[Guest]

beelzebub Wrote:now you guys are threatening legal action because she made you give back something that you didn't earn to the original owner?

I don't think it was meant as a threat, and US guys didn't say anything about it. I didnt even mention it.

It does kind of feel like stealing to me (but mainly cause i liked my new house)and because i can put in my own cash and immediatly get back to that amount of cash, i'm still wondering why this is an issue.

In my opinion, nothing has been "unprofessional" or "rude" on either end.

The only folks i see being unreasonable are the ones who are telling everyone to shut up and deal with it. This isn't a situation that is fair. I believe ALL who read this can aggree on that, so knowing it's not "fair" but better for the longevity of the game leaves me with little solace.

I'll likely be the beating bag for the top 4, and never reach that lvl with out spending 500 bucks. I know this is desirable to several, but what if i just bought it like Casenova did. How would that be ANY different than where i just was?

[zenith]

From experience, I am not sure any explanation will be enough to appease the emotions flying around this thread at the moment. This decision was not easy. I hope those involved realize I don't enjoy taking from players.

We now understand that buying one's way to the top is a big problem. We are in discussions about ways to prevent this from happening in the future. We never envisioned someone donating the way Casanova did. Due to this we need to make adjustments.

Allowing $20+ million to be given to two players this one time, and then stopping all similar future actions would be entirely unfair. We had to act quickly and decisively, as no doubt this ruling is now the example for future events.

I feel the term "retroactively" is not the best term to use in this situation. We came to a decision as soon as we could while looking at all angles. Did we envision someone would spend a lot of money and then after 2 months give everything to 2 other players and quit? Absolutely not.

This is our main reason for the ruling. It doesn't involve "destabilizing the economy" at all, even though it can happen. We are still technically in beta, and things have to change. Players need to adapt to changes we make, and the Awakened Lands Staff needs to adapt to the things players throw at us. We cannot see all ends.

Lostangel, you and DreadPiratePinky are not the only ones who have had to return gifts from "retiring" players because of this.

Changes will be made.

[Guest]

Thanks for the explanation, Zenith.

I am officially over it now. I will still take over, just much more slowly

[Guest]

Im not over it, I realize i can't change anything, but I'm not happy at all.

greed is an ugly thing