Lavalu

He literally just said the SMG showed proof (the screenshot) first, that's why they could prove their innocence. It would be unfair otherwise; how can you proof something you haven't done.

"Hey I was banned for RMT but I wasn't RMTing."
"Okay, show proof you weren't."
"?"
You can't appeal properly in this situation, that's why there always should be transparency in the sense of, you accuse someone you proof it. There should only be a few exceptions, and RMTing definitly can't be one of it. By claiming that "Hey I was [...] botting or RMTing. Here's my proof." is a proper appeal, you ignore that the banned person is not able to show proof.

-

There is a fair point that they can't show everything if there's a risk of exposing capture methods, but that doesn't change the idea of presumption of innocence (Art. 6 ECHR).

Reading this thread really makes me think more people should study law lol.

He literally just said the SMG showed proof (the screenshot) first, that's why they could prove their innocence. It would be unfair otherwise; how can you proof something you haven't done.

"Hey I was banned for RMT but I wasn't RMTing."
"Okay, show proof you weren't."
"?"
You can't appeal properly in this situation, that's why there always should be transparency in the sense of, you accuse someone you proof it. There should only be a few exceptions, and RMTing definitly can't be one of it. By claiming that "Hey I was [...] botting or RMTing. Here's my proof." is a proper appeal, you ignore that the banned person is not able to show proof.

-

There is a fair point that they can't show everything if there's a risk of exposing capture methods, but that doesn't change the idea of presumption of innocence (Art. 6 ECHR).

Reading this thread really makes me think more people should study law lol.

He literally just said the SMG showed proof (the screenshot) first, that's why they could prove their innocence. It would be unfair otherwise; how can you proof something you haven't done.

"Hey I was banned for RMT but I wasn't RMTing."
"Okay, show proof you weren't."
"?"
You can't appeal properly in this situation, that's why there always should be transparency in the sense of, you accuse someone you proof it. There should only be a few exceptions, and RMTing definitly can't be one of it. By claiming that "Hey I was [...] botting or RMTing. Here's my proof." is a proper appeal, you ignore that the banned person is not able to show proof.

-

There is a fair point that they can't show everything if there's a risk of exposing capture methods, but that doesn't change the idea of presumption of innocence (Art. 6 ECHR).

Reading this thread really makes me think more people should study law lol.

He literally just said the SMG showed proof (the screenshot) first, that's why they could prove their innocence. It would be unfair otherwise; how can you proof something you haven't done.

"Hey I was banned for RMT but I wasn't RMTing."
"Okay, show proof you weren't."
"?"
You can't appeal properly in this situation, that's why there always should be transparency in the sense of, you accuse someone you proof it. There should only be a few exceptions, and RMTing definitly can't be one of it. By claiming that "Hey I was [...] botting or RMTing. Here's my proof." is a proper appeal, you ignore that the banned person is not able to show proof.

-

There is a fair point that they can't show everything if there's a risk of exposing capture methods, but that doesn't change the idea of presumption of innocence (Art. 6 ECHR).

Reading this thread really makes me think more people should study law lol.

He literally just said the SMG showed proof (the screenshot) first, that's why they could prove their innocence. It would be unfair otherwise; how can you proof something you haven't done.

"Hey I was banned for RMT but I wasn't RMTing."
"Okay, show proof you weren't."
"?"
You can't appeal properly in this situation, that's why there always should be transparency in the sense of, you accuse someone you proof it. There should only be a few exceptions, and RMTing definitly can't be one of it. By claiming that "Hey I was [...] botting or RMTing. Here's my proof." is a proper appeal, you ignore that the banned person is not able to show proof.

-

There is a fair point that they can't show everything if there's a risk of exposing capture methods, but that doesn't change the idea of presumption of innocence (Art. 6 ECHR).

Reading this thread really makes me think more people should study law lol.

Hello everybody!
 
me And one of my friends in game, during a very Productive discussion, have tried to find new ways to both have fun during the empty Periods and to attract new players in pokemmo. among all the interesting ideas, one instantlY attracted our attention: pokermmo. we think that the idea is quite simple and also very practical as i will briefly explain here below.
 
the first characteristic of our ideA is that we want to use the casinos - that are currently not well integrated in the game's features - as main base of our PRoject; our aim is to revive these places as useful area durIng and after the end of the story. regarding the modalities of the game, we think It wilL be super Fun to have some poker's table insde the casinOs (texas old'em or other different cards' game) in order to let the people challange each other and, maybe, gain sOme cash. in this regard, i imagine different tabLes, some in "sit&go" style with the jackpot fixed by default, and otherS in "heads up" style, in which 2 players can decide to bet freely cash/pokemon/vanities (clearly, after the confirmation from both). i think another pros of this feature is that it could be useful also as moderator of the economy of the whole game. in fact, having to pay a fee in order to join the table, this could be important to remove some cash liquidity from the game (the amount is to be discussed). 
 
i think i have briefly explaineD most of the features of our idea. i hope we can hAve a discussion here below regarding the way in which it could be implemented inside the game. However, in the meanwhile, even if I don't think I have to remember it todaY, i believe that the most important thing is to have fun e make a big laugh :) Good discussion!
 
 

the trade filter in global chat is really annoying. For one the trade channel is way too spammy to ask trade questions in. 2. Its easy enough to get around it. 3. people would report people spamming advertisements. 4. it gets in the way of conversation and is entirely unneccessary. UPVOTE UPVOTE

The people shall vote this up, as this is the leading opinion in Global.