I submit that hearsay is correct. As this entire event is being told from the word of a 3rd party. The actual buyer or seller has never responded to the thread. So all the evidence brought forth is from 3rd parties, even the transition itself is being told to us via a 3rd party.
Right… but that’s fine, you can bring in out-of-court statements provided you aren’t using those statements to prove up the truth of those statements. There are loads and loads of exceptions and rules regarding hearsay evidence and unfortunately it gets tossed around too much as just “someone else said a thing” when it isn’t nearly so broad.
I can ask a witness about what someone else told her and she can testify to it despite that statement being entirely out-of-court. That 3rd party doesn’t even need to be brought in (although you’d be dumb NOT to) for it to be admissible. That’s why we ask witnesses things like:
“So how did that make you feel?”
“What did you do next?”
“Did you believe him when he said that?”
What we’re actually asking about and proving up is how the witness in front of us reacted to and responded to such statements. If you wanted to argue her responses were ridiculous you could go about it by attacking the reasonableness of her reactions based upon what was allegedly said, or you could bring in the 3rd party speaker to repudiate the testimony to show different statements were actually stated.
What you couldn’t do is say that the 3rd party speaker did not in fact say those things without some kind of proper rebuttal evidence since the statements were never offered in the first place for the truth of the matter.
So is it correct the say that because the 3rd party did not witness the actual transaction take place, they cannot testify with certainty what actually transpired during the AH transaction.
Anything they say happened during the transaction, such as the price paid or that the transaction even occurred can be considered hearsay?
Right, but we wouldn’t object on grounds of hearsay, we’d object for lack of personal knowledge if somehow this witness slipped our notice on why they were testifying in the first place.
Price paid, seller, that kind of stuff? No. They could identify who saw selling and for what values, but since it is AH data the easiest response is to mandate they actually supply the AH logs since it is documented.
Intent of the seller stuff? See above, it isn’t hearsay, it is something they lack knowledge of entirely. They can testify that they FEEL scammed all day, but they can’t make declarations of the other person being a scammer without being pushed back. People can testify about how they feel all day long, and that’s to the detriment of many a case when witnesses go off script and talk about their feelings.
Trust me, you don’t have to trust me
So at the end of the day, if this were a case brought to court.
Bases solely on the evidence we have in this thread.
The verdict either by judge or jury would be “Not guilty” of fraud or a scam.
For one, no rule was actually broken, but even if there was a rule for this, there is not sufficient evidence to support a ruling of “guilty” as we do not have the AH logs or testimony from either the seller or buyer.
No cause of action, no trial at all, these people would lose on summary judgment.
1 Like
All this nonsense.
Report those auctions and players posting them, they get in trouble for it so obviously it’s against the rules. Period. All the rest of this is blah blah. Keep doing whatever floats your boat, when it ends up sinking it you won’t be crying to us (bans extend to forums). Fortunately Blizzard is sending in game mail now in TBC so we don’t have to take YOUR word for it. Good luck.
1 Like
And you have evidence of this? Please see the above post.
3 Likes
Its not against the rules & people do not get in trouble for it…
Why do you people come in here and blatantly lie about this stuff?? Rofl
3 Likes
I DONT LIE EVER. Don’t have time for that. Believe what you want. You’ve been warned. Doesn’t affect me either way what happens to YOUR account.
General consensus is I’m right and you’re wrong, you’re vocal minority. All this defense, y’all getting people in trouble. Bru
1 Like
Care to rethink that position?
You apparently also do not have the time to know the rules of the game.
Also, on this thread, a blue post responded:
Just to confirm it: AH transactions are final and are not subject to intervention by Gamemasters, even if the asked price for an item seems higher than would usually be expected. This is down to the fact that we do not actually decide what an items perceived value for a player is supposed to be (outside selling it to NPC vendors), so whatever buyer and seller agree on is acceptable.
This stance actually goes both ways, too - if someone happens to offer their “Sword of Ultimate Apocalypse +17” for 40 coppers and a firm handshake, that’d not be reverted either. 
I believe it is very clear, this is not against the rules and any claims that a GM did something to the seller such as a ban or gave refunds to the buyer is misinformation.
8 Likes
LOL no… The buyout price is clearly listed. She wasn’t paying attention. Her fault his gain
2 Likes
You are correct. They don’t issue refunds buy do action people spam posting this nonsense. About 500 posts above this is Blue text from the EULA that outlines player behavior. Give it a read. I’m done with you too. Wasting my time.
2 Likes
I can guarantee you that you’re 100% mistaken. Blizz does not take actions against people for putting up auctions on the AH for an amount that you disagree with.
If you think I’m wrong, read the actual blue posts from Blizz employees that have been linked in this thread. Alternatively, feel free to ask over in the CS forums.
7 Likes
So an actual GM, responds by telling you “No, it is not against the rules, and no, we will not do anything about it” and you still persist in saying you are right.
Sorry, I will take the word of a GM over a random player.
Blue Post > Random players opinion.
3 Likes
No they don’t.
That’s a catch-all provision that if anything seems out of whack a GM has the authority to dole out punishments as they see fit since ultimately Blizzard deems what is and isn’t correct. Given that you’re now having to hang your hat on a discretionary OPTION for a GM and you have to caveat that with SPAM, not just posting a single Netherweave for a very high price, you’ve entirely lost the plot.
There’s no penalty about posting lots and lots of the same kind of postings. If spam was a problem, all the complaints over singles being sold instead of stacks would have garnered some GM intervention, and it hasn’t.
So you have no legs to stand on and you’re a dirty liar for trying to get people to abuse the report function in-game to attack people who aren’t doing anything wrong. Oh and that “Player Behavior” article also has explicit language that says abuse of the report function will see the reporting party actioned.
We know you’re not doing it, but you’re going to get some other person on here in trouble for trying out your suggestion.
3 Likes
At this stage, I think this dead horse has been beaten enough. We are now digressing into circular arguments and I believe it is clear nothing new or constructive is being discussed.
It is a shame the community cannot vote a thread closed.
1 Like
the sales not being reverted doesn’t mean people aren’t getting suspended for obvious scams
Delusion, thy name is Arielba.
5 Likes