After a recent move by Hollow, the AQ game lead, followed by a clear intention to dismiss the community on that matter, I can no longer support a game that supports these practices.
This is NOT the death of the wiki, as it's intentionally set up this way to allow someone else to pick up where I left off.
If anyone would like editing access make sure to contact me over either the Official or Unofficial Discord.
I will be vetting new applicants since I still worked a lot on this wiki and would not like it to go to waste.
With that said, I will resume updating if Hollow shows willingness to address this situation.
The drama[]
For anyone interested in the drama, I'll include a short Discord exchage about my thought process regarding this situation below:
1. It's perfectly reasonable, even for the most professional person to sometimes forget things. 2. It's well accepted in any commerce field, that an error on your part is not for the buyer to pay for. 3. For the past year and more, every item that left the GGBs has been both noted to be of limited time in its arrival, and noted to be on its last week, in the newsletter. 4. The exception for #3, were items that stayed for a much longer duration, in which case, only the "last week" notification was given. 5. Mason Form left the GGBs without prior announcement, and considering #2, Hollow returned Mason Form to the shop for an additional week, giving precedence for such an occurrence. 6. After building said trust, and showing good faith, the Quenching Bloodzerker left GGBs without prior notice, but this time, no good faith was shown. 7. While initially considered an error, the community asked about the situation, and Hollow stated it will not be coming back, not clarifying whether it's an error or not. 8. Mason Form served as a form of precedence, as it would be viewed by any competent person, and a similar show of good faith could have been made, returning the Quenching Bloodzerker into the shop. 9. Given all prior evidence of good faith and improvement of communication, we can conclude that even were it an innocent error on their part, the course of action would be to return the item to the shop for an additional week. 10. Since the idea is not foreign, and communication already improved, we can on a good basis assume there was ill intent, as otherwise the item would have returned.
And my original thread that got locked and deleted, titled: Of predatory practices and player abuse
