[DENIED] Adjusting rule to vouching

Usually, once a trade has been completed and a middleman was used, both users vouch each other and the middleman vouches them as well.

There should be a rule in place that when a middleman is used, the middleman is not allowed to vouch them.

The only person in a position of trust during a trade where a middleman is used, is the middleman himself. Only he can acquire the vouches (should buyer and seller decide to vouch for him).

I understand this will mean it's harder for users to gain vouches, however, it will also mean it will be harder for users to acquire a few vouches and then scam others.

 

By this logic it would mean that when 2 people are trading on their own only the person who was trusted should receive a vouch aswell. While I see where you are coming from and if this was easy to manage and wouldn't handicap new people trying to gain vouches I would support.

Due to this being pretty confusing, unnecessary, be too much work to moderate and it might push people away from MMs aswell, especially new users who are trying to gain vouches. No support.

 

By this logic it would mean that when 2 people are trading on their own only the person who was trusted should receive a vouch aswell. While I see where you are coming from and if this was easy to manage and wouldn't handicap new people trying to gain vouches I would support.

Due to this being pretty confusing, unnecessary, be too much work to moderate and it might push people away from MMs aswell, especially new users who are trying to gain vouches. No support.

This was more directed towards middlemen. I don't see a problem with the buyer and seller vouching eachother, to be honest. Someone sold goods, the other bought the goods. However, the middleman shouldn't be vouching for buyer and seller, as it will only provide them with an extra vouch where there shouldn't be one. Acquiring 50 vouches would in this case only take 25 trades, not 50.

I edited the original post.

Just my thoughts, thought I'd make a suggestion out of it. I see your point, though, and it's a valid one at that!

 

This was more directed towards middlemen. I don't see a problem with the buyer and seller vouching eachother, to be honest. Someone sold goods, the other bought the goods. However, the middleman shouldn't be vouching for buyer and seller, as it will only provide them with an extra vouch where there shouldn't be one. Acquiring 50 vouches would in this case only take 25 trades, not 50.

Just my thoughts, thought I'd make a suggestion out of it. I see your point, though, and it's a valid one at that!

I just woke up so I'm a bit slow, missed the "The middleman is also not allowed to vouch them." part. I can see how vouches from a middleman who are usually at a higher position of trust could be abused but this is the case with regular trades aswell. Would also be easier to enforce aswell as middlemen are usually more aware of the rules compared to random users just trading once in a while.

Guess there are just two ways of looking at this, I want to encourage using MMs as much as possible so I don't mind people getting a bonus vouch when choosing to do so as generally using one avoids a lot of scams. (There are exceptions of people SQing during MMing of course)

 

It should be one vouch per person. Buyer and seller vouch for one another. The person who contacts the MM vouches for him/her. MM doesn't vouch for anyone. That way it'd be harder to stack up vouches for all parties involved.

 

I have made this suggestion in the past, can't remember why it was denied 100% but if I recall it was a log of a transaction which is the main reasons for vouchers or something,

I support I guess.

 

No support
Who will be managing this? And how are we gonna stop users and middlemen from doing it? Should we add a sticky? It’s just too much hazzle for a minor concern.
I see where you are coming from tho, and I do not disagree with you in that sense.

 

No support
Who will be managing this? And how are we gonna stop users and middlemen from doing it? Should we add a sticky? It’s just too much hazzle for a minor concern.
I see where you are coming from tho, and I do not disagree with you in that sense.

Add a sticky, and also have MM take responsibility to inform the buyer/seller of it. The latter could just be a short copypasta message. It's definitely not a minor concern as it'd reduce the amount of scams significantly in the long-term.

 

No support

By saying the only person in position of trust was the middleman you might as well make it that anyone who goes first doesn't get a vouch. That way no new person will ever progress on the site? Middlemen often leave in the vouch that they middlemanned the trade.

 

No support
Who will be managing this? And how are we gonna stop users and middlemen from doing it? Should we add a sticky? It’s just too much hazzle for a minor concern.
I see where you are coming from tho, and I do not disagree with you in that sense.

For example:

STICKY: Middlemen reported for violating this rule will have their middleman thread closed.

 

For example:

STICKY: Middlemen reported for violating this rule will have their middleman thread closed.

That's a bit harsh, don't you think?

 

That's a bit harsh, don't you think?

There could be gradations, I was just giving an example

 

No support

By saying the only person in position of trust was the middleman you might as well make it that anyone who goes first doesn't get a vouch. That way no new person will ever progress on the site? Middlemen often leave in the vouch that they middlemanned the trade.

@Pegasus i wanna hear what you think about this

 

[PureCaper]

Kinda support, it’s pretty easy to farm vouches with free mms and low value trades since the middleman doesn’t cost anything it’s like getting an extra vouch for every transaction. I just don’t see how it would be enacted sadly

 

@Pegasus I can completely see your point, but I feel more people will just risk not using a MM so they can gain their own vouches and then that would result in more scams

Unless I am missing something, if i am, i apologize <3

 

@Pegasus I can completely see your point, but I feel more people will just risk not using a MM so they can gain their own vouches and then that would result in more scams

Unless I am missing something, if i am, i apologize <3

Agree with this point. It would be more useful to tell people to check the quality of the vouches someone has in a sticky somewhere. Anything that could discourage using a middle man is a bad idea imo. No support sorry.

 

[Tyler]

No suport this sets a dangerous precedence.


The same could be said for people who don't go first in a trade. they are not being trusted with anything so why should they receive a vouch?
Or if somebody uses my services to donate to Sythe, should they also not receive a vouch as they are not being trusted with anything.


We should also be encouraging people to use middlemen, not hinder them for doing so.

 

I agree with you, but this unfortunately has been denied many times between 2011 and now. I don't see this changing anytime soon.

MM's Not allowed to Vouch Traders

 

I agree with you, but this unfortunately has been denied many times between 2011 and now. I don't see this changing anytime soon.

MM's Not allowed to Vouch Traders

Oohh I missed that, I apologize!

 

@Pegasus i wanna hear what you think about this

I understand completely and sort of agree with it. I wish there was something we could do to prevent middlemen from vouching, however. I posted this suggestion because I witnessed it myself today. A guy had farmed a few low vouches (x2 from middleman vouches) and then attempted to scam people (or atleast was being very sketchy). But yeah, I do understand the other points people are making.