[denied] Rule Enforcement w/ Market Manipulation

Motivation: [Resolved]

The problem we're facing is two people are bumping a thread in the same section, but in the end, linking to one discord. It shouldn't be allowed to have another service provider as a sponsor if you're both bumping into the same section.

The official rule currently stands as:
Attempting To Bypass the 1 Thread per Market Section Limit: You may only have one thread per market section advertising your goods, services, or platform (Discord server/website, etc) unless otherwise specified. Attempts to circumvent this limit will result in a 1 month's ban and possibly a DNT in severe cases.

This rule is not complete enough, as it does not include if you're sponsoring someone also posting in the same section. That way, the sponsor is getting a double advertisement. From his thread, but also when people join via your link. We need more enforcement of the rules related to market manipulation. It is manipulation after all, and therefore can be twisted and turned, so they can find a way to pass by the rules.

Hypothetical situation w/ abuse example with this rule not being in place:
Get your 10 lads to create a Sythe account, create a discord server, sponsor your friend and start bumping. Maybe some things I missed, but you get my point. Your discord server will be advertised on 11 different threads. You could have all the servers on the whole first page to be redirected to your services.

The current rule is great, however, needs to be more enforced, so you can't abuse it in the hypothetical situation I attempted to give. We should remove the right to have a sponsor that is actively bumping in the same section.

By fixing this problem, we'll get rid of the potential abuse. After Pikachu's verdict it was clear, that it would be possible to abuse this - which no hate towards him, is just doing his job according to the rules stated & given to Sythe.

 

The actual rule is very clear as it stand.
2 ppl advertising one single discord in 1 section is rule breaking. 95% of the ppl here are in the gold market, if sponsorship isn’t allowed, then sponsor isn’t worth a single thing.

Supporting no change on the actual ruling.

Have a great day,
Gregs

 

I think you misunderstood my point. Having two discords advertised in the same section, shouldn't be able to sponsor each other. People can still sponsor each other, PK servers etc. Sponsorship is still allowed.

Like the example I gave, 10 people can create a discord in the SAME section and then just sponsor each other. Allowing them to abuse the workaround and fill a whole page, which in the end is all redirecting to ONE discord.

 

As long as the business is not conducted in the same discord server, it doesn't matter. If you have any proof of something like this happening you should report it. If not, you should just get a life and stop pursuing this stupid vendetta against Virt, grow up.

 

It's a suggestion. And why would I report it, if it ain't against the rules? I know it's not against the rules, but it's a suggestion. It wouldn't matter if this was a report. But we're in the suggestion section sir.

 

With the 10 accounts, it wouldn't be against the rules following the principle of the verdict I got. Sythe does not really involve themselves with sponsors, thus - I could be a GP seller, get your buds to create 1 acc each and advertise on the Gold Market but everyone is sponsoring myself for GP.

Doesn't it seem unfair?

 

The rule is far from being "very clear"

"Attempting To Bypass the 1 Thread per Market Section Limit: You may only have one thread per market section advertising your goods, services, or platform (Discord server/website, etc) unless otherwise specified. Attempts to circumvent this limit will result in a 1 month's ban and possibly a DNT in severe cases."

I was not advertising anyone else's discord or services nor was anyone else advertising my discord or my services. Yet I got banned for 30 days because I was outsourcing jobs to someone else. Despite the fact that I was handling payments and my clients would pay to my server's addresses and then I pay the person I'm outsourcing to on weekly basis etc, Sythe staff deemed it Market manipulation because the person I was outsourcing to was in my discord to take the orders as a worker.
So instead of me booking an in-game meeting between my client and the gold supplier and having to deal with different time zones, I let the guy directly communicate with the clients and he tells them to send the money to ME. Once everything is good, I pay him for the gold minus my fee.
Outsourcing work is okay in terms of Sythe rules as long as you declare to your clients that the work is being outsourced (Which I did).

Obviously this is in the past, but you can't say the rule is clear when we had similar discussions about infernal cape workers handling tickets but that was okay for some reason. The rule needs to be redefined and explained better.

 

As I said. The rule was very clear. You got banned because you had a thread which u outsourced to argendgold. This wouldn’t be an issue if Argendgold wouldn’t have had his own theead tho.

 

Outsourcing is not against Sythe rules.
I did not reference him in any way in my threads. All links directed to my server, where clients pay me.

Although I've learned my lesson and accept the consequences of my actions, I didn't fully understand the rule until I was banned.
Also, it seems to me that several other members have also had issues with the "market manipulation" rule, either because they feel like they were unjustifiably punished or because they reported someone who wasn't punished despite seeming to have violated the rule. This clearly indicates that the rule is unclear and needs to be redefined to specify what actions are permissible and what are not.

 

You say that you learned your lesson, however you do don’t even understand what u have done wrong… If you want to discuss this further, feel free to contact me on Discord.

The fact you outsource it, isn't the problem at all, as long your customers are aware of it.
The only problem here is, you outsource it to someone who also has an active thread in your section, and this is the Problem here.

 

So which part of the rule clarifies that? Especially when you take into account the outsourcing rule?

I’m not disagreeing with the ruling on my ban nor whether this or that should be considered market manipulation. My comment is simply to encourage staff to clarify the rule(s) more. It wouldn’t take more than a few minutes to edit the text and reword it to clarify what is considered market manipulation and what isn’t. That’s my argument here. Hence saying it is far from being “clear”.

 

I wanted to say this for 2 weeks now lmao

I feel as if the rules in general should be either not taken so seriously or they should have an overhaul. As of right now there is too much dogshit and dogshit people taking advantage of loopholes in the name of making an extra dollar or two and its really pathetic, not only does it devalue the market but it also devalues the value we have towards this website and its community

So support from me on the principle they do actually handle it properly, and also ban beast as he is the offspring of sticktalk. Throw him to the wolves like they did daddy dropperz