Staff: Be more cautious about Scam Reports.

Reporting OOO [Round 1] (200$ Donator)

Could have stopped a huge scam quit.

But instead let them slide and let them scam a shit ton.

Be more cautious with scam reports and don't take the easy way out.

Do some research and take your time with scam reports.

 

I looked into it thoroughly and there wasn't enough to match them up so i'm not quite sure what you're suggesting.

 

I feel that this case was simply ignored due to the fact that the user being reported was a $200 donor.

There are thousands of reports based on similarities between vaders and all the non-donors get banned instantly.

 

His donor status had nothing to do with my ruling but alright.

 

Agreed and I'd also like to note down that I did not handle the ban evader report because I also was certain there was a lack of definite proof and I was more than sure that the OP of the report wouldn't have been satisfied with a denial of his report. There was nothing we could do to prevent his scamquit from happening. The ban evader report didn't have enough proof and all the reports were flooding in at the same time. I fully support @Mootrucks on his decision there.

 

There was definitely not a lack of proof. Same interests, same country and same place of study (both students). That surely cannot be a coincidence. The situation could be avoided fairly simply. Mootrucks could have easily started up a staff discussion to find out whether Galvanize had donated through PayPal. This could have been taken into account and OOO could have easily been banned until he showed ID to prove who he was. This situation was not taken into account since Mootrucks only uses his brain when it's basically anything not related to me.

@Excelont it's a conspiracy that I've been working on this for a while. I believe Mootrucks is PAID to let these people evade. When I tried to report this my report was removed and I was told to contact an admin. I will certainly be doing this.

The donator rank was certainly used to impact their ruling. Saying that it wasn't is blatant bullshit. It's funny you will call up a staff discussion with elite dust but NOT to stop a $200 donor from scamquitting. Is that a coincidence or not? I think not.

 

Although there may have been a red flag or two in that report, a lot of the information within that report was speculation. As far as the IP audits, the matching IPs looked as if they were coming from a mobile device since there are current users that are on his audit also. I had checked the registered emails on file to make sure that they weren't similar and they were different. Now, there was a brief discussion amongst staff before Mootrucks made a decision because we wanted to make sure we had concrete evidence to back up the claims. We had followed our procedures as we normally do on reports like this one and came to a conclusion based solely on the report itself. There's no denying some of the information was somewhat speculative but yes, I do see what may have been perceived as hard and factual evidence. It wasn't enough to warrant a ban and we can't necessarily DNT on speculation either.

 

Again, you also had the opportunity to call up a staff meeting. I am the OP and the denial of the report did not affect me. I knew something bad was going to happen but I could have done nothing more than to let him scam quit. It's up to the staff if they want to let a user scamquit or not. I'm just the one who calls the shots and most of the scammers that I report are 100% factually correct. There was nothing put in place to stop scam quitters. It's not like RSPS where someone can be UUID/IP/Mac banned in an instance. If we had Mac/IP bans put in place on Sythe then these people would fail to come back anyway. Not only this but when I reported ipker10 he was banned. He came crying back to Sythe and yet he was given an unban. How is this fair for a ruling then? Does that mean King Krab can continue tweeting names and ddos threaten people then cry and come back to Sythe. This rule also needs to be made stricter too. Why does Sythe always unban Syed? There must be a reason for this.

 

So then release the amount of evidence that will be needed on a Sythe report in order to report a ban evader. If I knew I had to include more evidence I'd have written a 10 page essay then maybe he'd be banned quicker. There has to be more information rather than just IP addresses, similar Sythe usernames and similar Skype names. Effectively if I got banned, changed my IP by getting a new router, made a new email address which is random, and donated $200 to the site then you're basically saying I'm immune to the Sythe system. If anyone makes a report on me it will just be speculation and I'm free to do whatever I want till I scam quit. That seems pretty silly to me to be honest. It's not hard to change to a new person lol.

 

I mean to be honest, I'm sure there are plenty of active users on Sythe who've changed IPs, used new emails, and made new accounts who have had previous banned accounts that are now roaming around. I'm not endorsing that by any means but that's what is going on. It's not hard to change into a new person but we can't go around making decisions on speculation alone. I totally get your report and I totally understand where you're coming from though man. Every report is different so it's going to be hard for the amount of evidence you need.

 

Lets not forget that I'm not just a normal faggot. I actually speak to some of the evaders that I get banned. In fact this was a private report (shoutout to @Menno)

This guy London Boy had 8+ banned accounts. When I caught him again this is what he had to say:



@Hahanerd he clearly says that ban evaders are ONLY scamming people because they know they are gonna get banned so they "may as well cash out" before that.

Explain how you plan to counter this tactic. You say that people cannot be banned on speculation but there must be another way to get rid of ban evaders from the site. For a start there could be some form of VPN detection on the site. Why hasn't this been implemented? If VPN's were banned then a lot of ban evaders would be disappearing from the website. The only negative I can think of this is "there will not be 500k unique IP's on the site anymore". Having 500k unique IP's per month on the site is one thing but having 500k unique IP's on the site WHICH ARE NOT BAN EVADER'S is another. There needs to be change and people need to act fast.

I understand why people like Excelont resigned now. He was a great global but due to this happening it seems as if the site is dying since it is slowly becoming filled with ban evaders who want to utilise the opportunity of cashing out before they get banned rather than the people who want to own a business and make money the legitimate way.

 

This isn't even a suggestion you sit here and act like you're perfect and sitting here bitching over and over and over again. You want to be a leader you want to contribute to the site then come up with a solution to the problem not bitching because a human made a mistake welcome to this thing called life it happens. Be part of the solution not contributing to the issue. @Seraphic

 

With respect @Seraphic, perhaps this is a man that you don't fully understand. A long time ago, I was in Burma. My friends and I were working for the local government. They were trying to buy the loyalty of tribal leaders by bribing them with precious stones. But their caravans were being raided in a forest north of Rangoon by a bandit. So, we went looking for the stones. But in six months, we never met anybody who traded with him. One day, I saw a child playing with a ruby the size of a tangerine. The bandit had been throwing them away. @Syed was the bandit.

 

LOL I can come up to a solution to the problem. You're the one whose whining about a solution not being found. Why don't you come up with a solution then? You've been here since 2007 I would think that you had a couple of braincells.

Edit: Lets not forget that scam quits aren't 1 in a million. Scamquits happen very frequently now. It seems like you're not too familiar with this yourself @Lorenzo

 

@Seraphic I'm not whining let me be clear. Because I simply don't care. Mistakes happen. The fact that you have to sit here and complain over and over and over again because of the fact that a mistake happened shows the kind of human you are. I can almost bank you are a ban evader yourself. I am simply saying if you're going to complain have a resolution don't complain just to complain.

 

If someone blatantly admits they are going to ban evade and scam, then that's proof not speculation.

As far as an IP restriction on VPNs, that's a question for Richard. We could go around and manually check each user to see if they are ban evaders. As a matter of fact some staff do this, but we have been directed by Richard that we are courts and not police. That's why when a report comes in to the "court" we have to use an innocent til proven guilty mentality and wait until there's concrete evidence to ban.

 

LOL. I have 3 accounts first of all and none of those are banned. You can ask people around. You do care cause you continuously respond to my posts. Not only this but you claim scam quits are a mistake? LOL, so when you scam quit are you gonna be like no staff plz it was mistake ban all screenshots are fake. Good job. You're just another one who takes advantages of the flaws in the system and then trash talks people who try and find solutions to it. I have a lot of resolutions. Whether they are done or not is beyond my control.

 

@Seraphic Been a part of the site since 2007. Clearly not someone who takes advantage let's be honest for a moment. I'm not saying scamming is a mistake. I am saying staff members make mistake. Please spare all of us and get off of your high horse.

 

I have to agree a lot more could be done. DNT is not something evaders give a shi about, there is absolutely nothing in it for them. So they won't stop scamming and pardon. Scammers will keep scamming just because they can. And as can clearly be shown above they will keep doing it because they can just change themselves and rejoin. So either stop them from joining. .. or

You could of just DNTd based on speculation until you found further evidence, and then banned if there were more reports. The only reason you should dnt in such situations is just as a precaution, its safety and to protect the community that is what DNT is. In fact why not just DNT in such situations immediately to prevent any future occurrences like this. What are the staff losing by applying immediate DNT?

Protecting the community
Possibly stopping mass-scams/sq.
A small amount of time applying dnt.
Some time to get your evidence.
Have the accused DNT until report is over.
And then removing it if it isn't necessary or you ban.

Only down side to this is if you don't realise they're scum and remove dnt and they go mass scam... meh. I'll presume staff will have banned evaders so.

 

Can the restrictions of VPN's at least be put into the USL for Richard to see then? If that is the case then at least it prevents some ban evaders from getting back onto Sythe. It might not have a massive impact however it is a start.

Ban evaders will only blatantly admit to ban evading once they are caught. Not before. In that case it's too late to act.