That kinda takes me back to the days where CCP’s customers were one community, instead of a myriad of fragmented inward bound comm streams.
Scamming in general is no cause for alarm. However there are places where such action are not allowed such as the Forum’s Market place and especially the Character Bazaar, on that note it seems to me that during the discussion of the trade in question, you both agreed on a price, but instead of honoring your deal you changed the ISK you offered in the direct trade and quickly accepted before the seller would notice the difference, hence why the GM has transferred the remaining ISK for your purchase.
If I were you I’d remove the image from Reddit or you might find your account banned.
2 Likes
um im not allowed to post on redit?
talking about your experience is fine but exclude any sensitive info!
CCP, GM or ISD conversation may not be shared on Forums or elsewhere, they are strictly confidential. CCP or GM may choose to share to prevent similar situation if it warrants it, but nobody else may share such info.
1 Like
Reddit is not owned by CCP and their rules do not apply there. Unless you can show me “don’t post GM’s being dipshits on Reddit” in the EULA somewhere. You also seem to be forgetting there are two parties in those GM/CCP/ISD communications and just because one doesn’t want it shared doesn’t mean a pile of beans, the other person has a choice what to do with their communications they’re involved in. Also, if this scam is illegal then you’d better get your asses in gear to retroactively ban the hundreds who have done the exact same scam.
1 Like
did not know, i will remove it now, but can I fight the -4b i mean it was a jita scam lol, last I checked its been fully allowed
That would signify a truly massive policy change. You know, along the lines of the change back in the day in regards to Impersonation (which, admittedly, was direly needed and very well engaged on by CCP).
The reason I mention this as a policy change, is because the outlines of what is currently available allow for verbal agreements within constraints of game mechanics as part of a scam.
This is rather, well, interesting. Up to this point the only way I could see a GM action against him - depending on accuracy / completeness of what he’s described - would be the presence of impersonation. Not negotiations or verbal agreements, as we have no such thing as written agreements in EVE. Case “no such mechanism”. This is why players recommend to each other to only use contracts.
If what you are saying is correct, and the GM action specifies policy, that essentially means I can make a petition against someone who breaks his word in any relation to items / objects / in game currency. I could also trick people into exactly that, and then dump it on Customer Support.
I’m a bit unsettled here. The concept of a scam is dishonouring a deal. If this is (new) policy, that really deserves its own publication and clarification.
4 Likes
From what I can understand, it wasn’t a contract scam like you usually see (in Jita), but happened during a direct trade between two players.
When CCP recently updated the referral program (Recruit a Friend) they stated that any verbal promises/agreements made is binding and will be subject to punishment in accordance with their policies. I cannot confirm or deny that this is not a common practice (Policy) outside of the referral program.
1 Like
If true, then that means that trade window scams are no longer allowed. Will CCP reimburse the thousands of players who’ve fallen victims for such scams then, and deck the amounts from the scammers wallets?
In my opinion, the trade window is a joke by itself, and I would never use it to get a deal done (due to the obvious risk of getting scammed). But as a previous poster mentioned, this is indeed a significant change in policies towards scamming in the game.
From what I can tell, it would, as the previous poster previously mentioned, include all forms of scamming where the scammer claims Item X for Y ISK, but instead puts in Z ISK in the deal. May it be in trade windows, contracts or what not.
Aka, that would also include ALL of the spam scam contracts in Jita where people change the name of the contracts (Gecko for 1 mil, anyone?).
SCAMS
Updated July 06, 2018 01:17
A scam is what happens when someone takes advantage of a players misplaced trust, temporary confusion or ignorance of game rules, and robs players via legal in-game means. When this occurs, there is nothing the Support Team can do for the victim. Although low and despicable, scams do not violate any game mechanics and can not be compensated for by the GMs, nor can the scammers generally be punished for their actions.However, scams that affect areas outside of the game may not be tolerated in the same manner, such as, but not limited to:
Scams involving Character Transfers, mainly via the Character Bazaar where scamming is explicitly forbidden
Scams mimicking services provided by CCP while providing modified data via third party websites
Scams using exploits (fake or existing)
Scams involving the “PLEX for Good” campaigns
Scams that encourage the mark to purchase PLEX in order to acquire the ISK/Items
Seems like that GM wasn’t aware of Eve’s own policies in regards to scamming. Ooops?
We can debate this back and forth until the end of time.
If OP @Rainbow_Witcher wishes to have the verdict looked at and tried again, all he have to do is submit a support ticket with his claims and any proof he has.
2 Likes
yeah i put new ticket in, i actually biomassed the character because even with tiny bit of skills -4 billion wallet crippled doing anything on here 
Make a new character. Give my word that I will trade my main 1 trillion isk. Only send 1 million in trade window.
Petition
GM gives me a trillion isk and sets alt at -1 trillion.
Repeat
Profit
7 Likes
True that is exactly what the op needs to do. And ask for a senior GM to have a look.
However it would be nice to have clarifications on whether or not a policy change has been made in regards to direct trades.
Anyone else notice that there was actually isk injection taking place in this situation? (Looks like Ildrara did =) )
Ugh, it’s CCP Killjoy Karidor. His decisions are frequently … interesting, and he has very strong opinions on certain topics, to say the least. But he’s a Senior GM. It’s usually not worth the hassle to try and complain about one of his decisions. It’s also never a good idea to make GM responses public, no matter the platform. That’s a bit like murdering a guy to prove he stole from you - usually ends badly for you.
1 Like
Not sure there’s anything to debate really.
If CCP has changed their policies in regards to scamming, then that should be openly and thoroughly communicated to the community and playerbase.
I can see a few hundred contracts in Jita 4-4 which are clearly advertised as costing way less than is actually put into the contract. Can I get reimbursed for all of them, if I accept them?
Would be the easiest billions I’ve made in this game for a while.
Forgive the expression, but Holy ■■■■.
That would make no sense whatsoever. Different protocols for what constitutes the same user base dependant on point of entry of a user. Particularly as those changes in the Recruit a Friend program were in relation to Player Rewards and validity of the exchange within that specific transaction frame.
There is absolutely no way a player can even have the kind of information to determine circumstances then for validity of methods of referred players / unreferred players for transactions way beyond the scope of Player Recruiting & Rewards.
If accurate, that would be even more shocking. It might be a bit presumptious, but this may very well be a kind of thing to package up and push upstairs.
Damn. Oh if this takes on a life of its own as it always tends to do, I pity Customer Support, cause this has the potential to soak up as much resources eventually as the drama that resulted in the Impersonation policy changes.
Let me be clear, the nett result of this would be that on the one hand any type of current spam / scam would be formally disallowed, while the next iteration would be tricking people into agreements and using Customer Support to enforce those regardless of the issue of chatlogs & screenshots and interpretation.
Caveat: this is still going by what the topicstarter outlined and the currently available information. The problem for him is that this has become a classic case of reverse evidence. Which in its own right is way too tempting for people to unleash scenario’s of on Customer Support.
You expect scamming to be allowed, but when a GM does something that hurts your feelings then you cry for help. 
3 Likes
No he does not EXPECT scamming to be allowed.
Scamming IS allowed.
3 Likes
HTFU.
2 Likes