Steam clamping down on CSGO Betting Sites

[DieGrootHammer]

On Steam's involvement in this whole debacle:

I feel that Steam is not directly at fault for the proliferation of these gambling sites, but it did build the mechanisms and the system upon which this gambling business was built on. The fact that it allowed these sites to link directly to users Steam accounts makes it guilty by association. Valve and Steam has made it possible just enough so that they do not have direct influence or control over these sites, yet never did anything to stop it. It kept everything at arms lenght, an old tactic of Valve.

Every day Valve and Steam is becoming a more and more unethical mess of a company. Personally, people hate other companies like Ubisoft and EA for much less. Valve in my opinion is worse than both of those companies put together in terms of moral, ethical and consumer business practices.

[Flex]

On Steam's involvement in this whole debacle:

I feel that Steam is not directly at fault for the proliferation of these gambling sites, but it did build the mechanisms and the system upon which this gambling business was built on. The fact that it allowed these sites to link directly to users Steam accounts makes it guilty by association. Valve and Steam has made it possible just enough so that they do not have direct influence or control over these sites, yet never did anything to stop it. It kept everything at arms lenght, an old tactic of Valve.

Every day Valve and Steam is becoming a more and more unethical mess of a company. Personally, people hate other companies like Ubisoft and EA for much less. Valve in my opinion is worse than both of those companies put together in terms of moral, ethical and consumer business practices.

Very True. But for example. Should companies that manufacture money be held liable for gambling lawsuits? Because they are creating the thing on which gambling is based

[DieGrootHammer]

Very True. But for example. Should companies that manufacture money be held liable for gambling lawsuits? Because they are creating the thing on which gambling is based

Money in your example is the instrument of gambling, not the system. I can gamble on anything of value, does not mean that money making is at fault for gambling. But, creating the process and systems that fosters gambling, like Steam creating an environment where gambling can occur, that is why I'm saying they are wrong. Your example isn't accurate to what Steam has created. The fact that you can link Steam accounts to other sites, these sites get access to information about tangible valuable items, creates an environment where people can gamble on it. Thus Steam is indirectly liable.

[Flex]

Money in your example is the instrument of gambling, not the system. I can gamble on anything of value, does not mean that money making is at fault for gambling. But, creating the process and systems that fosters gambling, like Steam creating an environment where gambling can occur, that is why I'm saying they are wrong. Your example isn't accurate to what Steam has created. The fact that you can link Steam accounts to other sites, these sites get access to information about tangible valuable items, creates an environment where people can gamble on it. Thus Steam is indirectly liable.

Okay that makes sense yes. my example might have been a bit off. But Valve did not create any of these websites used for gambling. All they did was create the skins. A kind of in game currency you can say. Same as many other games. Dota, LoL, Warcraft, Over Watch and many many many others. These people (Owners of the sites) just used the competitive nature of CSGO and the people that play it imo. Not Steam or Valves fault at all

[DieGrootHammer]

Okay that makes sense yes. my example might have been a bit off. But Valve did not create any of these websites used for gambling. All they did was create the skins. A kind of in game currency you can say. Same as many other games. Dota, LoL, Warcraft, Over Watch and many many many others. These people (Owners of the sites) just used the competitive nature of CSGO and the people that play it imo. Not Steam or Valves fault at all

Again I am going to disagree with you. There are many games that has the same mechanics of using real world money to buy a skin or an in-game item. This is a very traditional product based business model; I give you money in exchange for a product. Now, this product has a monetary value, because I am capable of buying it, and thus, if the game allows, I am able to trade it for something of equal value. This is more of a barter economy. Now, if I create an economy like this, the onus lies with me to ensure that there are the necessary control and monitoring processes in place to ensure people don't take advantage of my economy. In the real world, money producers include a whole host of security measures to ensure that the money they produce cannot easily be manipulated within the economy it is produced for. The same onus lies with Steam. They have created this economy where skins have a huge monetary value. This is not just a simple "buy a product" business model, this is more leaning towards the model of an economy. And as the creators and managers of this economy, the onus lies with them to ensure proper control of the economy to not allow exploitation. Steam has not done this. They made it possible for external sites to access these barter items. They didn't properly control their own created economy. Other games have done the exact same system as CS:GO, yet they do not let outside influences gain access to their created system and potentially defraud it. I guarantee you that there is a proper black market for CS:GO skins, which is something Steam could have easily prevented by just preventing access to that API, yet they didn't, and thus they are guilty

[Flex]

Again I am going to disagree with you. There are many games that has the same mechanics of using real world money to buy a skin or an in-game item. This is a very traditional product based business model; I give you money in exchange for a product. Now, this product has a monetary value, because I am capable of buying it, and thus, if the game allows, I am able to trade it for something of equal value. This is more of a barter economy. Now, if I create an economy like this, the onus lies with me to ensure that there are the necessary control and monitoring processes in place to ensure people don't take advantage of my economy. In the real world, money producers include a whole host of security measures to ensure that the money they produce cannot easily be manipulated within the economy it is produced for. The same onus lies with Steam. They have created this economy where skins have a huge monetary value. This is not just a simple "buy a product" business model, this is more leaning towards the model of an economy. And as the creators and managers of this economy, the onus lies with them to ensure proper control of the economy to not allow exploitation. Steam has not done this. They made it possible for external sites to access these barter items. They didn't properly control their own created economy. Other games have done the exact same system as CS:GO, yet they do not let outside influences gain access to their created system and potentially defraud it. I guarantee you that there is a proper black market for CS:GO skins, which is something Steam could have easily prevented by just preventing access to that API, yet they didn't, and thus they are guilty

Okay I understand what you are saying. but now you are using my own example which you said was not a valid example. And at the same time cemented my argument. This has nothing to do with Skins being manipulated or reproduced.
The money gets made and sent off. To lets say a casino. The casino has to ensure that the money gets used responsibly with gamblers. Or even a better example, lets use tokens. The Casino has to make sure that their are measurements in place to ensure the tokens don't land up in 10 year old kids hands, and NOT the manufacturer of the tokens.
The steam market is very well controlled and monitored on the contrary to your statement. It is not easy to just trade, make, or steal items at all.

Manufacturer of tokens= Valve
Tokens= Skins
Casino= Gambling Sites
Kids=Kids

[DieGrootHammer]

Okay I understand what you are saying. but now you are using my own example which you said was not a valid example. And at the same time cemented my argument. This has nothing to do with Skins being manipulated or reproduced.
The money gets made and sent off. To lets say a casino. The casino has to ensure that the money gets used responsibly with gamblers. Or even a better example, lets use tokens. The Casino has to make sure that their are measurements in place to ensure the tokens don't land up in 10 year old kids hands, and NOT the manufacturer of the tokens.
The steam market is very well controlled and monitored on the contrary to your statement. It is not easy to just trade, make, or steal items at all.

Manufacturer of tokens= Valve
Tokens= Skins
Casino= Gambling Sites
Kids=Kids

Okay, again, I used the money example to my argument about economy creation. And again, we will have to agree to disagree, because I do not agree with your example at all. Valve hasn't created a product that people buy, they created a currency that has fueled an economy of huge scale within CS:GO. And that in itself is 100% fine, nothing wrong with that. But, they allowed outside websites to gain access to this economy, and I'm sorry, but the human race is a cesspool of degenerate people that would not hesitate the moment they can find a way to benefit themselves at the expense of others. Valve opened up their CS:GO economy to be exploited, and for what? What would they gain out of that? Why are these gambling sites capable of accessing Steam accounts? That access should never have happened, because Valve cannot control or monitor the usage (or exploitation) of their created economy outside of their own sphere of influence. Because they are giving access to other sites to this system, THAT is why I'm saying Valve is INDIRECTLY liable.