Guild Wars 2

People in the forums tend to be like Skritt. Someone shouts “market manipulator”, and everyone and their neighbor will follow along collectively. In Freud’s crowd behavior theory, people who are in a crowd act differently towards people from those who are thinking individually. People are pushing back at John Smith and the others who preach reason, because it’s easier to cast blame on “manipulation” rather than the fact that GW2 has a dynamic player driven market.

So I propose a challenge to prove the crowds wrong, but I need John Smith’s help. If you would be so kind as to add 2,000 Gold to my bank account, I’ll go out and prove that I won’t be able to manipulation the market as I please. This would be strictly for research purposes. In return for this, I’ll be giving Anet valuable research information, as well as solid evidence that manipulating the market isn’t as prevalent as one might believe. I won’t enjoy this one bit, but I’m willing to sacrifice my time for the betterment of the GW2 community.

Yeah sure he will do this. For “research” huh? Nice try

Sounds like a challenge to me. If I had the ‘head’ for the TP numbers game and I played the market on a daily basis I’d be extremely tempted to write up that 10 page abstract and summary details.

If I were you I WOULD write that up and see what kind of nibbles I get from John Smith.

On a side note: I do not believe for one moment that you wouldn’t like this one bit if you were given 2000 gold for this endeavor.

I’d believe this more if you had asked for 10,000 gold so you could actually control the CURRENT Precursor market as opposed to the prices they used to be.

I could likely buy several Dusks right now, but that would not enable me to actually control the pricing. Not only that, but most of the Precursors, you will notice tend to get undercut over and over until it reaches a lower price range eventually. (5-6+ of the same item)

However, if you assembled a TEAM – each getting 2,000 gold each – of perhaps 4-5 players you may be able to do so now.

I happily Volunteer to be on that team. =P But I’ll use my own gold thanks, that way I get to keep all the profit we’re about to make.

Come on John, we all know very well that there are no GM tools that allow for the creation of items or gold. So even if you wanted to, you couldn’t do that.

Don’t lead the poor guy on

Eolirin.1830:

Come on John, we all know very well that there are no GM tools that allow for the creation of items or gold. So even if you wanted to, you couldn’t do that.

Don’t lead the poor guy on

John is probably a Power Trader with 6,000+ gold. =P

Ashadow.6874:

John is probably a Power Trader with 6,000+ gold. =P

That could be I suppose.

2000 gold is not enough I sure

John Smith.4610:

I’ll need a 10 page abstract and summary details your methods first.

A ten-page abstract? I guess I’m not an economist, but all the abstracts I’ve seen were more in the <500 word range.

Ashadow.6874:

John is probably a Power Trader with 6,000+ gold. =P

That’s insider trading! With knowledge of what updates are coming in future builds of the game, he could easily position his stock to reap the benefits of whatever commodity will be in demand afterwards!

Smooth Penguin.5294:

People in the forums tend to be like Skritt.

New thread? Ooohh …. shiny!

Smooth Penguin.5294:

So I propose a challenge to prove the crowds wrong, but I need John Smith’s help. If you would be so kind as to add 2,000 Gold to my bank account, I’ll go out and prove that I won’t be able to manipulation the market as I please. This would be strictly for research purposes. In return for this, I’ll be giving Anet valuable research information, as well as solid evidence that manipulating the market isn’t as prevalent as one might believe. I won’t enjoy this one bit, but I’m willing to sacrifice my time for the betterment of the GW2 community.

I suggest you propose for the Snaff grant which is funded by the colleges of Rata Sum. They should fund such kind of research, and as far as I have heard they are looking for new applicants since the recent grant holder wasn’t doing research at all and rather traveled the continent on some fancy adventure, instead.

~MRA

John Smith.4610:

Abstracts are tiny, but summaries are not. In this case it’s the type of summary that details your plans for your research, not the summary afterwards.

Just to add that comment: You shouldn’t regard this terminology as universal for scholarly publications. The usage of “abstract”, “summary”, “extended abstract”, “short paper”, etc. varies greatly from discipline to discipline (and sometimes even within a discipline).

~MRA

MRA.4758:

John Smith.4610:

Abstracts are tiny, but summaries are not. In this case it’s the type of summary that details your plans for your research, not the summary afterwards.

Just to add that comment: You shouldn’t regard this terminology as universal for scholarly publications. The usage of “abstract”, “summary”, “extended abstract”, “short paper”, etc. varies greatly from discipline to discipline (and sometimes even within a discipline).

~MRA

I’m fairly certain in this instance Mr. Smith can demand that it conform to his standards before providing the grant. In this case the Golden Rule is literally true .

Somehow, its much harder to prove that you “can’t” rather than you “can” manipulate the market. Coming from a scientific perspective ofc. And ofc there will be some people who can’t resist the limelight and say that it can does work. :p

And before anyone says John Smith has no sense of humor, I’ll point out this thread flagrantly violates the “no calling out” clause of these forums… yet has not only not been infracted/anhilated, but has actually produced a (perhaps tongue in cheek) response from the targeted Dev.

I kinda hope the other actively posting Devs give John just the teeniest bit of kitten about this in the break room tomorrow.

Coldness.9628:

2000 gold is not enough I sure

This. Try 9k gold.

I like the way that smooth penguin ran away when a 10 page paper was made a requirement

John Smith.4610:

I’ll need a 10 page abstract and summary details your methods first.

Why do you need one of those?

Eolirin.1830:

Come on John, we all know very well that there are no GM tools that allow for the creation of items or gold. So even if you wanted to, you couldn’t do that.

Don’t lead the poor guy on

Pretty sure that the guy has a credit card, access to the gem store, and in game mail. Who says he needs special GM tools, if he finds the subject interesting enough?

Svarty.8019:

John Smith.4610:

I’ll need a 10 page abstract and summary details your methods first.

Why do you need one of those?

If the guy really knew what he was doing, John need only look at it and see for himself if the guy is correct or not. No need to actually prove it by doing an in-game experiment. Kinda like applying for a grant. You write down a lengthy paper explaining why you need to do it, detailed methodology, and expected output, parameters, etc. Then the grant-giving body takes a look, and if its worthy, they’ll give you the grant.

Can the nonquantitative disciplines get in on the action? I personally think most of the complaints in this part of the forums are caused by a failure of people’s perception in determining luxury goods vs necessities.

Do the mechanics of a game encourage such failure or do the people that tend to play games already exhibit such behavior?

Now that would make an interesting case study.

Complete side note: I cannot stop thinking of Apple products, while writing this post.

Hi there, I also want those 2000 shinies… but I just want them for buying a Dusk and the other things I need for Twilight. In compensation I would let you get a screenshot with me and my Twilight At least I’m being honest here

Could you also email me a very detailed summarization with bullet points.

I’d honestly like to see this happen. The report and John following through, that is (assuming the methods are approved).

But if you ran a live experiment, wouldn’t you unfortunately have to let the accused manipulators profit in the process, as you “relieve” them of their position?

John Smith.4610:

Abstracts are tiny, but summaries are not. In this case it’s the type of summary that details your plans for your research, not the summary afterwards.

Ah, I see. The 10 pages include both abstract AND summary. I read it wrong.

This is non-sense. No way you can prove no market manipulation with any method you could propose. That you cannot do it doesn’t mean others cannot do it either. And 2000 gold is not even remotely enough to manipulate the market. No further discussions necessary.

forever.6908:

This is non-sense. No way you can prove no market manipulation with any method you could propose. That you cannot do it doesn’t mean others cannot do it either. And 2000 gold is not even remotely enough to manipulate the market. No further discussions necessary.

While I agree that 2000 gold isn’t enough to manipulate THE market….but it may be enough to manipulate A market.

Smooth Penguin hasn’t been back to post in this thread yet, but I, too, would like to see his theories.

I think if you chose a single item that doesn’t currently look to be manipulated by another, or multiple, players, I think it could be manipulated to drive the price up.

I say this because I wonder how many people have looked at the price of butter and chocolate over the last couple of months….

My whole point is that I wouldn’t be able to manipulate the market, let alone one single item. Because the game population is so large, and market movements are active 24/7, one person with money can’t do much. There are thousands upon thousands who use the TP. Some to get rid of spare mats, some to get rid or equipment, and some to turn a profit by making it a mini game all in itself.

But then you say a bunch of people could control it together? Let’s assume that’s true. If these people effectively control the prices on the TP, to a price point where it’s ridiculously high, people will turn to another source of the items… Farming. You see, the TP isn’t the only place you can get mats or equipment. All the goods available on the market today are available <gasp> from playing the game </gasp>.

But then the argument comes up with Precursors or Legendary weapons. As soon as you mention one of these items, your argument is a fail before it began. You cannot use the term “market manipulation” when you speak of luxury or exotic goods. The supply of such items are always low to begin with, and people don’t actually “need” the goods in the first place. Just like I don’t “need” a private yacht or a Lamborghini. If you want the item, you pay whatever the price the seller asks. If not, settle for a fishing boat or a Toyota. Do not confuse the term “need” with “desire”.

Ooooohhhh……Shiney! Give me shiney now!

skritt, i’m hit

A typical grant proposal at consist of roughly 10 pages. 1st page is an overview of the issue and problem related the field of research and it’s significance in layman’s term. page 2-5 is the part where you refer to your method and approach scientifically. Page 6-10 will be your CCW and references, for a one year project, I’d say a 20k gold grant would suffice as a starting point.

I’d like to point out the the OP and John that the use of grant money in experimental economics will distort the recipients value of the funds as they were not earned in the traditional methods. OP, please work in game to save up the 2k gold you want. Once you’ve earned it then attempt to manipulate the market keeping detailed records of the items you attempt to manipulate. Bring all of that back here and we’ll have something speaking to the behavior of potential manipulators given the effort needed to acquire wealth. Seeing where you choose to try your manipulation is much more interesting than seeing what we already know… 2k is far too little to even dent a market in the long run.

If you want to get to that 2k fast just follow the existing market trends without attempting to manipulate them. You’’ll find that that is far more profitable than trying to control the actions of hundreds of thousands of market participants world wide.

DO NOT PUBLISH YOUR INTENDED ACTIONS. Only publish results and get a copy to John first. I’m sure he’d enjoy seeing the response of the Skritt if you post evn moderate success with a method on the forums.

But IT IS possible to manipulate the market.

If one knows the chokepoint(s), one can manipulate the flow(s).

It’s all about knowing how to gain enough money to be on the chockepoints level, then by consistantly getting money from lower level trading, you can begin to influence the chockepoint, which is at the higher trading level, and thus eventually can control it.

There is alot of psychological games to played within the context of market/trading. One can get most profit if they can stay ahead of the game…it is like a chess game.

Death Reincarnated.3570:

But IT IS possible to manipulate the market.

If one knows the chokepoint(s), one can manipulate the flow(s).

It’s all about knowing how to gain enough money to be on the chockepoints level, then by consistantly getting money from lower level trading, you can begin to influence the chockepoint, which is at the higher trading level, and thus eventually can control it.

There is alot of psychological games to played within the context of market/trading. One can get most profit if they can stay ahead of the game…it is like a chess game.

/sigh

That’s not market manipulation. That’s just a player being smart. And one person, even one group of people, cannot manipulate a game wide market that’s on 24/7.

aww man reading these posts from mods are hilarious

penatbater.4710:

Somehow, its much harder to prove that you “can’t” rather than you “can” manipulate the market. Coming from a scientific perspective ofc. And ofc there will be some people who can’t resist the limelight and say that it can does work. :p

Hah – you just presented a dichotomy and then said that one side was easier to prove than the other, which is literally impossible. For any true dichotomy, i.e. “P XOR Q”, proving or disproving either operand disproves or proves the other.

To put it simply: proving that you can manipulate the market disproves the claim that you can’t manipulate the market, while proving that you can’t manipulate the market disproves the claim that you can manipulate the market. Proving either disproves the other, so there is no difference in difficulty between the two!

/logic!

P.S. any system relying primarily on human input can be manipulated, e.g. a free market system like the TP. What’s debatable is the degree.
/pedant!

Akaji.1296:

penatbater.4710:

Somehow, its much harder to prove that you “can’t” rather than you “can” manipulate the market. Coming from a scientific perspective ofc. And ofc there will be some people who can’t resist the limelight and say that it can does work. :p

Hah – you just presented a dichotomy and then said that one side was easier to prove than the other, which is literally impossible. For any true dichotomy, i.e. “P XOR Q”, proving or disproving either operand disproves or proves the other.

To put it simply: proving that you can manipulate the market disproves the claim that you can’t manipulate the market, while proving that you can’t manipulate the market disproves the claim that you can manipulate the market. Proving either disproves the other, so there is no difference in difficulty between the two!

/logic!

P.S. any system relying primarily on human input can be manipulated, e.g. a free market system like the TP. What’s debatable is the degree.
/pedant!

I meant methodology-wise. From what position do you start from? This is the reason why when you try out to solve for proofs of some mathematical equations (don’t ask me for examples, I took them years ago :|), sometimes you start with the converse. "Prove x = y + z * a.* Then you assume that “suppose x =/= y + z * a… etc”

John Smith.4610:

I’ll need a 10 page abstract and summary details your methods first.

I would send it but a Skritt ate my home work

To me it seems he wants 2k free. Since laughably it will take him/her less time to get the abstract ready and do the ‘experiment’ (if you call it that) then it would to make the 2k since it takes forever to make that much money.

Revolution.6301:

To me it seems he wants 2k free. Since laughably it will take him/her less time to get the abstract ready and do the ‘experiment’ (if you call it that) then it would to make the 2k since it takes forever to make that much money.

No, I’m still working on my thesis. I can’t do that and farm Gold at the same time without use of third party programs that are strictly forbidden.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Death Reincarnated.3570:

But IT IS possible to manipulate the market.

If one knows the chokepoint(s), one can manipulate the flow(s).

It’s all about knowing how to gain enough money to be on the chockepoints level, then by consistantly getting money from lower level trading, you can begin to influence the chockepoint, which is at the higher trading level, and thus eventually can control it.

There is alot of psychological games to played within the context of market/trading. One can get most profit if they can stay ahead of the game…it is like a chess game.

/sigh

That’s not market manipulation. That’s just a player being smart. And one person, even one group of people, cannot manipulate a game wide market that’s on 24/7.

People manipulate the REAL market, which is far larger and more complex. Stop pretending it cant happen here.

while i first thought this would be a great sarcastic thread, i then got struck hard by the reality that the OP means what he says ^^

I need an answer now: in your “research” you want to proof that you aren’t able to do something . My question is: why would me and all the other listeners not just say “u suck” when you come back and proof you … erm … sucked “manipulating the market”? oh wait – we will My point: proof you are a good market manipulator first – then proof you cant manipulate the market. oh wait! you arent a good market manipulator! why? Because you dont have 2k G to fund you “research”

This thread has run its course, so it will be closed. Thank you.