Sunday, October 24th, 2010
Issue: 52   Editor: oSean


COLUMN: Points-buyers... and Their Rights. Noir
Recently, bodhisattva- better known as Mags, the Mood Radio DJ- wrote a topic in the game forum which caught my interest. It begged the age-old question; should people who have spent their own, hard-earned cash on points, lose their points if they get banned?

It isn't an easy question to answer, and Mags gives a compelling opinion. I feel that quoting just one line at a time, though more acceptable in what we call 'good' English, would merely skew the argument Mags portrayed. So, in a death-defying display of contempt for standard practice, I present to you the most relevant sections of Mags' topic.

"People banned with points [...] should have that money refunded I must say or credited points on their new account, IF THEY PAID FOR THEM.

And its not hard for an admin to see if they purchased the points with real money.

Having your points taken away from you that you just paid for regardless whether you broke a stupid little rule is theft.

A person has paid for that product and because they break some...wait for it..."Who gives a fuck really its just a game"...rule is being effectively stolen from.

If they have broken no civil laws, criminal laws or cause malicious or lasting damage to the software and or systems that bootleggers operates on then all they have done really is been a goose with their account. Hardly worth them being ripped off by the game owner.

Its time you changed all of this BSF. If you arent going to be around to interact with people atleast make it so you arent totally fucking them in the arse without spit if they break one of the oh so pure and holier than thou game rules."


Interesting.

Part of me agrees. I've never spent a dime on this game, but if I were to put myself in the shoes of someone who HAS. How would I feel? Let's say I spent $10 on a couple of points. I play the game and enjoy the newfound opportunities my points present to me.

Then one day, I break a rule. A silly little rule which, although it has its place, is really rather nitpicky. Something which, for a first offense, should surely be met with little more than a slap on the wrist.

Like what, I hear you ask? With an uncharacteristical surge of enthusiasm, I have actually done some RESEARCH for this article (as opposed to scribbling down an article while the adverts are on during the X Factor... or when Diva Viva were performing.)

According to the Terms of Service, you can be banned for any number of things. Allowing anyone other than yourself to access your account; against the Terms of Service. That's right... asking your brother/sister/grandad to log in to your account twice a day to do a quick OC while you're away on holiday, is a bannable offence.

Accessing anyone else's account is also against the Terms Of Service. Your friend's internet has screwed up, he just wants you to log into his account to put him on vacation until his internet is fixed... both you and your friend are banned.

Number 8.7 in the Terms of Service- you may not "stalk" (their words, not mine) or otherwise harass another user. Harassing another user is a bannable offence? TAKE A PEEK IN THE OFF-TOPIC FORUM! Every other user is a fucking troll. Where are THEIR bans!?

8.8 made me laugh- you may not store personal data about other users. What counts as personal data? Obviously their email does, but their username? Their rank? Their signup date? There are Bootleggers helpsites dedicated to storing all that stuff. I know of crew leaders who have stored usernames and email addresses of their crew members, just to be able to contact them in case their crew comes under fire. Technically, if you add a Bootlegger on MSN, you've broken the terms of service.

Number 11 absolutely takes the chocolate-covered biscuit.

11. MODIFICATIONS TO SERVICE
We reserve the right at any time and from time to time to modify or discontinue, temporarily or permanently, the Service (or any part thereof) with or without notice.


What this essentially means is that BSF2000 can modify any part of the Terms of Service without telling a soul. You are still bound by the Terms of Service, and can subsequently be banned for newly introduced rules... BSF could introduce a rule that every user must sing Amazing Grace whenever a State Don snuffs it, and anyone who fails to do so has their account terminated. Laughing. M. AO.

But who are we to question these rules? We accepted the terms of service on signup. We didn't read a bloody word, but we accepted it. Fine. That's ok. It's our fault if we break one of these rules.

Nobody would care. Nobody would give one solitary toss... if money didn't come into it. But it does. Oh boy it does. BSF2000 reportedly makes thousands of dollars from this website. A normal ban might be met with annoyance, but the moment money comes into it, a ban might be met with a lawsuit.

And that is the state of affairs so far; if you break a rule, big or small, you lose your points, end of. There is an appeals process of reportedly limited success, but otherwise, your hard-earned points are gone forever.

Which brings us back to the question: do rule-breaking players who have purchased points, deserve to lose their points as well as their account? I stress: I am not talking about the hackers and the BOT-users, those who post child porn and those who spread viruses... both Mags and I are talking about the little rules.

Firstly, I agree with Mags, who emphasised, and I quote, "IF THEY PAID FOR THEM." Users who break rules should lose any points not bought with real life cash. Chances are, any points not bought with cash were bought with exploited Bootleggers dollars anyway.

However, I cannot agree with everything he said. The implication is that there should be another set of rules for people who have spent cash on the game; a set of more liberal rules, which allows more freedom and opportunities to screw the game over. The implication is that point-purchasers are a better class of user, and are above the pettier rules which the rest of us have to adhere to.

Maybe I've taken it the wrong way. He might just have easily have meant that all the pettier rules should be eliminated altogether, for EVERY user. But I can't help feeling that that just wasn't the point of the topic. The emphasis was on fairness, or priveledges, for point-buyers; NOT all users.

I know that the point-purchasers are what keeps the game up and running, and banning them is the equivalent of jailing the head of Greenpeace for putting his plastic in the wrong recycling bag. But we can't have a different set of rules for different people.

The fact of the matter is, we accepted the Terms of Service. It's a shit answer, but it's the right one. We can suggest changes to BSF's policy, but we can't complain. It's like complaining to your pharmacist that the paracetemol you took last night, cured your headache... exactly like it said on the packet, which you should have read before taking.

I agree, as Mags says, that if the user breaks a tiny, insignificant rule, an outright ban and removal of points seems like overkill. But every case is different, and I think it really should be at BSF's discretion as to whether he takes action or lets them off with a warning. Frankly, he ought to show some respect to those who have spent good money on his game; but not at the expense of everyone else.

In short; I disagree with the concept of letting users off completely, whether they have bought points or not, and whether the rule is a good one or not. Though I admit, I'll be pissed off if I get banned for not singing Amazing Grace...