EVE General Discussion

The plex price stabilizes where the market allows it. What are you willing to pay for it? What are you willing to sell it for?

PLEX is like heroine. At one time you had the money to afford it or maybe a "friend" got you hooked. Now that you're strung out and can't afford it anymore, you may have to wh0re yourself out in order to fund your addiction. In reality, its time for an intervention.

Burn them all, Grimmi, this is our game.

I'm sure the average person would be much better served by doing 2hrs overtime at work each month and paying for their sub that way (not to mention looking good to the boss) than simply going inactive due to a lack of imagination (or failed attempts to break in to someones routine "end game")

Do you also post about your bans and negative wallets on the forums afterwards; insist you've never bought ISK and then have another Dev come along and "out" you? Because that would be epic

After that incident, the frequency of people coming on to the forums to try and whip up support really damped down.

Dear CCP,
Dear Grimmi,

I am concerned.
while I appreciate the effort you and your team are putting in the war against RMT and to keep the economy in check and guarantee the income stream of CCP with PLEX I highly suggest CCP to overthink this approach to track, find and terminate RMT operations because ultimately you most likely are financing and supporting cybercrime and terrorism with it.

In 2008 the Office of the Director of National Intelligence declassified a Data Mining Report that in page 5 unveiled the existence of Project Reynard.



What the US Government and other intelligence communities had learned over the years is that organizations like Al Qaeda and traditional organized crime organisations that are heavily involved into financing terrorism had largely shifted away from traditional income sources and started running operations that included cyberlaundering, Fraud and the use of Botnets for cybercrime activities, especially in relatively uncontrolled environments such as Online Gaming Communities / Digital Currency Market to create a new layer of anonymity for their operations and catering to the market of Online Gamers with In-Game Items such as PLEX / ISK and other popular digital currencies in return for a mostly anonymous stream of income.

The Richmond Journal of Law & Technology published a paper you can find here: Digital Currencies and the financing of terrorism

That puts into perspective how little funding really is needed to finance an act of terror and how important it is that even small amounts of funding are denied to those organizations to avoid something like 9/11 and other attacks happening in the future.



Sad truth is, if you even spend a budget of $10.000,00 a year to buy ISK from RMT Operators that you don`t know anything about at all, neither who they are nor what their motivation to do RMT is, you are most likely helping to finance cybercrime and in worst case an attack on innocent people that could costs hundreds of people's lifes.

If you think that CCP unwillingly / unknowingly would be financing a terrorist operation is a bit far fetched I do have a more accurate example for you.

IED's have been the number one cause of injuries and deaths in the war against terror so far.

An IED cost a shockingly $256 to produce.

The Coalition casualties report states.
In 2009, there were 7,228 improvised explosive device (IED) attacks in Afghanistan, a 120% increase over 2008, and a record for the war. Of the 512 foreign soldiers killed in 2009, 280 of those were killed by IEDs.

In 2010, IED attacks in Afghanistan wounded 3,366 U.S. soldiers, which is nearly 60% of the total IED-wounded since the start of the war. Of the 711 foreign soldiers killed in 2010, 630 were killed in action. 368 of those were killed by IEDs, which is around 36% of the total IED-killed since the start of the war to date.

Insurgents planted 14,661 IEDs in 2010, a 62% increase over the previous year.
The number of killed in 2012 was 405

So no matter what budget you spend on fighting RMT, if only a single human being dies from an IED produced with the money you spend on buying ISK it is one too many.

From the statement Grimmi made that is more or less a showcase of being proud of his work and CCP's policy about how to handle RMT.

But how can you justify doing this if you know the consequences of your actions are what I described above?

Please at least consider thinking about my concern.
Thank you very much for your time.

It's really simple, CCP should be the prime example of why buying from RMTers is bad and has real life consequences.
And therefore never buy from RMTers in the first place.

My previous comment is based on facts and things happening right now, every day, not on fiction or conspiracy theories.

Many people don`t even know that most of the RMT scene is heavily organized and run by organisations you wouldn`t give your money to if you'd know who they are.

Would you buy ISK if you know you are financing Boko Haram kidnapping 200 girls with it in Africa or Al Qaeda building IEDs to kill your friends who currently serve in Iraq/Afghanistan?

Many people still rather tell themselves "I`m just buying some ISK from that poor student that makes a few bucks extra".
This is simply not the case.

The argument "I bought that AK 47 from the black market arms dealer before you could because hell do I know what you'd do with it" is simply the worst thing to do.

You shouldn`t have bought it in the first place.

I personally think a company like CCP should be able to catch RMTers with the tools they have or are able to implement in the future without having to rely on actively supporting an unknown motivation by the RMT Operator.

All I ask is to overthink this approach and maybe focus on a different solution to the problem.

What?

So... the ends never justifies the means?

The money spent cant be cancelled or withheld or frozen for various reasons?

So when the FBI buys drugs from a dealer, the dealer gets to keep the money, right?

Sorry, Im afraid your objection can only weaken attempts to end the problem, not strengthen them