Really sighing at some of these disputes

won_gold_gold SCAMMED for over 10k! as an example.

Why is it all these high names are not TWC/DNT?

I understand they may have been taken out due to it originally being applied, but there is more than enough valid proof. There is a lot of proof to convict...

Instead it's being brushed under the carpet and they are being shown bias replies.. Now I don't mean to piss on anyone's feet but this is just pathetic.

Last time I checked, being an open market you should be respecting both parties not just one. If there is a possible scam report say on a newcomer, a normal member or someone with 1-2 vouches you would be literally sucking his cock adding them to DNT...

 

He was DNT'ed for the timebeing however @video removed it due to the report being 5 years overdue. In addition to that, I think it's staff discretion . . . the administrators are in contact with these higher-up guys as they have no intent to scam yet they still need to figure it out. For example, in the case with won, if the money was taken back, he'd have to pay it. The admins know what they're doing.

 

I think you're misreading what I am getting at.

That was just an example, not my full post. Staff knowing and staff being bias are two of the same on this forum and others, I think you are also forgetting that.

Again, not trying to piss on anyone, but I think it's clear after several hundreds of disputes that an odd few are getting shown a green light.

 

I'm getting at everything you're saying. Then you used a bad example. Mind giving a good example? Staff don't seem all too biased in my eyes as I frequent the RAS section often

 

I read many disputes. If anything, I read more disputes than I post.

What i'm getting at though to help you understand, why is it a few people are getting away with the same protocol as anyone else?

if it was me, you, or someone lower we would be smacked into TWC/DNT no matter how "trusted" we are.

 

Here are my thoughts.

A DNT should take in the following factors

• Ability of user to scam more in a short time
• Willingness of user to get it resolved
• Validity of report

Originally a DNT was applied on Won, and I think fairly. Won is able to scam HUGE amounts.

However after talking with Won, it was apparent that they had 0 intention to scam, and were cooperating fully with staff on Sythe. Also due to the report being 5 years old, there are validity concerns.

DNT's are very subjective, and imo I think the Won situation was correctly handled, but again, it is very subjective.


I assume you are also referring to the Milo situation and I actually had spoken with Chloe as to why Milo is not TWC for what appears to be a shady dealing. Basically it comes down to there is a decent amount of information and correspondence between staff, accusers, and people who are reported and we may not be getting the full situation by just looking at the information contained in that report.

In the end as I said above, DNT, TWC, bans and punishments are all subjective and being friends with mods does help, subconscious bias is a very real thing in the world and on Sythe its no different.

 

It really is an example of someone being above the rules of Sythe. It was a scam, regardless if they end up paying back or not. They ARE owed the money and the fact Won (as much as a cutey as she is) has been intentionally covering it up to make it seem like they either don't have to pay or that 3rd parties are preventing them from paying (even though all proof shows every excuse they've made up has been a lie). It doesn't matter if it effects their business just because they're a big player, but the fact they never made an effort to even pay out over a 5 year span is just extremely poor business practice since it wasn't even some measly $50 dollar purchase that could be easily forgettable; its over $10K.

An appeal to authority is not a safe assumption to have here. Staff decisions shouldn't be automatically assumed to be right just because they're staff - we're all humans and get things wrong, staff included.

 

I am speaking about more than just those, but yes that is one other example. I read many disputes, so these two are just two that stick out like a sore thumb at the moment.

For you and @gambling_babz though - Don't remove DNT without repayment... my exact thoughts.

NO ONE and I mean no one is above the rules, just because you have the title of the queen of England does this mean you're above the law? of course fucking not..

In my eyes (not a bias opinion to say the least, I don't communicate with Won) it was a scam. They have avoided it as you said yourself.

You're right though, we do get things wrong and that's everyone. I have witnessed people get hacked etc including myself (Skype hacks etc) and even then it's like you can claim it's not your fault but ultimately it's your stuff that affected the person regardless the same applies with Won in this situation no matter how much of a big player you are.

This is sort of the reason I have stayed away from say account sales etc, and just stuck to my marketing via services. I understand staff have to call the shots, but with that being said what happens if Won DOES decide to say fuck this i'm done? Who are they to say that he/she shouldn't be twc or dnt until further notice considering it's simple protocol.

 

Who are the few people?

 

There is quite literally a few who are let off easily. Two of which got mentioned above, I could go into more names, but that would involve time and checking up to make sure of things.

 

I've answered this in the suggestion thread but the quick answer is that it hasn't yet been decided that Won owes this or not and this case will likely take a fair amount of time to resolve. It's not necessary to DNT them until we actually decide if they are responsible to repay this debt

 

I appreciate you taking time to post there, although this isn't just based on him alone.

He/she was just one of the examples for this current state of time, there has been many in the past and i'm sure there will be in the future moving forward.

 

Why is it not? If the final verdict is Richard, whose been in the market since the LITERAL beginning, you don't think his background knowledge would help come up with the right answer? I know it may seem like I'm kissing up to staff right now but it makes total sense. TWC is subjective as stated above and all cases are handled evidence-based proof. Where's the flaws?

 

Richard is wrong about so many things, I really don't have time to bring it all up on a single post. Doesn't matter how much of an expert someone is, their opinion and decisions aren't fact and are just as human as anyone else here.

 

If, after all this time and evidence, you still can't see that a debt is owed and a DNT is warranted, you may as well remove all DNT/TWC ranks and start over with proper rules that everyone is subject to. No one should be above the rules.

 

It's under investigation.

This means that a TWC/DNT would be approved until further notice, it's simply based on them not thinking they would scam at the moment.

 

It shouldn't matter what they think, though. Protocol is protocol.
If it was me, or anyone else for that matter, the DNT would still be there.

You can't call free market every time but then deny newer/less trusted market users the same rights as for example Won.

Maybe that's just me, but whatever.

 

Thank you, you are a fucking mind reader.

 

It is not confirmed that won owes the debt so why would we give him a dnt?

 

Not sure if you're retarded or just being dumb, same applies to you @Pendulum

An example for the pair of you - CrazyPipe is a scammer! @Champ shows here the normal protocol. it's quite possibly a fake scam (impostor) but he still applies the normal protocol - Learn a thing or two from him.