DeletedUser80720
Guest
well he did say to us that it will now cause minimal damage kinda not though since 1000 to 20 is a big difference xDExactly. This was insulting at best.
well he did say to us that it will now cause minimal damage kinda not though since 1000 to 20 is a big difference xDExactly. This was insulting at best.
Hey guys, please note that the compensation of 30% is granted to all users (that did not have it before) and will be running for 48h.
We understand that this will not completely undo the damage or unbalance, but we do hope to make it as minimal as possible.
Is this really what Inno is compensating us with? LOL this is just straight pathetic.
Same here.What a stab to the back of all loyal tw players. I will not be playing anymore tw worlds or any inno game ever again.
JawJaw thank you for your efforts to fix the issue. Unfortunately the only fix that would've solved this completely was a server roll back and refund, giving out any more bonuses will only add to the damage. Please just leave it as is.
Hey guys, please note that the compensation of 30% is granted to all users (that did not have it before) and will be running for 48h.
We understand that this will not completely undo the damage or unbalance, but we do hope to make it as minimal as possible.
...from a legal standpoint . . . .
Also from a legal standpoint . . . .
Senior's discounts, ladies nights, limited edition and exclusive offers are all illegal. In all countries. Who knew?
I'm fairly well convinced that this 'mistake' was a calculated money grab - in part by this pitiful excuse for a 'solution' - but I'm pretty sure that ultimately our options are to either take our business elsewhere or simply man up, turn around and bite the pillow.
While this whole disaster leaves me with disappointment that a 'mistake' on their part has affected a large percentage of their player base and I am considering making any worlds I am playing on the last still I doubt that this was a money grab by inno. If it truly were a money grab I am sure they would have found an excuse to leave the packages up for their entire intended duration so that vastly more people would have purchased the products or as a solution they would have said the only 'fair' way to deal with the issue is to allow everyone the opportunity to purchase the same products.
Senior's discounts, ladies nights, limited edition and exclusive offers are all illegal. In all countries. Who knew?
We all enjoy being internet lawyers at times, but I can one-up you as an internet judge, and it is the opinion of this court that in general businesses are not forced by law to offer any particular product or service to any particular person. Until money changes hands or an agreement is signed, they're free to make offers as broadly or selectively as they please and withdraw them at any time, in general. There may be exceptions where there are concerns around issues like racial discrimination, but even then I've heard that (*ahem* I mean that my ruling on) the recent US Supreme Court decision leans against the broadest interpretation of public accommodation obligations.
None of these are points are particularly relevant, however, since InnoGames is a German company, operating under German and European Union law, not US law, be it state or federal.Actually, this does in fact break a number of state laws and there have been cases where companies have been successfully sued for things like discounts for woman etc.
So there's you answer, i knew.
Limited editions are open to everyone until stock runs out so that's a whole different story.
Also with the 2006 AGG a case could be made for this particular thing but idk if i want to spend my summer break reading up on the specific subject, i've spent more than enough time on stuff like this in uni.
None of these are points are particularly relevant, however, since InnoGames is a German company, operating under German and European Union law, not US law, be it state or federal.
None of these are points are particularly relevant, however, since InnoGames is a German company, operating under German and European Union law, not US law, be it state or federal.
To be fair the 2006 AGG which CHT alluded to is German legislation... although dealing with employer/employee discrimination rather than how and what products businesses offer their customers. What can I say, internet lawyers amuse me
You're wrong again
even though it is the main focus point of this particular German Legislation that does not mean it's its only use.
This bit is taken directly from the legislation itself.
Beyond the fields of employment and occupation, the AGG also applies to access to and supply of goods and services, for example when shopping, visiting a restaurant or a discotheque, searching for a flat, or conducting insurance and banking transactions. The procurement of goods and services is generally a form of bulk business, which is generally conducted without regard to the individual involved. Individual contracts between private persons are not included in this category.
I'd say this perfectly matches Inno.
So you internet lawyer read up, perhaps do a case study or two on the AGG before i have to prove you wrong again...
are admissible when there is an objective reason for it.