Comments on: The Spoils of War

By: Karatheya

Karatheya — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 06:44:51 +0000

Yeah, I always used to get one or two spam comments, usually they arrive during the day and I zap them before anyone sees them, but this came in overnight.

To auto block something like that (no URL, just a creative return address) I’d have to block author linking entirely, which I’m not prepared to do.

By: Gravity

Gravity — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 01:15:08 +0000

Some spam got through mate, look at comment above mine.
Gravity´s last blog ..Collection of good reading

By: Hinenuitepo

Hinenuitepo — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 21:34:11 +0000

My guild is particularly generous:
they provide all repairs for every ‘main’ raid, they provide flasks, and they provide enchant mats and epic gems for main pve upgrades. We also solicited (and the officers contributed the most) donations to get every member that needed them, their 245 chest and bracers.
Most of the money comes from selling recipes and crafted gear.
We make a lot of money, but we spend it fairly quickly too, so we don’t usually have more than 40k g in bank.
All officers have an authenticator.
Redistribution is a good idea, but I suspect could easily lead to even more guild drama. Just as an example, my guild does use ep/gp (I prefer SK) and there are people that can only attend 50% of raids. They constantly complain that they can ‘never’ get loot from those that have 100% attendance (I know, I know even with SK perfect attenders get more loot by the nature of their attendance).
If we redistributed, those people would have 500g of the guild’s money, while I’d have somewhere along the lines of 15k, which I’m sure would piss some people off.

Interesting thoughts here, though.

By: Gravity

Gravity — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 09:30:59 +0000

Redistributing is a nice idea; hadn’t really thought of doing that. I quite like the idea of a guild paying for repairs though, to ease the emotional pain of progression raids.
Gravity´s last blog ..Keybinding, do it

By: Karatheya

Karatheya — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 09:22:17 +0000

Indeed, I suggested as much in the second paragraph of the article.

The problem is that the authenticators have been available for a year and a half now, so by all rights we should see no guild bank hacks at all today. And yet we do, because people are lazy / skeptical / swept up in the rapid anti-authenticator mob that have only anecdotal evidence of one or two people to back them up.

As to spreading into 40 separate banks, I understand what you’re saying, but the point is that once the gold is divested, it no longer belongs to the guild.

Let’s say that your guild bank gets hacked and you get back your items but no gold. Assuming you were using that gold for operations, you’re going to have to re-build it somehow – perhaps supplemental lower-level raids to sell BoEs, whatever. The guild has to deal with the loss.

But say that you force your officers to get an authenticator and encourage your members to do the same. Your guild bank is safe, but a member who doesn’t get an authenticator gets hacked. It’s sad, but the guild bank has lost nothing and the guild doesn’t have to compensate.

By: Brent

Brent — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 08:47:49 +0000

Honestly, rather than preparing to be hacked, wouldn’t it be better for the officers with access to the bank’s resources to take the time to get an authenticator or use the Blizzard Mobile Authenticator?

Its kinda like saying “I’m worried that the bank I’m with might steal all my money. I better put a little in 40 different banks to be safe.”