Both of which used IRC logs, now not sure if DM's were exchanged, but Shuji "implied" supposedly that it could be a bug, whereas Xabia blatantly stated in IRC that it was probably a bug and to send again. Don't really think Shuji was deserving of a 30 day ban, UNLESS there are logs (DM or otherwise) that show that he did state that "Bug" was the result of the action. I think the lesson was from Xabia, don't use "Game Issues" as an excuse to scam. Though modifying logs, events, etc. has been commonplace for years.
As for Rikku, stop "Whinning" :P
Kir only posted the information he had on the "scam" attempt and didn't whine really just posted the facts that he had, as many have in the past. On second note, "Almost everybody scams..." is a quite frankly far from the truth. In fact, most characters don't go past level 1 and many more "honest" traders than thieves, but as per the game, thieves are around as they should be.
I'll just say up front that I think banning someone for indicating that something might have been a bug is silliness. That said:
"He didn't say: "It's the bugs fault. Bugged. Bug got my credits. I blame the bug." He said: "Is it possible""
Yes, indeed a huge difference. In the land of semantics and obtuse courts of law. Meanwhile back in the real e-world, it's not that big a difference. Whether I tell you that your wallet which you handed me is in the toilet or I tell you that it might be in the toilet, you're going to be looking in the toilet.
'the log is fake!'
Really? Kir Jax faked the log to set Shuji up for a ban a day down the road when other traders inform him that saying it's a bug can be a ban worthy offense? I'd say Kir Jax is the criminal mastermind here.
If only Shuji had disputed the veracity of the logs in his post in the thread where Kix Jax posted them, or when after people started saying it might get him banned. Or even when he created this very thread. Instead he just says 'I never told him to check with the asims'.
'But lying IC is totally legit, dude!'
Yes, I'm sure that alluding to the combine's bugs was meant completely in character.
'No one but the person involved should have been allowed to go to the asims!'
I'm not sure how the person who either sent the credits which weren't received due to a possible bug or who didn't send the credits and is the scammer himself, is uninvolved.
"at most an ASim can say "there was no bug", but he shouldn't even confirm/deny whether or not money exchanged hands in public."
They said there was no bug, they didn't confirm or deny whether or not money exchanged hands. Isn't that exactly what you say they can do?
I guess with Galaxy shift coming up maybe some A-sims are just getting cranky about having to take time away from moving a few thousand planets around, and fixing all these wonderful new bugs that actually exist to check some scammer who cannot just turn around and say "use a middle next time"
A-Sims are human to. It's like bugging a cop during a riot. Normally being a jerk or J-walking would get you a ticket at worse. Doing it during a riot gets your butt arrested.
Her imaginary friends think you have issues. Her multiple personalities agree. So her inner child is refusing to speak to you!
Yes, I'm sure that alluding to the combine's bugs was meant completely in character.”
As much as editing a screenshot and succeeding because of your RL graphics editing skills is IC (which, no, it isn't really, but it's always been permissible in the context of scamming itself relying on the OOC situation of taking advantage of a person's stupidity/impatience/time schedule/whatever). I mean, consider how conversations like that can play out naturally:
Scammer: I didn't get your credits. You must not have sent them!
Victim: Did too! Look, here's the screenshot!
Scammer: Here's my screenshot. You totally didn't.
Victim: Okay, giving you benefit of a doubt here.. you think it could be a bug?
It's an open question. There's no acceptable answer, if the scammer doesn't want to be hostile towards his victim. "No" leads only to "you didn't send and that makes you a liar" (hostile) OR "it didn't go through and may not be your fault" (not hostile) .. There's not really a third option. If that qualifies as blaming a bug and making the ASims do work .. then it's ridiculous to even bother to allow scamming, if the victim can literally argue the scammer into getting banned.
Stick to the ol' party line, "we don't interfere with trading situations." -_-
Doesn't matter who brought up it (possibly) being a bug first, if they suspect it is a bug they make a bug-report, if it turns out to not be a bug then they simply got scammed, if it was a bug then they either get what they paid for or their credits back
If no one reported this to the ASSims, then it's simply Jenos taking it upon himself to look in to it and he wasted his own time, if someone else did report it then they should be banned for wasting the ASSims' time not Shuji for possibly scamming Kir (in trade disputes it comes down to who makes a more believable argument to determine who is in the right)
“You conveniently turned things around with the other party asking whether it's a bug instead of the first party hinting at it being a bug.”
No--the point is that conflicting screenshots necessarily hint at it being a bug if the scammer isn't openly accusing his victim of being an asshole. It ends up with the scammer admitting it could be a bug, and whether that occurs as a result of someone else asking the question and him agreeing, or him proposing that as a possibility in the first place, seems to come down to exactly the same point.
Kir alleges on Day183 that he sent the credits on Day181 and Shuji said at the time (Day183) that he had no events for that day but if the credits show up he would send them back, and now 2 days later he gets banned for claiming it was a bug (which he never said, he said "is it possible, in this bug-infested game, that they got lost")
In that situation, the only one who should have been banned was the one who insisted it be looked at: Kir
But imo no-one should have been banned over this matter: the worst that should happened is the credits deducted from Shuji's account (if it could be proved that he did receive the credits) and returned to Kir, but as has been stated many times: they don't get involved in trade disputes
The reason giving for banning Shuji was because of wasting Jenos' time, but seeing how it wasn't him who brought it to Jenos' attention, it should be the one who did, and if it wasn't Kir either, then the one who did should be banned for butting into a trade dispute that had nothing to do with them and wasting Jenos' valuable time over it
Technically, all scam reports in the traders lounge should now be "He scammed", and the scammer should reply "I scammed."
Otherwise, it is now a bannable offense because one of the two blamed a bug in the game.
Seriously Jenos... do you realize your credibility as aSim is weakening day after days? You were one of the most popular aSim less than a month ago, and now you're becoming the one getting all the reproaches... You seriously need to think twice before acting, and more than anything, to learn to shrug and smile.