TWC Dispute

Dear staff,
I asked a few of you for information as to why I was issued a TWC, but no one has responded. UniversalHacks posted on one of my threads telling me that I received the TWC for

He then told me

In response to that, I need to mention a few things:
1. My current leading offers changed a lot because it felt like 9/10 people that added me were trying to scam me or they just wanted to see the rare in trade.
2. One day I would feel like someone offered a legit $2000 price on my cracker, then 3 days later when we scheduled a meet to conduct the trade, the buyer went MIA.
3. If there was a report about me "dodging trusted buyers," I think you will also notice that before I even started to discuss a price with them, I told the buyer the only way I would do the trade is if he/she went first, we did an IRL meetup, or we used hahanerd, n4no or video as the OMM.
4. In regards to the statement above, if the buyer agreed to those terms I was not selling for anything under $0.50/mill. You may think "okay just a waste of time because everyone can buy gold from kevin001 for .47 on PA." That is true, but a buyer can not easily get a blue partyhat or christmas cracker from the GE or in trade. Buying one of these in trade can take hours upon hours and the buyer will often overpay by 100m+. So my hope was maybe someone would offer me a great price for one of my rares since they are so hard to come by.
5. tl;dr points 3+4: I did not come to any sort of negotiation with trusted buyers as none of them were willing to offer me $0.50+/mill
6. I actually did come close to a trade with a "trusted" buyer in the PM system on this site:

 

TwC came from this thread: http://www.sythe.org/showthread.php?t=1452588

It's fully warranted in my opinion, you lied numerous times about both the offers you had as well as your willingness to perform IRL trades. It's shady, this is exactly the kind of thing we give TwC's for

 

First of all I want to point out that even the reporter mentioned

However... both sypherz and video believe my alleged actions are TWC-worthy.
Now on to actual evidence, not just speculation...

In the report, BSGPSeller notes:

After I heard about the news, it really scared me in to reconsidering my idea of conducting IRL trades. If there is a way to view all the edits made to my thread, a moderator will notice that I edited my original post REMOVING the fact that I would do an IRL meetup. I did this edit a few days after the post denying an IRL meetup with Sarune because I forgot I still had that as a payment option.

BSGPSeller then notes:

I did add svf.og on skype and we did end up reaching an agreement. More about this in my next few points, continue reading about svf.og and our deal.

BSGPSeller continues to say:

First of all, digressing from the main topic a little, if I were trying to scam, why would I be asking for .485 and not budge a single fraction of a cent lower when other sellers were allegedly selling for cheaper. No hard evidence here though... moving on.

Secondly, here is proof that svf.og (the guy mentioned in the quote above) DID add me on skype AND offered me the .485. I did NOT feel a need to prove myself to BSGPSeller that I had received a legitimate $.485/mill offer. Seriously, how does that support his case for issueing me a TWC. BSGPSeller thinks "He isn't proving that he actually received a .485/mill offer, must be a scammer." What I'm thinking "First of all, this guy won't be able to pay high enough because he's a flipper. Second of all, if I prove myself like he is requesting, he may just take my buyer..."

My proof that svf.og actually was offering me this:
http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/7769/55278239.png
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/6788/42638166.png
http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/1973/16702172.png
http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/1907/75727610.png
http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/9313/39477298.png

What to understand from those screenshots:
1. It is on the 14th of August, the same date that the evidence was taken by BSGPSeller convincing the issuing mod that I was being sketchy/lying about my leading offers.
2. svf.og and I agreed on $0.485/mill, as evidenced in the links.
3. svf.og and I also discussed meeting up IRL, also showing my willingness to consider a meetup even after I said I wouldn't (also why I added the guy on skype that posted about an IRL meetup).
4. We continue to talk about a date for the meetup.
5. I mention "in light of the article i read from the nypost, kind of nervous, that's why im having us meet like 30 seconds away from the police station." Another imperative piece of proof in my favor.
6. Overall, verifies my legitimacy in my statements to BSGPSeller noting that I had a .485 offer and that he would drive down to me and do an irl trade with all cash.

Next, BSGPSeller writes:

First of all, RSGP and a christmas cracker are two WAY different things. RSGP is easily obtainable while a christmas cracker is not buyable from the GE instantly, nor is it easy to obtain from players in-game. Realizing this, I was hoping that I could sell my cracker for a bit higher than the current rate at which it would trade for RSGP due to its rarity. Obviously, BSGPSellers and the issuing mod oversaw this and my posts on my thread clearly stating this notion.

Please review the following pieces of evidence in my favor:
1. This confirms I mentioned I was keeping a leading offer on plain RSGP and another on my rares: http://www.sythe.org/showpost.php?p=11353227&postcount=45
2. On the right of this screenshot, the leading offer on cracker is proven to by legitimate: http://img827.imageshack.us/img827/6286/40395902.png
Of course you notice his offer is a combo offer, but that screenshot is to prove I didn't just pull offers out of my ass.
3. BSGPSeller is right on the fact that crackers were price checked at 3.4-3.6b at the time he researched it. As mentioned before, I was hoping someone would give me a better deal to the fact that the cracker is so rare.
4. BSGPSeller also does the math for a $.485 deal and helps deduce why I did not accept a $1550 offer on cracker... because if I was going to accept .485 at a minimum, that would come out to $1649-$1746 for the cracker. So.. $1550<$1649 and $1550<$1746 so of course I wouldn't sell it.


In conclusion, BSGPSeller says:

1. This thread proves that I did not lie about anything. The original report did NOT prove that I lied about anything to begin with...
2. I also think that through logic we can understand why one may feel like I brushed off the market flippers/"trusted" and mainly dealt with the newcomers. If you can't figure it out, it's because all of the market flippers weren't offering enough to meet my price range! (Note: please review my original post where I noted that I was going to sell to Rohail, mod at the time, helping prove my case that I would sell to a trusted person if they offered enough)





In Conclusion:
1. I have proven that all offers noted were legitimate.
2. Behavior falsely interpreted as "sketchy" should now not be seen in that way because of the evidence I have provided.
3. I was willing to trade with trusted buyers if they were willing to pay enough, as evidenced by my correspondence with Rohail.
4. My IRL meetup anxiety is explained and proven with screenshots of the same day BSGPSeller's evidence was taken from. This proves that everything I told him was the truth to the best of my knowledge.
5. Overall, I am sure you now agree that all behaviors previously interpreted as deceiving/sketchy all have a legitimate, truthful explanation.

Lastly, I used BSGPSeller's name a lot in this dispute... this is not because I am trying to bash him or hurt his reputation. I did this because it was his evidence that got me a TWC, so I decided my strategy to get rid of my TWC is to debunk all of his evidence. Sorry BSGPSeller for using your name so much in this dispute...

I also want to thank Video for finally responding to my dispute 13 days after I posted it :s I do appreciate it Video Hopefully we can get this case closed once you read through my essay I wrote haha

Thanks again.

 

I just wanted to touch up on Video's post.

You believe my TWC is warranted because I 1. (Allegedly) lied numerous times about the offers I received 2. (Allegedly) lied numerous times about my willingness to perform IRL trades.

1. Please review my evidence in the above post where I prove that I did receive the $0.485 offer. The screenshot of the Skype conversation was taken from BEFORE my correspondence with BSGPSeller where I told him he would have to beat $0.485/mill.

2. Please review my evidence in the above post where I discuss my willingness to do IRL trades.

Again, thank you video for responding to my dispute. If you need a more concise dispute let me know and I will try and sum up my points better. I do feel that if you read through the post above, everything gets explained and there is more than enough evidence to convince you that my TWC was not warranted.

Thanks!

 

I would support removal of the TWC, there seems to be good enough reasoning behind the actions.

 

I would also support removal.

 

Yah, support.

 

Support removal.

 

Support removal

 

Requesting removal.