Increase Middleman Utility

[Deacon Frost]

Thanks, video, your thread gave me the idea for this http://www.sythe.org/showthread.php?t=904826 .

As I see it, Middlemen are a dying breed. They don't get used as much as they should, and then people complain when they get scammed and the person doesn't get banned. I know this suggestion will be frowned upon by some, but you staff members will love it because of how much it will improve the Report a Scammer section, and scam prevention.

New rule: Users who are scammed when not using a middleman (unofficial or otherwise) may not report the other person for scamming, at all. In order to report a person who has scammed you, a middleman must be involved in the trade, as a third party account of the scam must be presented in your report.

"Why?" you ask?

Because people who do not use middlemen are baiting. If you trust the person you're about to trade with, completely, fine, don't use a middleman. If you get scammed, then it's your own fault. It's been said time and time again, and this forum has put in countless hours of working on fine tweaking the middleman system for it to be used so carelessly is ridiculous.

I think that it would be up to the staff to simply say "If a middleman was not involved in your trade, you weren't taking every precaution to ensure your safety, so why should I waste my time making you safe in the future?"

It boils down to two things:

1. The amount of effort put into making middleman work on Sythe, and all the members who put their time forth to help others for free in most circumstances. Not to mention the official middlemen who need business, this will help .

2. If a person doesn't want to use a middleman, they want to be scammed. Maybe not consciously, but it's a careless act and people should not be given special treatment just because they're butthurt because they couldn't play it safe.


So, that's that. This would be very easy to implement. 99% of scam reports could be ignored, thereby allowing that section to remain clean, and most of those would be easier to reach a decision in as the other party could be contacted in them for additional information.

The only con is that there will be lots of users out there that are scammers and aren't banned. However, if you do this, then that won't matter because users will use middlemen. .


Feedback?

 

[Sup3r 4ut03r]

I love it. I support, but I doubt it would ever get fully implemented into anything.

 

[Angelmax]

It makes sense, the only problem is that there would be an influx of middlemen intending to scam.

Some kind of level of verification lower than paid-OMM status would be required, surely.

 

[Sup3r 4ut03r]

It makes sense, the only problem is that there would be an influx of middlemen intending to scam.

Some kind of level of verification lower than paid-OMM status would be required, surely.

Junior OMM; with half the requirements of OMM. If you trade without one, then... (continue his rule here too lazy to type it). This is a great idea, but it would have to be tweaked a lot.

 

[Deacon Frost]

It makes sense, the only problem is that there would be an influx of middlemen intending to scam.

Some kind of level of verification lower than paid-OMM status would be required, surely.

I don't disagree with that, entirely.

But it'd be like this. You'd have your trusted middlemen that lots of people go to, then the new middlemen that fewer people go to. If you go to a lower level middleman and still get scammed, you can then report it at least. It shows that you tried to prevent being scammed. Which is really what this whole idea is about. I don't think it's going to stop scamming, or even prevent scamming, but it certainly is going to require users to put more thought into their own safety, and take weight off of the staff.

If you have a higher level trade, use a higher level middleman. Someone that's been doing it for a while, with lots of vouches, experience, etc. If you want top notch, get an official middleman.

We want users to use middlemen, even though there's always the potential scam, it's much safer as it's easier to determine if a middleman is going to scam whether than a seller/buyer.

EDIT: I do think in the very least, it will reduce scamming. At least, notable scamming, as reports will be less prominent.

 

[Chriscross23]

Ok but...

A) you don't trust any of the free MM's you go to option B

B) Use an OMM but neither pay fees

Then what? You decide to trade without one and now you know you have a free scamming card.

No support.

 

[Deacon Frost]

Ok but...

A) you don't trust any of the free MM's you go to option B

B) Use an OMM but neither pay fees

Then what? You decide to trade without one and now you know you have a free scamming card.

No support.

If you don't trust any of the free MM's, you're in the same boat as trading with a person in the first place. The idea is to put forth more effort to your own safety, and reduce bitching. Really, that's it. You don't decide "I don't like condoms, I'm not going to wear one", you decide "I may not like them, but they will probably help, lets not risk having sex without one." At least, that's your train of thought if you're smart.

If you don't want to pay fees, settle on a free one, there's lots of semi-trustable mm's, at least more trustable than your average buyer/seller. And if you decide that you trust your buyer/seller more, then have at it, but don't complain when you get fucked and wind up with a child or STD on your hands.

 

[BaYBeeZ]

I don't support this either.

Simple reason being the one major flaw that trusted members *could* begin scamming if they know a scammer report couldn't be filed against them. (ie. Trusted members not using a MM and convincing newer members to go first to them)

 

Ok but...

A) you don't trust any of the free MM's you go to option B

B) Use an OMM but neither pay fees

Then what? You decide to trade without one and now you know you have a free scamming card.

No support.

This.

Even if this was to be implemented, there would be too many flaws and you'd to make the perfect adjustments to everything. It's a very good suggestion, but there's too much involved for it to go through.

 

[Deacon Frost]

This.

Even if this was to be implemented, there would be too many flaws and you'd to make the perfect adjustments to everything. It's a very good suggestion, but there's too much involved for it to go through.

I think you guys are assuming it's going to stop scamming . The idea here isn't to stop scamming, it's to get the users to play it smart. In reality, it's really easy to implement. Pass the rule, make the announcement, remove any threads that don't involve a middleman in the trade.

The rest is cake.

I'm sure your biggest concern is people who scam remaining unbanned. I'm sure this won't be a big circumstance because if members follow the rule, and play it safe, those users that scam will have less of a chance of scamming, and even if they do scam, you're in the same situation you were without a middleman. So, report them . It's as easy as that. All this does is add an extra requirement .

And for those of you who were around, remember when text was practically accepted as proof? The rules of reporting a scammer have changed drastically, and the quality has improved greatly because of this.

 

[BaYBeeZ]

Don't get me wrong, I love the idea but I feel as though a rule like this can be abused.

Through my eyes, I can see this encouraging scamming and allowing scammers to stay around longer in the community. All a scammer now has to do is avoid using a MM and they will be able to scam as long as they please because no one can report them.

Edit: I also don't agree with this:

2. If a person doesn't want to use a middleman, they want to be scammed. Maybe not consciously, but it's a careless act and people should not be given special treatment just because they're butthurt because they couldn't play it safe.

I've only ever had to use a MM once and I have done over 100 trades. There is a certain level of respect that I have for people willing to do a trade straight up with me.

 

[Rsaccounttrader]

I think this is risky because a new member will get scammed and then complain that the scammer didn't get banned. It will decrease the site's reputation.

 

[Deacon Frost]

Don't get me wrong, I love the idea but I feel as though a rule like this can be abused.

Through my eyes, I can see this encouraging scamming and allowing scammers to stay around longer in the community. All a scammer now has to do is avoid using a MM and they will be able to scam as long as they please because no one can report them.

True, but that's not Sythe's responsibility. If you knew the amount of time spent on the middleman system, and perfecting it, and governing it... Hell, it's been around since before me, and it's still being worked on to be made better. As I see it, if you deny using the system they've spent countless hours working on, then they should deny your scam report for not using their system.

If a person gets scammed because they didn't use a middleman, that's their own fault. They didn't take any precautions, so it should not rest with Sythe to give you closure.

I think this is risky because a new member will get scammed and then complain that the scammer didn't get banned. It will decrease the site's reputation.

I don't know what reputation you're talking about, but there's nothing that's going to decrease Sythe's reputation. Everyone already thinks this site is plagued with scammers, and maybe it's true, but those people haven't visited other sites .

I'll say it again, if a member doesn't use a middleman and then they want to bitch about getting scammed and the person who scammed not being banned or any action being taken, I'm sorry, but I don't see where they should have that right? Like I just said above, the system has been worked on quite a lot, use it. If you don't use it, don't bitch when you get fucked.

 

[Chriscross23]

If you don't trust any of the free MM's, you're in the same boat as trading with a person in the first place. The idea is to put forth more effort to your own safety, and reduce bitching. Really, that's it. You don't decide "I don't like condoms, I'm not going to wear one", you decide "I may not like them, but they will probably help, lets not risk having sex without one." At least, that's your train of thought if you're smart.

If you don't want to pay fees, settle on a free one, there's lots of semi-trustable mm's, at least more trustable than your average buyer/seller. And if you decide that you trust your buyer/seller more, then have at it, but don't complain when you get fucked and wind up with a child or STD on your hands.

Ok then what about this. When I was completing my OMM application 90% of my OMMs were from 1-5 AM PST. I stayed up all night knowing it would make me the smart choice. At this time I would be doing 2-3 MM's at a time. So what if no free MM's are available? You have to wait til the morning. I know most people wouldn't want to do that.

 

[Angelmax]

I don't disagree with that, entirely.

But it'd be like this. You'd have your trusted middlemen that lots of people go to, then the new middlemen that fewer people go to. If you go to a lower level middleman and still get scammed, you can then report it at least. It shows that you tried to prevent being scammed. Which is really what this whole idea is about. I don't think it's going to stop scamming, or even prevent scamming, but it certainly is going to require users to put more thought into their own safety, and take weight off of the staff.

If you have a higher level trade, use a higher level middleman. Someone that's been doing it for a while, with lots of vouches, experience, etc. If you want top notch, get an official middleman.

We want users to use middlemen, even though there's always the potential scam, it's much safer as it's easier to determine if a middleman is going to scam whether than a seller/buyer.

EDIT: I do think in the very least, it will reduce scamming. At least, notable scamming, as reports will be less prominent.

The problem is that there will be still be newer members who are easily scammed, and they won't know who should be trusted and who is shady.

 

[Deacon Frost]

Ok then what about this. When I was completing my OMM application 90% of my OMMs were from 1-5 AM PST. I stayed up all night knowing it would make me the smart choice. At this time I would be doing 2-3 MM's at a time. So what if no free MM's are available? You have to wait til the morning. I know most people wouldn't want to do that.

If there are no free MM's available, and you're not willing to wait for one, or find someone to middleman (I'm sorry, but I won't buy that there's no one on at all willing to help middleman a trade) then you're rushing, and rushing will ALWAYS get you scammed. It's not a smart way to trade.

You don't have to get a person who is trying for OMM, you don't even have to get an OMM... just find a person you both are willing to use, and use them. If you get scammed, you can report the trade. But if you decide to not use a middleman AT ALL, then you can't. You didn't play it safe, you didn't try to protect yourself, it's not the staff's responsibility to kiss your knee and make the bad people go away if you keep doing stupid shit.

 

[Chriscross23]

If there are no free MM's available, and you're not willing to wait for one, or find someone to middleman (I'm sorry, but I won't buy that there's no one on at all willing to help middleman a trade) then you're rushing, and rushing will ALWAYS get you scammed. It's not a smart way to trade.

You don't have to get a person who is trying for OMM, you don't even have to get an OMM... just find a person you both are willing to use, and use them. If you get scammed, you can report the trade. But if you decide to not use a middleman AT ALL, then you can't. You didn't play it safe, you didn't try to protect yourself, it's not the staff's responsibility to kiss your knee and make the bad people go away if you keep doing stupid shit.

Sadly I'm busy so I can't give a full response etc. It doesn't matter whether they SHOULD wait for a MM. 90% of the people here WILL NOT wait. Now are we going to make that 90% change their ways to help the what...5% of people who MM? Still no support but I hope you can prove me wrong if I check back here later.

 

[itsboom]

Ok then what about this. When I was completing my OMM application 90% of my OMMs were from 1-5 AM PST. I stayed up all night knowing it would make me the smart choice. At this time I would be doing 2-3 MM's at a time. So what if no free MM's are available? You have to wait til the morning. I know most people wouldn't want to do that.

Then you dont use a MM and scam the other person first, because they might try to scam you.

 

[Deacon Frost]

The problem is that there will be still be newer members who are easily scammed, and they won't know who should be trusted and who is shady.

This is one of the biggest flaws in this idea, I do agree. However, a new member also has a decreased chance of getting a scammer banned as most of them are unaware of the 'no text logs' rule. Therefore, the point is moot. The same weight applies to that rule, and if we're going to cater to knew traders who can't do some research before trading, then they are definitely going to get fucked, regardless.

What'll happen if this gets approved? Users will encourage new users through guides/stickys/etc to use middleman. It'll become common knowledge quickly that not using a middleman means that you're not trading safely, and therefore you must deal with all the consequences.


I saw a point in a previous post about trusted users taking advantage of this and scamming newbies by convincing them to not use middlemen. While this is certainly not ok, don't think it will go unnoticed just because a report couldn't be filed. Irregardless, everybody should use a middleman. If knowledge spreads of a trusted user not using a middleman, then people are going to suspect. And the reports will still be filed by the newbies, and if a mod cares to handle that report, then I see nothing wrong with that.

But policy should be that in order for a report to be handled, a middleman must be used.

 

[Deacon Frost]

Sadly I'm busy so I can't give a full response etc. It doesn't matter whether they SHOULD wait for a MM. 90% of the people here WILL NOT wait. Now are we going to make that 90% change their ways to help the what...5% of people who MM? Still no support but I hope you can prove me wrong if I check back here later.

We need more middlemen, we do. It's a good business, and it'd be nice to see all of Steph's and everyone else's hard work be put to adequate use. You're still missing the point. It's not about that 90%. It's not about the 5%. It's about Sythe, and that's that.

It's about changing the policy so users know where the situation stands. Why should the staff put a bunch of hard work into banning someone when average joe bitches because he wasn't smart enough to use a middleman? It just adds to the work, sorry, it's not a paid service, I haven't even had to do scam reports and I can see the injustice here. People are getting treated kindly, and their asses are being wiped when they fucked up.

I don't blame scammers when a middleman isn't used, I blame the people who didn't take the time to ensure their safety.

Then you dont use a MM and scam the other person first, because they might try to scam you.

I'm sure situations like that will arise. But hopefully this will be accepted into the traders system when people realize the mods aren't going to kiss their asses for being dillweeds.