Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

PSA: The $45,000 refund was fake - updated

13

Comments

  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,765
    edited September 2017
    @VorpalChicken28 you might want to check: http://www.pcgamer.com/star-citizen-backers-obtain-a-45000-refund/

    You were wondering about them not mentioning the 45k refund, yet the 330$ what would leave a door open that the 45k itself, the ticket that was shown, was real (say if they were talking a separate refund ticket, not the 45k one):

    "The Reddit post contains a number of screenshots of correspondence between the poster and CIG's customer service department detailing the refund process, however: "The screenshots do not represent the actual communications which were shared to and from our support department," the CIG representative wrote. "So no…there’s nothing to it at all. There is no story.""

    So that's a pretty direct statement that the ticket was edited, hence fabricated, so they in that way do state that 45k refund wasn't real, yet part of one edited 330$ refund ticket (with its ID visible, easy to track).
    Gdemami
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    MaxBacon said:
    @VorpalChicken28 you might want to check: http://www.pcgamer.com/star-citizen-backers-obtain-a-45000-refund/

    You were wondering about them not mentioning the 45k refund, yet the 330$ what would leave a door open that the 45k itself, the ticket that was shown, was real (say if they were talking a separate refund ticket, not the 45k one):

    "The Reddit post contains a number of screenshots of correspondence between the poster and CIG's customer service department detailing the refund process, however: "The screenshots do not represent the actual communications which were shared to and from our support department," the CIG representative wrote. "So no…there’s nothing to it at all. There is no story.""

    So that's a pretty direct statement that the ticket was edited, hence fabricated, so they in that way do state that 45k refund wasn't real, yet part of one edited 330$ refund ticket (with its ID visible, easy to track).
    That quote just reads like them
    stepping around the truth. It doesn't specifically say there was no 45k refund but that that wasn't the entire communication.
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,765
    Kefo said:
    That quote just reads like them
    stepping around the truth. It doesn't specifically say there was no 45k refund but that that wasn't the entire communication.
    It's a very direct statement that the refund ticket was edited.

    Mind the ticket ID was in the browser URL of the screens, it's as simple (assuming the ID real) CIG to check that ID and find a 330$ refund instead. That's what it reads like, a real ticket, a real refund, but edited to fabricate a believable 45k refund.

    As quoting:
    ..a refund was issued recently to one customer, but in the amount of $330. I asked if it appeared this was the same customer, and if this customer had perhaps doctored the correspondence to make it appear as if the amount refunded was $45,000. The response I got was: "Yes to the first. Yes to the second…as best as we can tell."

    I don't believe they would risk lying on what would be so easily proveable if true by the guy in question just by letting the media verify the ticket.
  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member LegendaryPosts: 9,000
    Unless they added an NDA condition to the refund.  Stating they would grant the large refund under the condition they say no more about it.  That way a spin could be put on it talking only about his expense being refunded but not his guild to discourage others with large accounts to do the same.  Unlikely yes, but not impossible.
    [Deleted User]MaxBacon

    "We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa      "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."  SR Covey

  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Unless they added an NDA condition to the refund.  Stating they would grant the large refund under the condition they say no more about it.  That way a spin could be put on it talking only about his expense being refunded but not his guild to discourage others with large accounts to do the same.  Unlikely yes, but not impossible.

    Well that, or CIG could have paid a reddit mod in order to delete the account. Or CIG could have hacked into reddit and deleted his account. Or CIG could have hacked into a satellite, aimed it at the reddit servers, and bombarded it with ions until his account was corrupted. 

    I suppose we can believe whatever we like, and we will. Whenever the literal evidence supports an argument, then we can only talk about facts and literals. Other times, coincidences are more than acceptable, as long as it suits our agenda. 

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,765
    CrazKanuk said:
    Well that, or CIG could have paid a reddit mod in order to delete the account. Or CIG could have hacked into reddit and deleted his account. Or CIG could have hacked into a satellite, aimed it at the reddit servers, and bombarded it with ions until his account was corrupted. 

    I suppose we can believe whatever we like, and we will. Whenever the literal evidence supports an argument, then we can only talk about facts and literals. Other times, coincidences are more than acceptable, as long as it suits our agenda. 
    For all there is, the CIG statement stands, the ball is the guy who made the claim that could easily prove it real if it was, the reddit account delete talks by itself... Unless... what you said xD
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,765
    edited September 2017
    Rhoklaw said:
    Issuing a statement is NOT proof. It's just words.

    A video showing a communication with CIG on their website with the $45,000 refund being refreshed seems like proof to me.
    The company statement is far more solid because if the refund was real, it would be easy to prove the company lied (unreasonable to believe they would take such a risk), something the media was interested in pursuing, but:
    I've attempted to contact the Reddit poster (who said in their post that they preferred to remain anonymous) about this refund, and will update the story if I hear anything back.

    Update: The redditor who made the original post has deleted their account.
  • FlyByKnightFlyByKnight Member EpicPosts: 3,967
    Rhoklaw said:
    Issuing a statement is NOT proof. It's just words.

    A video showing a communication with CIG on their website with the $45,000 refund being refreshed seems like proof to me.

    Of course, in today's world, anything is possible.

    One rule of thumb though, you can't trust anyone to be 100% honest, regardless of their position, relation or social status.
    Sad but true.
    "As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*" 

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member LegendaryPosts: 9,000
    edited September 2017
    CrazKanuk said:
    Unless they added an NDA condition to the refund.  Stating they would grant the large refund under the condition they say no more about it.  That way a spin could be put on it talking only about his expense being refunded but not his guild to discourage others with large accounts to do the same.  Unlikely yes, but not impossible.

    Well that, or CIG could have paid a reddit mod in order to delete the account. Or CIG could have hacked into reddit and deleted his account. Or CIG could have hacked into a satellite, aimed it at the reddit servers, and bombarded it with ions until his account was corrupted. 

    I suppose we can believe whatever we like, and we will. Whenever the literal evidence supports an argument, then we can only talk about facts and literals. Other times, coincidences are more than acceptable, as long as it suits our agenda. 
    Companies reaching a settlement combined with a non-disclosure agreement is pretty normal these days and a lot easier than hacking accounts, servers, or satellites.  :smile: 

    It's also a good answer to the question of why the guy has suddenly gone dark.
    MaxBacon

    "We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa      "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."  SR Covey

  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,765
    edited September 2017
    Companies reaching a settlement combined with a non-disclosure agreement is pretty normal these days and a lot easier than hacking accounts, servers, or satellites.  :smile: 

    It's also a good answer to the question of why the guy has suddenly gone dark.
    lol,

    If I was to take a refund I would do exactly what happened here; I would fake the refund with the screens and the vid (just a few tricks with the frames), I also wouldn't expect to CIG to ever react to it, so if they did I would delete my account as the media reaching me to verify if the company claim was true, because then I would be proven fake if I engaged, deleting my account would be the best option to drive theory-crafting. :)

    I wonder if they paid him "another 45k" to delete his account.

  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,502
    MaxBacon said:
    This also tells about the refunds sub credibility when the admins claimed they personally verified the legitimacy of that refund...


    I think that's a bit of a reach.

    All it means is that the scammer did a convincing job. A lot of the "proof" was posted after the original claim and I guess it was this "proof" which was the so-called verified stuff.

  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,765
    edited September 2017
    I think that's a bit of a reach.

    All it means is that the scammer did a convincing job. A lot of the "proof" was posted after the original claim and I guess it was this "proof" which was the so-called verified stuff.
    It was very deceptive, but from the ground up they wouldn't have any proper standard to verify refunds, all of them fly by nobody cares if real or not everyone assumes everything is real (even the 11K refund troll that was self-announced faked time ago was never verified), this one stirred them to check because of its amount.
  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,502
    MaxBacon said:
    I think that's a bit of a reach.

    All it means is that the scammer did a convincing job. A lot of the "proof" was posted after the original claim and I guess it was this "proof" which was the so-called verified stuff.
    It was very deceptive, but from the ground up they wouldn't have any proper standard to verify refunds, all of them fly by nobody cares if real or not everyone assumes everything is real (even the 11K refund troll that was self-announced faked time ago was never verified), this one stirred them to check because of its amount.

    Should we even expect them to have standards or a criteria for verifying refunds though? They're not media releasing details from some government whistleblower.
    They probably don't care about the veracity of refunds and perhaps it was even a case of claiming it was verified to help it be taken more seriously, than it might have otherwise been, who knows?

    The point though, is that the motives or culpability of the mod are completely unknown, he could have easily been duped or he could be playing along with it, I just don't think it's fair to claim anything is definite, atleast not without actual proof.

  • FrodoFraginsFrodoFragins Member EpicPosts: 5,898
    edited September 2017
    When a hate for a game is this intense, there is obviously a severe agenda against SC and anyone involved in doing things like this needs mental help right away.
    they've taken over $100 million and really aren't close to delivering what they promised.  How many more years do people have to wait before they can call CR on his scam and/or mismanagement?

    People will think twice about crowdfunding a game once they've experienced it with SC.  That's not good at all.
    Athea
  • FrodoFraginsFrodoFragins Member EpicPosts: 5,898
    edited September 2017
    Kumapon said:
    To be perfectly honest, we still don’t have any actual proof of either set of claims. We have a he said, he said. CIG denied it, not refuted it.
    How do they refute it?  The guild wasn't named and may not exist.  and the dude making the claims vanished as soon as CIG made a statement 

    Do you want them to show you all of the refunds they did give on the day of the claim?
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,765
    edited September 2017
    Should we even expect them to have standards or a criteria for verifying refunds though? They're not media releasing details from some government whistleblower.
    They probably don't care about the veracity of refunds and perhaps it was even a case of claiming it was verified to help it be taken more seriously, than it might have otherwise been, who knows?

    The point though, is that the motives or culpability of the mod are completely unknown, he could have easily been duped or he could be playing along with it, I just don't think it's fair to claim anything is definite, atleast not without actual proof.
    Not really because it's not about that, there's no criteria for it, it's just a place where the higher the quantity and amounts of them, the better, so I would mean what I said more on the that not specifically to this verification that was one exception, one that felt under a very deceptive case.
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    MaxBacon said:
    Kefo said:
    That quote just reads like them
    stepping around the truth. It doesn't specifically say there was no 45k refund but that that wasn't the entire communication.
    It's a very direct statement that the refund ticket was edited.

    Mind the ticket ID was in the browser URL of the screens, it's as simple (assuming the ID real) CIG to check that ID and find a 330$ refund instead. That's what it reads like, a real ticket, a real refund, but edited to fabricate a believable 45k refund.

    As quoting:
    ..a refund was issued recently to one customer, but in the amount of $330. I asked if it appeared this was the same customer, and if this customer had perhaps doctored the correspondence to make it appear as if the amount refunded was $45,000. The response I got was: "Yes to the first. Yes to the second…as best as we can tell."

    I don't believe they would risk lying on what would be so easily proveable if true by the guy in question just by letting the media verify the ticket.
    The quote I was talking about it doesn't very clearly say it was edited. The quote you posted doesn't say that grub never gave a refund for 45k but just that that response looks like it was edited. It's them spinning everything
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,765
    Kefo said:
    The quote I was talking about it doesn't very clearly say it was edited. The quote you posted doesn't say that grub never gave a refund for 45k but just that that response looks like it was edited. It's them spinning everything
    "The screenshots do not represent the actual communications which were shared to and from our support department"

    Seems clear to me that's what was stated there, especially as their first statement to Ars they already stated a lot of information was fabricated and that the refund given to said account was of 330$, not 45k.
  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,502
    MaxBacon said:
    Should we even expect them to have standards or a criteria for verifying refunds though? They're not media releasing details from some government whistleblower.
    They probably don't care about the veracity of refunds and perhaps it was even a case of claiming it was verified to help it be taken more seriously, than it might have otherwise been, who knows?

    The point though, is that the motives or culpability of the mod are completely unknown, he could have easily been duped or he could be playing along with it, I just don't think it's fair to claim anything is definite, atleast not without actual proof.
    Not really because it's not about that, there's no criteria for it, it's just a place where the higher the quantity and amounts of them, the better, so I would mean what I said more on the that not specifically to this verification that was one exception, one that felt under a very deceptive case.

    That might be so but it still doesn't mean that the mods creditibilty is questionable beyond a shadow of a doubt. We don't actually know what occurred here, we don't know if he got fooled or how he got fooled, all we can do is hypothesise and that's why I think leaping to conclusions is unwise.

  • TheScavengerTheScavenger Member EpicPosts: 3,321
    The hilarious part is Derek Smart and his fans, and all the haters of SC were celebrating such a large refund to the game that they hate so much. Wonder how they are feeling now.

    My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB: 

    https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul



  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,502
    The hilarious part is Derek Smart and his fans, and all the haters of SC were celebrating such a large refund to the game that they hate so much. Wonder how they are feeling now.
    Knowing those guys they'll be laughing at drawing that much attention to refunds and the fact that some people are unhappy etc. Beyond that I doubt they even care.
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    MaxBacon said:
    Kefo said:
    The quote I was talking about it doesn't very clearly say it was edited. The quote you posted doesn't say that grub never gave a refund for 45k but just that that response looks like it was edited. It's them spinning everything
    "The screenshots do not represent the actual communications which were shared to and from our support department"

    Seems clear to me that's what was stated there, especially as their first statement to Ars they already stated a lot of information was fabricated and that the refund given to said account was of 330$, not 45k.
    Except it still skips around actually saying there was no 45k refund, just that that refund was for 330 which the person never denied and said there was a 330 refund in addition to 45k. 

    They are trying to wordsmith their way around it. If the 45k refund was a lie why write the screenshots do not represent..... when you can just say we never issued a 45k refund and just be done with it?
    Octagon7711MaxBacon[Deleted User]
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,765
    Kefo said:
    Except it still skips around actually saying there was no 45k refund, just that that refund was for 330 which the person never denied and said there was a 330 refund in addition to 45k. 

    They are trying to wordsmith their way around it. If the 45k refund was a lie why write the screenshots do not represent..... when you can just say we never issued a 45k refund and just be done with it?
    The first statement on Ars states the account in question was refunded for 330, not 45k; then answering the journalist that he edited the 330 refund ticket to make it look like the 45k refund.

    And because this is stuff on the media, people are not that aware of fabrication and manipulation of screenshots/videos of websites to that level, it's not a "photoshop'ing it".
  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member LegendaryPosts: 9,000
    edited September 2017
    The guy made reference to a org which they didn't comment on at all, just the posters account.

    Why would he reference a corporate card and using paypal, something that could be easily investigated?

    "We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa      "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."  SR Covey

  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,765
    edited September 2017
    The guy made reference to a corp which they didn't comment on at all, just the posters account.
    Why would they if it was fake? 

    All CIG had to follow up was the ticket ID present on the screens and/or timestamps to find the supposed ticket, everything else would be the backstory for the 45k value.
Sign In or Register to comment.