Please explain

[LovelyYEWY]

im curious
answer plz
the first part of magic's question
when did the rule cum

 

The rule is a new revision to an old rule.

Do any of you actually disagree with it or are you just wasting time?

 

[LovelyYEWY]

if this rule appleiez 2 evry1 im as happy as a farmer on pay day

w00t

 

[Karl]

I'm just wasting my time if that's the only other option.

Why would you re-comment? Enjoy your most likely, Infraction.

And to respond to all this madness about the past couple of posts, I think(and agree) that trading specifics when dealing with trades is a Sythe.org PM, Otherwise any RaS should be void, It'd complicate things for the first couple of weeks, but It'd eventually be implemented well like No uncropped MSN pictures or Chat logs.

Maybe an announcement wouldn't go amiss, presuming it will be implemented into the guidelines for trading.

 

[Chriscross23]

The rule is a new revision to an old rule.

Do any of you actually disagree with it or are you just wasting time?

I do disagree with it to an extent that if this should be made a rule it should be

"No PM no compensation"

This rule came out of nowhere. The looks of it seems like it was made so Tyro could save a buck or two (correct me if I'm wrong).

But I suggest if this rule no pm=half compensation it should be no pm no compensation. Half compensation doesn't look like you're firm enough with this rule. If you're going to pull the "he didn't PM card" you might as well make it a firm rule.

 

[Sup3r 4ut03r]

Why would you re-comment? Enjoy your most likely, Infraction.

Thanks, I will. I was simply responding to his post.

And to respond to all this madness about the past couple of posts, I think(and agree) that trading specifics when dealing with trades is a Sythe.org PM, Otherwise any RaS should be void, It'd complicate things for the first couple of weeks, but It'd eventually be implemented well like No uncropped MSN pictures or Chat logs.

Maybe an announcement wouldn't go amiss, presuming it will be implemented into the guidelines for trading.

Are you proposing to require a PM to prove the user's authenticity and connection with the MSN? If so, this would be a great addition to the current trading rules. Any RaS before the rule was in place, the rule would not be taken into account, and any after, the report would be denied.

 

[Chriscross23]

Thanks, I will. I was simply responding to his post.



Are you proposing to require a PM to prove the user's authenticity and connection with the MSN? If so, this would be a great addition to the current trading rules. Any RaS before the rule was in place, the rule would not be taken into account, and any after, the report would be denied.

This is already a guideline for trading. It should not be made into a rule that you HAVE to PM someone to trade with them; you would just be foolish to not request a PM.

 

[Sup3r 4ut03r]

This is already a guideline for trading. It should not be made into a rule that you HAVE to PM someone to trade with them; you would just be foolish to not request a PM.

Well then, just about everybody scammed by an impostor or even a hacker who has access to a member's MSN but not Sythe account is a foolish person, leaving about 15% of reports in the Report a Scammer section fools. It would cut down on impostors, and be a bit more handy when handling Scam reports to know that the person is linked to their MSN, without having to go searching everywhere.

 

[Chriscross23]

Well then, just about everybody scammed by an impostor or even a hacker who has access to a member's MSN but not Sythe account is a foolish person, leaving about 15% of reports in the Report a Scammer section fools. It would cut down on impostors, and be a bit more handy when handling Scam reports to know that the person is linked to their MSN, without having to go searching everywhere.

Pointless rule is pointless. How are you going to make people follow this rule? There is no possible way that during a trade you can make someone PM someone. The only plausible answer to this would be:

No PM=No compensation.

 

[cosrob97]

I'm sorry, but I disagree with this no pm = half refund. Any man and his dog can go around claiming his msn is hacked and go on a scamming spree. Most people would think "Ah he's on Sythe now and I'm talking to his msn, must mean nothing is wrong." He scams the person. Then 10-15minutes later a report a scammer comes out. He is found guilty and only needs to pay back 50%, he pays back half of what he scammed and gets away with it.

Not the best idea.

 

[RecoveryKing]

I'm sorry, but I disagree with this no pm = half refund. Any man and his dog can go around claiming his msn is hacked and go on a scamming spree. Most people would think "Ah he's on Sythe now and I'm talking to his msn, must mean nothing is wrong." He scams the person. Then 10-15minutes later a report a scammer comes out. He is found guilty and only needs to pay back 50%, he pays back half of what he scammed and gets away with it.

Not the best idea.

This. Also, people who know the person they are talking to can end up getting screwed by this. Example: I did a trade with hahanerd just days before his MSN got scammed, and I didn't request a PM because I have talked with him many times before over MSN and know that MSN to be legit (this also being right before all the hacks started). Had the person already hacked his MSN I would have been scammed myself, and with this stupid rule Hahanerd would have only had to pay me back 2.5 pins (how you split a pin I have no idea). I'd think he would pay me back the full amount had this actually occurred, but if the same trade had gone on with different people that possibly would not be the case. I don't think someone should end up out of pocket potentially hundreds of dollars just because they trust someone they have dealt with before, you are responsible for your MSN and that should always be the case.

 

[cosrob97]

Solution: request a PM.

Even that still doesn't work 100%. Anybody can claim that they were told to send a pm by a random, so he/she sends the message "You wanted me to pm you". The buyer thinks oh I asked him to send a pm so he sent me one. The seller scams him, a report a scammer comes in and the response by the scammer was "Somebody on msn asked me to pm him to confirm that he has the real (insert name here) added) and ends up getting away.

I didn't explain it the best, but hopefully you understand.

 

[cosrob97]

But I'm saying if the person fakes their msn being hacked, so if somebody request a pm they could do it easily.

 

[Rsaccounttrader]

I think the normal "PM or not, you are responsible for your MSN" should be the rule UNTIL a set time after the user has removed his MSN from his profile/signature, added that his MSN was hacked in his signature, and after he got a staff member to make an announcement about the hacking. Say, 12 or even 24 hours. At that point, the "no PM, no refund" rule should go into effect.

What do you think of this?

 

[Carpet M00ncher]

Why would you ask a PM from someone you've traded 10 times? Asking them for a PM would just be extremely annoying on each trade, it's only really neccessairy on the first trade you make with them to confirm their msn is legit

 

Why would you ask a PM from someone you've traded 10 times? Asking them for a PM would just be extremely annoying on each trade, it's only really neccessairy on the first trade you make with them to confirm their msn is legit

You should always request a PM , each and every time.

 

[superrspure]

I believe this thread has gone a bit off-topic...

Alright, allow me to clarify.

Assuming it can be proven that the MSN hacker, using Tryo's account, scammed a person, then that person is entitled to compensation. If it can be shown that the person did not ask for a PM or take some extra measure to verify the counter-party's identity (or if the person admits such) then they are only entitled to half of what they lost.

Now if it can be shown there was a conspiracy as you are alleging, then the person was not scammed, but rather is himself attempting to scam via conspiracy.

In future we may make it the case that no PM = no reimbursement.

As to Tyro's actual case, as I said, it is on going. For now we are assuming his innocence based on natural justice and his good character.

May I see an "update" of this "case" that apparently is still going on.

 

I believe this thread has gone a bit off-topic...





May I see an "update" of this "case" that apparently is still going on.

You're the one that caused all the problems, Brandon.

 

[superrspure]

You're the one that caused all the problems, Brandon.

I find it funny how you just assume things...But no you're incorrect, I'm not Brandon.

 

[FireZ]

I find it funny how you just assume things...But no you're incorrect, I'm not Brandon.

Your correct in saying that you aren't Brandon, your Drewskyd.

See you later. Go stir up trouble somewhere else.