Pardon C$ Debt

[Neku]

I've been on CS since 2008. I have spent hundreds of dollars on C$, and I have traded a lot of C$ for valuable pets.

There is absolutely no situation that would make me value CS pets more then actual C$, and literally no situation where I would rather someone go into C$ debt then risk them having an "unfair advantage" in the form of some additional pets.

How are the effected people considered a minority(as in, there being a small group impacted) while also apparently being enough of a majority that setting their balance to zero while keeping their pets could impact the economy enough that staff won't do it? I'm sorry, but I can't wrap my head around this logic.

Maybe there is no solution that's fair to everyone. In that case, let it be unfair to the people who aren't in financial chickensmoothie debt. Given how many people have shown their support in this thread, it's clear the active majority agrees. I would gladly let a few dozen people be 2000 C$ richer in pets then have those same people be 1000 C$ in debt.

And, again, this is from someone who has been an active part of CS since it was founded, and had spent hundreds of dollars on the site.

[Lex.]

Either this really has affected too many users that it WILL affect the economy, OR they simply don't want to put the effort in to do it for the "small" amount of users that were affected to them.

This is what they said in response to my help ticket asking similar questions:
"Duplicating positions creates an incentive to purposefully produce problems to make a profit from them. Depending on the extent it can have a visible impact on rarities and availability."

But how can this be the case when literally no one expected this?
Not to be rude but sounds like a work around/cheap response.
Unless this was some sort of elaborate cyber-attack/scheme/heist or whatever you want to call it, then why not?
And if it IS one of the above, than that is something that should be addressed in itself. This *is* a specific case. And this doesn't happen often at all, so I'd say this is also a rare case, as it happened on this large scale.

Again, it's just looking like the userbase taking the brunt of all of this.

@Neku

How are the effected people considered a minority(as in, there being a small group impacted) while also apparently being enough of a majority that setting their balance to zero while keeping their pets could impact the economy enough that staff won't do it? I'm sorry, but I can't wrap my head around this logic.

THIS. THIS!

[Falco]

I've been on CS since 2008. I have spent hundreds of dollars on C$, and I have traded a lot of C$ for valuable pets.

There is absolutely no situation that would make me value CS pets more then actual C$, and literally no situation where I would rather someone go into C$ debt then risk them having an "unfair advantage" in the form of some additional pets.

How are the effected people considered a minority(as in, there being a small group impacted) while also apparently being enough of a majority that setting their balance to zero while keeping their pets could impact the economy enough that staff won't do it? I'm sorry, but I can't wrap my head around this logic.

Maybe there is no solution that's fair to everyone. In that case, let it be unfair to the people who aren't in financial chickensmoothie debt. Given how many people have shown their support in this thread, it's clear the active majority agrees. I would gladly let a few dozen people be 2000 C$ richer in pets then have those same people be 1000 C$ in debt.

And, again, this is from someone who has been an active part of CS since it was founded, and had spent hundreds of dollars on the site.

I was also wondering this.

What if someone is in the negatives but literally cant do anything about it?
Ex; not having enough to pay, no pets, no items, etc.
What would happen then?
This situation seems to be extremely stressful for people.

[lyney]

out of the 153 people that have seen this, 147 people voted that it should, in fact, be pardoned. 96%.

i'm genuinely not trying to sound hostile with this, but why is it suddenly such a "small minority" that it shouldn't be something that affects others? and yet, as other users have pointed out, we are given the antithesis that enough people have been affected that it can be "exploited"?

this is a special case that we feel should be pardoned. that's literally it. because despite such a little part of the playerbase being affected, we still have only 6 people out of 153 thinking it shouldn't be done.

[PinkAngel]

out of the 153 people that have seen this, 147 people voted that it should, in fact, be pardoned. 96%.

i'm genuinely not trying to sound hostile with this, but why is it suddenly such a "small minority" that it shouldn't be something that affects others? and yet, as other users have pointed out, we are given the antithesis that enough people have been affected that it can be "exploited"?

this is a special case that we feel should be pardoned. that's literally it. because despite such a little part of the playerbase being affected, we still have only 6 people out of 153 thinking it shouldn't be done.

Judging by the past response, (Reference Lacuna+191195) either a majority of the voters were those affected or the majority of voters unaffected support that debt be pardoned for the affected players. But it is my interpretation on the meaning of this message, not a fact.

Regarding the poll being skewed by players who are aware of the situation and those affected. People who are aware of the situation/affected should be the ones voting over players who are unaware of the situation blindly voting?

To make a decision whether someone is supportive of the C$ debt pardon, they would have to educate themselves anyways on the situation. Therefore becoming someone who is knowledgeable.

Unrelated to the conversation above v v v
Why I included a poll:
Having a poll is important as it allows players who are uncomfortable or unable to voice their opinion/ to show their preference on the pardoning of debt. The poll also allows people to change their opinion, so they are not locked into Yes or No if they decide to change their mind.

[pandaa]

yeah some of my biggest concerns are those who can’t afford to/have the means to pay off their debt, specifically minors and younger kids :\

[Celozon]

I would just like to make a quick post that no one is asking users to pay off C$ debt by paying real money. This is not and has never been the case. Beyond being able to still trade for C$ normally, if you send in a ticket site admins can offer you an alternative way to get your C$ back that will not negatively impact the pet economy or the site in general like re-creating pets has the potential to do. I strongly suggest sending in a ticket if you have C$ debt and would like an alternative. I can't speak more on it as I'm not privy to all of the details and just here to share this as a lot of people seem to be unaware still, which is why we have been asking people to send in a ticket if they are in this situation.

[Lex.]

I would just like to make a quick post that no one is asking users to pay off C$ debt by paying real money. This is not and has never been the case. Beyond being able to still trade for C$ normally, if you send in a ticket site admins can offer you an alternative way to get your C$ back that will not negatively impact the pet economy or the site in general like re-creating pets has the potential to do. I strongly suggest sending in a ticket if you have C$ debt and would like an alternative. I can't speak more on it as I'm not privy to all of the details and just here to share this as a lot of people seem to be unaware still, which is why we have been asking people to send in a ticket if they are in this situation.

Beyond being able to still trade for C$ normally, if you send in a ticket site admins can offer you an alternative way to get your C$ back that will not negatively impact the pet economy or the site in general like re-creating pets has the potential to do.

But why should that involve/include making people reverse CS Store purchases? They obtained the c$ rightfully along with the pets/items they bought. [This is the only thing I know is possible, from a user that asked.]
It means the person STILL has no c$ AND gave up their own pets/items. [/gen]

[Darni]

I would just like to make a quick post that no one is asking users to pay off C$ debt by paying real money. This is not and has never been the case. Beyond being able to still trade for C$ normally, if you send in a ticket site admins can offer you an alternative way to get your C$ back that will not negatively impact the pet economy or the site in general like re-creating pets has the potential to do. I strongly suggest sending in a ticket if you have C$ debt and would like an alternative. I can't speak more on it as I'm not privy to all of the details and just here to share this as a lot of people seem to be unaware still, which is why we have been asking people to send in a ticket if they are in this situation.

I know you said you aren't privy to the information, but I was wondering are you privy to knowing if this will be said on any future announcement? I just want to know if like everyone who is in debt will be alerted of this option like if they'll be sent a message or will they have to look at the announcement or look at a specific forum thread to find this info. TY in advance for answering if you can or any other moderator/admin can

[macintalk]

i'd just like to come in and say, as mods keep saying how such a small amount of the userbase was affected by this and how it'd be unfair to give them an unfair advantage or whatever - i wasn't affected by any of the reversals. i wasn't put in a negative c$ balance, i didn't lose any pets throughout this. yet, i don't care if people get their c$ debt pardoned - i don't care if the original pets are duplicated for people who got them reversed, i really do not care about any of it. none of it seems like an unfair advantage. it just seems like making things easier on people who were affected by this exploit (while not many actual accounts were affected, those accounts were ACTIVELY TRADING leading to hundreds of users being affected by this exploit, despite their accounts never having been compromised themselves, yet they're practically being punished for it by having debts they need to pay off)
none of this stuff were the traders faults, yet staff seems to be treating it like it was from what i can see. none of these people meant to trade with someone who was hacked, and they all deserve something in return for this hassle they're dealing with. no one should have to deal with debt on a pet collecting site. and some staff have also said no one is asking users to pay off c$ debt with real money, but, c$ is a premium currency. you pay money for it. you are expected to pay money for it more often than not. chances are, with How inflated c$ is, it will be a struggle to sell the pet they got back for the same amount they sold it for, and vice versa. for people who traded for multiple things, this is even worse, leading to them being hundreds of USD worth of c$ in debt, which is genuinely just ridiculous. i wasn't affected by this at all and yet i fully support pardoning this because it should never have happened in the first place.