New suggestion about users who not posting from home ip

Problem:
Currently, users who receive a Trade with Caution (TWC) for not posting from their home IP can continue using the forum without resolving this issue. This creates a risk of ban evaders returning under new accounts.

Proposed Solution:
When a user receives TWC for not posting from their home IP, they should have 15 days to post from a home/residential IP.
If they fail to do so within the 15-day period, their status should be upgraded to "Do Not Trade" (DNT) to prevent potential ban evasion.
This ensures that users who intend to trade are properly identified while reducing the risk of evaders returning.
Considerations:
Users should be clearly informed when they receive TWC that they have 15 days to fix the issue.
There should be an appeal process for users with legitimate reasons (e.g., traveling, ISP issues).

 

Support
This should also be "automated" if possible

 

Support

 

No support

People can be on business trips or vacations for longer periods. Penalizing that with a DNT isn't necessary.

Additionally, the pardon-system, which is the extension of a DNT, does not go well with your described issue

 

Thanks for your feedback — your concern about users being on vacation or business trips is completely valid. However, the proposal isn’t about punishing legitimate users; it’s about closing a loophole that’s often exploited by ban evaders.

The 15-day window is a reasonable grace period, and the proposal explicitly includes an appeal process for users who are traveling or facing genuine connectivity or ISP issues.

The goal isn’t to slap a DNT on everyone automatically, but rather to set a clear deadline that encourages users to verify themselves if they intend to trade — and to escalate the status if no good-faith effort is made.

As for the concern about the DNT being tied to the pardon system — I believe this case is different. The DNT here wouldn’t result from scamming or major offenses, but simply from failing to confirm identity in a timely manner. Once the user posts from a home IP, the DNT can be removed quickly without requiring a full pardon or lengthy process.

In fact, this could reduce the load on staff by automating part of the process and discouraging potential

 

Thank you for your response ChatGPT

-Grace period and deadline: (1) Since a deadline restricts user freedom (by forcing him to do something), it must deliver clear benefits (e.g. proven reductions in ban evasion).
In your proposal you claim: fewer ban‑evaders. I don't see why this is the case under your model (do you have data to back this up?). In fact, 'upgrading' a TWC to a DNT could push more users to evade rather than comply. (2) Some Sythe members are digital nomads or live in regions with unreliable internet/electricity. A 15‑day timer would penalise or put unecessary strain on potentially legitimate users

-DNT and the pardon system: read up please
The DNT rank was created for a very specific purpose. Broadening its scope would require strong justification, which is currently lacking

-Strain on staff: Typical AI-word salad. Constantly monitoring a rolling 15‑day window and handling the extra pardon requests would increase staff workload.

 

Thank you for your response, President-Zora worker.

Alright, let’s be real about how the current system works:
A user gets banned for scamming, creates a new account, avoids posting from their home IP to dodge detection, and continues trading.
Even if they get a TWC, they don’t care — they just keep trading under it.
Then, after they scam again, staff finally ask them to post from a home IP — but by then, it’s too late. This cycle keeps repeating.

My suggestion is simple:
Users who receive TWC for not posting from a home IP should have 15 days to do so. If they don’t, they get a DNT. It’s not permanent — they can resolve it anytime by verifying their home IP.

And if someone genuinely can’t access the internet due to electricity or travel issues, then trading shouldn’t be their priority. We’re here to make Sythe safer.

This isn’t about punishing honest users — it’s about closing a loophole that scammers abuse over and over again.

 

There's not really a problem that you're solving.

Your premise hinges on TWC’ers going around and scamming people, were it not for a DNT.

Now ask yourself: is this really happening or a problem? If so, substantiate it with real examples and data.

The fact that users display a TWC (read: Trade With Caution) already serves as a warning mechanism to customers. One could argue that if they choose to go with a TWC’ed user, they’re taking a well‑informed risk. And in the end, that’s the label that best fits someone who has never posted from their home IP. DNT should be reserved for more malicious stuff like outright scamming.

 

TWC is a warning, sure — but it doesn’t actually stop them from trading. A lot of new users don’t understand the risk, or simply ignore it — and evaders know that. They use that gap to scam before staff eventually link them to a banned account.

If you're looking for examples, you already know the section for that.
There are plenty of banned users who came back under new names and got caught after scamming again under the new name .

 

We could also simplify things for staff:
Prevent new users from registering using mobile data or public Wi-Fi.
If they register from a non-home IP, their account would be limited — no posting or thread creation — until they post once from a home/residential IP.

This way, staff don’t have to monitor TWC users for weeks — the system catches it early, and it blocks evaders from slipping through right after registration

 

I support this. If an account hasn't posted from a home Ip after a certain amount of time the account in question should be Dnt'd there's no reason to not post from a Home Ip if that's what this website requires.

Staff won't have alot of extra work as the thread will still be there until the matter is resolved, It'll be a case of clicking a thread and applying a Dnt'd or maybe a new rank should be updated for it.

 

We're going in circles.

TWC is a warning mechanism that serves to alert users and that befits the gravity of not posting from a home IP. My claim is that this policy measure has been pretty successful so far, because nothing proves otherwise.

You’re trying to implement a change for a problem that doesn’t exist. If you want to change it, you have to prove there is a problem—namely, that the current model is failing in its job, meaning that users who don’t post from home IPs and have TWC’s are successfully scamming. Substantiate that (with data or strong examples) and we might have a discussion. Otherwise this is a dead suggestion. Onus is on you friend

That's some stasi-DDR logic.

 

Don't the Twc mean Trade with Caution? So even if the user has a twc he's technically allowed to be in the market? If so ain't that a major risk to other users? Yes the twc will act as a deterrent's but it's still possible for that user with a twc to enter the Market just to scam, I think a Dnt until the issue is resolved is a much sounder way of doing this for the safety of users.