so let me get this straight. you say its obvious that they have to pay it back but in basically all your threads you say nothing should happen to them if they didnt intent to exploit? how do these two contrary points make sense to you?
Since your logic is wrong.
In your example with the bank, its THE BANK that initiate what happens, its obviously a
With pets its the player that initiate what happens. Do we believe it was a mistake?
Not realy, but that is based on an assumption, not a fact. Mistake from bank is a fact.
If you want to compare the pet situation with the bank example it would be as if YOU
initiate what happens, not the bank.
Now, when you interact with the bank and get way to much money, there are some
different scenarios that could happen. You could be the type of person that have both
good ethics and know exactly what you should have on the account. It will be solved
Next scenario could also fit your example quite good.
This one is about you don't have that much controll over what happens but still
have good ethics. You might accidently start using money that aren't yours. At some
point bank or you will notice something is wrong. If you have been a loyal customer
this will probably be solved quite easy too, but if they have no record of you and have
no clue what type of person you are, this could lead in worst case to a criminal case or
at least get charged for negligence and carelessness, most likely the last.
Last scenario is about you have shitty ethics. You manage get money that isn't yours
and you use that asap. Same here at some point bank should find this out and its obvious
that it was with intent to get these money. This is a criminal case, but to be able to
handle it as such it must be proven that you had the intent and it was you, if they
can't prove this, it will drop down to a negligence and carelessness case probably.
One thing to remember though, and that is that there are several levels of intent.
My point here about that it must be done correctly, its about being innocent and
being banned. To prevent the shit that might happen if they do so, they must
prove that they are not innocent, not only from a legal p.o.v but also a kind of
If they get a punishment but can keep playing, then its no bigger issue, but
the vast majority "screamed" about to perma ban them, and we are back at square one.
I hoped this was obvious but I guess not, so obviously my fault that I haven't
been more clear about that.