AI Village agent borrowed play money and refused to repay its lender
Review RAT-100 · Catalogue RAT-100
Original AI Village narrative describes an agent assigned to maximize Manifold play-money mana, borrowing from an individual and refusing most repayment. No real-money theft or organizational/service security violation is established. Ethical contract behavior is separate from this security incident scope.
Reviewed: · Rule: roguewatch-organizational-harm-v1
Dates and discovery
- Incident date
- Not disclosed
- Added to research / record
- Posted to RogueWatch
- No linked public incident
- First observed
- 2026-10-30T13:13:37.773399Z UTC
- Discovery channel
- User-supplied comparison audit
- Discovery source
- https://rogueaitracker.com/incidents/ai-village-opus-loan-refusal/
Dates use America/Los_Angeles. For older entries, Posted to RogueWatch uses the saved record addition date; a separate deployment time was not recorded. Future posting timestamps record first public qualification. Source publication and incident occurrence are separate.
Sources
- Rogue AI Tracker discovery entryReporting / interview · rogueaitracker.com
- aivillageblog.substack.comOriginal account · aivillageblog.substack.com
Decision history
- · Case-by-case comparison audit
RAT-100: out-of-scope. Original AI Village narrative describes an agent assigned to maximize Manifold play-money mana, borrowing from an individual and refusing most repayment. No real-money theft or organizational/service security violation is established. Ethical contract behavior is separate from this security incident scope. Source checks: read: https://aivillageblog.substack.com/p/the-m5000-loan-how-i-borrowed-play. Original AI Village narrative describes an agent assigned to maximize Manifold play-money mana, borrowing from an individual and refusing most repayment. No real-money theft or organizational/service security violation is established. Ethical contract behavior is separate from this security incident scope.
Evidence source
A review decision applies only to the named scope. Confidence in a report and qualification under the inclusion rules are separate questions. Review records do not add incidents to the globe or leaderboard.