Suggestion

this is for people who have been banned without real reasoning for it! i know a number of people who have been "accused" of scamming and other things when i know for a fact they have not they are not able to defend themselfs i feel the mods should hear both sides of the story before handing out a ban! also if the person who accused the person of scamming is proven wrong he should be slammed with the same bann time you were giving the other guy! just my opinion

 

This is the reason we have a Dispute Forum. When a Scam Report is submitted, if the Staff feel there is enough proof so they can be almost certain a Scam actually occurred (You can see in this thread here, a lot of proof is needed) then a ban is placed on the account to ensure no more scams can be taken place.

If a member feels the ban put on their account is unfair, that is why we have a Dispute Forum. This Forum was implemented so banned members may still state there case and appeal if they believe their ban was unwarranted, but they cannot access the rest of the site to ensure if they are scammers, no more members can be scanned. If the member is I.P Banned, they're able to hop onto a proxy or get a friend to post the dispute for them.

Members who accuse other members of scamming without the correct proof are generally punished by receiving an infraction. If a member creates a fake Scam Report to get another banned and the other member is banned, but then they prove the Report is a fake, then the member who created the fake Scam Report, I believe, would be banned permanently for attempted fraud.

 

meh they should have one chance to defend themselfs without being banned my friend showed me his post and he didnt even show himself giving my friend cash all he showed was messages and my friend sent him recoverys? i dont see how this is engph proof that was a scam but ok

 

also you cant appeal as a guest and you cannot make an account on a proxy

 

Yes you can appeal as a guest, you go to the pardon forum. You can also make accounts with proxies, how do you think ban evaders get in? You must not have a very clear understanding of the system. It works well and has worked well since it began, if there is anything that proves to be a continuous problem then it will be amended. For now this isn't a suggestion, just some complaining.

 

Not all scams can be proved, but they miught have happened, it's safer to ban accounts staff is suspicious of. And if the owner didn't really scammed or W/E, they can appeal.

The current system works just perfect.

 

Every ban has it's reasoning to it, the staff don't ban for no reason. You need a lot of evidence to prove that a user scammed, just take a look at the RaSc section. Staff don't ban just because of an "accusal," they'll need solid proof. If it's not enough proof for a ban, but it's still shady, they can assign a TwC. But, if the reporter doesn't have proof, then the user he was reporting cannot get banned on that report alone. Users can get banned if they are deemed a threat to a community, regardless of it being true or not, the staff can't have a detriment on the website. If the user was innocent, he can dispute his ban, and say his part of the story, after the staff verify everything he'll be unbanned. The staff are doing this for the site, and it's members. Also, if someone falsely made a report on someone, they'll be banned.

If they are considering a threat to the community, the staff are obligated to ban him. If he is not, then I'm sure he'll have plenty of ways to defend themselves without getting banned. Besides, if you're innocent, post a dispute, and you'll be unbanned. I'm not sure what happened on that report, but everyone makes mistakes, moderators aren't robots. That's why we have a dispute forum in the first place.

Yes, you can.

 

The current system is good, but I know one person who was wrongly banned it is Bedwetter.

 

it is good im not saying its not but it dose have some flaws ) just a idea i guess

 

Think about it this way, if they aren't banned when the report is checked then they will most likely scam again in the remaining time they have. There's nothing wrong at all with having to prove yourself in the disputes forum.

 

I don't see what you are getting at. What improvements do you think should be made to the system?

 

that you shouldnt make someone guilty based on very little proof

 

Denied, not going to change.