Item Changes to the Due Diligence rule for trades.

Hello,

I would like to ask if there will be any changes to the due diligence(DD) rule relating to items at or over 5b, or if the rule has changed, and hopefully get some clarity from staff about it(@Tim in particular, since they are the author of the post about DD) on what is or isn't required in terms of due diligence.

The rule as posted:
https://royals.ms/forum/threads/int...-rule-handling-real-world-trade-goods.213575/

Please consider this recent ban appeal:
https://royals.ms/forum/threads/ban-appeal.245586/

Despite some attempts, this player was held accountable for items on their account under 5b, which they were unable to quantify with any kind of log/screenshot/evidence.

Specifically as it relates to scrolls*, consider this portion of the appeal(without knowing the details, I will assume it's CS/WS that's being referred to in this part. Heidi can feel free to clarify, as it is their comment that I'm citing):
https://royals.ms/forum/threads/ban-appeal.245586/page-3#post-1568031

The player in this appeal supposedly purchased scrolls under market value and didn't remember who the seller was. While speculation on this specific appeal is pointless, it seems reasonable in general for a player to not feel the need to remember the seller of scroll(s) when, as the DD rule states, the value of the trade is under 5b.

I don't believe I have ever, for example, conducted due diligence when buying or selling CS/WS, along with many other players on this server. If I knew that it was required by rule, however, and could be the difference between clearing myself in an appeal or staying banned, I probably would've started logging every single CS/WS transaction from the moment I created my character.

Also, if someone agrees to sell a sub-5b item under market value(likely CS/WS as it pertains to this discussion), does this require DD as well? Should players simply start logging DD for all CS/WS trades going forward?

Hopefully can get some answers to the questions raised in this post. Cheers.

*I'm only asking in the context of buying CS/WS for mesos, as the player in the appeal was probably doing. I am not talking about cases where CS/WS are used as a unit of currency for buying/selling items.

 

Well when i read the bann appeal it seems more that the player is unable to five a solid explanation of a huge part of his wealth before he started with his documentations.

Not jsut a few scrolls under the treshhold of 5B

 

This ban appeal also isn't something DD would cover - the rule is meant for otherwise legitimate players getting good deals by helping RWTers quickly liquidate their items. Zodiac is being suspected of RWT directly, not of simply taking advantage of RWTers.

 

The point of this feedback thread is not to discuss what the linked ban appeal is about, it's outcome, or whether it is "covered" by the DD rule. I chose to cite this ban appeal because it provides a clear example that pertains to the question I am posing about the DD rule.

Again, the player was asked to provide details about trades that were under the value of 5b. Trades under 5b do not require DD according to the rule. Therefore, I think it's reasonable to ask if the standard for DD has changed, and/or if we as players should start logging certain trades under 5b.

Hopefully staff can provide some clarity.

 

Thank you for your replies, and thank you @Tim for answering the first part of my question.

Going off of your reply @Heidi , let me re-phrase and simplify the second part of the question, which remains unanswered.

Do we, as players, need to start logging and creating evidence of our trades and transactions with certain items under 5b such as CS/WS?

The reason for citing and linking this specific ban is because the player in this ban was held accountable for these specific items. The specific reason(s) for the player's ban has little to nothing to do with my question. It is just a citation to provide an example showing that the situation I am describing has happened, and that I am not making it up.

In addition, items such as these are things that players commonly conduct trades with, so it seems prudent for me and other players to know if we should start logging our trades with these items in order to properly account for our wealth progression and/or provide evidence so staff in the case of a ban appeal.

Due to the value of the items being significantly lower than 5b, I can actually understand where you are coming from with your reply, Heidi. Perhaps staff could even draft or create an additional due diligence rule specifically for CS/WS, or other important items that fall below the value of 5b?

With all of that said, hopefully you or another staff member can answer the second part of my question.

Thank you again for your replies and taking the time to interact with the thread.

 

I think the part about that ban appeal that's confusing people is the part where they were asked to explain the origins of their 23 CS and 33 WS that were described as "unaccounted for" or "unexplained."
Usually in RWT appeals it's just "You were traded CS/WS/Bcoins from a lvl7 character etc etc" and it's over. It's just strange that CS/WS that are usually seemingly easy to trace are "unaccounted for."
I can see how this may make people worry that this sets the precedent that we need to start logging our CS/WS trades

 

Thank you @Tim for the clear and concise answer, and @Heidi for your answer with additional clarity and explanation.

I hope that the answers given in this thread by you two can help provide more consistency and precedent in future ban appeals for Royals players.

Please feel free to close this thread as its intended goal and purpose has been achieved.

Cheers.