34 replies to this topic

[Sera]

Maybe you're right then, I don't have heim on msn to pester for clarifications on specific assurances. I only know what has been resolved via tickets in the past.

[LordVader]

Why are people acting surprised / angry.

This has been their effective policy for quite a while.

On one level, it's actually a change for the better.

Scenario:
Person A and Person B have access to account, the account is hacked by Person C who does not know either A or B and has not had previous access to it.

Under the old policy, they'd pretty much just tell you that since you shared your account, it's your own damn fault and they can't do anything about it.

Under the new policy though, Person A and B are both considered practical owners of the account, so they can then take action against person C.

Yes, if Person B betrays person A, then you're SOL, but prior to this... weren't you pretty much just SOL anyway?

Under the old policy, if you shared an acct info and really worked with the GM's team you could get assistance in recovering your items depending how detrimental it was to your overall gameplay. Send in a ticket missing 20 bwings on shared acct, probably won't get helped. Send in ticket missing full acct worth of items/gears/mvp carded gears, they would work with you and assist more than likely.

Under the new policy, it's pretty much you are screwed. Even if A and B decide upon creation they want to be co-owners of said account, and C, D, E, F and everyone between there and Z hacked that account they get a free pass b/c A and B were account sharing. The GM's don't know how many people were initially set to share the acct or if everyone agreed to share then someone changed their mind. Now they resort to a "hands off" policy.

A system like that should NOT be in place unless there are the necessary means to perform proper sharing and teamwork through the game itself. Since there is not, saying that there is no way to share and we won't help anyone that does share and gets scammed is just terrible.

The collateral system may sound good, but all the people you play with won't have the same assets as yourself or be able to match the values of the things needed to loan. In the event of guilds with items like Maya Purples, Ghost Armors, Hibrams, and other critical MVP gears for guild function, they are at a SEVERE disadvantage to scammers and the like.

Noone is really focusing on the single person accounts but the unified efforts of sometimes 50 or more people that could easily be pillaged now while the GM team stands idly by.

Totally unrelated:
NG> WOE with MP use for my 150 sorc. Prefer S.Sunnies pls.

[Sera]

They used to check logs to identify IPs which frequently accessed the account over an extended period of time.

If person C accesses the account twice a week for woe, it'd show up, and be considered normal over a period of a year or so. If out of the blue person C accesses the account once or twice, then stops, and the owner of the account sends in a report about missing items, that would be a flag.

I mean, they do use *some* common sense.

[jax5]

Totally unrelated:
NG> WOE with MP use for my 150 sorc. Prefer S.Sunnies pls.

For WoE, do you mean un-named Maya Purple S.Sunnies, ordinarily stored on multi-user accessed account (i.e. guild recaller) and no longer protected from theft?

just making a point regarding new policy update, not your personal integrity.

[Sera]

I wouldn't trust him to shine my shoes.

[jax5]

I wouldn't trust him to shine my shoes.

I don't consider sandals (or hair) to be shoes.

[LordVader]

They used to check logs to identify IPs which frequently accessed the account over an extended period of time.

If person C accesses the account twice a week for woe, it'd show up, and be considered normal over a period of a year or so. If out of the blue person C accesses the account once or twice, then stops, and the owner of the account sends in a report about missing items, that would be a flag.

I mean, they do use *some* common sense.

Then why is the saying, "Common sense is not so common."

I understand they USED to check IP's but once they see it is a shared account the policy takes affect and boom. Shared account rules apply. It quickly goes into a grey area of how person C got the account info. Hacking? lol unlikely. More sharing on an already shared account? Very likely. Worth further investigation? No, see policy.

This whole thing just gives GM's the backdoor to say if/when they feel like doing something they might but always keeping the get out of support free card with bogus policy.

[meoryou2]

We are able to tell a lot from our logs, but they do not tell everything, like if a deal was made outside of game with real life friends, or by using a messenger service, or if it was a loan, or if the item was traded away because the original owner wanted to quit. Our log system does not flag or track these things, so we have to put more responsibility in the hands of the community when it comes to keeping their items safe. I would like to see a lending system implemented into Ragnarok, and we have proposed it, but we have to deal with these issues today, and right now, we have to put the responsibility with the owners of the items.

It's stupid simple: if you are going to lend out an important item open a chat, have both parties in the chat, and have both parties agree that it is a short term loan and will be returned on or by xx-xx-xxxx date.... then grab screenshots. Really simple to prove then that it was intended as a loan and not something just given away / whatever then.

[Pyrasia]

It's your guild and guildmates and items, deal with your own internal problem/betrayal yourself '

[Trixdee]

This is not an easy matter. You take just as much risk loaning your gear to someone you feel you know quite well and someone random. There should be a safety net of some type for loaning a gear for WoE and such. Hopefully the GMs eventually can work one out. Friendships can go bad, bad stuff can happen, this makes that a lot easier.

Edited by Trixdee, 02 June 2011 - 04:03 PM.