Accept Bitcoin as a form of payment

[DeletedUser26154]

Bitcoin is mainly used for illegal transactions.

I did a little of my own fact checking.
A few places of merit do accept Bitcoin.



I wouldn't if I ran a company.
Why take chances on a decentralized currency?
That also costs money to use.
If I'm going to pay money to get money.
I'd rather it be to Visa, Mastercard, etc.
Because I know those companies are not going anywhere in my lifetime.

lol, like State money isn't used for illegal purposes

State money is backed up by a Federal Government and a Bank System.
It's Centralized.
You need this, whether you want it or not.

utterly

How can acceptance of bitcoin affect the game?

Bitcoin goes under while Inno has real money tied up in it.
Then Inno loses every penny of what they had in Bitcoin worth.



It's an unstable, unregulated, non-centralized currency.
No one even knows who runs it.
That means "more dicey than regular money".
There is no logical reason for any MMO company to accept cryptic currency.
There are so many other proven, bona-fide, centralized forms of world wide currency already available.

Thanks, Ardak

Ardak, I'm sorry

Ardak, I didn't even realize

So, Ardak

By the way, this discussion really ought to be conducted in private conversation, as it is way off topic.

No, I don't want you spamming my private conversations like you did last time.

 

[DeletedUser]

Or you can go on being told what to do, no matter to me.

Being told what to do? I don't see how my position puts me in the status of being told what to do. In a lot of things, choice is good. In others, for the public good, choice is not the best option. Utilities are an excellent example. Could you imagine if there were competing water companies in each community, every one with their own system of pipes? It benefits the entire community to have one common source in that case. To me, currency is the same way. Standardized currency gradually replaced both the barter system, as well as the early colonial currency system in America where every colony issued its own currency notes. It did so for 2 reasons. One was that it made it easier to buy/sell with an agreed upon standard method/rate of exchange. The other was that it made the currency itself more secure, as it was not tied to an individual colony's status, but the country's as a whole.

Who decides what a bitcoin is worth? Who guarantees it? Who administers it?

And your point about a choice on whether to use it or not is moot, because if Inno were to decide to take a chance on using it, I would also be forced to take that risk as their continued financial stability directly affects me as a paying player. It's like internet banking. Some people think that if they don't use it, they are safe, but that's not true. Regardless of whether they use internet banking, their bank does, which means that their information is on the internet whether they like it or not.

 

[DeletedUser13838]

A problem with bitcoin is that it is illegal to use in some countries that inno has servers in (e.g. russia and maybe turkey). Frankly I'm not sure what Inno gains from it (ie increased revenues vs cost of setup and transaction costs vs digital currencies and large fluctuations in exchange rates).

And your point about a choice on whether to use it or not is moot, because if Inno were to decide to take a chance on using it, I would also be forced to take that risk as their continued financial stability directly affects me as a paying player.

I don't follow this. If I buy diamonds with USD, I'm not paying Inno directly but through a 3rd party that comverts it to EUR and bitcoin would work similarly. The only real risk would be Inno needing to constantly change the bitcoin price due to large fluctuations in the exchange rate.

 

[DeletedUser]

I don't follow this. If I buy diamonds with USD, I'm not paying Inno directly but through a 3rd party that comverts it to EUR and bitcoin would work similarly. The only real risk would be Inno needing to constantly change the bitcoin price due to large fluctuations in the exchange rate.

The risk is that Bitcoin is not backed by anything. Euros are backed by the European Union, USDs are backed by the US Government. If Bitcoin founders for any reason, any company that accepts/uses it is at risk. If the company is at risk, my investment in that company, in the form of money invested in my cities, is at risk.

 

[DeletedUser13838]

The risk is that Bitcoin is not backed by anything. Euros are backed by the European Union, USDs are backed by the US Government. If Bitcoin founders for any reason, any company that accepts/uses it is at risk. If the company is at risk, my investment in that company, in the form of money invested in my cities, is at risk.

Inno wouldn't actually hold bitcoin just like they don't hold USD or japanese yen.

 

[DeletedUser26154]

How many people here use Bitcoin?



Please say so below.

 

[DeletedUser28670]

I had you ignored until recently.

What happened recently to make you un-ignore us? LOL

 

[DeletedUser26154]

What happened recently to make you un-ignore us?

You guys are good for my likes total.

 

[DeletedUser9930]

OFF TOPIC

Just a couple of brief comments:

Longshanks, the messenger doesn't concern me, only the message. Is a period of apprenticeship required for one to make a suggestion? Re this discussion: no one has yet produced any valid reason why we should not suggest that Inno accept bitcoin, rather the reasons focused on why Inno should not accept bitcoin. For instance, if the suggestion had been that only bitcoin be accepted as payment, then everyone has 'skin in the game.'

Ardak & Longshanks, I'm sorry you feel that I'm trying to stir up trouble. As stated above, I do not carry on vendettas or concern myself with who is speaking, unless I'm making a direct reply {your names appear here courtesy of Algona, who chastised me for being impolite in referring to previous posts by number}. I did, however, infer, perhaps incorrectly, that the suggestion's opponents were not users of bitcoin.

To all, in case you've forgotten, here is my original post:

I'm perplexed. Why do non-users of bitcoin care if Inno accepts it as payment for diamonds? It seems to me that you'd want the company to profit. Certainly, Inno wouldn't agree to accept bitcoin without doing an extensive financial investigation.
​

Ardak, I don't remember having a private conversation with you, though I did have a monologue with Algona (me doing the talking). Many of the postings that you cite deal with people misinterpreting my comments as personal attacks or criticisms or not answering the question I posed.

Algona and Longshanks, this is another species of what-is-allowed-versus-what-ought to-be-done. I believe that just because something is allowed doesn't make it right or, in this case, sensible. You seem to believe, correct me if I'm wrong, that it's perfectly okay to do anything that is permitted. In other words, I think that certain other considerations are more important than mere legality.

Algona, I was unable to come up with any reasons non-users might have to oppose bitcoin usage. A failure of my imagination?

In reply to ardak's question, no. I do not use bitcoin.

And I do applaud the current direction of this thread, albeit with a few deviations, in its discussion of bitcoin usage. It's informative!

 

[DeletedUser26154]

OFF TOPIC

Just a couple of brief comments:

Longshanks, the messenger doesn't concern me, only the message. Is a period of apprenticeship required for one to make a suggestion? Re this discussion: no one has yet produced any valid reason why we should not suggest that Inno accept bitcoin, rather the reasons focused on why Inno should not accept bitcoin. For instance, if the suggestion had been that only bitcoin be accepted as payment, then everyone has 'skin in the game.'

Ardak & Longshanks, I'm sorry you feel that I'm trying to stir up trouble. As stated above, I do not carry on vendettas or concern myself with who is speaking, unless I'm making a direct reply {your names appear here courtesy of Algona, who chastised me for being impolite in referring to previous posts by number}. I did, however, infer, perhaps incorrectly, that the suggestion's opponents were not users of bitcoin.

To all, in case you've forgotten, here is my original post:
I'm perplexed. Why do non-users of bitcoin care if Inno accepts it as payment for diamonds? It seems to me that you'd want the company to profit. Certainly, Inno wouldn't agree to accept bitcoin without doing an extensive financial investigation.
Ardak, I don't remember having a private conversation with you, though I did have a monologue with Algona (me doing the talking). Many of the postings that you cite deal with people misinterpreting my comments as personal attacks or criticisms or not answering the question I posed.

Algona and Longshanks, this is another species of what-is-allowed-versus-what-ought to-be-done. I believe that just because something is allowed doesn't make it right or, in this case, sensible. You seem to believe, correct me if I'm wrong, that it's perfectly okay to do anything that is permitted. In other words, I think that certain other considerations are more important than mere legality.

Algona, I was unable to come up with any reasons non-users might have to oppose bitcoin usage. A failure of my imagination?

No.

 

[DeletedUser9930]

Ardak, which of my questions are you replying to?

 

[DeletedUser]

Longshanks, the messenger doesn't concern me, only the message. Is a period of apprenticeship required for one to make a suggestion? Re this discussion: no one has yet produced any valid reason why we should not suggest that Inno accept bitcoin, rather the reasons focused on why Inno should not accept bitcoin. For instance, if the suggestion had been that only bitcoin be accepted as payment, then everyone has 'skin in the game.'

The messenger does concern me when it appears that there is an ulterior motive for his post. Maybe Bitcoin isn't catching on fast enough and they're using shills in online games and other segments of the economy they want to infiltrate to push their agenda. The only valid reason to suggest that Inno accept Bitcoin would be if there were someone that couldn't pay any other way or if it was easier to use than normal payment methods. However, that is not the case, therefore there is no valid reason to make this suggestion except to promote the use of Bitcoin. And who would benefit from that? Possibly a player whose username is bitcoin123?

Algona and Longshanks, this is another species of what-is-allowed-versus-what-ought to-be-done. I believe that just because something is allowed doesn't make it right or, in this case, sensible. You seem to believe, correct me if I'm wrong, that it's perfectly okay to do anything that is permitted. In other words, I think that certain other considerations are more important than mere legality.

I have no idea what you are talking about here or where you got it from. I don't believe that it is perfectly okay to do anything that is permitted, as you would know if you'd read some of my posts on other threads. Besides which, my position on this thread is the opposite of that philosophy. smh

 

[DeletedUser]

While I hate to contribute to a post where the ultimate purpose is, apparently, for somebody called "Lemonwedge" to pose as two or three different people, in order to annoy somebody else called "Ardak Kumerin"...

Fine. If Inno accepts Bitcoin...which Bitcoin do they accept? As of today, there are at least two cryptocurrencies using that name -- because of course there are, the sucky thing about anarchy is, there are no rules -- each claiming to be the One True Bitcoin. So does Inno go for the Bitcoin of Rome, or the Bitcoin of Avignon? Should they pick Sunni Bitcoin, or Shiite Bitcoin? And what do they do when the next Great Bitcoin Schism inevitably occurs, or the one after that? And most importantly of all, why should they bother, when there's already this stuff called "actual money" that hasn't been proclaimed heretical by anybody?

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/706/204/d3f.jpg

 

[Algona]

Algona and Longshanks, this is another species of what-is-allowed-versus-what-ought to-be-done. I believe that just because something is allowed doesn't make it right or, in this case, sensible. You seem to believe, correct me if I'm wrong, that it's perfectly okay to do anything that is permitted. In other words, I think that certain other considerations are more important than mere legality.

Algona, I was unable to come up with any reasons non-users might have to oppose bitcoin usage. A failure of my imagination?

Not quire sure what my personal morality re laws/rules has to do with this discussion*, but it's sorta like this: Being sometimes rational, reasonably close to mature, and somewhat competent I'm solely responsible for what I do. If something is against the rules, and I decide to do it anyway, I accept full responsibility and punishment for doing so. If something is within the rules, then I feel free to entertain the notion of doing it, with due consideration to other factors such as but not limited to: Fun? Useful? Does it harm someone?

In the case of this particular discussion whether or not a non-stakeholder should voice their opinion I submit that it is not against the rules, is harmless, is useful, and is fun. (That last is mighty subjective feel free to disagree on that one.) To wit:

Iit can't hurt for anyone to toss their 2 bitcoins in. (See what I did there? I made a funny!)

What's the old saying? A failure to imagine is an imaginary fail? I wouldn't sweat it though. Others will let you know potential problems eventually if you'll permit them to speak their piece. If you can't figure out why folk might be opposed to bitcoin then I'd suggest that you telling non-stakeholders they shouldn't voice an opinion in the matter might be counterproductive to a healthy examination and discussion of the Proposal. More voices, more chances of discovering critical factors. Useful, no?

There's a lot of mighty smart folk and a lot of different ways of thinking on this forum. Excluding their participation is not a good idea. As my Grampa used to say back on the family farm, "That dog don't hunt."

Fun? I'm sick like that. A look at my post count shows that I enjoy the forums.

Within the rules, harmless, useful, and fun! Hey, I touched all four bases! It's a Home Run! And I think I've used up my quota of metaphors for the night.

But i haven't asked you yet. How is it good for the game to limit participation in this discussion?




* You're not up to some weird trickery of trying to equate allowing folk to post solely because it's in the rules to making posting possibly a bad thing? Nah. Must be my imagination, huh?

 

[DeletedUser26154]

While I hate to contribute to a post where the ultimate purpose is, apparently, for somebody called "Lemonwedge" to pose as two or three different people, in order to annoy somebody else called "Ardak Kumerin"...

I've only seen a post exactly like this...



About 25 times in my life.

 

[Freshmeboy]

I find it disconcerting this is a proposal rather than a question...asking if INNO accepts Bitcoin or why they won't, either on the forum or directly to the corporation itself, is one thing.....trying to drum up support in the form of a proposal to lobby INNO about amending payment policies seems a tad shady to me.....

 

[DeletedUser26154]

asking if INNO accepts Bitcoin or why they won't, either on the forum or directly to the corporation itself, is one thing.....

trying to drum up support in the form of a proposal to lobby INNO about amending payment policies seems a tad shady to me.....

Mmm Hmm.

 

[DeletedUser]

Not quire sure what my personal morality re laws/rules has to do with this discussion*...

* You're not up to some weird trickery of trying to equate allowing folk to post solely because it's in the rules to making posting possibly a bad thing? Nah. Must be my imagination, huh?

While I can't technically speak for other forum members...I doubt it's that complicated.

Cryptocurrency advocates -- and especially Bitcoin advocates, of whom I happen to know a few -- rarely think any farther than "Don't tell me what to do, YOU'RE NOT MY DAD!" (See also: almost everything Sloppyjoeslayer has ever written.) For these people, accepting or rejecting Bitcoin isn't a question of reasoned analysis, or pragmatic judgments, or determining what may or may not be profitable in the long-term. It is a question of "personal morality", and rather simplistic morality at that: Bitcoin is liberty made manifest, so those who reject its holy blessings must be the minions of tyranny.

As a general rule, "weird trickery" is beyond them.

PS: I'd post another meme here, but my last post makes it clear I don't know how to do that on this forum. WHAT IS THIS ARCANE SORCERY

 

[Algona]

As a general rule, "weird trickery" is beyond them.

Boss, i have to dispute that. Leastwise I think SJS and Tensk are eloquent top notch intellects. SJS also has a long track record of being extremely knowledgeanle in game practice and theory and unhesitatingly helps people in need of answers. Can't say the same about Tensk, but that's because he doesn't post enough to judge such.

I will say that I don't think either is above manipulating a conversation to improve their stance in a debate, but neither am I. Ain't a sin, just another weapon in the arsenal of wit. i do admire the subtlety they can bring to a conversation, I don't have that skill, more of a sledgehammer kinfa guy.

i'd recommend asking Ardak how to do the meme stuff he is our resident memeologist.

 

[DeletedUser26154]

i'd recommend asking Ardak how to do the meme stuff he is our resident memeologist.

First, you need a really good mentor.



Second, wild, unbridled creativity.
Third, the ability to tie two completely unrelated images together.



Lastly, read about 100 good books.