Bump Rule Infractions

This suggestion isn't meant to fix the system, it's about trying to make the system fairer.

With regards to what you said, why do you think my suggestion will stop traders posting confirmations? The only difference would be when someone requests one, instead of them making a new post, they will be required to edit a previous post and link that instead. Unless you're trying to tell me traders are too stupid to edit their posts, can you please mention these "circumstances" when someone won't be able to edit a post?

Also, if someone pays for live chat that's great. However, what it shouldn't do is have an indirect affect on how often someone can by-pass the eight hour bump rule; even though this suggestion applies to anyone using Skype and any other on-line chat service just as much.

 

I post once. Then I get 25 customers in a couple hours. They all post on my thread and my last post is way far back. Suddenly the customer is no longer seeing the post and it grows extremely long with all the confirmations I have to do. I start losing business because my customers can not understand what is going on. That isn't fair. There is also enforcement issues (aka it really isn't all that enforceable).

 

The reality is that is that the topics that get bumped more often are also owned by people who are less likely to scamm. The rule is just good as it is. Most of these sellers/buyers have spent years building up their trust and kinda deserve it for not being assholes who cheat someone out of their 200$ after getting 50 vouches.

So no support at all!

 

I'm sorry but as for the bumping of confirmation... I think that's ridiculous. People wouldn't want to confirm as it would be a hassle to edit a post.. it is much easier to just post something new. I really do not support this just by the fact that it may discourage SOME people from taking the precautions. Don't like it? Get more business =p.

As for the vouch portion, I agree. Vouches should be in the vouches section (What about graphics?).

 

Using a completely unrealistic scenario to discredit my suggestion is hilarious. I was going to sit here and type out, using your example, how on any day you might get 3-5 people out of the 25 asking for a post confirmation on your thread and how editing+linking a previous post would be easily achievable. However, I then realised you'll probably just argue all 25 would ask for confirmations via your thread, which I really can't argue with...

So instead all I'll say is it's very easy to link someone to a specific post, so the customers not seeing your post shouldn't be a problem. Plus, in all my time on Sythe, the maximum amount of times I've seen a trader posting confirmations (on the RS trading sections) is three times during a two hour period. Therefore, my question to you is, if we used a more realistic example are you telling me that during a 2 hour period editing a post three times and linking it is too much trouble/work?

Also, unless I'm missing something, to me it's very enforceable. If someone posts a confirmation before eight hours of their last bump, it's worthy of an infraction if reported/seen?

So you don't support it because you feel due to your status and the fact you haven't scammed, you would rather be able to post and by-pass the eight hour bump rule instead of editing a previous post and abiding by the existing rules?

It would be too much hassle to edit a post? It may discourage some people from taking the precautions?

Like I said before unless you're trying to tell me traders are too stupid to edit their posts, please elaborate your argument... You can't just post saying it will discourage some people, especially when there's absolutely nothing to support what your saying...

 

Even if you only get 4 or 5 it gets to be a large unorganized mess of a post. On top of that if the post was something that was not trivial, you are simply cluttering up the natural order of the forum and fucking with the whole idea of linearity.

It's unenforceable because we have over 20 moderators and they all moderate slightly differently and as soon as we start infracting for it people are going to start saying we have being unfair and everyone who is effected is going to come out and say we are harming them and their customers safety. Then people are going to bitch and whine about how complicated everything is and no matter what we do no one will be happy. We made the rule simple for a reason..... Nothing else worked. We specifically did not add confirmations to the spam rule as we did "added" because people were concerned about it. We've had this discussion many times before and we'd rather additional safety.