Does this mean

I can scam everyone and get away with it by not using the PM system?
(edit) Suggestion is to ... not do this anymore

 

You can scam every single one of your skype contacts and then make a post later saying your skype was hacked. If you didn't pm anyone then you're not liable. It's a rule from the time when skypes were easily compromised. These days with 2fa skypes, I think the rule should be changed so that users are now responsible for their skypes since anyone can implement 2fa

 

No it's not, was actually a pretty recent addition. Leanbeans skype got hacked and the hacker scammed some fucknut for $2k, the pm confirming the skype was around a month old.

Was a pretty big ordeal, happened right around when the coinking 10k+++ scam occurred.

Also since when are skypes not easily "hacked"?? More so cracked and or SE'ed rather, still happens all the time. S/O Bladebro

 

Tbh I cant decide :/ I agree with you on that fact but at the same time, people should ALWAYS require a PM...

I would say keep the rule for now.

 

Skype is unsecure and is complete shit. s/o Bladebro.

PM's are internal and always controllable by our own means, which is why we use them as a required regulation and make it readily available, and require it from traders.

 

I personally don't think it should be a MUST. Things can work on a case by case basis but like OP said:
>scam skype contact list
>don't send pm
>???
>profit

 

I'm sure you'd have to prove your skype was actually hacked.

 

You're a little late to this party. This has happened several times with major Sythe users and high calculated trade totals.

Already been discussed. Beating a dead horse tbh.

 

It wasn't me, my skype was hacked.

What else is there to say?

 

Can't necessarily get away with it.

 

Beating a dead horse tbh.






_________________________
Fifa 15 coins

 

Sometimes it isn't required in a report where it's 101% obvious the user scammed; and the ones banned this way usually never dispute it. It's there because everyone uses Skype and when a Skype is compromised it isn't the compromised user's fault - it has nothing to do with security or being smart. At the time, a MS employee was being paid to release Skypes and therefore we have no faith in Skype at all.

In the bigger cases where reputable members are targeted it becomes harder to determine if they were hacked or not (who's going to hack a 50 post member?). That's why the rule is in place and there are reminders on the forums to always double check a Skype isn't hacked by PM'ing the associated Sythe account - which isn't difficult.

 

The "case by case basis" is far to subject to favoritism, say a highly trusted user gets "hacked" and scams 50m. Everyone would assume the highly trusted user did not do it and it was a hacker whether it was or not.

Staff wouldn't ban an R2P or arcus over such an amount regardless. The required Pm rule SHOULD in theory negate this favoritism.

But in reality most people dont actually Pm before every trade..

 

That's actually really true, i've noticed around 50% of my trades do not ask for a PM, even upon offering them one. Their replies are usually something along the lines of "nah I trust you"

 

Yea + 95% of the users that asked for a pm the first time wont ask for one again the next time we trade with them.

but even with that in mind, I believe we should keep the rule. They have to learn to ask a pm... + Roary said that the user will still be banned if its clear they are the ones who scammed.

 

Yep. And hypothetically IF you were to scam them and claim your skype was hacked their report would be closed and no action would be taken.

It's a damned if you do damned if you don't situation, but I still feel the rule should be in place all things considered. Skype is one of the least secure messengers in recent memory, possibly even more so than MSN.

 

Dont be ridiculous