StarGateWars Forums

It makes sense that you should be able to refuse a donation of PPT, or else everyone would be screwing over everyone else with their donation tactic.(people who clearly have more money than brains).

The only issue seems to be that if the PPT is refused, its only fair that you should get your money back, or get that PPT of which was rejected by said player.

As for the convenient update after the thread... well. We all know how speedy Forum is when it comes to... well... anything. Who knows. Maybe he finally started reading the forums?

While I agree it makes sense for players to avoid having someone buy them a ppt just to know exactly when they get off ppt it doesn't explain how ETL had this ability before the update.

I thought Admin was here to provide a game and to make money, giving a player special abilities is not a good way to keep people playing (and PAYING).

Furthermore, JaseB should get the $10 back because the way I see it, he paid for a bonus that was not provided. If a player can refuse a bonus that costs REAL WORLD $ then he should get the $ back.

It is a pretty simple idea. When you buy something, if it doesn't work you get your money back.

Sam Fisher wrote:While I agree it makes sense for players to avoid having someone buy them a ppt just to know exactly when they get off ppt it doesn't explain how ETL had this ability before the update.

I thought Admin was here to provide a game and to make money, giving a player special abilities is not a good way to keep people playing (and PAYING).

Furthermore, JaseB should get the $10 back because the way I see it, he paid for a bonus that was not provided. If a player can refuse a bonus that costs REAL WORLD $ then he should get the $ back.

It is a pretty simple idea. When you buy something, if it doesn't work you get your money back.

jase has posted he doesnt want the money back... as he has got $280 ish dollars for his account i'm sure he is happy...

but the point in question about if the update was done before and not mentioned or done after... even I am curious

where did it say that etl had that update before everyone else?

Exploiting a loophole? It isnt technically a loophole if it has been used for a while by a lot of people as a tactic. And it didnt kick you off ppt, it just reset yours to a full two days starting at donation time and was used to shorten the length of ppt from 4 days maximum without an ascension to perhaps 2 to 3 days, depending on when donation was done. And I know that DD has done it, to a player, I forget who they did it to. It is was so they could mass him sooner. Now it seems that JaseB was trying to use this tactic against a friend of admin and then the game changed...so the only thing that was exploited was the friendship that enabled the change to happen. Because hell, I would love to have the game admin in my back pocket...

Yuck that is a sleazy tactic. Hmm one that looks like it was used by a few people too. DDE used it, by their own admission.

I didn't know about either the cheating in TSA or EPA. That is disappointing.

As for this whole issue... its either a sleazy tactic or a loophole... probably a loophole. I am glad its fixed but its not good when something like this gets fixed due to one players input, and gets applied to them before others. At the very least the people that were using this tactic before hand, DDE (CoP), should have reported it, not only when it effected one of them(CoP).

I think a number of you are missing the real point here. Screw the $10, screw whether it was an exploit, loophole or a tactic... the real issue is... ETL had the option to refuse the benefit of this donation before others had the option, so was the game changed because of ETL's and Forums relationship? Was Forum aware of this issue before ETL reported it?

I think Forum or ETL really needs to address this.

Who said ETL had the option first

Have you all forgotten the whole Caspian incident, where certain people realize admin had changed the attack max to 200 from 100 and then caspian being funded from others massed Omega...

Omega got no reparations for that incident......

The same idea is in this case, There was an update done... Because the default is at not accepting ETL didnt even have to know about it for it to help him... So admin didnt post an update right away maybe he didnt think it was that important of an update to require its own post in the updates page

Radium wrote:This is so funny seeing the supposedly honorable EPA leader putting up a post like this. This was so typical of what I saw in the EPA and TSA before I left them to join Omega.

TSA had a member who used the bug where you got ascended weapons for a cheap price, and then could resell them at the higher price. When I brought it to the attention of the leaders of the TSA that we had a cheater in the alliance they did not care, since the account was one of the more powerful ones back then.

Then in the EPA remember Nez who was ostracized over the same exploit I believe. Since the EPA did not want the loss of power they kept him in the alliance for a very long time. I started complaining about this on the EPA forum and Wolf got pissed at me and started deleting my posts. It was during this time I left EPA.

Now I see the current acting leader himself of the EPA tried to exploit a loophole in the game to cheat someone out of their ability to get a PPT. Then having the balls to come on the board here and complain that his exploit of the system failed.

This is so humorous finding someone trying to claim some moral high road when they were being sleazy all along them self. Note I am not saying any of the leaders of the EPA are cheaters. But they have their share of sleaze, and obviously were trying something sleazy in desperation during the recent war.

I haven't left yet.

And I would appreciate it if you didn't post crap about me in the forum - I have never deleted any of your posts, or anyone elses in the EPA Forum - this is yet again total tripe coming from somebody who hasn't got a clue what they are talking about.

Trying to look big and clever are you, thinking I'd gone?

As for cheaters - Anyone I have found or suspected to be cheating in the EPA has been investigated/discussed with the Admins if necessary, and removed from the alliance if appropriate. Regarding Neznani - he disputed that he actually cheated and it was requested to the Game Admins that it was looked into - in the meantime I believe Neznani left permanently and was then removed from the alliance - but not before.

Don't spout malicious gossip and rumour (and down right crap) unless you know the full facts! Otherwise you just end up looking like a prize chimp! Got it!!??

As for being able to refuse PPTs....

Well, firstly, it was acknowledged a long (long) time ago by Forum himself that PPTs were no longer seen as donations, but as a generic part of gameplay (I also believe PPT bonuses were altered at the time).

Secondly, I only found out about being able to refuse PPTs when ETL came on MSN to tell me he could refuse the PPT that JaseB had bought him. Now, that is by no means saying that ETL cheated or got Admin to change the rules (trust me - it's not his style), but it does seem that he was aware of the change when nobody else was. Whether that was through beta testing (in which case it could be claimed it was an unfair advantage) or 'whatever' is beside the point.

The point is he was aware of an update that nobody else was, as the update had never been announced (until a few days after the event). It is therefore understandable why some people may cry foul, or be angry that they felt misled into parting with their $10.

I'm all for people having the option to refuse PPT - but there was no warning during the purchase of said PPT that stated this could happen.

Bottom line is, it may only be $10, but it was $10 that was spent under false pretences, in that the bonus that JaseB was led to believe would be provided, was not. Therefore it should, no, MUST be refunded.

sgtpepper wrote:Who said ETL had the option first

Have you all forgotten the whole Caspian incident, where certain people realize admin had changed the attack max to 200 from 100 and then caspian being funded from others massed Omega...

Omega got no reparations for that incident......

The same idea is in this case, There was an update done... Because the default is at not accepting ETL didnt even have to know about it for it to help him... So admin didnt post an update right away maybe he didnt think it was that important of an update to require its own post in the updates page

Well i think my post needs to be addressed

You all continue to claim that ETL knew about it first but when someone finds out something before Omega it becomes all fine and dandy

sgtpepper wrote:

sgtpepper wrote:Who said ETL had the option first

Have you all forgotten the whole Caspian incident, where certain people realize admin had changed the attack max to 200 from 100 and then caspian being funded from others massed Omega...

Omega got no reparations for that incident......

The same idea is in this case, There was an update done... Because the default is at not accepting ETL didnt even have to know about it for it to help him... So admin didnt post an update right away maybe he didnt think it was that important of an update to require its own post in the updates page

Well i think my post needs to be addressed

You all continue to claim that ETL knew about it first but when someone finds out something before Omega it becomes all fine and dandy

Responding to your own posts - now that's funny!

Let's not twist the issue here. The issue isn't about ETL or who knew about it first - the REAL issue is about being misled into paying for something, and then the 'goods' not being delivered. If the update had been made public - or there was a warning attached to the purchase of the PPT (and it is a purchase, NOT a donation), then fine, it wouldn't be a problem. However, it was not announced until some time after - therein lies the problem.

It has nothing to do with Omega V Everyone else, so do not try to make it such!

Wolf359 wrote:

sgtpepper wrote:

sgtpepper wrote:Who said ETL had the option first

Have you all forgotten the whole Caspian incident, where certain people realize admin had changed the attack max to 200 from 100 and then caspian being funded from others massed Omega...

Omega got no reparations for that incident......

The same idea is in this case, There was an update done... Because the default is at not accepting ETL didnt even have to know about it for it to help him... So admin didnt post an update right away maybe he didnt think it was that important of an update to require its own post in the updates page

Well i think my post needs to be addressed

You all continue to claim that ETL knew about it first but when someone finds out something before Omega it becomes all fine and dandy

Responding to your own posts - now that's funny!

Let's not twist the issue here. The issue isn't about ETL or who knew about it first - the REAL issue is about being misled into paying for something, and then the 'goods' not being delivered. If the update had been made public - or there was a warning attached to the purchase of the PPT (and it is a purchase, NOT a donation), then fine, it wouldn't be a problem. However, it was not announced until some time after - therein lies the problem.

It has nothing to do with Omega V Everyone else, so do not try to make it such!

Yes responding to my own post was kinda funny but i figured most people would ignore mine with your huge post right after...

And if u read most of this thread it was "I quit because ETL writes the Rules" So it was about Omega/etl vs everyone at the beginning

But i do understand that after your post the thread was beginning to lead into another direction so my post my be a little off topic now but it is wstill in topic with most of the thread

TheRook wrote:you have no proof it wasn't done before then just not put in an update there have been times before where forum has put that he may have forgotten something

So we have no proof it WAS done before then either. Difference being, the rules before Dec 10th were what they were, so anything done unofficially before that date, especially if expedited to benefit one single player, is AT BEST a mistake that needs to be compensated for (i.e., $10 refund to JaseB, even if he no longer plays).

TheRook wrote:by the way

its a DONATION

No, it was a PURCHASE. In good faith. Based on the rules as known at the time of the transaction. If he wanted to donate, he could've used the separate DONATE option, without attempting to confer benefits on another player.

slicky wrote:Indeed, and the fact that he has sold things that really do infact belong to admin in the first place, now leaves it at him owning Admin $280, but i don't suppose he will want to give that back now will he?

How do you figure this - does everybody in the game owe admin $$$ then when they give "admin's" goods to someone else? I think NOT.

TheRook wrote:p.s. I'll take that $1000 this is in writing and as s uch a legal binding contract

I'll be devil's advocate here, even though you're joking - this is an online forum, not a written document - I think you'd be hard pressed to find any jurisdiction that would recognize anything typed on here as having any legal status (unless, of course, criminal matters were involved).

Are you people thick? Suppose that Jason implemented the update and just didn't announce that he did. The default option in your preferences is to reject donations from other players. Meaning that the PPT would be refused even without ETL knowing.

Well, your theory is no less 'thick' than anybody else's, because it is just speculation until someone responsible for the change (Jason... possibly ETL?) enlightens us.

Zodiac wrote:Are you people thick? Suppose that Jason implemented the update and just didn't announce that he did. The default option in your preferences is to reject donations from other players. Meaning that the PPT would be refused even without ETL knowing.

Easy! It isn't really about ETL anymore, or 'who knew it before the announcement' or 'what the default option is' - it's about payment for something you expect, which in this case, did not happen?

Go stomping around the forums insinuating people are 'thick' again and I will warn you. I haven't left yet - and I'm still a Forum Admin and will not tolerate such outbursts.