Kasandra Morgan - it's a question of ethics

APPLAUDS! One of the best written responces! Thank you!!

Hugz

Cath

Uh, it should be obvious-- taking the money from the casino game? Fine. House usually wins, but sometimes not. Think of it as a security consulting fee.

Subsequently giving and then violating one's own word? Well, that's dragging your own reputation through the mud. Posthumously claiming it's "not your fault" but the fault of some "problem" you have? Well, that's priceless, but don't expect to have respect. I'm really confused why you would defend that sort of behavior.

Eggy, I don't think that customer response or Linden dedication has deteriorated, perhaps it just hasn't grown with SL.

I'm thinking the number of Lindens may need to be increased.

But even if it is, we still need to be able to work things out for ourselves, hence my suggestions. Being as public as possible in these types of situations keeps people honest.

I'm not deriding anyone for making ethical judgments.

Rather, I am deriding a specific ethical judgment that I've perceived to be unfounded, and have proceeded to attempt to show why I believe it to be so.

You are certainly at liberty to disagree with my reasoning, but stating again and again that "I am right, and you are wrong" does not constitute argumentation. It does not, properly speaking, even constitute an "ethical judgment."

As for my verbosity -- for some reason this is a criticism I frequently receive. I admit that I'm not concise and that my prose could probably use some editing for clarity and succinctness, but describing my arguments as "verbose" does not refute them, nor does it prove that my rhetoric "hides" the facts.

To be honest, when people criticize my verbosity or my diction, I have to wonder if reading is difficult for them, and I mean that in the most invective-free way possible. I suspect the disconnect in this respect is partly due to the fact that I spend much of my days mired in books, and I don't own a TV or spend much time gaming, so what I write here seems pretty piffling compared to what I experience all day, which allows me to go longer than most people in these forums seem to expect or are able to comprehend.

To each their own, I guess.

Whoa Whoa whoah, 80,000 only worth 50 bucks? Try again, 100,000 is worth 450 US Dollars so 80 is worth over 300 dollars. You really screwed this guy over.

JV

*sigh* read my original post, Phineas. It's all explained there, step for step. Kasandra actually does a reasonable job describing the "problem" in her post as well.

And as for the 40k, which was described to me as "birthday money," how would you feel about taking someone's birthday money, especially if it wasn't what you considered to be what was originally agreed upon? Like I have said before, I'm not expecting anything more from Kasandra. No one else should, either.

I'm only "defending" that sort of behavior insofar as I'm describing it as ethically acceptable.

I agree in that I don't think Kasandra's behavior ranks as "classy" or "elegant" or even all that "nice," but where I disagree with the masses here is that what Kasandra did was actually "wrong" in an ethical sense.

As for the matter being "obvious" -- sorry, that's not an acceptable rationale. It's "obvious" to most people in RL that gay marriage is wrong -- is it? It's "obvious" to most people in RL that furries and BDSM types are perverts -- is that the case? It's "obvious" to most of our legislators and voters that drugs like marijuana should be illegal -- should they be?

It is precisely this kind of moral reasoning -- a reasoning which relies less on discourse and rationale and more upon feeling -- that drives us to do stupid things to one another in RL, and it's clear that it drives us to do stupid things to one another in SL, if the forums are any indication.

*sighs back* You had earlier said,

"The only point you're really arguing with me on is that what she did is ethically wrong. If you can't see that, then perhaps you have the same problem."

I understand the "problem" of the gambling machine well enough. What I was asking in my reply was what "problem" I apparently shared with Kasandra. You seemed to be inferring that I shared Kasandra's presumed amorality, so I was merely asking you to clarify.

[/B]

I am no expert on morality, trust me

The "problem" as I have stated, and I believe others have highlighted, is not in her gambling problem, but in her choice to inform me that she was going to hold my money, and then proceed to take that same money, gamble it away, agree to pay me back, and then reneg on that deal as well.

Hope that claifies.

Phineas,

LOL. You are really a gas.. There is nothing wrong with my reading comprehension, thanks. My point is that I disagree with your take on this issue. I pride my self on doing the right thing. Like telling a store owner his front window is broken rather than reaching through the hole and grabbing whatever I can...

If you want to split hairs about your derision, have at it. I choose to take you at face value. Either way you are making judgement calls and minimalizing other's ethical viewpoints, while excreting your own ethics in the *blame the victim* vein. If you think about it, we would never have to play *blame the victim* if a certain segment of society could excercise some self control and sound judgement in the first place...

So YOU can tell people they are wrong. I see. Confound the rest of us for doing so ourselves!

I just dig the part about your verbosity be called into question before, maybe instead of belittling others comprehension skills it's time to take a long look in the mirror...

rule #1 do not insult your audience when trying to make your point.

LOL

*runs and hides back in my corner A,B,C,...I'm learnin to reed

Whoaaaahhhhhhhhhhh......80k???
And I thought I had a problem!!!
Perhaps a gamblers anon event is in order! I will be hosting one sometime this coming week. Watch the forums and event schedule.

For the most part, I am staying out of this, however I feel the need to refute one remark, just to get that aspect out of the equation:



Now, I am your average 20 year old College sophmore and I do infact get birthday money from my family. I go to school a couple hundred miles away from my house so it is a heck of a lot easier to send birthday money than to send out a bluky gift. Also, it allows the gift giver to let me choose what I want for a gift, be it a few new movies, a credit card payment, or a case or two of beer. Now, my self, I would actually choose the movies or my addiction to speed... err, rather Second Life, but yea, adults do indeed get birthday money.

Just a thought.

You are making what is called a "straw man" argument in which you compare "the obvious" (as per subsets of the general population) with actuality. You're also comparing apples and oranges, to boot.

Censure directed at somebody who behaves like a hypocrite, or at least like a liar, is not at all equivalent to the examples of bigotry you are attempting to refute it with. That is not an acceptable rationale.

edited for spelling/grammar

Chrom, I was not saying, "Oh I am a gambling attict, you should pity me." I was saying, "I am not perfect, I am not a bad person, I just made a bad decision."

That decision was gambling away all that money.

When I said I had a compulsion problem, I wasn't asking for pity, I was stating an aspect of me personality that caused me to do this, the same way it causes me to play SL for 18 hours a day. Sometimes its called "driven" when I am building something for someone, but when I am in a casino, we call it a "compulsion problem". I told you this not because I wanted everyone to pull out a hanky but because I didn't want everyone thinking I am a cold hearted b*tch. I am not, I am a very nice b*tch who had no idea she was losing the entirety of his funds.

Since we are all evaluating my ethics, I think I will jump in being a philosophy minor and all ethics is one of my favorite topics.

Question 1: Did I steal his money?
My Answer: No, I took it so I could give it back and even had I just walked away with it once the game gave it to me it was mine. Some people asked, what if this happened to you, well it has happened to me already. A newbie loses all their starter cash in my casino, I give it back plus 50 more and they used that to exploit 1/3 of my money. I had to run up and turn off the game as they were playing just to stop them. Did I think they stole from me? No. In my stupidity I gave them the money. Did I ask for it back? No. I couldn't imagine doing that. What is the point of casinos if everytime someone loses big or wins big the other person can just ask for the money back.

Question 2: Did I lie to him?
My Answer: No, when I said I was going to give him the money, I fully intending on doing just that. As for a payment plan I told him I needed to see how my finances were to see how much I could pay. My finances are garbage at the moment so I offered to spend my last dime in RL to give him half back and he threw it in my face and decided trying to run me out of SL was a better plan. Oh well...

Question 3: Did I break my word?
My Answer: Oh yeah, big time. Amazingly enough, I hate to break my word and go through great lengths not to. This was the acception to that rule. Maybe it was because he was a stranger I had never spoken to or maybe it was because I didn't realize the value of 80K. But that is what I did. I broke my word.

If this really is just a warning, and not an attempt to get me flamed, then I agree with Tony, don't make games that pass out 80K and expect me to hold it for 5 days or you might be disappointed.

P.S I seriously considered having someone else hold the money, but I didn't want to hand it to someone have them spend it and be responsible for it...doh

This thread isn't about creating a national SL bank.

It's about a script error that allowed for another player to empty an account. It's been going on since beta; it will happen again to another player unless the person hosting the casino game implements their own personal protection from anyone ever emptying an account again.

SL decided what their bank was going to be by offering and bringing in IGE and GOM. Money comes in from those companies, and money goes out through those companies at the player's whim/desire or need.

The time to have regulated how much money can come in or out of SL was when these companies were approved by LL with a viable way to monitor that the market is not flooded with Lindens and/or the in-game money wiped dry by players using GOM or IGE to make USD.

This is not an issue for government or banking regulations. This is not a reason to form an in-world government/court system to prove who is or who is not guilty by their peers. A viable government system or judicial system will not work in SL because of alt accounts and the possibility of jury rigging, fraud and other fun banking regulations.

Oh wait, I'm wrong.

Bring on the drama.

Edit:

On second thought, why would I want to get involved in this stupidity?

Naw, my fault. Tried to be serious in the wrong thread. Live and learn.

My response was serious. This subject is worthy of a discussion, but quite possibly on another thread so it's not lost. But the losing of money because of unprotected scripting that takes money from an individual's account is by no means a call to arms to set up a government or banking system.

You know what, Kasandra? I'm getting tired of you telling people that I took your offer of half of what you told me you would give me at first, using your "birthday money" and threw it back in your face.

The reality is that you're p.o.'d because I didn't accept the offer. I dare you to show anyone how I "threw it back in your face." I told you it was unacceptable and that's that.

Don't make me out to be the pr*ck here. I was trying to stick to a deal that YOU originally made.

Not you, Lynn. Don't agree with you -- this is one of many disputes/infringements I've seen in this area in SL -- but yours was a serious response, and I appreciate it. Took my response down because I started getting bombarded with silly IM's in game, and I don't want to be bothered.

Pick my fights a little more carefully in the future -- so I'll wait for a better issue to take a stand on. Which, perhaps, is something akin to your suggestion.

Donovan, no offense was taken.

But it is something to consider as SL grows.

Please do post again on this subject, because it does need to be discussed, especially on how to implement something like this -- even if we all disagree -- or come to the conclusion that SL just isn't ready for it just yet.

I didn't break a deal, a deal implies that I was given something in exchange for something else and didn't do my half. I said I was gonna do something and did something else instead, that is breaking my word.

And I don't have to prove that you threw my offer for half in my face because we are here, aren't we? I think that is evidence enough.

You're really a sad, confused person. That is not the definition of a deal at all. Maybe that's why this happened in the first place...because you don't know what a deal is.

Oh, and the reason we're here is because you refused to pay me what you agreed to, not because I threw anything back in your face. You're really some piece of work.

For future reference, you can pay someone L$ even if they aren't online by using Find->Person->name->Pay. That probably would have kept that cash from burning a hole in your pocket.

From my reading there were mistakes on both sides; I expect you've both learned from it.