[Strell]

I see your point, but the fact is those coupons, unless distrubuted online, are not meant to be distrubuted digitally. Scanning them and allowing people to print them weren't the intended use of the coupon. If you really wanted to put them up "just for people to see what they look like" the poster can always paint over the barcode. The $5 off PSU Best Buy coupon was put online, then photoshopped to be easier to read / not so grainy and then a new scan was put up... Best Buy never intended for that to happen.

If stores should police themselves over coupons, then they should likewise police themselves over glitches, because only dumb cashiers give away $50 games for free when bought with a $3 game.

I'll put it down right now though that, like I said earlier, I'll use any coupon put on here (if its legit) and take part in any deal if it benefits me, I'm just pointing out some double standards.

Roufuss> OMFG I GOT LIKE $8,493 IN FREE PC GAMES LAST WEEK



But I do think he has a point. I don't see why digital distribution of a coupon is ok.

[blaked569]

hey this is my first time ever posting on CAG. i agree with Roufuss and co. and i just wanna say that there's something absolutely SHAQ-FUing retarded with the way things work on CAG. some naive idiot posts about how a game is 10 dollars at wal-mart but is 20 at target and how he made some money by screwing target over, and instantly hordes of self righteous pricks reply "OMG BLAH BLAH YOU ARE HORRIBLE BLAH BLAH THAT IS AGAINST THE LAW." but OH, when somebody scans a $5 dollar off PSU best buy coupon, asshats are bragging about how they picked up 30 copies of duel masters or 30 jampacks for free and nobody bats a SHAQ-FUing eyelash. seriously. some people on this forum make me really mad.

[Noodle Pirate!]

It would just b e easier to ban the people bragging about or suggesting the illegal activity instead of pussyfoooting around it and letting it be freely encouraged. Its not like these people contribute anything productive to this community and will be missed anyway.

[Strell]

It would just b e easier to ban the people bragging about or suggesting the illegal activity instead of pussyfoooting around it and letting it be freely encouraged. Its not like these people contribute anything productive to this community and will be missed anyway.

That would be seen as despotic censorship (for reasons I don't comprehend).

[Roufuss]

It would just b e easier to ban the people bragging about or suggesting the illegal activity instead of pussyfoooting around it and letting it be freely encouraged. Its not like these people contribute anything productive to this community and will be missed anyway.

Nothing illegal is going on here though... the illegal things are deleted off this site instantly (like photoshopping fake dates on coupons). Price matching and finding glitches isn't illegal at all, as its the stores job to catch those.

Take for instance the Sears thread... I believe it is every store's policy to call the store you're trying to PM to, find out if it's in stock and if the deal is legit, and then allow the PM. Most stores don't.

[Noodle Pirate!]

Not true, i still see tons of people talking about running to walmart and returning stuff they know they didnt get there. Cant get much more illegal then that.

[Arakias]

Heres my quick moral issues topics:

A big peeve is when people say "Oh my god, Game X (generic obviously) is on sale for $10 less at the Best Buy 40 miles away!" Considering the time and effort and gas consumption (likely $8 for amount of gas) was the deal truly worth it? Morally, this is bad for the environment! Of course if you are going that way or whatever, sure maybe, but do people actually take into the cost of gas when they go "cheap" on videogames?

What about people here (including me) who have to own/horde every game and leave them unopened on the shelf (again I have some unopened). If you are the ones that horded 10 copies of some $5 game from CC, people will hate you for being greedy and selfish, which is wrong.

Returning goods from one store to another for a greater value? Morally wrong, but not legally. I personally dont have to say its not a terrible issue though unless you are doing it to a mom and pop shop.

Pricematching known mistakes to other stores? Morally wrong. And you can't claim its "false advertising" at the store because the stores use disclaimers to say they are not responsible for any typos. If you tried to sue, you'd just be laughed at.

[Roufuss]

Not true, i still see tons of people talking about running to walmart and returning stuff they know they didnt get there. Cant get much more illegal then that.

Wal-Mart can't really prove that person didn't buy the game or object there, so it's not necessarily illegal per se, since they can't prove a motive that the person knew what they were doing.

If people would mark those posts for moderation, I'm sure they would be deleted, as the mods don't have time to comb every page of every thread day after day. I know that 90% of the posts I mark for moderation are dealt with.

[shrike4242]

Returning goods from one store to another for a greater value? Morally wrong, but not legally. I personally dont have to say its not a terrible issue though unless you are doing it to a mom and pop shop.

Why is it "not a terrible issue" when it's not a small retailer? It's the same situation in either case, if it's a large retailer or a small one. In either case, your contract of sale is with the store you bought it from, not from some other vendor. Returning an item to a store without a receipt is a courtesy that the store offers, and something that people decide to exploit when it suits their purposes.

[JSweeney]

Wal-Mart can't really prove that person didn't buy the game or object there, so it's not necessarily illegal per se, since they can't prove a motive that the person knew what they were doing.

If people would mark those posts for moderation, I'm sure they would be deleted, as the mods don't have time to comb every page of every thread day after day. I know that 90% of the posts I mark for moderation are dealt with.

Just because a crime can't be proven doesn't mean the commission of it is any less illegal. It just means that the person conducting said acts is far less likely to face the consequences of their actions.

[Skylander7]

Heres my quick moral issues topics:

A big peeve is when people say "Oh my god, Game X (generic obviously) is on sale for $10 less at the Best Buy 40 miles away!" Considering the time and effort and gas consumption (likely $8 for amount of gas) was the deal truly worth it? Morally, this is bad for the environment! Of course if you are going that way or whatever, sure maybe, but do people actually take into the cost of gas when they go "cheap" on videogames?

What about people here (including me) who have to own/horde every game and leave them unopened on the shelf (again I have some unopened). If you are the ones that horded 10 copies of some $5 game from CC, people will hate you for being greedy and selfish, which is wrong.

Returning goods from one store to another for a greater value? Morally wrong, but not legally. I personally dont have to say its not a terrible issue though unless you are doing it to a mom and pop shop.

Pricematching known mistakes to other stores? Morally wrong. And you can't claim its "false advertising" at the store because the stores use disclaimers to say they are not responsible for any typos. If you tried to sue, you'd just be laughed at.

Technically, it's up to the merchant's sole discretion to honor a price from another retailer, as it is the case that a merchant can refuse service to a customer as long as it is not discriminatory in nature (depending on your state laws that regulate commerce). As for honoring an advertised price that is offerred at that particular store, it is false advertising (although they often have disclaimers in print that open plenty of loopholes to get out of a misprint, such as "at participating locations", "while supplies last", "no rainchecks", etc etc). You may get laughed at by the store associates for it, but not by management. That's why many stores have likely pulled every HD for the 360 from their shelves to effectively minimize customer complaints about explaining a misprint.

[mykevermin]

dumb cashiers

Like there's any other kind.

Nobody's gonna change their minds based upon what I have to say, but succinctly - if you're knowingly ripping off game stores to make a pittance of a profit, either through fraudulently returning the items to another store or selling them on eBay, whether the matter is legal or illegal, there's a simple truism amidst all of it.

You're a cunt.

[Roufuss]

Just because a crime can't be proven doesn't mean the commission of it is any less illegal. It just means that the person conducting said acts is far less likely to face the consequences of their actions.

I honestly think that if Wal-Mart wants to cut down on something like that, they need to mark their products somehow so you can tell they came from a wal-mart. Maybe a blue dot somewhere on the packaging, always in the same place, so a CSR can easily say "Oh, this is one of ours, ok"

[lawdood]

I honestly think that if Wal-Mart wants to cut down on something like that, they need to mark their products somehow so you can tell they came from a wal-mart. Maybe a blue dot somewhere on the packaging, always in the same place, so a CSR can easily say "Oh, this is one of ours, ok"

Or, more likely, they'll just stop the practice of accepting returns without a receipt. TRU just did it a couple months ago and the more dishonest dillweeds keep taking advantage of that current policy, the more likely it will be abandoned.

[mykevermin]

I honestly think that if Wal-Mart wants to cut down on something like that, they need to mark their products somehow so you can tell they came from a wal-mart. Maybe a blue dot somewhere on the packaging, always in the same place, so a CSR can easily say "Oh, this is one of ours, ok"

An interesting point, seeing as how they single-handedly strongarmed the computer software industry into adopting smaller packaging for games (on the PC side). I dunno if people want to have boxes with "Wal-Mart" stamped all over it, but perhaps they could stamp the seal (like EA does with their games now, if you notice the cellophane at the bottom) - this way, they could return only their product, and anything open/missing the seal can be returned for store credit, and with the use of a driver's license (and limit it to roughly 3 returns per 6 months).

[Trakan]

Yea, I don't get this either... mods are locking the threads on price mistakes and glitches, yet the ones with scans of a coupon are allowed to stay, even though the Playstation Underground Best Buy coupon wasn't meant to be digitally distrubuted. It just seemed a bit hypocritical.

We're not locking them because they're price mistakes or glitches. It's the morality/ethics arguments that go on for pages that cause the threads to get locked. Yes, sometimes we can just delete posts, but often times it's much easier to lock the whole thread. The second thread you talked about that was gone the next time you logged onto CAG was locked/moved because everybody knew what discussion was already going to come of it.

[Roufuss]

We're not locking them because they're price mistakes or glitches. It's the morality/ethics arguments that go on for pages that cause the threads to get locked. Yes, sometimes we can just delete posts, but often times it's much easier to lock the whole thread. The second thread you talked about that was gone the next time you logged onto CAG was locked/moved because everybody knew what discussion was already going to come of it.

Wouldn't it just be easier to give the offending people a little warning through PM, kind of like a cease and desist? The PC glitch thread got locked and I know of a few CAG's who completely missed out on that, it's the only reason I bring it up.

I know in that glitch thread there was only 2 or 3 vocal people who kept parading around ethics, they ruined the deal for many other CAG's who probably wanted to give the deal a shot.

Yea, I know the discussion went back into the CC ad thread but honestly, most people don't check those unless there is a reason in the title, like 8.96 clearance or something similar.

[shrike4242]

Wouldn't it just be easier to give the offending people a little warning through PM, kind of like a cease and desist? The PC glitch thread got locked and I know of a few CAG's who completely missed out on that, it's the only reason I bring it up.

I know in that glitch thread there was only 2 or 3 vocal people who kept parading around ethics, they ruined the deal for many other CAG's who probably wanted to give the deal a shot.

Yea, I know the discussion went back into the CC ad thread but honestly, most people don't check those unless there is a reason in the title, like 8.96 clearance or something similar.

Been tried in the past, some people end up listening, others don't. Some people stop yapping about the issue, and others pick up the charge. This thread may have had 2-3 vocal ones, though that's only that thread.

For those that "missed out" on the glitch situation, they can blame the ones who turned the thread into a flamefest for having it locked.

[Trakan]

Wouldn't it just be easier to give the offending people a little warning through PM, kind of like a cease and desist? The PC glitch thread got locked and I know of a few CAG's who completely missed out on that, it's the only reason I bring it up.

We'll see. This thread should eliminate all of those problems. You won't have to worry about that discussion ruining those threads anymore. There won't be those few people who ruin the thread, it won't have to be locked, and CAGs won't completely miss out on any deals.

[Roufuss]

We'll see. This thread should eliminate all of those problems. You won't have to worry about that discussion ruining those threads anymore. There won't be those few people who ruin the thread, it won't have to be locked, and CAGs won't completely miss out on any deals.

I can sleep better at night now

[Skylander7]

Wouldn't it just be easier to give the offending people a little warning through PM, kind of like a cease and desist? The PC glitch thread got locked and I know of a few CAG's who completely missed out on that, it's the only reason I bring it up.

I know in that glitch thread there was only 2 or 3 vocal people who kept parading around ethics, they ruined the deal for many other CAG's who probably wanted to give the deal a shot.

Yea, I know the discussion went back into the CC ad thread but honestly, most people don't check those unless there is a reason in the title, like 8.96 clearance or something similar.

It's a shame that the deal got ruined, but I was thinking.. whereas some of the problem was the morality of the glitch, I think some of it was also friction of egos, self-righteousness, and just downright desire to (what we call in Alabama) stir up some shit. The end result was factionalist bickering and the locking of a thread that had a pretty sweet deal.

In addition to the morality thread, I say we have some pseudo Vs. thread with an embedded 2 player flash game to settle who's right or something. Maybe a flash emulated Combat or Street Fighter II, or maybe even a homemade one with two CAGs standing side by side.. you could make their ballsack get bigger by hitting the spacebar the fastest. ACDC's "Big Balls" could even play in the background... then, whoever has the biggest balls, their point was right. Plus, they'd be so tired from hitting the spacebar so fast, that they wouldn't post anymore on how they're right and everybody else is a douche, and how Dick Cheney is going to shoot their grandpa or something, etc etc.

[chosen1s]

Wal-Mart can't really prove that person didn't buy the game or object there, so it's not necessarily illegal per se, since they can't prove a motive that the person knew what they were doing.

If people would mark those posts for moderation, I'm sure they would be deleted, as the mods don't have time to comb every page of every thread day after day. I know that 90% of the posts I mark for moderation are dealt with.

Posts like this one really concern me. How can anybody think a crime has only occurred if the victim can prove the criminal's guilt? I am going to assume Roufuss did not mean to phrase it this way.

So...more on topic - when somebody makes a post about ripping off Wal Mart and says in their OP "this isn't illegal since Wal Mart can't prove anything" (which we have all seen 100 times by now), are we saying that nobody is allowed to respond to that statement? Or say it's a touch more "gray" than that...say, several people begin filling threads with comments such as "You can forget about getting this deal at the Best Buys in XYZ city - I'm cleaning them out first thing in the morning and selling it all on Ebay Ha ha ha ha ha" - the CAG policy is to no longer discuss dishonesty or call that poster out on hording (or other actions that violate the spirit of CAG)?

I understand the need to cut down on the flame wars, but this seems like a nice big leap in the direction of moral ambiguity - and honestly sounds like a path that leads more in the direction of Fat Wallet than CAG. One thing I really like about CAG is that the voices for "higher ground" are louder than the voices crying "every man for himself" and "it's only illegal if you get caught!". Not to be melodramatic here, but it sounds to me like the calls for higher ground have just been silenced (or, at the very least, confined to an irrelevant corner of CAG).

[shipwreck]

Posts like this one really concern me. How can anybody think a crime has only occurred if the victim can prove the criminal's guilt? I am going to assume Roufuss did not mean to phrase it this way.

So...more on topic - when somebody makes a post about ripping off Wal Mart and says in their OP "this isn't illegal since Wal Mart can't prove anything" (which we have all seen 100 times by now), are we saying that nobody is allowed to respond to that statement? Or say it's a touch more "gray" than that...say, several people begin filling threads with comments such as "You can forget about getting this deal at the Best Buys in XYZ city - I'm cleaning them out first thing in the morning and selling it all on Ebay Ha ha ha ha ha" - the CAG policy is to no longer discuss dishonesty or call that poster out on hording (or other actions that violate the spirit of CAG)?

I understand the need to cut down on the flame wars, but this seems like a nice big leap in the direction of moral ambiguity - and honestly sounds like a path that leads more in the direction of Fat Wallet than CAG. One thing I really like about CAG is that the voices for "higher ground" are louder than the voices crying "every man for himself" and "it's only illegal if you get caught!". Not to be melodramatic here, but it sounds to me like the calls for higher ground have just been silenced (or, at the very least, confined to an irrelevant corner of CAG).

This doesn't apply to people getting called out for hoarding. Not hoarding is indeed a general "spirit of CAG". I don't think we generally have to deal with flame wars about hoarding because everyone takes care of those on their own. I know I've never modded anyone calling out a person who is talking about hoarding.

And the "Walmart trading" posts always get removed if I see them or if the moderation team is notified about them in general.

I think you are painting everything with a bit too large of a brush. We're not going to be damaging the "spirit of CAG" in any way by keeping moral discussions of whether a deal is morally right or not off of the Deal Forum.

[Roufuss]

Or say it's a touch more "gray" than that...say, several people begin filling threads with comments such as "You can forget about getting this deal at the Best Buys in XYZ city - I'm cleaning them out first thing in the morning and selling it all on Ebay Ha ha ha ha ha" - the CAG policy is to no longer discuss dishonesty or call that poster out on hording (or other actions that violate the spirit of CAG)?

I understand the need to cut down on the flame wars, but this seems like a nice big leap in the direction of moral ambiguity - and honestly sounds like a path that leads more in the direction of Fat Wallet than CAG. One thing I really like about CAG is that the voices for "higher ground" are louder than the voices crying "every man for himself" and "it's only illegal if you get caught!". Not to be melodramatic here, but it sounds to me like the calls for higher ground have just been silenced (or, at the very least, confined to an irrelevant corner of CAG).

By this logic, every single thread will turn into a flame war on CAG... some people think scanning and printing coupons shouldn't be allowed, some people think PM'ing mispriced ads shouldn't be allowed... the deal thread needs to remain about DEALS, not about how Johnny objects to the deal because he feels it's morally wrong. If you don't have a post pertaining to the deal at end, then you need to not post.

Do you know how obnoxious it is having to wade through 10 pages during EVERY clearance sale because everyone has to throw in their two cents about hoarding? Alot of good information gets lost in the cracks because people feel the need to voice their opinion, and we've already seen dire cases where a thread gets locked and nobody gets in on the deal.

If I have to name one thing I don't like about CAG, it's that every person with the "higher ground" morals feel the need to ruin a thread for others by constantly bashing us over their head with their holier than thou ethics and morals. I'm sick of seeing the same thing occur in every major sale... people talk about hoarding, than ethics and morals, and eventually the thread is 100 pages long when maybe 10 pages are only talking about the deal at hand.

I'm all for Cheapy and the mods finally putting a stop to it.

[shrike4242]

One thing I really like about CAG is that the voices for "higher ground" are louder than the voices crying "every man for himself" and "it's only illegal if you get caught!". Not to be melodramatic here, but it sounds to me like the calls for higher ground have just been silenced (or, at the very least, confined to an irrelevant corner of CAG).

CAG has 60,000+ users now, and in the earlier days with much less users (when I joined and earlier), there were less people just out for themselves. Expand the user base through the years, and yes, we'll get more idjits just out for themselves, FW-style.

The calls for higher ground haven't been silenced, far from it. This is one place that the whining, bitching, complaining and the like, on "ethical" grounds, that be discussed in here.

We've had multiple threads around recently that have drawn ire from multiple sides of CAG, and they degenerated into flame wars and general chaos. It was thought that a central location for it would be a better place to try and have intelligent discussion about these types of issues, rather than inside the thread itself.

See some comments below about your concerns, chosen1s:

This doesn't apply to people getting called out for hoarding. Not hoarding is indeed a general "spirit of CAG". I don't think we generally have to deal with flame wars about hoarding because everyone takes care of those on their own. I know I've never modded anyone calling out a person who is talking about hoarding.

And the "Walmart trading" posts always get removed if I see them or if the moderation team is notified about them in general.

I think you are painting everything with a bit too large of a brush. We're not going to be damaging the "spirit of CAG" in any way by keeping moral discussions of whether a deal is morally right or not off of the Deal Forum.

Shipwreck hits all the rights points with this reply. I'm in 100% agreement with him on all the points above.

[GHardin]

I feel a little mixed when it comes to deals and exploits to said deals...on the one hand, I don't really see a problem in taking advantage of a deal or exploit, so long as it is for your own personal use. On the other hand, when people say they're going to hoard these things and turn over a profit on eBay, it just leaves a little sour taste in my mouth when thinking of some of these deals.

Don't ask what the point of this post was; I'm still trying to figure that out. ^_^;;;; I want to say something along the lines of it's alright if you're using it for yourself (or maybe others here), but it's just wrong when you deceive the stores to hoard and peddle the goods on eBay, etc.

[JSweeney]

Wouldn't it just be easier to give the offending people a little warning through PM, kind of like a cease and desist? The PC glitch thread got locked and I know of a few CAG's who completely missed out on that, it's the only reason I bring it up.

I know in that glitch thread there was only 2 or 3 vocal people who kept parading around ethics, they ruined the deal for many other CAG's who probably wanted to give the deal a shot.

Yea, I know the discussion went back into the CC ad thread but honestly, most people don't check those unless there is a reason in the title, like 8.96 clearance or something similar.

Please Roufuss. You know that's not the whole truth. Yes, there were people parading around screaming about ethics, but there were people taking the contrary position that were yelling just as loudly and as long.
The thread got locked because the thread degraded due to this. Not because of one specific group, by because of the direction the thread as a whole took.

[JSweeney]

CAG has 60,000+ users now, and in the earlier days with much less users (when I joined and earlier), there were less people just out for themselves. Expand the user base through the years, and yes, we'll get more idjits just out for themselves, FW-style.

Quite. But that's the nature of the beast as more people join, you have to expect that there will be more "undesirables" as well, be it trolls, thieves or whatever.

The calls for higher ground haven't been silenced, far from it. This is one place that the whining, bitching, complaining and the like, on "ethical" grounds, that be discussed in here.

On top of that, previous ethical complaints have been taken seriously, and changed the SOP of the mods. As shipwreck mentioned, Walmart scam threads are immediately locked, instead of festering the ways that they had in the past. I trust the morals of the majority of the mods in charge, and thus don't think they'd allow blatant theft to be discussed in an open forum.

We've had multiple threads around recently that have drawn ire from multiple sides of CAG, and they degenerated into flame wars and general chaos. It was thought that a central location for it would be a better place to try and have intelligent discussion about these types of issues, rather than inside the thread itself.

It seems completely reasonable to me... it's at least worth the attempt. Whether or not it's successful, it's still worth the attempt to prevent radicially off-topic flamefest from spawning. I don't think it will stop offhand mentions in the threads unless almost overzealously enforced, but it gives the mods a basis to go in an delete arguments in the thread, as they are not off-topic and in the wrong thread.

I can't say I exactly like the idea, but it's not unreasonable. From what I've seen, the moderators are reasonable people... and the site is no longer what it was. It's a mature site now... it's set in it's ways, and it's users know those ways, as Shipwreck so clearly illustrates.

For good or for ill, the general morals dictating the site have already set in, and those aren't likely to change all that much unless there are gluts of new people all joining at one time... and even that likely wouldn't have much effect.

[allyourblood]

i won't say anything regarding the morality of a deal one way or another. i'll just remind the people who object to certain deals that you do have tools at your disposal -- namely, the telephone and e-mail. if a deal offends, and one wishes to prevent said deal from existing, one can always call the corporate offices (or e-mail them) of any retail chain and level your concerns with them. i'm sure they'd be very appreciative and would probably take the necessary steps to ensure the deal is quelled as soon as possible.

this is not in reaction to any specific deal. just a gentle reminder that those who have moral objections to a "deal" don't necesarily have to sit idly by and watch it evolve in silence.

[evilmax17]

I dunno, "moral" issues regarding CAG can be broken down pretty easily.

-"Will this get CAG into legal trouble?" Fake coupons, illegal practices, etc. Moral discussion? Who cares. If it can get us into trouble, nip it in the bud.

-"Will this ruin any relationships that we have with stores?" I'm not up to date on our business relationships with retailers, but back in the day we would get special hookups because of partnerships. I remember CheapyD alerting EBGames of a price mistake in order to maintain good business. Moral discussion? Who cares. It's just being smart and putting the long-term ahead of the short-term.

-"Am I potentially screwing other CAGs by doing this?" Hoarding, flipping, etc. If you're taking meat away from your bretheren for your own benefit, you're a douche. Moral discussion? You bet. Gray area? Mmhmm. These subjects used to incite some wars, and I'd bet they still do.

I guess when you boil it down, it's all about keeping the deals seperate from the commentary. This is all well and good for threads in the VGD forum, but it makes Deal Discussion threads a bit stickier. I didn't see the end of the Sears HDD thread, so I'm not sure why that was specifically deleted. But if somebody makes a thread to talk about a specific "questionable" deal that they got, at what point does it become lockable? Isn't some "moral discussion" expected in such a thread?

Fine line I suppose.