Appeal Denied

I’m not going to recount all of the specifics for my case, since I have prior thread about it.  Mine was supposedly coin distribution.  I was building JJ Watt’s set, which for whatever reason is becoming a theme with those being popped by their automated banning system.  Working in a highly controlled environment in my career, I’m baffled that an audit doesn’t have to provide any sort of results back up the initial or appeal decisions.  They literally send the same form appeal denial email to everyone.  No human contact is not ok, even Microsoft gives an actual person for their rewards program, jfc.

Just before writing this post I finished a BBB claim and an FTC claim.  I would highly encourage those people who have been accused and banned, submit claims..  It is one of the few avenues we have to force EA to be better and maybe make positive changes in these virtual currency, lootbox, auction house sorts of situations.

EA has been top 3 worst companies for ages, they don’t give a fuck about BBB

I get your point, which is also the reason for the FTC claim and their sentinel database.

I wonder what they’re looking at to show that you are a coin seller. My guess is its the same evidence they’d show any outside company to prove their point. 
 

It shouldn’t matter moving forward though, I think EA is moving away from the auction house.

coperg225281 said:

I wonder what they’re looking at to show that you are a coin seller. My guess is its the same evidence they’d show any outside company to prove their point. 
 

It shouldn’t matter moving forward though, I think EA is moving away from the auction house.

But even in a real audit (internal, federal or otherwis), the auditee is provided the opportunity to provide commentary on the findings (ie detail).  Neither of these things happens with their process.

The outside case in this sense would be many cases, not one.  It would be more an indictment of willful negligence in process and predatory actions. I’ve referenced Robinhood Inc. as a similar case, granted that was an SEC driven one.

happened to me aswell years ago, i was spending them bucks on packs too and they still banned me

EA assumes we are all a bunch of powerless teenagers when the whales are mostly older, educated, professionals or former professionals, and know how to use the system to challenge EA. Kudos to OP.

I would hope it has nothing to do with building team diamonds. At least I hope not as I just started on that project and almost done my first player. I would be completing all 32 to earn watt to keep.  I have noticed some of the lower ovr set pieces 5-10x the median price, and I won't buy those.  It would be a real crap thing for us to give these sets then penalize if you do.  

I do see you can repeat each player, so do you get a token each time or just the time? I could ppl making multiple and just flipping high watt/gurly pieces

Madisonmike said:

I would hope it has nothing to do with building team diamonds. At least I hope not as I just started on that project and almost done my first player. I would be completing all 32 to earn watt to keep.  I have noticed some of the lower ovr set pieces 5-10x the median price, and I won't buy those.  It would be a real crap thing for us to give these sets then penalize if you do.  

I do see you can repeat each player, so do you get a token each time or just the time? I could ppl making multiple and just flipping high watt/gurly pieces

I’ve only made him once and is my RE.  It’s likely the volume of buying and those outliers in pricing in what is being purchased.  Be aware that some of the cards comprising the TD cards are also sets, some requiring up to 10 cards (not just the DD cards).  

For me, at a point I gave into some of the price gouging and just bought.  Nothing ever over 75k though and out of 1000 or so cards, 5-10% are being price gouged.   One instance was buying the only Logan Thomas cards for like 12k and 61k, respectively.  That was for my very last 2 TD cards for JJ’s set.

mvandor said:

EA assumes we are all a bunch of powerless teenagers when the whales are mostly older, educated, professionals or former professionals, and know how to use the system to challenge EA. Kudos to OP.

Thank you!  Appreciate the positivity!

Madisonmike said:

I would hope it has nothing to do with building team diamonds. At least I hope not as I just started on that project and almost done my first player. I would be completing all 32 to earn watt to keep.  I have noticed some of the lower ovr set pieces 5-10x the median price, and I won't buy those.  It would be a real crap thing for us to give these sets then penalize if you do.  

I do see you can repeat each player, so do you get a token each time or just the time? I could ppl making multiple and just flipping high watt/gurly pieces

So if putting an 80 elite up for 5-10x more than it's worth is penalized, EA should put a cap on certain cards and the problem would be solved. They allow it, ban people for it, and they can't even explain exactly what you did. I'm waiting for the day that i read EA has lost the license.

SportsPerson94 said:

So if putting an 80 elite up for 5-10x more than it's worth is penalized, EA should put a cap on certain cards and the problem would be solved. They allow it, ban people for it, and they can't even explain exactly what you did. I'm waiting for the day that i read EA has lost the license.

The thing is, they already do set the minimum and maximum threshold.  When you go to post or purchase in the AH, those things are listed from my recollection.    

In essence, buying selling is happening within the confines they have set.  They still “potentially“ penalize people for over-purchasing.  Not sure what is happening on the sale side infraction-wise.

Motionez11 said:

But even in a real audit (internal, federal or otherwis), the auditee is provided the opportunity to provide commentary on the findings (ie detail).  Neither of these things happens with their process.

The outside case in this sense would be many cases, not one.  It would be more an indictment of willful negligence in process and predatory actions. I’ve referenced Robinhood Inc. as a similar case, granted that was an SEC driven one.

You thinking EA AH ban will rise to the level of a Federal or "otherwise" audit?  My bet is they (Federal or "otherwise") have higher priorities...and EA knows that.  Thus...they gonna do what they want to do.  The form email I have seen folks post are very vague..."cheating" or "manipulation" could be almost anything...buy a gold pack for 500 coins and get a 79...sell that 79 for 2300 coins on the AH...boom...if they want..."manipulation" (never heard of them going this far).  Wish you the best of luck and hope you get that "real" audit.

von11 said:

You thinking EA AH ban will rise to the level of a Federal or "otherwise" audit?  My bet is they (Federal or "otherwise") have higher priorities...and EA knows that.  Thus...they gonna do what they want to do.  The form email I have seen folks post are very vague..."cheating" or "manipulation" could be almost anything...buy a gold pack for 500 coins and get a 79...sell that 79 for 2300 coins on the AH...boom...if they want..."manipulation" (never heard of them going this far).  Wish you the best of luck and hope you get that "real" audit.

I never mentioned wanting a federal audit, I was providing a point of reference for audit practices…. But they are providing an electronic marketplace, currency and goods.  Explaining away/disregarding the actual seriousness of what is going on as you have is not valuable commentary.  

Auditing in general involves the same processes, regardless venue.  In their form email replies, they reference auditing and/or in review of audit findings.  It is disingenuous at best, for those references and no actual provisioning of a report or providing a person to contact.    

To be fair lootbox, virtual currency, online marketplaces and predatory practices have been hot button topics in recent years with the video game sector.  This extends to gamification of trading as well.