Actually, the drug argument is the first thing that popped into my head. Can't beat supply and demand, so legalize and tax.

I'm not sure what you're talking about. If I wanted to buy a +40 jillion sword of epic wanking for WoW, I could go to any number of sites, and pay cash for that. I could do it *right now*. I could buy Diablo 2 items *right now*.

It is true Blizzard sells pets and crap like that for cash, but it is not true that they are selling anything different now. They're providing a cash auction house where PLAYERS can sell stuff to OTHER PLAYERS for money. In short, they're targeting the third party sites that sell items. That's it.

If Blizzard *themselves* were selling weapons or armor or something that they created, then yes, I would agree. This is just bringing the player-to-player exchanges that have been around since forever in-house.

Eh. If I was going to have to deal with a bunch of cash, I'd charge a fee too. It's a huge pain in the ass. They'll need new staff, and they'll have to pay fees, etc, etc.

All they're doing is hosting a player auction house, where items can be bought from players by players for cash. They're not selling items themselves.

Your point would be more valid if there weren't dozens of services that do the exact same thing already. I see this as Blizzard making a virtue of necessity: if people are going to sell their rare items, then why not facilitate that?

Nobody is making you play.

Zero?

Emails in the comment header.

People still buy porn?

Weird.

My kingdom for mod points.

This doesn't even qualify as a hack. It's more like a tactic a curious script kiddie would try just to see how something worked, and suddenly being pleasantly surprised when some other user's data was handed to them on a silver platter as a reward for bothering.

Sadly, I'm willing to bet this kind of "exploit" is probably far more common than anyone is willing to admit. Like those of us who have ever "left the water running" and only coming to realize it 50 miles down the road.

It's something so stupid, most developers wouldn't bother checking their own work for such a "rookie mistake", simply because they're just that good.

My thoughts exactly. It would only be a burden if you had to update the old records.

That being said, however, I'm sure that shit is hardcoded all over the damn place.

This is a common tactic to use against news organizations. Chances are, they're going to have to pay copy costs for each page as well...I think federal law caps the cost at $.25 per page. Joy.

I'm guessing you're a fan...In fact, you may actually be her, judging by your meticulous grammar and extraordinary vocabulary.

Why don't you check the revision history? Find on page? Really?