Banned accounts - Questions from all Top 3-50 teams. Developer needed

[LüK€¥]

He's providing play by play cometary for you so enjoy ��

lol, but we can read though...

[Dipstik]

Speaking of banned accounts, can we get Baroness, Upsman, and Weasel back up in here?

It's a new year, and I doubt anyone in the current slate of moderators even knows who they are anymore... how about an amnesty?

[LüK€¥]

Speaking of banned accounts, can we get Baroness, Upsman, and Weasel back up in here?

It's a new year, and I doubt anyone in the current slate of moderators even knows who they are anymore... how about an amnesty?

It seems fair. Bring back the beasts....

[F@st]

0

I know!! So confusing. Can't understand him, poor grammar. Hurts my brain.

That What ppl say when they are short for fight me with word.

That strange i dont have any problem with other, only with guys who dont like me or get owned.

1nyway no bundle that back to normal spot. Swafle house have disapared of top dont have see in 200 and eastsiders get there place. 20.30 No need to put screen that just 3/4 vaults ip bh players last time for free.

Plan by gree dont have remove ip that just What I see. I dont have anything about these teams and players

[LüK€¥]

0

That What ppl say when they are short for fight me with word.

That strange i dont have any problem with other, only with guys who dont like me or get owned.

1nyway no bundle that back to normal spot. Swafle house have disapared of top dont have see in 200 and eastsiders get there place. 20.30 No need to put screen that just 3/4 vaults ip bh players last time for free.

Plan by gree dont have remove ip that just What I see. I dont have anything about these teams and players

I agree what you say, and am not fighting.

[crime cow]

It seems fair. Bring back the beasts....

I don't remember baroness or upsman so I'd say bring them back. However, I would hope by now they've found other things to occupy their time...

[Dipstik]

I talk with them every day. Haven't seen weasel though.

[xWolfSlayerx]

Speaking of banned accounts, can we get Baroness, Upsman, and Weasel back up in here?

It's a new year, and I doubt anyone in the current slate of moderators even knows who they are anymore... how about an amnesty?

I agree with you.

[montecore]

0

That What ppl say when they are short for fight me with word.

That strange i dont have any problem with other, only with guys who dont like me or get owned.

1nyway no bundle that back to normal spot. Swafle house have disapared of top dont have see in 200 and eastsiders get there place. 20.30 No need to put screen that just 3/4 vaults ip bh players last time for free.

Plan by gree dont have remove ip that just What I see. I dont have anything about these teams and players

I have never seen you own anyone.

I believe the rest of your post is essentially stating that you have yet to see gree take any action regarding rankings two wars ago, right?

[Captain Torgue]

I have never seen you own anyone.

I believe the rest of your post is essentially stating that you have yet to see gree take any action regarding rankings two wars ago, right?

Fast has pwned you on numerous occasions.

[LüK€¥]

Fast has pwned you on numerous occasions.

Dah dah dahhhhhh..... The Cap returns...

[crime cow]

Fast has pwned you on numerous occasions.

Screen shots or it didn't happen.

[Red BD]

As someone said many, many posts ago, this is a mess. It's a combination Dynamite Bar Exam Question/Business Ethics Thing. (BTW Crime Cow, I am an actual lawyer and strongly suspect Dippy is as well based on many of his posts- not that it matters, but you asked).

Anyway, the way I look at this (if anyone cares) is that some low level code boy (or whatever they are called) screwed up. The "erroneous offer" went out. The vast majority of those seeing the bundle offer at issue would know it was a mistake. If they mistakenly did not understand it was a mistake, I guess it was what's known as a "mutual mistake of fact."
As I recall from Law School, the manner in which such is USUALLY rectified judicially is to essentially "call off the deal", and if there are damages that can't justly be erased by that, award them.

Of course I went to law school way before Al Bundy invented the Internet, so wtf do I know?

Now I must also admit that had I come across the offer I may have taken it- several times- but then as Mom once told me, "(I'm)horrible person." It would have been wrong to do so and I would have known that unless I was some relatively new player. Some SAS guy?? Give me a break.

So Gree did not handle a mistake which should never have been made in a perfect world. It was a major league screw up- but was their solution really unreasonable given the relative few who actually mistakenly benefited from the mistake? Even if they were SASers and other golden players?

Easiest solution would have been to give all players 2,000,000 gold (assuming one could only purchase the bundle once).

What would you be saying about that???????

[montecore]

As someone said many, many posts ago, this is a mess. It's a combination Dynamite Bar Exam Question/Business Ethics Thing. (BTW Crime Cow, I am an actual lawyer and strongly suspect Dippy is as well based on many of his posts- not that it matters, but you asked).

Anyway, the way I look at this (if anyone cares) is that some low level code boy (or whatever they are called) screwed up. The "erroneous offer" went out. The vast majority of those seeing the bundle offer at issue would know it was a mistake. If they mistakenly did not understand it was a mistake, I guess it was what's known as a "mutual mistake of fact."
As I recall from Law School, the manner in which such is USUALLY rectified judicially is to essentially "call off the deal", and if there are damages that can't justly be erased by that, award them.

Of course I went to law school way before Al Bundy invented the Internet, so wtf do I know?

Now I must also admit that had I come across the offer I may have taken it- several times- but then as Mom once told me, "(I'm)horrible person." It would have been wrong to do so and I would have known that unless I was some relatively new player. Some SAS guy?? Give me a break.

So Gree did not handle a mistake which should never have been made in a perfect world. It was a major league screw up- but was their solution really unreasonable given the relative few who actually mistakenly benefited from the mistake? Even if they were SASers and other golden players?

Easiest solution would have been to give all players 2,000,000 gold (assuming one could only purchase the bundle once).

What would you be saying about that???????

The problem is that would severely aggravate their biggest spenders, which Gree does quite a bit, but I think the aggravation would be so severe that the game couldn't survive. There are people who spend five figures a month on this game to get far less than 2mm gold, and they do it every month or every other month.

Situations like this do happen from time to time in the physical world - and usually, once the sale has gone through and the product has shipped the buyer simply got a great deal. Taking your legal approach a step further, let's say you own a jewelry store and have a watch that costs 500,000 for sale. But due to a price mistake, you have it listed as for sale at 500 dollars.

I go in and buy it for 500 dollars (sold by an employee who wasn't aware of the actual value of the watch), put it on my wrist, and walk out of the store. What is your recourse, legally?

I believe (not being a lawyer) that if you had seen the error before the transaction went through you could have refused the sale. But once the sale is complete, you have my 500 dollars and I have the watch, what are you going to do? Sue me for making a purchase?

[Dipstik]

I did a little research, poorly since it's completely outside my area of expertise, and I didn't see an answer to that question. I assume if the product were valuable enough, someone would try. I also think the fact that there was no living person to authenticate the sale would be relevant.