these. That is not to say that the community can't. We as a community can be sure that scammers are known, and be sure that they know how we feel about them - we can make this an unpleasant environment in which to be unethical. They will (eventually) leave.
But GMs moderating such things would set a horrible precident of formally judging based essentially on a popularity contest. Dusty is popular and well liked for very good reason. MinD.deadly is (at least now) disliked by most and also for very good reason. But anytime we allow *official* regulation of our society based on such metrics of being liked or disliked by others, we set up a very slippery slope to allow in ugly forms of corruption and tyranny of the majority.
Re: I was scammed by Holako, and need help please!
(tl;dr: It appears I need to have submitted 20 postings in order to get to vote in any polls, and there are some running right now, so here we go...)
I agree with Amarynthus in that GM interventions should not be driven by popularity of any party involved in incidents like this one. Would the GMs have exposed holako's alt char list if a less known or less popular player had been the victim of the offense?
From what I remember, MinD.Deadly has not been particularly unpleasant whenever we met. It seems that others had a different opinion about him even before the incident. Might this, in combination with his possibly limited capability to express himself in english, have made it relatively easy for the GMs to decide to expose him?
In the past, have GMs issued any official scammer warnings about players who 'scammed' players less popular than Dusty? I'm asking because I can't find any on the forum and because I am still new here and I'd to get to know how this community handles stuff like this.
On the one hand, I am thankful for the alt char list because silly me could easily be taken advantage as well. On the other hand, it doesn't feel good.
I agree with Amarynthus in that GM interventions should not be driven by popularity of any party involved in incidents like this one. Would the GMs have exposed holako's alt char list if a less known or less popular player had been the victim of the offense?
From what I remember, MinD.Deadly has not been particularly unpleasant whenever we met. It seems that others had a different opinion about him even before the incident. Might this, in combination with his possibly limited capability to express himself in english, have made it relatively easy for the GMs to decide to expose him?
In the past, have GMs issued any official scammer warnings about players who 'scammed' players less popular than Dusty? I'm asking because I can't find any on the forum and because I am still new here and I'd to get to know how this community handles stuff like this.
On the one hand, I am thankful for the alt char list because silly me could easily be taken advantage as well. On the other hand, it doesn't feel good.
-
mistergrey
- TMW Adviser
- Posts: 535
- Joined: 03 Jan 2010, 21:39
Re: I was scammed by Holako, and need help please!
It's definitely a controversial choice of action, but situations like these do affect the GMs as well. GMs get to hear about these situations, have players demand they take action, watch as players complain if and when they do take action - the summary of that is that no matter what the GMs choose to do in situations the rules don't explicitly cover, somebody will be upset.
Further, most GMs don't likely have access to detailed alt lists of every character on hand to expose them with - this usually implies that somebody with that access was asked for help. The ones with that kind of access to information are usually not as present in game, so are often less subject to the whole "popularity contest". GMs can act directly when a rule is broken, but in cases where the rules don't cover a situation that is causing drama... they have only their own judgement and the advice of others.
Some details are also often not mentioned in these discussions. Perhaps there were similar incidents reported in the past, in game or on forum, that led to this list being posted. There have also been some big changes to the people involved in the project lately, which means some existing policies/ways of handling situations may change.
Personally, I've always felt that authority figures should never play the favorites game, because then they become biased and sometimes won't be able to judge situations fairly. This doesn't seem to be the case currently, though; I've seen ones with ample authority and access wanting to help their friend or intervene, but choosing not to because they know it would set a bad precedent. This seems like a good thing, to me.
Further, most GMs don't likely have access to detailed alt lists of every character on hand to expose them with - this usually implies that somebody with that access was asked for help. The ones with that kind of access to information are usually not as present in game, so are often less subject to the whole "popularity contest". GMs can act directly when a rule is broken, but in cases where the rules don't cover a situation that is causing drama... they have only their own judgement and the advice of others.
Some details are also often not mentioned in these discussions. Perhaps there were similar incidents reported in the past, in game or on forum, that led to this list being posted. There have also been some big changes to the people involved in the project lately, which means some existing policies/ways of handling situations may change.
Personally, I've always felt that authority figures should never play the favorites game, because then they become biased and sometimes won't be able to judge situations fairly. This doesn't seem to be the case currently, though; I've seen ones with ample authority and access wanting to help their friend or intervene, but choosing not to because they know it would set a bad precedent. This seems like a good thing, to me.
<Mistakes> you are too difficult to trollTiana wrote: I apologize if I gave anyone the impression that BC is the troll-king of the GM's. That title is rightfully held by mrgrey
<Frost> Germans have Chess Boxing. English have Cheese Racing.
<Frost> I'm slightly terrified what the Russians consider violent sport.
<o11c> chatroulette
<Jaxad0127> YOu can't grab yourself.
<Jaxad0127> Elenore explicitly prevents it.
<Mistakes> speak for yourself
-
Amarynthus
- Novice
- Posts: 51
- Joined: 26 Mar 2014, 19:29
- Location: Hurnscald
Re: I was scammed by Holako, and need help please!
Oh that's not what I meant to imply. I'm glad the list was provided and think that was a reasonable thing to do.amaranth wrote:I agree with Amarynthus in that GM interventions should not be driven by popularity of any party involved in incidents like this one. Would the GMs have exposed holako's alt char list if a less known or less popular player had been the victim of the offense?
We have the ability to block/ignore/whatever players, but this can be circumvented by countless cryptic alts. If one wants to avoid a specific person for *any* reason, they should be able to do so. The GMs need not judge on whether the reasons are valid. Player A is uncomfortable around Player B for some reason: do not punish, ban, or take items from Player B, but do empower Player A to make their own informed choices of what other players they might want to interact with or avoid.
My point was that - as much as I would have personally wished for the hat to vanish from MinD.deadly's inventory and reappear in Dusty's - I don't think it was objectively justifiable for a GM to force such a transaction.