[the_logos]

The difference is that behavior that is contrary to the roleplaying mandatory policy is verifiable by simply playing the game. By definition, in fact. If you see someone talking about Simpsons in a roleplaying mandatory game, you can be positive that roleplaying mandatory is a policy and that the reality does not match up to the policy.

Selling gear takes place out of the game, however, not in it. In-game, A giving B an item looks the same pretty much regardless of the transaction that took place out of game to a player.

RMT = trade between players, not first party sales from the admin. Players typically don't provide each other with receipts when trading stuff between themselves.

If you're talking about first-party sales from admins, then you can produce a receipt if and only if the admin in question chooses to provide one. If he doesn't, it's not verifiable. Heck, I run successful commercial MUDs and you don't even get a receipt if you mail us cash, check, or a money order (though you do via credit card or various other online purchase methods).

In other words, the only way it's verifiable is if the admin-seller chooses to make it so. There is literally no feasible way to verify that it happened otherwise. Contrast that with your roleplay example, where by definition violations of the policy are detectable in-game.

--matt