Support: About strange PED deals, MA_Answer #1 & some FollowUps

Hi,
thank you for your reply!

Guess I understand the reasons, allowing transfers like I asked for might put you into a situation where you'd violate national banking/ postal laws, right? OK, I can accept this and will act accordingly. (Idea: Some of the EU banks have banking licenses, right?)

Thinking more of this matter, though, raised some more questions. A whole "pool of piranhas"! Your mentioning "our common policy is to block the involved Entropia accounts" to the question if "trades without suitable worthy equivalent" would be allowed is interpreted by me now that only "trades with suitable worthy equivalent" are allowed, means "PED <-> items of suitable worth". All other trades would involve a risk of getting the account blocked?

I can imagine a lot of fully legally (?) EU activities that would include such transactions, and that would not be distinguishable without knowing the full context, for instance:

- Transfer of PED/ materials from/ to CND, usually between Soc members, RL friends or relatives to avoid the flight costs, done using auction and overpriced buyouts (haven't done yet, but forums are full of descriptions);

- Payment of "in game" services like FAPping, "hired guns" for LG/ PvP zone mining etc., "herding" (Merry Mayhem was full of them) and many others (haven't done yet, but forums are full of descriptions);

- "Sponsoring" a newbie, be it selling (otherwise TT'd) armor parts for sweat, accepting crazy rates (100 bottles -> 1 PED?), or giving presents, maybe even "investing" into a disciple, helping her with PED to graduate (I admit to have done often, both selling most cheap and giving presents);

- Helping depositing when at a friends location there's no working method at this moment (there are times UKash doesn't work everywhere ...), or advancing some 100 PED in case of a delayed depositing progress to keep a friend going (I admit to have done, in the past);

I'm very sure there's a lot more possibilities for similar transactions that might classify as "reason for blocking". In a lot of cases there might be a "one-way-transfer" without suitable equivalent.

As you see, I might be guilty yet. Even if I never ever have done anything I'd see even in relation to violating the EULA, my account might be in danger. And so might be the accounts of very, very much EU participants because there's a lot of possibilities getting involved in such "suspicious transfers". Borrowing my 5B's to a trustworthy friend for a week, for sure at my own risk? One way trade. Getting 'em back later? One way trade. DANGEROUS!

I feel this is a situation that's:

a.) not good for the participants, because nearly everyone will have done something sometimes that might endanger the account, and

b.) not good for you, because there might be lot's of transactions, done with the best intentions and without any object of putting you into trouble, nonetheless doing it.

So I kindly ask if it wouldn't be good thinking about this and making clear rules? § 17h wouldn't be seen as suitable for a lot of my examples (including my initial question), because it aims at the participant and it's behavior - a transfer like this might be perfectly legal from their views, and they wouldn't violate any laws, just doing the transfer they'd maybe make you violating the law in a given country!

I know this is a can of worms I have opened. But it might become important one day in the future to have clear rules what's allowed and what not. EU is meant to grow and to be a long time project, and many participants have invested quite large sums - thus certainty of law is urgently necessarily!

Please don't see this as another question, see it as kind of advice - there's no need for instant answer, but I'd very appreciate if you'd think of this problem and'd work out a solution in the near future. I feel it's an important issue when, due to unclear rules, a lot of participants accounts are in danger to receive a block?

And so I'll finally ask a question, regardless: Am I allowed to post this correspondence into the relevant EU forums, because of the major impact it may have on many of the participants?

Thanks for reply to last question, and for working hard making EU better, maybe even someday providing clear rules about legality of the various kinds of transactions among participants.

Kind regards

Xandra

PS: I might have done wrong before, unknowingly, see above - and I'm now rather unsure if I gave a reason for a block! I have given some stuff to my wife without equivalent, I have given some serious PED to a friend that couldn't deposit at this time (no UKash/ PaySafecard/ CC possible, after having got cash/ mail), and I regularly give smaller or not-so-small presents to newbies. So I'm guilty, and I hope you're researching well before blocking! Thanks!

PPS: Hope I don't send this twice - session time seems to have timed out ...