Dromsex wrote:

Lupus Aurelius wrote:

There was not exploit or fraud.  Because there was no rule / requirement / procedure that it violated.  There was no hack, becuase someone did not use out of game mechanics to affect in game performance.  The only ones that are at fault here are the Devs, everything else was done according to the at the time published game rules and functionality.  Corrective Action at this point would be to declare it an exploit, create a mechanic to prevent it, and publish it in an easily referable source, such as an Exploit Forum or list, and state from this point forward, it is not allowed.  To retroactively punish people for something that was not a violation prior to that point is inherently wrong, logically, and ethically.

Thats simply not true. Something is an exploit as soon as it gets someone an unintended advantage. Declared or not. No need of hacks, bugs or declarations.

If u use the insurance to make money by intentionally blowing the insured item up - you dont use the insurance to insure yourself against pityful losses, but to actively gain money.

And by this you do something not intended. And by that you exploit. End of story.

Nope, wrong.  First question that no one has answered - what requirement does it violate?  Until you can answer that, there is no violation. Period.

EDIT:  You can not prosecute someone for an activity if it does not violate a law.  You cannot claim someone violated a rule or requirement, if no requirement or rule exists to cover that issue.  A general rule that could be applied to cover unanticipated situations still has to have some criteria to which it applies.  Until you can show such a rule / requirement, you cannot state that anyone violated anything.