MS>OS. SR. Those are rng and fair.
Swipe credit card and then profit. GDKP
RNG is not necessarily fair, and oh yeah LFM MS > OS XUZ HR, PST with experience and GS, checking logs.
That comment is so weird…
Hey, you can do this, but we’ll probably ban you for receiving RMT’d gold? How the hell do they think they can accurately decide who is and isn’t doing it in bad faith? They just gonna randomly ban innocent people for trying it?
nobody is getting banned for receiving gold unless they paid real money for it 
Seems pretty clear what they’re implying here.
You can still do this, but we still reserve the right to arbitrarily decide who is and isn’t guilty, since technically there is actually no way for them to determine who meant to take bad gold.
Actually it is. GDKP is how gold sellers wash their currency back into the market further adding to the inflation (i.e. 300gold level 24/5 greens). As the player base spends gold in those areas, gold farmers sell the gold they earned back to gold sellers who then sell it back to the player base who then gets back into GDKP essentially turning the game into a Pay to Win version of the game. GDKP is a disaster and should be a bannable offense.
Now keep in mind that applies to all gold transactions not just GDKP’s.
1 Like
yup. I guess it’s time to report people who sell stuff on the AH to a known gold buyer…
I suppose I always knew that gold sellers would do something like this, instead of doing something more obvious like mailing the gold to someone… but this is pretty ridiculous and a strong argument against GDKP and why it should probably go away… because if Blizzard just decides one day that some person took gold (from botters they are profiting off of) despite it being a totally random AH listing or random group they joined… Not sure how exactly Blizzard thinks this policy is ok, especially to punish the “user” instead of the “profiteer”.
There’s no reason to think that there’s more RMT gold in GDKP’s than anywhere else.
Bots aren’t going into your average GDKP and trying to dump gold.
1 Like
Sure, but it’s not about them, it’s about the people that bought it and would go to a GDKP, and everyone that “profits” from that person is all of a sudden culpable according to Blizzard.
No more culpable than in any other format.
Yes, like I said, and this is why the policy they seem to have implemented is dumb.
The key point I’m trying to make here is that this problem, while not really limited to it, and maybe even innocent the majority of the time, is still part of the greater umbrella of why people might have a distaste for GDKP.
Sir this is SoD where everyone is level 25, quests reward 2g at max level, and items in GDKP’s regularly sell for 5-20g. You are always welcome to join a GDKP with a gold per item cap on it.
You will leave with either more gold you came with, more items you came with, or both.
Yes people who watch 1 or 2 click bait youtube videos and refuse to educate themselves.
You can’t deny that while it may or may not be the cause of said problem, it is still a symptom of said problem, and that’s why some people don’t like it. No one likes bots → no one likes RMT’s → no one likes things that become an effective way of promoting them. Innocent or not, it does have a correlation.
It’s more that there’s people who just don’t like GDKP’s as a concept and intentionally conflate them with RMT while actively lying about what actually happens in them.
Two things can exist for entirely different reasons, and yet still make a random connection to something else that just happens to naturally work for both of them. This is like making a product that was meant to do one thing, but then people find out later it has a much better use for something else.
And if there was a prevalence of RMT gold in GDKP’s that would be a totally valid point.
But the actual reality is that the vast majority of GDKP’s don’t have items going for anything other than completely reasonable amounts. So the people who claim otherwise are either simply ignorant and refuse to educate themselves or are actively lying.