Clearer rules on releasing scammers info to public

If I was a scammer, I wouldn't do the 2fa, and even if I decided to and releasing someones information (public) could be detrimental. Someone could use someones name etc with 2fa, and Sythe would carry a liability for releasing bad information. It's the internet, some people are naturally scum, middlemen exist (admin middlemen if you really need it) and contracts and ways to do large deals exist as well.

Easiest way to deal with scammers is realize they exist, use an official middleman for medium - high transactions, and use an admin level middleman + contract for high value transactions, and for low value (5-10m) use a trusted MM with a strong thread who has conducted transactions higher then the one you're doing as they're trying to build a rep.

Simple as scammers scam online. People age 15-18 or whatever who aren't employed will take a chance to steal $15 over the internet. It happens, and there's ways to be secure about large scale transactions.

 

Can anyone take time out of their day to explain to me specifically why we're limiting how much information can be released on a scammer?
a scammer, not a random forum user.

If the user is hacked, it's one thing.
But if a person deliberately steals off another user why shouldn't it be made public?

again, they stole off another user,why should they be given any sympathy?

 

Because it MAY be false information, and the upkeep of that information is an added issue. Account names (for runescape accounts) are already listed, and you can avoid being scammed using a middle-man. Scams happen, it's better to teach people how to avoid them then anything.

 

Well, there's alot of speculation.

So if a regular user scams his info shouldn't be released because it could be fake. I'll give you that one

What if it's a user who donated via paypal?
You implying that he could have hacked a paypal account, made a payment to sythe and not get charged back to the origional paypal account owner?
Even if it's simply a relative or his parents, I'd think it's a pretty good incentive not to scam or else your family's personal information gets leaked

What if the user has svu?
His information shouldn't be released because it might not be his phone number?
I mean, we're not talking about releasing a full on dox on every scammer with credit card details etc.

We're merely stating
Name (if paypal's involved)
Phone number (if svu's involved)
Registered Email address/es
Skype Name/s
IP
Scam Amount
Scam Report Link

and it should be stated public, not given to the scammed person.
The reality of the fact is most likely nothing will happen to the scammed. But to some people, having their personal information leaked is a big deal.


Also, If somehow (the one-off) a person steals another person's identity he can simply open a dispute and get it removed

 

I believe you mean SVU, 2fa has nothing to do with a person's identity.

Theres no way you can prove someone else's information was used in the scam. The person scammed using said information, then the information should be released to the public to prevent any scams from that "person" again.

Using a middleman WILL NOT stop someone from charging back. Have you even traded before?

Of course the internet is full of scammers, but this is one way the users of Sythe can help protect themselves from being scammed again by the same person.

Runescape account names help with ONE market and they can be easily changed to something else.

Thanks for the input

funbox hit the nail right on the head, we were trying to discuss what info should be released to the public and to get a rule that people actually have to follow. Because the current one is not enforced. I agree with all that funbox listed, and I think ID should not be sent in for public eyes as that's way too personal.

 

Name (if paypal's involved)
Phone number (if svu's involved)
Registered Email address/es
Skype Name/s
IP
Scam Amount
Scam Report Link

Support to that, phone number possibly stated as XXX-XXO-XXXO (hide 2 numbers) reason being, could be using someones number, but giving most of it would be equal in protected people on the future. I'm just against a scammer using fraudulent information and the legitimate person getting harassed because of it. As long as there is nothing being provided which can be used to harass a person, I fully support that.

 

I can understand what you mean by the phone number, but i still don't agree that it shouldn't be displayed. Realistically If I svu with a phone number, I can't randomly go in the street and just "get one". Family member, friends, friends of friends. Also, i doubt that people apart from the person getting scammed would "Harass" people via phone from different countries.

And obviously, people who get scammed just want their money back and they know that If they act civilized there's a higher chance to work things out rather than going "OH YOU FUCKING CUNT WHY THE FUCK DID YOU SCAM ME I'LL SUE YOU".

Realistically will this stop scammers? no.
Will this help victims of scams? Probably not.

But hey, If i got scammed by a cunt I'd prefer to know who it is even though I'll prolly have no chance of getting repaid. But the sense of their "being an option" is better than nothing

 

I don't know about releasing it to the public, because as a site we have to uphold a certain type of reputation. However, I wouldn't think there would be an issue if you release the scammers information to the person, or people who have been scammed and they decide to do whatever they feel necessary in order to recover their lost wages, and ensure the person can't do the same thing to someone else.

 

I'm fine with this then, but only if the number is released to the person who got scammed, and the number is PARTIALLY released to others. If I used a friends phone for SVU, and they're getting harassed, or a random classmates etc. It would cause an issue and possible harassment and it's too personal. To the person who got scammed sure, but to the public at least hide one digit. Just avoid that one thing, at least a single digit hidden, but release it to the person who got scammed to have something. If we can do that, I'd fully support the release of information. It's just the odd case where it isn't actually that persons phone number.

 

I think the reason they cant do this is legality issues, the scammer could sue sythe for posting their personal information. Else I would totally agree with this.

 

Completely agree with this, and Sythe is an open forum meaning anyone and everyone can see what's posted on here through a simple google search. If someone used a hacked PayPal or a fake PayPal with someone else's information...? You kind of run into a problem unless it was certain that information was the users, but how can you be certain?

I personally do not support releasing anyone's information, other than to the victim themselves as they fully deserve to do their own investigation. That kind of falls into the black-hatting category and in a way indirectly adds support to black-hatting activity.

 

I agree with this but I also see how scammers almost always use fake or stolen info, and sometimes honest people do get hacked...but the staff should be able to tell which is which...maybe if we refine the list to Repeat offenders/ Ban evaders/ Serious Scammers etc Large amounts of $ or gold being scammed. That way you don't accidently ruin someones name over a 5$ trade. Anything over a couple hundred dollars in most states is a felony offense I think those types of scammers FOR SURE should be posted. EDIT: I also find it funny half the people protesting this got banned LOL maybe thats why they was against it?

 

true haha, bump

 

Releasing personal information for RS related scams, mostly at the value of $20 is ridiculous IMO. What happens if there is one guy/girl in a nice family home who is the scammer? How's that worth this kids house getting swatted for example and all this other shit that could happen. Another example: Scammers information leaked, some black hat wannabe then digging deeper into these details and using their personal information to threaten the scammer such as sending emails to their school, university, grandparents or whatever. Giving address's is retarded aswell as home phone numbers and even facebook information. There is too much extortion, malicious shit going on with the internet these days, spam throwing out people's address's, facebook family all that shit is a joke. If it does happen and innocent people are to get butt fucked because of their shitty kids scamming, I hope the person who leaks the information is held responsible.

Bare in mind I'm talking worst case scenarios here, I've seen people offer as little as $10 (off site forums) to get someone swatted.

I do agree highly with paypal, emails and skypes to be leaked but anything more could be too dangerous. It would also give sythe a bad name. If you're still getting scammed after the continuous amounts of warnings to use highly trusted MM only, then i believe it's that persons fault for getting scammed and not doing their own research on this person previously.

 

And what if they pardon?

 

I do not agree with the original post, not sure if the idea has mutated since then. The rules are pretty clear imo.

The rule explicitly states private information; the intention of the rule is prevent people from doxing each other for personal information that wouldn't otherwise be willingly released (except perhaps to close friends).

That being said, there is huge difference between:
1) releasing personal information that the owner wants to keep private
and 2) sharing information that the owner has willingly put out.
The former is what the rule is about.

By doing sales with people, scammers are giving out their information as a form of contact. Scam reports are public. Therefore whenever someone purposely scams, they declare any relevant information they used to scam to be public via the structure of Sythe. Any of the information they used to scam can thereby rightfully be shared and posted by other members. That is exactly what is being done in the example thread by Black Tux. No other personal information is generally released, such as addresses, Facebook accounts, or IPs.

 

If the rule was clear Black tux would be banned by now, and so would anyone who posted in that thread. Please stop inferring and refer to the misguided rule they have laid out. It needs changed if people wish to keep posting threads like this, there needs to be clear rules on what can be released or what cannot.

You either stop the posting of these types of threads, or come up with a clearer rule, so people aren't abused. You can't keep allowing these types of threads and not have any specific rules for them. They are breaking the only rule regarding personal information and there fore should be banned, but that's only the case sometimes.

 

There are no laws that have zero ambiguity. That's why court systems exist. I did "infer" anything. I clearly explained why I don't believe Black Tux violated this rule. Read my post a couple more times if you still don't understand.

 

I read your point and didn't understand it. You are saying you should continue breaking the rule laid out for us? Or that we should all infer and get our own idea about the rule and what it actually entails? You also mentioned that IPs weren't posted in his thread, when they clearly were.

As a normal member of sythe, you shouldn't have to guess what the rule actually means. If it says this information should not be posted at all, then it should not be posted. But that's simply not the case. So I'm sick of people getting banned for releasing personal information when the rule isnt clearly laid out for everyone.

So again, you infer Black Tux is ok? But the rules clearly state otherwise. You are only assuming this.

 

Suggestion Section Clean-Up

I am going to note that this was discussed in the SL during Blade's time and not much came of it.