Hello, all I just want to share a hypothetical situation regarding auctions. I really do want to stress the fact that to the best of my knowledge this has not occurred. I'm not out here lookin' for a marketplace blacklist. [THIS IS AN ENTIRELY HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION AND SHOULD NOT, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES BE ATTEMPTED BY ANYONE] --------------------------------- To set the scene: this conversation takes place on a non-EMC controlled communication platform (email, Reddit, whatever). Player 1: I've got an idea. Whenever your auction falls down a bit on the EMC forum page, I'll throw in a bid at the minimum bid increment. Player 2: And? Player 1: In return, I want a 20% commission on all profits you make after my bid (secretly a bump). That is, if an auction has stagnated at 1000r, and my bump makes players bid it up to 2000r, I just want a 200r fee from you for helping reinvigorate things. Player 2: And I suppose I should do the same for you? Player 1: Precisely. We both make more money from our auctions, and we'll always be sitting on the top of front page. --------------------------------- Again, I feel the need to emphasize: I have not, nor do I intend to, participate in this activity. As clearly stated in the Auction Rules: I would just like to point out a potential loophole in the changes to the Auction Rules. When players are afraid of losing traction and visibility in the forums, it seems natural that they may collaborate to increase earnings collectively. The hypothetical scenario presented above is quite simple, but a dedicated team of a few players could arrange "bumps" in such a way as to mitigate suspicion. Because all communication takes place beyond EMC moderators' jurisdiction, the only investigatable evidence is auction post history. Perhaps, no money could even be changing hands - simply a promise of "today me, tomorrow you." Once more, this is an entirely hypothetical situation, but a valid question nonetheless. I'd like community (and preferably some staff) input on how this risk can be mitigated, whether by revoking the Auction rules changes or some other avenue. Thanks for reading, FunWart
Nice find! I'd like to say that staff probably anticipated for this but to be honest I don't believe that anymore. I suppose the real question here would be if this is scamming or not. I'm not going to bother myself with going over the rules (I got more fun things to do) but I could imagine this to be a bit of a gray area. See, one way or the other 'Player 1' still takes a risk that if no one bids after them then they're obligated to pay for the auction and pick up the goods. Something which might be 'fixable' afterwards but... I dunno. But yeah, new changes usually also bring a heap of new problems to go along with 'm.
If player 1 bids and no one bids after them, they are stuck with winning the auction though and have to pay up. If a price stalls, it's for a reason. Leave it alone and don't try to manipulate the system is the easy answer. If we get evidence that you do, you're punished for it. A balanced system will regulate its own prices.
I kind of wondered about this, not that I have done it.....But I could definitely see this being a scenario! Thank you for clarifying Krysyy!
