the first warning is for one transaction only; and because of that someone is gonna get banned; if they want it or not; be it the whale or the sellers, and one of them is gonna be their core with a lot of money!
the thing is the money come from a source; and this source is multiples bots; so it does not matter if the WHALE only did ONE trade; the money already have come from multiples previous negotiations(flagged ones) and thus would be removed, because the whale is already the second or third or more times the money is being “flagged”.
Was it this ones?_?
Am the sexy alchemist 
sorry for no names, UI was a cluster Fluff had to be eliminated 
Hold on, It is possible that maybe he could change his behavior into buy something every three months but what makes you think that I will not ban that one?
Like I said and keep saying in above, its a problem how to improvise our rules.
And one more, I could still track how much he earned as whole.
there is no need to edit it.
nah; well i do not agree with that i will finish with this sentence, but if you believe selling 300 items with 1million each; just because they are stacked and is one time put in the market is only one transaction; you are the wrong one; at least in any basic understanding of negotiations, and as i have read the thread there is not any mention of the gm saying that stacked items would be counted as one transaction only.
it may not ban the buyer, but the silver is; and thus the silver will be removed and thus the whale paid for nothing!.
as i stated before; once someone is banned, the silver is gone, and thus is the rmt.
Makes some bundles of silver for TP fight fire with fire 
2 Likes
I edited a typo and added this “or the number of trades made by the silver seller are applied to the buyer too.”
Don’t act like I’m hiding anything.
It’s a game.
No, on the first infraction the silver is not removed. You’re wrong again.
I can only judge by reading what’s written and by what happened in the past.
and that’s how p2w conquers the universe XD
dude you seems to really not get it? really? THE whale may be the first; but the transaction of the bots sending the money to the throwaway account is NOT, and thus would be removed.
AH; I GIVE UP.
it seems you really do not understand that for the whale to buy or for them to send to a throwaway account it would already means that the accounts are flagged and the silver already had their first infraction!, the whale as the final consumer would already be the last one.
edit: i will just copy this here and leave; again.
multiples bots>throwaway account>whale > would result in ban(for the bots)
multiples bots>multiples throwaway accounts> ONE WHALE (final consumer)> result in ban(for the whale)
at some point this money would already be traded multiples times, by multiples accounts and the whale as the final consumer may not be warned/banned, but the silver should be removed, because the silver already went around multiples times (transactions) of questionable means!. because the silver origins already comes from multiples bots and they would not use legal means to transfer it, and even if the whale first offense (warning), at some point in the line, it should have happen more than one transaction because it comes from multiples sources and thus the silver would be tracked and removed in the end.
No, it’s not. You seem to not have read any previous posts.
Sure, I read that. Waiting for the update 
Well I don’t see any reason not to ban if this man shows that behavior.
The solution could be simple
I’m planning to archive every market transaction which going to receive my Warning or Ban by account.
Surely this user tracked history could support our grounds if they are showing this behavior and they could be punished.
3 Likes
Wouldn’t it be better to seize the silver/items bought with silver instead of a warning only?
That would discourage it altogether, just my 2c.
That’s the second punishment atm, but well the rules could be harsher and much specific after first actions taken. I was even considering ripping off everything he got from the first place. but well thats too harsh to begin with. And punishments comes to act we know there is no going back. Its like official ban process.
3 Likes
After googling “How to stop RMT” for some time, I found an interesting tidbit. Why not enforce players to buy from the cheapest item in the market. EG. If there are 2 items being sold at 1000 and 500, make it so the players can only buy first from the 500 ones. Then remove the delay from selling items worth less 50k in total. So that when the buyers have to transfer silver, they have to buy your crap first 
Yes, I understand that atm it’s the 2nd punishment (do you get it, @nery_ma?), but I don’t think that removing something that shouldn’t be there in the first place is too harsh.
There are legit players that never RMT/bot/cheat and letting someone go away with their stuff is not really nice.
It already happened with people exploiting GVG for free TP, they got away with it and now they even act clean.
Yes, many people also going to agree with that one, but let us watch for this period and how things works.
we still could update this one to reverse the things or… well simply taking away. either way the door is still opened.
2 Likes
If you want to remove RMT, best way is to shut the server down.
People that have money find ways to do it. -Ugly Truth
1 Like
which is why community plays a critical role for it, rather than just solely leaving everything to admins
1 Like
Question, can you track the likes on a player, but reports are automated?_?
if yes…
I have a suggestion [hopefully good one] For player interaction that you can track, the creation of another checkbox on the same window where you Like a player with something like 
“Suspected Bot” or something like that…
something you guys can track the same way as Likes but without it been vague like a “Dislike”
it could have a negative opposite aura to the like heart and the ability to be removed obviously so non bots can ask for it to be removed by players that place it by mistake…
hope its understandable what am suggesting
like a negative karma effect? ‘w’?
1 Like