Make Investment & Loaning Rules Clear

[SoldierAlex]

Hello Mc-Market,

Recently I've seen that many people are under the impression that loans don't need to be paid back. This has caused much confusion in scam reports. Many are claiming the scam report against them is invalid and they do not need to pay their hard earned money.

The way I see it, the rules should be like so:

• An investment that involves equity, percentage of profit or otherwise not directly receiving money when being paid back. Not required to pay back

Reason: Money is not promised in the form of a ROI but instead in the form of shared revenue

• Directly receiving money back from ROI or direct payment Required to pay back

Reason: Money is directly promised as a ROI. This is still required even if a server or otherwise a project fails. The reason is that the money was directly promised in the form of a ROI and the pay back can be determined. Where as an investment's pay back can not be determined because it is directly dependent on the project.

 

[Ivain]

It's already been said that investments are at your own risk. Not paying back loans is bannable, as far as I know. However, if you invest in a project and it fails, unless there is clear proof of a scam nothing can be done about it.

however, to respond to the original suggestion, I agree, it could do with being a bit more clear.

 

[Mick]

Accepted. I've added in a little post to investments & loans which is now stickied. Better late than never, right!?

Thanks for the suggestion.