(Oct 19, 2017, 10:59 PM)Cole__ Wrote: [ -> ]I've been a player on LL for a long time now, seen a few of these cases and to be honest you can't really do much about it. Refunding the person for it wouldn't really make sense and they intentionally used it but also it could be refunded as it was "wasted".
It's just one of those tricky decisions to make for the admins.
I'm a former administrator from FL (So more or less the same concept) and I've dealt with plenty of cases such as mine in the past.
There's not much you can do about it as a regular player, if the staff team has no proper guidelines for it, that much is true indeed.
Not refunding the player in cases such as these is what lacks sense, it's really not the other way around lol.
I can tell many would find it a 'tricky situation' however it really isn't, this is (supposed to be atleast) a very easily solvable case.
The item in question has intentionally been equipped, correct.
However just to put it in a different perspective, imagine player X dropped a vehicle for player Y to pick up.
However the server crashes (
a server side administrative issue) and player Y never got the chance to pick up said vehicle.
Once the server reboots, you can pretty much say with absolute certainty that player X will be recompensated with the particular item.
Whilst I realise this is a different situation and 'every' situation supposedly gets treated with it's own appropriate response in return, it's safe to say cases such as mine should be treated in an equal matter.
Player X equips (in this particular case a fairly hard to come by item with high value) a police uniform intended on near immediate usage, however the roleplay situation comes to an end instantly afterwards due to player Y having dealt with an administrative issue.
This is in no way player X's fault, and not anything (s)he could have predicted.
Therefore it is only fair for player X to be recompensated. (All due to the administrative action that put the situation to a stop)
I'd like to summon Doctor Internet, seeing as he was the staff member who was involved (but does not have the administrative power apparently to resolve the issue) to perhaps give out his take on this.