# Came back from break -4 Billion ISK **URL:** \ **Category:** General Discussion\ **Created:** [July 24, 2018, 2:32pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164 "2018-07-24T14:32:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Noragen\_Neirfallas](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/noragen_neirfallas/32/375148_2.png) [@Noragen\_Neirfallas](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Noragen_Neirfallas)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 6:51pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164/61 "2018-07-24T18:51:27Z")
All that needed to be posted here was to request the ticket be escalated or looked into by another Senior GM. The validity of scamming was never in question simply whether or not this scam was within the rules ---
**Author:** ![zluq\_zabaa](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/zluq_zabaa/32/19011_2.png) [@zluq\_zabaa](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/zluq_zabaa)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 6:53pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164/62 "2018-07-24T18:53:30Z")
Agreed. Unless there really was some unpublished change to how CCP deals with scams. Were there any recent court rulings or new laws put into effect that might tighten CCPs possibilities to ensure a scam-friendly in-game environment? P.S. I think scams are an important part of the game, but I’ve always thought CCP must be riding the razors edge, legally speaking. ---
**Author:** ![Whitehound](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/whitehound/32/59604_2.png) [@Whitehound](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Whitehound)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 6:55pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164/63 "2018-07-24T18:55:13Z")
> [@Neuntausend](#): > > I’m not saying that OP wasn’t using an exploit, but had this decision been made because of an exploit, would the response not explain that? I wouldn’t expect to receive a detailed explanation. When one already knows one is messing with the trade window and tries to scam a player, and a GM then intervenes, then it explains itself. The explanation is simple: don’t cross the line. ---
**Author:** ![Rainbow\_Witcher](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/rainbow_witcher/32/230064_2.png) [@Rainbow\_Witcher](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Rainbow_Witcher)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 6:59pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164/64 "2018-07-24T18:59:10Z")
I didnt exploit anything i simply switched isk from 4b to 4m last second and he accept, as for the impersonation issue where i got scammed it happened months apart lol ---
**Author:** ![Neuntausend](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/neuntausend/32/11965_2.png) [@Neuntausend](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Neuntausend)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 7:02pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164/65 "2018-07-24T19:02:22Z")
> [@Whitehound](#): > > I wouldn’t expect to receive a detailed explanation. > > When one already knows one is messing with the trade window and tries to scam a player, and a GM then intervenes, then it explains itself. The explanation is simple: don’t cross the line. That would be a weird way to handle things, though. I work in tech support myself, and believe me, you can’t expect users to know what they did wrong, unless you explain it to them. ---
**Author:** ![Whitehound](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/whitehound/32/59604_2.png) [@Whitehound](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Whitehound)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 7:02pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164/66 "2018-07-24T19:02:32Z")
> [@Rainbow\_Witcher](#): > > I didnt exploit anything i simply switched isk from 4b to 4m last second and he accept, as for the impersonation issue where i got scammed it happened months apart lol While I get that you’re just trying to scam is the trade window designed to make trading safe. You mess with that you mess with CCP. If you had told the other player that you would need to pay in 10 chunks of 400m ISKs and so the first amount will be 400m and you then said you’d be giving him more thereafter, then it would have been acceptable. Messing with the values right at the input isn’t messing with the player but messing with CCP’s game. ---
**Author:** ![Zachri](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/zachri/32/69948_2.png) [@Zachri](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Zachri)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 7:02pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164/67 "2018-07-24T19:02:59Z")
> [@zluq\_zabaa](#): > > It’s not a scam, it is using an Exploit as far as I understood from the reddit post. Trade Window games are not deemed an exploit, something determined years ago. The confusion on reddit is probably in relation CCP only having stated that years ago, and never having thought about it since. There’s good reasons why every new player organisation or pubbie group educates its kids on this exact thing. ---
**Author:** ![Zachri](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/zachri/32/69948_2.png) [@Zachri](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Zachri)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 7:07pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164/68 "2018-07-24T19:07:09Z")
> [@Whitehound](#): > > While I get that you’re just trying to scam is the trade window designed to make trading save. You mess with that you mess with CCP. > > If you had told the other player that you would need to pay in 10 chunks of 400m ISKs and so the first amount will be 400m and you then said you’d be giving him more thereafter, then it would have been acceptable. Messing with the values right at the input isn’t messing with the player but messing with CCP’s game. Actually, that’s a case of subjective perspective. Which may be right or wrong, but for CCP this has always been irrelevant. Even if they provide Support Articles warning players against these methods, they do stipulate that it is not a violation. Whatever the complete picture may be in this individual case, it certainly is interesting in terms of the potential (!) shift in terms of policies. But, as stated before, a lot really depends on how accurate and complete the topicstarter was. The tidbit of changes in relation to Player Recruitment / Reward relations may be of importance, at this point that is a bit of a gap. At minimum in terms of information, whether it applies outside of the scope of those transactions. ---
**Author:** ![Whitehound](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/whitehound/32/59604_2.png) [@Whitehound](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Whitehound)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 7:07pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164/69 "2018-07-24T19:07:21Z")
> [@Neuntausend](#): > > That would be a weird way to handle things, though. I work in tech support myself, and believe me, you can’t expect users to know what they did wrong, unless you explain it to them. GMs are not customer support. They are support, judge, jury and executioner in one. And when the intervention by a GM isn’t enough explanation then who knows how much explanation someone needs? Sometimes you just get a smack in the face, and when it needs an expalnation, too, then maybe see a therapist. ---
**Author:** ![Zachri](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/zachri/32/69948_2.png) [@Zachri](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Zachri)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 7:09pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164/70 "2018-07-24T19:09:33Z")
> [@Whitehound](#): > > GMs are not customer support. They are support, judge, jury and executioner in one. Of policy. They do not create this, they apply it. Overall they are very good at it, but human errors can happen, and lack of clarity or change over time can also be a factor. Would not be a first in EVE’s history. That said, CCP always figure it out, consolidate policy, and then business as usual. ---
**Author:** ![Whitehound](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/whitehound/32/59604_2.png) [@Whitehound](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Whitehound)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 7:10pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164/71 "2018-07-24T19:10:00Z")
> [@Zachri](#): > > Whatever the complete picture may be in this individual case, it certainly is interesting in terms of the potential (!) shift in terms of policies. I don’t think so. I think the line between who gets scammed and by what means has always been clear. Only we get new players each year and we always get some who try to dig into the mechanics for scams. If we ever allowed for scams to exploit mechanics then we might also allow botting, because that’s not so different in the end. ---
**Author:** ![zluq\_zabaa](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/zluq_zabaa/32/19011_2.png) [@zluq\_zabaa](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/zluq_zabaa)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 7:10pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164/72 "2018-07-24T19:10:00Z")
> [@Zachri](#): > > Trade Window games are not deemed an exploit, something determined years ago. The confusion on reddit is probably in relation CCP only having stated that years ago, and never having thought about it since. There’s good reasons why every new player organisation or pubbie group educates its kids on this exact thing. Oh sure, if he was just changing from 4B to 4M and the other didn’t see it, it’s correct use of scam. (unless he used some form of input automatisation for it) ---
**Author:** ![Zachri](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/zachri/32/69948_2.png) [@Zachri](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Zachri)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 7:14pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164/73 "2018-07-24T19:14:04Z")
> [@Whitehound](#): > > I don’t think so. I think the line between who gets scammed and by what means has always been clear. Only we get new players each year and we always get some who try to dig into the mechanics for scams. If we ever allowed for scams to exploit mechanics then we might also allow botting, because that’s not so different in the end. Nobody is saying to allow scams by means of exploiting mechanics. The focal point here (for this type of “venture”) is scamming by means of following available mechanics. There is a difference. But this is where CCP has always drawn the line. Take note of how we interpret subjectively, whereas CCP takes a step back. Be this as it may, CCP can and does change policies over time. This would not be a first time. Once upon a time if you got caught botting, you got a 30 day ban. With the influx of new and different types of players, and thus the introduction of different learning and adaptation curves, CCP has changed those policies. Get caught now, and you get an explanation and a 3 Day ban. This isn’t a topic of “allow X” → “open door”. CCP decides these things, on a type by type basis (different from case by case, obviously, as it was the year after EVE went live 😛 ) ---
**Author:** ![Whitehound](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/whitehound/32/59604_2.png) [@Whitehound](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Whitehound)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 7:14pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164/74 "2018-07-24T19:14:32Z")
> [@Zachri](#): > > Of policy. They do not create this, they apply it. In most games is it the game master who sets the rules and polices. That’s why they are called game masters. ---
**Author:** ![Zachri](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/zachri/32/69948_2.png) [@Zachri](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Zachri)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 7:15pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164/75 "2018-07-24T19:15:11Z")
> [@zluq\_zabaa](#): > > Oh sure, if he was just changing from 4B to 4M and the other didn’t see it, it’s correct use of scam. (unless he used some form of input automatisation for it) Yes, this is why I said "provided that what the topicstarter has shared is a) accurate and b) complete. Experience tells us that when people let their belly speak, there’s always more that meets the eye. That could be just emotion or such, but it also could be that someone is selective in sharing. Humans, odd species. ---
**Author:** ![Zachri](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/zachri/32/69948_2.png) [@Zachri](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Zachri)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 7:19pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164/76 "2018-07-24T19:19:35Z")
> [@Whitehound](#): > > In most games it is the game master who sets the rules and polices. That’s why are they called masters. I’m balancing cloakies at the moment or I’d go looking for CCP’s old devblogs and public statements on it, but they are around. There’s feedback and decision processes, but CCP has its own approach to matters. Rightly so, because there are innate difference between types of games and types of behaviour within them. GM’s are human too. I once had a petition where the GM decided against something, but on a very odd basis. I escalated this, and a senior GM concluded that the previous GM was not fully informed. No worries, in training, can happen. We players are human too. So the reverse also holds true. Aside of us players being able to be devious and subversive which GM’s are not able to. The only thing of real interest here is what popped up in regards to the potential policy change of “once an agreement is established between players as visible in communications in game any transaction is enforceable”. Whatever happens with the topicstarter’s petition is seperate from that. ---
**Author:** ![Whitehound](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/whitehound/32/59604_2.png) [@Whitehound](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Whitehound)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 7:21pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164/77 "2018-07-24T19:21:05Z")
> [@Zachri](#): > > There is a difference. Yes, and you’re struggling with it. When the focus of your scam is to mess with the direct input then you’re no longer messing with the naivety of another player. You are in fact messing with the input system, which was intentionally designed by CCP to make trading safe. If that’s something you cannot understand then it’s also the direct explanation why you fail to see the difference. ---
**Author:** ![Whitehound](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/whitehound/32/59604_2.png) [@Whitehound](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Whitehound)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 7:22pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164/78 "2018-07-24T19:22:57Z")
> [@Zachri](#): > > and a senior GM concluded that the previous GM was not fully informed. So it just means that there are more than one GM, and that they do decide over matters and even their own. That’s perfectly understandable. ---
**Author:** ![Tuttomenui\_II](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/tuttomenui_ii/32/479440_2.png) [@Tuttomenui\_II](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Tuttomenui_II)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 7:23pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164/79 "2018-07-24T19:23:55Z")
“Save”. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. =P. Safe is what your looking for, for future reference. Let your auto correct know. ---
**Author:** ![Zachri](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/zachri/32/69948_2.png) [@Zachri](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Zachri)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 7:24pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164/80 "2018-07-24T19:24:54Z")
> [@Whitehound](#): > > Yes, and you’re struggling with it. > > When the focus of your scam is to mess with the direct input then you’re no longer messing with the naivety of another player. You are in fact messing with the input system, which was intentionally designed by CCP to make trading save. > > If that’s something you cannot understand then it’s also the direct explanation why you fail to see the difference. I do get the difference. But CCP takes a different perspective from how we feel about it, that is their prerogative. I once got scammed by a trade window, as once upon a time I got scammed with escrow (no longer exists). In both cases the scam made use of the mechanism’s flexibility to mess with input in interation between players. In both cases I got told “HTFU”. It would be nice if, following the potential of policy change, CCP would come up with a renewed statement on what is allowed / disallowed. They only do so rarely, often it takes years for them to be clear on something. [Previous page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164.md?page=3) [Next page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/came-back-from-break-4-billion-isk/92164.md?page=5)