I guess I didn't make this clear enough in the thread it happened in.

Nobody took 9 gifts away from her account or sent them in her stead.

I took a look, and as far as I could see she sent 10 total to him (more than she thought she did, which would make sense given she said it was showing she sent him the max amount of gifts).

What probably happened to make her think that was due to server lag; the server took a while to remove the gifts she sent from her account, so when she checked later it finally delivered the other 9 (but apparently not the messages).

Why it was looked into should be obvious. Staff are held to a higher standard than players as far as behavior goes. If their behavior is not upstanding, there are consequences.

From what I know, there isn't any way to obtain objective evidence that Simeone scammed or was scammed. There are two sides of the story that may be true or false. Assuming that there are logs for gralats being picked up, food being placed etc. It isn't enough to prove anything. The player could say it was given to them and there are multiple possibilities. There are those "farm for me and I pay you 5k gralats" scams then there are those who enter your house and farm them demand to be paid. Maybe there is a chat history with what both players said but who knows if they started off some rp and the other player decided to use it to their advantage. The weirdest and most dramatic things could happen in graal.

My point is that there isn't anything concrete/substantial enough to prove anything for such scams. I have nothing against G4G although I do think that to a certain extent, greed or want plays a part in it. What we do encourage is spending the extra 10 gralats on secret santa or doing it with someone that they trust. Trading with someone they know well however doesn't guarantee 0 risk either.

i think its hard to confuse between sending 1 and 10. Lmao

@milo, everything in graal is "extent greed". Or else why would ppl buy gralats. And we gave u solution, make secret santa unlimited and then u guys can argue that g4g is at ur own risk or whatever

What I meant to write was "to a certain extent, greed" left out the comma there.
And yes, it is, I know that. I don't see your point on how making secret Santa unlimited would then make our stand that g4g is at the player's own risk more concrete because either way, trading gifts with another player has its risks regardless of whether people can use secret Santa unlimitedly or not. Having no limitations to secret Santa only reduces the possibility of people doing g4g and thus being scammed, but the risks of doing it and then getting scammed still remains which is what I think you meant to imply instead.