People With Pardoned DNT

Describe the problem:
People on Sythe should be held more accountable for performing scams in the past. How it stands currently, you are able to get an infraction removed by appealing or asking for a pardon. I agree with appealing and over ruling an infraction because generally this is done because the result isn't satisfactory. I don't agree with completely removing easy ways to find infractions.

Right now you need to use the search function to find peoples past infraction history. The issue with this is that if they are active on Sythe, and in a lot of cases are donators, it is not as simple to find this kind of information.

What current rule(s) tackle this problem:
None.

Explain the change:
I believe every past infracted member of Sythe should have a PERMANENT black mark to warn potential buyers who they are communicating with. Either something within the profile on the first page or on every post similar to a TWC but smaller and on the right side where join date, post information, and referrals are. This would directly help new buyers that request PMs, check profiles, or are simply browsing the sale pages. I don't think this should apply for people who have DISPUTED the infraction, but only for those that simply received a PARDON to return to the community.

Explain why this change will fix the problem:
New users won't have to do any extra work to find past infractions on Sythe users that are still active and can easily bury their past infractions.

Side-effects:
Some old infracted members will not like this as it could potentially harm future sale opportunities but I think this is required due to so many returning infracted members. Users that have used Sythe without any infraction are more clearly justified and are also rewarded for good trading ethics.

 

System is currently fine.

Permanently handicapping market parties isn't a good idea. People are already evading. Your change will incentivize this even further, or they will seek out other trading platforms — which reduces activity.

No support

 

I would argue that the person handicapped themselves by making the choice to scam. Using Sythe is a privilage, not a right. Once you've been given that chance to come back, why not display that kind of information? If people were actually interested in selling on Sythe they would have accountability.

If they are not interested, they can leave. Giving new and honest sellers more opportunity.

Additionally, majority of the people that would have blackmarks don't contribute to the community apart from the autobump they get to use on there 20+ threads. I doubt this would change how majority of these users operate in general.

On another note, majority of these sellers don't even use Sythe as a trading platform, but more as an advertisement platform. Sending users to their discord, then directing them to different communities and selling platforms anyways. This means that sellers don't care about staying on Sythe to perform trades and are more interested in the views Sythe gets as such an old selling platform.

Sythe community is dead so it should be treated as more of a selling and trading platform.

 

That may all be true, but it's still an extra push in the back to evade. It's unlikely that users who aren’t known for their integrity would put themselves at a disadvantage in this hypercompetitive market.

As for your second point: exactly—that's my point. If it's dead, then why would users, whom you've now permanently handicapped, bother to advertise here if there's minimal influx to their Discord (your change would cause this)? It would kill the website even more.

 

I don't believe it would kill the website more because the people using the website, majority of the time, are auto bumping anyways. Why would they stop auto bumping if they paid for it?

Lets say these people do leave. This now gives new sellers a chance to begin making a name for themselves. If people are ban evading, they take that risk to further their punishments. As they do now.

I would much rather a big seller make a new account, evade, and get punished for his actions then waste potentially 100s of customers time with an exit scam after being allowed back into the community after a year or two.

The damage would be considerably lower if they were forced to evade like you said. Or they could grow a pair and own up to there mistakes, if they truly were a mistake. Accountability should be everything in a hypercompetitive market, and the honest sellers should prosper. Not the shady big guy.

 

The other way can be argued just as easily: someone with a tainted reputation might be more successful at exit scamming on a new account, precisely because that new account isn’t tainted. It’s therefore speculative whether exit scams are more or less likely to happen under the current model or yours. The impact is speculative too — you'd need data to back that up.

What is clear, however, is that people would have more incentive to evade under your model. They'd also be less likely to pay their debts after being caught scamming, since there's no chance of being pardoned. This would impact the CRF, and debtors wouldn't get partially repaid like they do now.

Part of the problem you're describing is also tackled by the vouching system, which allows for negative reviews and general reputation. Very often, when someone wants to make a transaction, the first thing they do is ask someone they trust for a credible market user.

 

Will edit this post with response after work in 10 hours.