In-Game Events and Gatherings

TL;DR - Don't trust anything that Shattered Crystal says. SOMERblink was knowingly violating the rules.

Got it.

Edit: That's not my stance. It just seems that's the argument being made.

What is the algorithm in which the "winning number" is selected? Really just random or are other factors in this?
Did CCP verify any of the coding in the background? I seriously believe that SOMER has a specific behavior algorithm in their code.
They keep track of which numbers you favor. They also keep track of winnings for each player. *Snip* Please refrain from spreading baseless rumors. ISD Ezwal

That is apparently rumor mongering

Just because we are seeing a lot of strange things that look like isk laundering. Apparently it is not.

Precisely - there are achievements for winning multiple ships that give free credit, so it's not uncommon for a string of wins on the same ship, and that page only shows the last few.\

I really would be all up for "SOMER-bashing" had I ever seen anything resembling hard evidence that I was being scammed out of my money. The truth however, is that it's a gambling site and more people are going to leave the table with less money than they started with compared to those who luck out.

Even when my own balance has gone into negative profit (and it's never been a big source of profit anyway), I've never had any reason to suspect that I was being cheated.

My advice to prospective players is to play it for the fun of it, not to win. That way you'll feel like you've got your ISK's worth regardless of your win/lose ratio.

"CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th."

Lol.

Blink "removed" bonus but leave their GTC bonus page active :)

Seems like they want to get more $$$ :)

Why would they not leave the GTC page active? Resellers offer affiliate programs and by buying codes via affiliates you support CCP, reseller and the affiliate all in one. Why is it "lol"? Why would Blink not want to get more $$$ via completely common practice? Wouldn't you?

As bona fide space lawyer you will understand the difference between SOMER having an agreement with CCP to deliver prizes and me having an agreement with SOMER to have a chance at winning those prizes. I understand SOMER couldn't give away the prizes because their agreement with CCP fell through - it is no problem at all, if only SOMER undoes what I did to enter the competition for those prizes.



That is incorrect. They claim I got what I paid for ("valid play") and won't do anything.



That is incorrect. I have mentioned it several times in several threads. This is SOMER's thread though, not CCP's thread, so here I focus on what SOMER has (or more precisely hasn't) done.


Ah the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave. What exactly has US jurisprudence to do with scamming in pretend-space hosted on an English server by an Icelandic company? Want me to find a counterexample in one of the hundreds of other countries of the world?


By now we are three steps removed from the actual scam. SOMER not doing what it said is not the problem, CCP not doing what they said is not the problem, no, the forum warriors who complained, they screwed me over! It is ridiculous. You seem to be grasping at straws just to try to divert attention from the fact that I had an agreement with SOMER, they couldn't deliver and they refused a refund.

My account on Somer blink was disabled, not sure why can anyone help?

I really do hope you get your 16Bn back and maybe one day, if getting it back is your goal and not just wantonly bashing Blink on every forum possible, you will see you are barking up the wrong tree.

Point one - the space lawyer jab - I have never applied to the bar of any jurisdiction in space. I am not a space lawyer, I just play one on the internet.

it seems lawyers at work here as "valid play" is a legal term and very few lay persons would know that term or how to use it in its proper context. Litagation is in the air.

Your deposit did not create an agreement (beyond your own imagination) with Blink to have a shot at those prizes. Your deposit created a tacit agreement to play Blink according to their rules and you did. Yes - valid play. The prizes announced by CCP Navigator were to be given away as a promotion sponsored by CCP. CCP pulled their sponsorship. Blink is at no fault for losing the sponsorship. You won 70% of your deposit and could have taken ISK but chose not to. You had valid play. Promotions sponsored by entities take on the responsibility to produce the prizes offered. Blink would be held harmless in this action as they did all they could to produce the prizes other than toss dried beaver bones on a tanned raccoon skin to conjure them up. Your argument is no more valid than if I wanted to enter a drawing by a Chevrolet Dealer for a Corvette the dealer ran an ad in their own newsletter to promote and instructing "potential winners" to bring ticket stubs (must spend money to got to movie ticket stub, even if I had never gone to a drive-in) from any local (local would need to be defined) drive-in movie. I went to a movie, I saw the movie, the Dealership reneged on the Corvette drawing. Because it was a drawing which is considered a form of gambling because the outcome is not guaranteed, and you were not charged to specifically to enter the drawing regardless of the amount of money (even spaceship money) you have spent to get free access to the second drawing, you have no damage as you suffered no loss after having valid play and taking your chances (just as Blink did) that the sponsors would not renege. I would have no claim against the drive-in movie even though the movie had a sign in their window about the drawing. A court would find the movie held blameless and even consider the movie a victim as its reputation was damaged by the sponsor reneging and having hapless dreamers forming a picket line for every Saturdays, all night "Machete MovieThon".

This example may seem ridiculous, but look closely at the relationship of each entity here. The dealership made the announcement, the dealership reneged. People watched the movie and dreamt about seeing the next movie in a Corvette. The movie conducted business as usual, except for putting a poster in their window, and gave each ticket holder "valid play" and probably sold them some popcorn and a condom.

Point two - I am correct. I have seen players be stinky buttflaps shooting off their mouths in chat and still be offered by blink to return their prizes to their que so the players can have a second chance at deciding how they want to redeem them.

Point three - The second "you are incorrect" jab. Oh wait, I deserved that jab as I am not a forum rat who reads and posts all over. Therefore had not seen your posts in other forums, so yes, I was incorrect and apologize for not following your writings, though your command of the English language is superior.

Point four - First, this is not about outer space. seperate fantasy from reality for a minute. This is about an international business entity with offices in the United States, an affiliate in the United States, possibly named authorized third party resellers in the United States, and we all know MacDonald's is headquartered in the United States and most Blink players are playing from their non-Corvettes in the parking lot and hustling the Mickey D WiFi which is probably in the United States and is no more liable for the non-damages you feel you suffered than is Blink, even your ISP is no more liable than Blink for the damages you did not suffer even though you would not have known anything about this sponsorship, or at least would not have been able to participate without an ISP.

Point five - No, i am not reaching at straws. If other players had not objected to the sponsorship of these prizes, would CCP have withdrawn them? If you say yes CCP would have reneged, then you are blaming CCP of a conspiracy to defame Blink. If your answer no, then you would have expected the sponsorship would have been followed through and you would have had your shot at the CCP owned and controlled pixels.

In this case, I have always held that CCP is at fault, not the forum rats and not Blink. I was sarcastically pointing out that anyone as naive (uninformed, not stupid) as you about credible liability and exactly whom is at fault could be expected to spray everyone who stood in your way of having your distant shot at these amazing prizes. Just a few days ago, I was in a grocery store and a person occupying the race car grocery cart (my personal favorite to haul behind my Hoveround) in front of me in line pointed at me and tossed excoriating gibberish though it was my fault that person had dropped the sucker it had extorted from the much taller person with the credit card who seemed somehow connected to a NASCAR driver's chaffeur.

Good luck. I am done. I have breathed my last breath into your tilting at windmills. If a post is not answered, does anyone hear the tree fall?