Counter-Scamming

DDoSes aren't allowed.
I got DDoSed by my customer too, italianmidget, he's banned now because of that
If you're staking dont use same IP you use to contact your sythe customers . IP can be easily taken from your skype :/

 

If you go into someone's house and "steal" your tv back, you are actually taking back what was once yours (not stealing).

Just don't pull a Punker

 

Suppose you sell someone an account and they later file a chargeback. If you take your account back, you would not be banned on sythe.

Suppose you are buying gold from someone. You pay them through paypal and you never get your gold. If you file a chargeback, you would not be banned on sythe.

Suppose you sell someone gold and they file a chargeback against you. Later, they offer to sell you the same amount of gold. If you take that gold without paying them, you WOULD be banned on sythe.

If people have the means to get their stolen goods back, I think they should be allowed to do so. Legally of course (no ddosing, no blackmail, etc.) Also I do not condone taking MORE than was originally stolen from you. We already allow this in the case of accounts and paypal trades, I'm not sure why we specifically disallow one type of trade

 

that's not fair surly?

 

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. A scam for a scam makes the whole of sythe banned.

 

Do you think that people shouldn't be allowed to file chargebacks then if they get scammed? Why is it ok for me to take my money back out of a scammer's paypal account if they scam me, but it's not ok for me to take my gp out of their account (legally) if they scam me?

 

That's not what people are arguing. They think your third statement about not being able to take back what was scammed from them is ridiculous.

If someone scammed me 500m gold, then tried to sell me 1b in the future, I'd probably only pay them for the 500m surplus.

 

And yet you'd be banned for counter-scamming. That's what the current rules are. That was my point, that it is ridiculous

 

I'm in agreement with Video and Dialatic on this issue. I would have assumed it was fine (especially if you have evidence), I guess I was wrong

 

I think if you can provide proof that you know who the scammer is and that he did it, you should be able to counter scam. You could make a specific mod for approveing counter scams through Pm's so no one would know other than the 2 discussing it. or maybe even just allow it then provide proof after its done, scammers are going to scam, honest people will keep it honest, not really sure if passing an approveal will really make a difference. safe route would be passing an approval though, just throwing the other option in there to see if anyone has anymore insight on it.

 

Yes it does it make right because the TV doesn't even belong to them, it's YOUR TV that someone took from you.

I 100% agree with OP. Counter-scamming should be allowed. By the way, Nate did it, im not sure why you just didn't take YOUR gold back, Arcus.

 

With PP, it's easy to chargeback without hacking/scamming them, but with getting your GP back, you have to either A) Hack them, or B) Scam them during a separate trade.

 

IDB, how are you scamming them? If someone scammed me 500m, and I'm middlemanning a trade for them later on, I should be able to hold 500m worth of the trade and keep it because it's mine. I didn't do anything malicious to get it, I didn't scam them, but I got my money back. If they gave me 600m to hold, then I'd return 100m to them.

 

Arcus would have been banned if he did that. Nate was never officially allowed to counter-scam, after he did it was ruled that no one, including staff, was allowed to counter-scam

Suppose they want to sell you back the gold they scammed you. What's wrong with just accepting the gp and then saying "You owe me this much gold already, so I will pay you for the gold by absolving your debt to me." You haven't scammed anyone, you paid them for the gold by removing their debt to you

 

honestly i think some/all of the people saying that counter scamming and taking what is rightfully yours might be trying to brown-nose and get good status here or something.

I still personally think you should be able to counterscam when they owe you.

 

People who think that you can counter scam and take what it rightfully yours are trying to brown-nose and get a good status.

Yet...

You just said it yourself.


No one's trying to brown-nose (or ass kiss - as normal people say it). We don't agree with a rule, so we're trying to get it changed. If anything, we're doing the complete fucking opposite of kissing ass.

 

Totally untrue. You're supposed to call the authorities. Vigilante justice I can assure you is illegal.

If we allow counter scamming it is just going to make investigating scams a bitch. First you have to prove a scam happened. We can't just say 'if someone steals your shit it is your right to try and steal it back.' That is senseless.

 

We already have these reports. It's what happens when someone files a chargeback because an account got taken back. Or when someone files a chargeback for gold they never got. They're really not a terrible pain to deal with. We already DO say that it is your right to take your stuff back, that's why we allow chargebacks in the first place. This rule as it is currently written only prevents one very specific type of "counter-scam", which is taking back gold that was stolen from you. You're allowed to take back accounts that are stolen from you, you're allowed to take back $ stolen from you, and yet we don't have a mass flooding of hard-to-handle scam reports

 

good idea

 

I think that the rule should be considered for review. If there was 100% proof.