Jump to content
Theodosius

Administration meta interference

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

Deletion and bans are absolutely risks that bankers have to take into consideration when issuing loans. The scale of this event may be unprecedented but the substance of it, a borrower being annihilated by deletion, isn't even uncommon. And while NPO lost pretty much all possible access to their financial decision makers, that doesn't even come close to applying to GoG/BK. They raged out on their own, which again is a very common kind of loss that banks take.

Making this deal leaves other banks that made an objectively better decision behind competitively, which is the very definition of unfair. Now, 50% is a huge chunk in a sense, but on the other hand no competent bank will ever lend out more than they're willing to potentially lose in the first place.

First, you're not wrong that they are risks, but not on this scale.  Not on a scale where the Admin bans 11 (!!) members of NPO's gov team (Possibly more if others were involved in the smear campaign).  If it was a single or couple ban/delete, you'd have an argument here.

Second, I'm focusing on NPO for a reason.  NPO is the center of this argument.  The funds returned back from GoG/BK (If they were), is where you and everybody else upset about this should focus your argument on - as that would be a much more legit argumentative stance.

Third, your statement on "other banks who didn't invest" has no relevance here.  You simply have no idea why they didn't invest to begin with.  It could be that they simply didn't like NPO to they didn't have the funds to invest in NPO.  The argument has no ground to stand on.  Also as for other investors who were impacted by this, Alex very clearly said to contact him and he'll look into it as well.

Fourth, yeah, 50% is a huge chunk.  Seb, alone, was returned around $20bil.  Imagine losing $20bil as well.  You're also correct that no competent bank will ever lend out what they're willing to lose too, but no competent bank would ever lend out funds if they knew the AA was dealing with illegal/ban worthy activity too - or would be investigated for such.  Keep in mind, NPO kept this as secretive and hidden as possible - to the point of lying to the Admin about it.  You think they would tell their investors about it?

 

Finally, just go roll Seb for investing such a large fund into an alliance that attempted to destroy your communities.

Edited by Buorhann

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Elijah Mikaelson


Alex made a statement that he would refund 50% of the investment and it is to be refund to investors and not to be kept by banks or the owners such, as the 15 billion Seb got he is not meant to keep any for himself, Nor is any of it meant to be kept for the bank.

1) Alex are you checking to make sure this agreement is being followed?
2) Did you talk to each investor in the list to make sure the amount they invested matches the amount being claimed?
3) Also did you check to see how much these banks have made?, it seems a little odd to refund billions when people have made billions?

I personally think you should have had a list of the investors and dealt with them rather than putting it on one nation? 

But I still disagree with you handing out billions, you did not bail out the other banks that failed and lost billions of investors money?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bjorn Ironside said:

But I still disagree with you handing out billions, you did not bail out the other banks that failed and lost billions of investors money?

Actually, he did.  The bank that Syndicate held for BigBoss or whatever his name was, got stolen and was returned with only 20% loss.  (The thief went into VM after stealing it, however)

Edited by Buorhann
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Elijah Mikaelson
1 minute ago, Buorhann said:

Actually, he did.  The bank that Syndicate held for BigBoss or whatever his name was, got stolen and was returned with only 20% loss.  (The thief went into VM after stealing it, however)

The broke the rules by entering VM thats why it was returned ?

I am talking about the first two banks Seb had that lost billions of investors money? Sphinx bank lost billions when Rado left where is that bail out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bjorn Ironside said:

The broke the rules by entering VM thats why it was returned ?

I am talking about the first two banks Seb had that lost billions of investors money? Sphinx bank lost billions when Rado left where is that bail out?

Neither of those dealt with Alex banning said players.

Do take notice of the fact that I did state if any funds of BK/GoG were returned, that's where your argument should be.  Not with what NPO was given.

Edited by Buorhann

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Elijah Mikaelson
24 minutes ago, Buorhann said:

Neither of those dealt with Alex banning said players.

Do take notice of the fact that I did state if any funds of BK/GoG were returned, that's where your argument should be.  Not with what NPO was given.

The money given back to seb did state NPO and GoG bail out, Sphinx had a loan with BK that i hear is being refunded, Moonlight banking had a 4b loan with BK and got 50% of it back

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bjorn Ironside said:

The money given back to seb did state NPO and GoG bail out, Sphinx had a loan with BK that i hear is being refunded, Moonlight banking had a 4b loan with BK and got 50% of it back

At least he's being consistent with his decision.  In any case, my only concern was the NPO/bans part of it.  I have no argument for the rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Elijah Mikaelson
1 minute ago, Buorhann said:

At least he's being consistent with his decision.  In any case, my only concern was the NPO/bans part of it.  I have no argument for the rest.

But they was banned for cheating?

IF i loan money to someone who cheated and they got banned? do i get my funds returned?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bjorn Ironside said:

But they was banned for cheating?

IF i loan money to someone who cheated and they got banned? do i get my funds returned?

That's the precedent he set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been told by senior NPO members that there is sufficient liquidity to pay all outstanding debts.

Edited by Lu Xun
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/16/2020 at 6:25 PM, Theobius said:

Nation Link: https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=18180&display=bank
Ruler Name: Seb

Nature of Violation: I'm not even sure how to classify this


So, there's a few guys who owe me like 20 bucks irl but I've never seen them since high school, @Alex what's the standard rate for helping me get my loans back?

Screenshot_2.png.092620e89af6abd38f04060d98e24870.png

 

Now, on a more serious note, this is unnecessary administration interference into meta, player-to-player banking/loaning operations. Banking has always been and will remain a player risk. People quit all the time. People default on loans all the time. It's nothing unheard of. If you can't handle the risks, don't loan your cash away. You don't get to call an admin in with a baseball bat to settle your debts for you. Unless.. we are to assume you are going to become an active meta factor, pursuing all the defaulted loans from people who quit the game in the past 4 years? If so, an infinite waiting line is gonna form at your door right about... now. 

 

On 2/16/2020 at 6:28 PM, Leopold von Habsburg said:

What a dangerous precedent it sets. We all know the risks on loans and lending out money and that is why people charge interest to help mitigate that risk. Also choosing who you deal with is key to a banks success. This isnt even a government bailout from say your alliance this is basically an act of god with money being created to compensate an already risky venture. Anyone who lost money with NPO and friends mass deleting should not expect to be compensated from moderation, that is absolutely ludicrous.

 

Lol at you finally giving a shit about admin thumbing the scale when it's against you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Comrade Marx said:

Lol at you finally giving a shit about admin thumbing the scale when it's against you. 

Except the Administration is actually "tipping the scales" in our favour, as t$ lost loan money when your friends deleted. Nice try though.

Edited by Theobius
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Comrade Marx said:

 

 

Lol at you finally giving a shit about admin thumbing the scale when it's against you. 

It's a shame that this all could have been avoided if NPO just simply didn't cheat. Twice.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think 10% would have been fair.

s/o @Seb for being a great banker!

May this be a testament to all future bankers that if you don't get as good as Seb, you're not good enough.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/16/2020 at 6:24 PM, Alex said:

Of course I didn't tell them to cheat.

I just mean that in the absence of moderation action, they most likely would have repaid the debts owed. This was, in my opinion, an impossible to foresee risk, and the impact could have bankrupted / ended some of these player-run "banks."

As I stated, I think these player run organizations add a lot of value to the game and the community, and I don't want to see them end. Verifying and "bailing out" for 50% of defaulted principals in this extraordinary circumstance is, in my opinion, a way to ensure that they continue to exist (while also not fully insuring them or making banking "risk free.")

Again, he wasn't fully compensated. Only 50% of the losses were compensated.

My reasoning being that it would be unreasonable to expect him to know that they were cheating (I didn't know, how would he or others know?)

You let the Polaris bank take a large hit as a direct result of actual player cheating, even giving out an in-game strike for it.

Why didn't Polaris get the same consideration Emerald is getting now? Actually Emerald seems to be getting far more consideration, since you're backstopping loans for  alliances that didn't have moderation action taken against them.

Edited by Deja
forum broke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear you all, and to be honest, I didn't expect this much negative feedback. In hindsight, trying to help these investors out and make sure that they didn't lose all of their money because of the NPO moderation decision was not worth this hassle.

I hope I've made it clear that this was a very atypical incident, and I have no intention of doing this again.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Deja said:

You let the Polaris bank take a large hit as a direct result of actual player cheating, even giving out an in-game strike for it.

Why didn't Polaris get the same consideration Emerald is getting now? Actually Emerald seems to be getting far more consideration, since you're backstopping loans for  alliances that didn't have moderation action taken against them.

Problem is, Polaris actually broke a rule that has already been set by a precedent from past AAs (Hiding bank in a VM nation).

This is different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Alex said:

I hear you all, and to be honest, I didn't expect this much negative feedback. In hindsight, trying to help these investors out and make sure that they didn't lose all of their money because of the NPO moderation decision was not worth this hassle.

I hope I've made it clear that this was a very atypical incident, and I have no intention of doing this again.

Well, I for one appreciate your efforts, and I'm glad to hear it won't happen again at least

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Buorhann said:

Problem is, Polaris actually broke a rule that has already been set by a precedent from past AAs (Hiding bank in a VM nation).

This is different.

I don't think you know the incident I'm referring to. No offense.

But yes, some time before that we got in trouble for the VM thing. Separate incident.

Edited by Deja
space phrasing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Comrade Marx said:

 

 

Lol at you finally giving a shit about admin thumbing the scale when it's against you. 

Sorry you guys got owned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Elijah Mikaelson
6 hours ago, Alex said:

I hear you all, and to be honest, I didn't expect this much negative feedback. In hindsight, trying to help these investors out and make sure that they didn't lose all of their money because of the NPO moderation decision was not worth this hassle.

I hope I've made it clear that this was a very atypical incident, and I have no intention of doing this again.

That is the problem Alex, no investors lost money due to you banning people for cheating, they lost if from poor investments. I think this is what so many are upset about that bankers and investors make billions off loans and other investments, and they do that bu charging interest on loans as a rick factor.

You basically removed the risk of many reasons why interest is charged?

I did ask before but do not remember getting a reply but what IF: Someone loans a nation cash and they are banned for one of the following.

1) Multi
2) Spawning money

if you bad them from moderation decision why will you not return 50% of the cash lost? after all they can not pay it back due to moderation decision, BK and GoG quit from acting out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/19/2020 at 3:01 AM, Alex said:

I hear you all, and to be honest, I didn't expect this much negative feedback. In hindsight, trying to help these investors out and make sure that they didn't lose all of their money because of the NPO moderation decision was not worth this hassle.

I hope I've made it clear that this was a very atypical incident, and I have no intention of doing this again.

Sheepy, I think you meant well but we have all been hurt by the NPO cheating so unless everybody is going to get compensated singling out the bankers is very unfair. Remember when you said there was no way to undo the damage done by the cheating??? Why are you trying to help some but not others?

I do think this reflects part of an ongoing issue that involves the rather underhanded strategy of admin manipulation that is involved when people are privately messaging you. It most definitely feeds into NPO accusations that suggest that certain older players have more weight in the say of admin decisions than appropriate. 

This situation reflects an ongoing problem in which admin decisions are made in the dark during a conversation between the admin and a party with an invested interest that is putting forth an agenda and possibly only half the relevant information. This isn't the first time. Remember when NPO messaged you and attempted to get clearance for what was effectively cheating when all the facts came to light? Remember when Seb attempted to convince you that his attacks on Grumpy's bank wouldn'tbe slot filling and get you to sign off on it?

I don't think this is something you can fix or make fair because unfortunately now the only real options are cash for everyone hurt by NPO and removing the money sent to bail out banks because any other option is unfair on your players to whom you said you couldn't couldn't undo the NPO cheating and by extension that you couldn't compensate them for their losses.

I say this because I do think NPO in a blind rage have stumbled upon a truth... you can gain advantage with a private message to the game admin or at the very least perhaps mitigate some damage. Ultimately this issue will harm the game NPO is right about that and you do need to address it. 

 

 

Edited by Senatorius
Phone
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/18/2020 at 7:24 AM, Theobius said:

Except the Administration is actually "tipping the scales" in our favour, as t$ lost loan money when your friends deleted. Nice try though.

 

Hmmm yes you're right that the admin is tipping the game in your favor. Thanks for coming out with it, corncob.

 

On 2/18/2020 at 7:26 AM, Filmore said:

It's a shame that this all could have been avoided if NPO just simply didn't cheat. Twice.

 

Bandwagon onto NPO being declared cheaters retroactively all you like. The financial records we had showed that GPWC wasn't sending even half of what they made to NPO but Alex decided once we compiled it, after demanding it, that he didn't want to even look at it. Keep circlejerking over the narrative though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Comrade Marx said:

 

Hmmm yes you're right that the admin is tipping the game in your favor. Thanks for coming out with it, corncob.

 

 

Bandwagon onto NPO being declared cheaters retroactively all you like. The financial records we had showed that GPWC wasn't sending even half of what they made to NPO but Alex decided once we compiled it, after demanding it, that he didn't want to even look at it. Keep circlejerking over the narrative though. 

GPWC only sending half is irrelevant when there's still the logs of Anne telling people not to bother actually playing the game and just sign in every couple weeks. Or are you another one of the people who haven't actually read the report? 

Plus there's still the whole "NPO's offshore spawned in millions of tons of resources in less than a day"

Edited by Filmore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.