You can donate 600$ on Sythe and allowed to scam 5.7B?

Title says it all. Sorry sythe, you put a bad reputation on yourself after this scam report. 4 pages of text & 1 mod response. Lol?

resolved

 

More like 15-20b lol

 

Facts.

 

Money talks lol

 

a

and it appears scammers walk..

 

Look here, where does it say in their TOS for Mafioso that "by accepting you are agreeing to change your PW to something not common or the pin should be complex, and no where here does it state that the ticket system isn't safe so please know if we scam you we will use this as a fallback plan"

They didn't say anything about any of this in their TOS so their TOS are invalid in this case and should have to repay spencer for the scam.

 

That report was fun to read. I'm honestly amazed at the verdict in this specific case. I've seen some obvious scammers get away with shit but this one report just makes me cry internally lmao.

@Spencercslv1 Your account was sick. RIP.

 

Tough situation and really difficult for staff to determine who to ultimately lay blame on. With that said, this one felt fucked up, ngl. Sorry for your loss, @Spencercslv1.

 

F

not the first and not the last victim of the ToS game.

 

If your password was password. the pin was 1234. and you used multiple service providers. the question of who is at fault comes into play. There was a determination that one person couldnt be it and that it HAD to be someone who guessed the pin. The entire argument rests on someone guessing a pin. And who still claims innocence. Yes it sucks to be hacked for an ironman. I have felt that experience personally. But, imagine if youre the worker and youre innocent? to get all of this pinned on you and lose a 2b deposit and it not be your fault. It isnt like the server profited 5b, or even 1b. whoever hacked him did. and there is no definitive culprit. You can argue; why would someone clean thier own ironman? and the counter argument being, why would someone put in a two bill deposit to scam someone 1b? Rolling the dice with a sythe report is not a logical gamble. I think that they mad an acceptable decision. And the offer they made to rebuild the account was fair. Not because it was able to get you back to where it was. But because it got you on the track to rebuild. supplies for bossing, and basic supplies ect. Account security was the retraction of their offer, but, regardless, i would still wager the verdict would have been the same given that while mafioso said it could have been X worker. There was no proof it was him. And i got bored and tested how aids it is to test a pin. and it really is ass. So unless your pin was 1234. i really wouldnt feel confident in blaming someone who is potentially innocent. The concept that a third party hacked him is reasonable. I know its a joke, but Woox isnt quitting. its unfortunate, and he has every right to be upset, but personal attacks and "sythe approved vaguely worded threats" are a bit much. When my maxed ironman had a similar problem. i went through the 5 stages of dying. Anger, bargaining, ect. I do feel for your loss. but, the verdict is correct, even if unfortunate. Donating money should and probably does mean dick all.

 

Yes but then why would they fire the worker ? then use the 2b deposit to pay back @Spencercslv1

If they 100% thought the worker didnt do it he wouldnt be fired, they would have just gave him a warning in my opinion and say if it happens again you lose ur deposit.

They would only do this if they believe the worker did it or have a reasonable doubt he did.

Its a shame what happened to you spencer. Hope it gets sorted mate.

 

Firstly, this wasn't the password nor the pin. This is clearly shown by the fact that Exissential said his "password types". "Anyone with knowledge from any of your previous service providers could have reasonably guessed your password/pin combination." --> Taken from thread (Exissential). "Only the Mafioso team and workers in my ticket would have knowledge of my login info." --> Spencer on thread. What this tells us is that Spencer has used Mafioso only which means this entire point is INVALID. The only people who could've hacked him besides the worker is another worker. His PC was scanned of any malicious activity therefore ruling him out of being phished.

Exissential confirmed the worker hacked the account. Proof: https://img.sythe.org/$WM0/aF0jRqQA...lYjY3YTU1YzdlNWI0NjA4MjEwNWNkOTZjMTliNGMucG5n and
https://img.sythe.org/$D/I2t/M2YySP...lZGFkODU1NTY3MmQ5MmUyN2E1ODI5ZmU3OTc1NWMucG5n
The hacker is confirmed to be the worker. This cannot be a misunderstanding either because Exxisential had 5 days to investigate the issue and 5 days later that was his conclusion. As soon as Spencer posted the items he lost, he began to move onto account security as a last resort. As others have said, they also fired this worker which you would only do if you were certain he hacked Spencer.

For reference: His password wasn't "password" nor was his pin "1234, 1111, 9876" etc. Furthermore there is yet for proof to be posted regarding the 2B deposit even after being asked numerous times by Spencer and Yellow Hat.

 

Legit admitted that it was their worker that scammed, fired him, and only when he wanted more than what they were willing to refund did they cause a stink. Seems like you can hire a bunch of hungry Venezuelans, they scam, owner more or less gets off scot-free.

 

Sythe and the Sythe staff team need to spend some time to develop new rules/rulings and set a new precedent when it comes to account service scams like this one.

I don't think there was any corruption or mal intent involved in the report, and I am sure it's extremely difficult to look at all the details from situations like this and draw any certain conclusion, and I think the staff team does the best with the information they get and the rules we have in place currently. However we cannot keep having this same outcome or account service scam reports over and over, it's frankly embarrassing for sythe.

It is and always will be impossible to prove beyond a doubt who the scammer was in these situations, but that doesn't mean the ruling should be 'nothing happens get fucked account owner'. There needs to be other ways to determine liability instead of just can I tell who scammed the account or not.

For example, I didn't read this report super thoroughly, but I believe it was mentioned that the workers/service provider violated their own TOS but informing the customer that they could/SHOULD log into their account during the service. It would be easy to set a rule that said something like, should you violate your TOS by doing something like this, and you don't cancel the order as a result, then you have accepted liability should something go wrong with the order or the order results in a scam. That way we don't need to prove who took the items, because the provider breaking their TOS holds them liable as long as it's fairly obvious it wasn't the customer themselves, like in this situation where it was an ironman bank that had more value invested in services by 10 fold than the value of the stolen items.

We must have some set of rules that determine what actions do and don't result in shifts of liability between the provider and the customer, and who will be responsible in case a report occurs and there is no way to be 100% certain of what happened, because that's 99% of these reports, and the current method of, 'idrk sorry can't help' is just like it says, unhelpful. my 2 cents