Gold for intellectual property or licence to use copyright

[Mens Rea]

I suggest that there is no harm in pointing out that the explicitly described rule only apply to the forums (private or public), in-game and IRC.

If the suggestion is that the rule extend wider than that, then perhaps the shard should consider changing the rule to make it clear that *any* solciting is against the rules of the shard - or alternatively, that the exchange of anything with value for in-game property/gold is against the rule.

Otherwise the rule is misleading, and the shard would be arbitrarily banning someone who has not acted outside the scope of the rule. It would be utterly absurd to ban someone for relying on wording of the actual rule and then to turn around and say to them the rule is wider than it clearly says.

[iamreallysquall]

I suggest that there is no harm in pointing out that the explicitly described rule only apply to the forums (private or public), in-game and IRC.

If the suggestion is that the rule extend wider than that, then perhaps the shard should consider changing the rule to make it clear that *any* solciting is against the rules of the shard - or alternatively, that the exchange of anything with value for in-game property/gold is against the rule.

Otherwise the rule is misleading, and the shard would be arbitrarily banning someone who has not acted outside the scope of the rule. It would be utterly absurd to ban someone for relying on wording of the actual rule and then to turn around and say to them the rule is wider than it clearly says.

go back to law school
"Soliciting anything on Second age for real currency, or in trade for items of tangible value/expense through the forums, be it public or private communication or in IRC or in-game is not allowed and will result in account termination if discovered."
learn to read

[Mens Rea]

Provide some useful input.

[iamreallysquall]

at what point does communication only start to cover the forums? hmph mr bigshot?

[Mens Rea]

"...through the forums, -BE IT- public or private communication -OR- in IRC -OR- in-game is not allowed and will result in account termination if discovered"

Let's see. Solciting ... through the forums, be it public or private communication...

The "be it" statement is refering to private or public communication in the forums.

Otherwise it would read: ...through the forums or public or private communication or IRC or in-game...

The remaining specific places you are not allowed to solicit are expressed in an exhaustive list due to the word "or". Otherwise, there would be a catch-all at the end, such as "or any other medium".

[Hans]

This thread is pointless drivel.

You keep confusing real-world law with UOSA rules. And you grossly misproportion the value of a forum signature, like it's some sort of real-world, tradable commodity.

Several people have given you this same simple suggestion, yet you ignore it. If you want the line drawn for you between acceptable and unacceptable trades, you need to ask an admin. Hell, an admin just told you it's up to them to decide. And it just fueled your fury.

But that isn't the real reason you're doing this, is it? It's not about getting an answer to your question. It's not the respectful way to go about this. This is rabble-rousing. Attempting to raise some superficial debate on UOSA "law" to a bunch of people that really have little to do with the shard operations - the players, is a waste of time. It would have been easy to just ignore if you'd quit bumping your own thread, like attention-whoring Stewart:



"Blah blah, hypothetical situation, blah blah." -- With you around, it's like BanningU, and Protard never stopped posting.

You need to pay extra special attention to this rule:
-Respect the Staff. No one is being paid for their work here and we have gone to great lengths to find honest and competent staff members.

Give it a rest man!

(Sorry for bumping this thread - this is the last time I'm posting here. Is there any way to put someone on ignore on the forums?! GOOD GOD!!!)

[Mens Rea]

Oh, and then there's the fact that the rule only applies to soliciting, not the actual trading of irl currency for in-game items.

So effectively the rule is that you are not allowed to advertise or negotiate the sale of in-game items on the forums, on IRC or in-game. However, the rule does not ban the actual involved in selling in-game property for irl currency.

I mean no disrespect, and I fail to see where you have imported the idea I am disrespecting the shard admins from.

You never know, they might not have noticed the "loophole" the stated rule leaves open, or alternatively they might have intended it to be that way. Your leg-waving post does nothing to clarify this.

[Malaikat]

This is a privately owned and freely available server. You've entered no contractual agreement with its management. You have no legal rights here other than the always present - just gtfo - option. Derrick and the staff can rewrite the rules or interpret them in any way they see fit, as often as they see fit, and with no prior notice. They CAN (if they were to so desire) lay down "arbitrary" bans for literally no reason at all.

If you don't like it, leave. It's really your only recourse.

[Mens Rea]

I'm not trying to assert any legal rights, I'm just pointing out that the rule does not cover (a) selling items for irl money, provided; (b) you don't advertise on the forums, on irc or in-game.

My assertion that the rule only covers certain actions in certain circumstances. Try engaging with the content of the assertion rather than just trying to have a go at me.

Like I say, the rule could be intentionally worded this way. The admins can leave it the way it is, which is fine by me - I think the substantive effect of the rule is fine the way it is - "do what you like but don't do it here". Or alternatively, I have brought the shortcomings in the wording of the rule to the admin's attention and they can act on it as they see fit.

You can hurl abuse at me all day and all night, it doesn't detract from my assertion one bit.

[Malaikat]

I'm not trying to assert any legal rights, I'm just pointing out that the rule does not cover (a) selling items for irl money, provided; (b) you don't advertise on the forums, on irc or in-game.

They don't have any way to police it if the transaction is arranged off their property, and it likely absolves them from any legal liability...which I'm certain is a portion of the rule's intent.

My assertion that the rule only covers certain actions in certain circumstances. Try engaging with the content of the assertion rather than just trying to have a go at me.

No one's going at you. Maybe if you'd read entire posts in context rather than trying to be such a self-defensive little girl, you'd hear what everyone has been telling you for the last 40 posts, staff included.

I think the substantive effect of the rule is fine the way it is - "do what you like but don't do it here".

It sounds like everyone is in agreement then. So, why are we having this discussion at all?

[Mens Rea]

I'd love to agree with you that you "knew it all along" and you've just returned to say that I have been agreeing with you the whole time without realising it, but:

From what I understand, the rules only state that you can't make exchanges for currency.

Perhaps, also, the rule simply applies to items with a direct monetary value - tangible physical assets

You have done a complete 180 on the matter.

[Malaikat]

I've gained a better understanding of what this is all about and also of the rule itself, true. You forgot a quote tho...

considering you're not a staff member, I'd say you should stfu and let the shard's administration rule

And I haven't completely changed my argument. I'm simply placing a greater emphasis on the point that staff can interpret rules any which way they choose in any given situation.

[Mens Rea]

Like I say, the rule could be intentionally worded this way. The admins can leave it the way it is, which is fine by me - I think the substantive effect of the rule is fine the way it is - "do what you like but don't do it here". Or alternatively, I have brought the shortcomings in the wording of the rule to the admin's attention and they can act on it as they see fit.

You "stfu".

[Malaikat]

Don't worry - Malaikat is eventually going to cry on the forums.

Annyyy minute now...

[Mens Rea]

Subject: Selling Silver Weps!!! (macing, fencing, swords, archery)

3.1k swords

If you legitimately want these, that's fine, but don't be a jackass. I'm not going to entering a bidding war with you every time I want to buy something simply because I'm squeezing some entertainment out of our little forum quarrels.

This is crying. Crying because I outbid you on the auction. On the forums. It's been and gone Malaikat.