Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst
1
2
  1. #21
    For it to be a supported transaction between players, the item aka the guild would have to be able to be placed into a trade window. You can report the other person for a scam, but don't expect to get your gold back.
    when all else fails, read the STICKIES.

  2. #22
    The Lightbringer Kevyne-Shandris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Basking in the Light
    Posts
    3,255
    Quote Originally Posted by Tziva View Post
    The watermarking thing isn't really relevant. Blizzard doesn't accept screenshots as evidence.
    Which is funny, considering that was the purpose of that watermarking for verification of who/what server/and date. With it embedded it's very unlikely to be forged, too. It's not a typical watermark.
    From the #1 Cata review on Amazon.com: "Blizzard's greatest misstep was blaming players instead of admitting their mistakes. They've convinced half of the population that the other half are unskilled whiners, causing a permanent rift in the community."
    Blizzard's blame game in action: Deleting 6,100+ of Kevyne's posts and threads from the WoW forums.

  3. #23
    Free Food!?!?! Tziva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    WHEREVER I WANT AINT NO ONE GONNA DO NOTHIN ABOUT IT IMMA T-REX
    Posts
    10,844
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevyne-Shandris View Post
    Which is funny, considering that was the purpose of that watermarking for verification of who/what server/and date. With it embedded it's very unlikely to be forged, too. It's not a typical watermark.
    Not really, on a practical level. The purpose is probably for identifying private servers. I doubt the average GM, who is basically glorified customer service, has the time or resources to check and verify screen shots by exposing and reading the embedded watermark every time some random submits one as evidence of whatever. There are also circumstances where screen shots might not contain a watermark, or where the areas of the screenshot that don't contain the watermark might be successfully tampered with. It's also worth noting that the policy not to accept screenshots also predates the embedding of the watermarks.

    So with all that in mind, I can understand why they would instead choose to rely on chat logs and reject screen shots as evidence.
    AbathurSnuggles: Blizzard Alpha Videos

    For Moderation Concerns, please contact a Global:
    TzivaDarsithisRaduxArleeSimcaElysiaZaelsino

  4. #24
    If it does not fit in a trade window, it's not supported by Blizzard. It is allowed and the scammers are likely to get punished but there is a high chance that no refunding will be included. It will somewhat come down to the gamemaster handling your case.

  5. #25
    Never got why people buy guilds lol...I own 5 or 6 of them, two of which are at level 25, and I didn't pay a copper :-) I see people getting rid of guilds, I create alts and take it. Free storage!
    Quote Originally Posted by Warwithin View Post
    Politicians put their hand on the BIBLE and swore to uphold the CONSTITUTION. They did not put their hand on the CONSTITUTION and swear to uphold the BIBLE.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Jensen View Post
    Except maybe Morgan Freeman. That man could convince God to be an atheist with that voice of his . . .

  6. #26
    Pit Lord velde046's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    2,415
    Supporting stuff is something different than allowing it. Blizz does the latter and would be stupid if they burnt their fingers on doing the first....

  7. #27
    The Lightbringer Kevyne-Shandris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Basking in the Light
    Posts
    3,255
    Quote Originally Posted by Tziva View Post
    Not really, on a practical level. The purpose is probably for identifying private servers. I doubt the average GM, who is basically glorified customer service, has the time or resources to check and verify screen shots by exposing and reading the embedded watermark every time some random submits one as evidence of whatever. There are also circumstances where screen shots might not contain a watermark, or where the areas of the screenshot that don't contain the watermark might be successfully tampered with. It's also worth noting that the policy not to accept screenshots also predates the embedding of the watermarks.

    So with all that in mind, I can understand why they would instead choose to rely on chat logs and reject screen shots as evidence.
    Digimark has an online version to check for consumer/professional level watermarks (it's surmised that Digimark helped Blizzard, BTW). Blizzard should have their own inhouse reader (and it wouldn't take rocket science to view and verify it. No different from reading EXIF data).

    It's an embedded watermark, Tziva. So embedded the attempts of that website to extrude it from the background showed how difficult it will be for even PSD pros. It's designed that way to be very difficult to scrub, it will leave traces behind, and to go around it by pixel work not only would be too time consuming (especially for reporting a recent violation in less than 48hrs...pixel work is VERY time consuming) it will leave tell tale signs. After examining some screenshots, can see how difficult on the pixel level to modify the background, without leaving evidence of tampering, too. Why watermarking is so good at what it does, to effectively remove it you have to alter the photo.

    The policy was in effect even though they knew it existed. Last thing they wanted folks to know is this feature existed.

    Now since the cat is out of the bag, it's time that screenshots are used to backup reports (at least full screenshots, not altered/cropped).
    From the #1 Cata review on Amazon.com: "Blizzard's greatest misstep was blaming players instead of admitting their mistakes. They've convinced half of the population that the other half are unskilled whiners, causing a permanent rift in the community."
    Blizzard's blame game in action: Deleting 6,100+ of Kevyne's posts and threads from the WoW forums.

  8. #28
    Titan Wildtree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Iowa - Franconia
    Posts
    12,888
    I don't get how this could turn into an argument.... Good lord......

    Before giving false advice, please look for yourself first, and then give the OP advices.
    Apparently Guild Banks are part of the scam policy.

    It takes but 10 seconds to find the answers needed... "blizzard scam policy" typed into google and BAM
    https://us.battle.net/support/en/article/scam-policy

    But I have to say, that's also valid for the OP. It's faster to look online than creating a thread and receive second hand answers that are tainted, or outright false.

  9. #29
    If you advertised and sold the guild for in game gold then you have a case

    Tell them the guild was amicably desolved or it was a guild you and your alts leveled up tell them you told the purchaser what the deal was and they ripped you off

    Now i CBA with the details regarding this and ive learnt that most QQ threads about scamming never reveal the full details

    but you have nothing to loose by reporting and seeing what happens

  10. #30
    Free Food!?!?! Tziva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    WHEREVER I WANT AINT NO ONE GONNA DO NOTHIN ABOUT IT IMMA T-REX
    Posts
    10,844
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevyne-Shandris View Post
    It's an embedded watermark, Tziva. So embedded the attempts of that website to extrude it from the background showed how difficult it will be for even PSD pros. It's designed that way to be very difficult to scrub, it will leave traces behind, and to go around it by pixel work not only would be too time consuming (especially for reporting a recent violation in less than 48hrs...pixel work is VERY time consuming) it will leave tell tale signs. After examining some screenshots, can see how difficult on the pixel level to modify the background, without leaving evidence of tampering, too. Why watermarking is so good at what it does, to effectively remove it you have to alter the photo.
    I know how watermarks work. I didn't say anything about removing the watermark.

    The watermarks don't appear on all qualities, for example (as I understand it, they don't appear if you have it set to lower quality; the default quality might not even have them). They also don't appear on older screen shots prior to the watermarking system. I am pretty sure they don't appear if you just do a general screen cap and paste into a new file (rather than using the actual file from your wow/ss folder), which is what I do and can't be that uncommon. You can also take a screen shot of a screen shot to hide evidence of manipulation.

    Additionally, I am pretty sure the watermark also doesn't cover the entire surface of the screen shot, so it should be possible to edit the image in some areas without messing up the watermark, allowing the screenshots to be successfully tampered with. It's also possible that if someone sends in, say, a cropped screen shot of the chat log that it not contain any portions of the watermark.

    So there are a lot of reasons why the watermark isn't foolproof enough to take screenshots as guaranteed evidence, even if it was something customer service reps could easily access.
    AbathurSnuggles: Blizzard Alpha Videos

    For Moderation Concerns, please contact a Global:
    TzivaDarsithisRaduxArleeSimcaElysiaZaelsino

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •