> Jay Scott writes:
> >>> This 30 minute flurry of activity looks a tad suspicious if you ask me
> >>> $CYC 15 99 1997/03/23 01:43:20 1 2 847 758
> >>> $CYC 15 1 1997/03/23 01:30:48 16 3 758 847
> >>> $CYC 34 99 1997/03/23 01:22:50 1 2 847 758
> >>> $CYC 34 1 1997/03/23 01:18:14 35 3 758 847
> >>Looks like a couple of users (maybe one user with two addresses?)
> >>transferring about $50 from one account to another. That's
> >>one way to jack up your score...
> >Yup. New player 847 (anonymous, of course) transferred just under $50 to
> >758 <email@example.com>, whose e-mail account bears the name
> >"Ilya Lipkind".
> Also note that player 847 had just recieved his first $50 allowance, and
> promptly gave all but $1 of it away to player 758.
> >From the FX rules file (http://www.ideosphere.com/fx/docs/rules.html#Rules):
> > You may only control one IF account.
> > You may not trade with the purpose of transferring money between accounts.
> > These are not "rules" because they are not enforceable. Because FX is
> > self-regulating, users are allowed to report suspicious activity to the
> > FX administrators.
> > Penalties for rule violations are completely at the whim of the FX
> > administrators, and may include (FX money) fines, coupon fines, and
> > account deletions.
> I suggest at a minimum that we delete account 847 (only holds a -1 in
> $CYC, and hasn't done any other trades yet), and forfeit the $49 player
> 758 gained in this collusion.
> Does the FX database contain information on who owns anonymous accounts?
> I think this kind of information would be crucial to allow the FX
> administrators to check accounts suspected of collusion...
I was wondering how long it would take for someone to suggest some
draconian "know your customer" big brother type scheme for FX.
Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures
Finger for Public Key Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern
Vote Monarchist Switzerland