Hello,
For the sake of someone reading this report in the future, I will address this report.
Report in question:
MyPVM Plugin Exposed/Violations
I've only skimmed the report, as it's quite lengthy, technical, and I'm currently advertising for the accused party, so I'm not allowed to handle the report.
As I understand it, the report is about whether the accused party is using an unauthorized third party client as opposed to RuneLite, how this alleged use of a third party client is advertised, and how it is addressed in their ToS. I may be wrong in my assessment.
The report was made on January 3, 21 days ago at the time of this post, and the DNT was only placed yesterday, January 23.
My understanding, and again I haven't read the report or even the staff member's original decision, is that the staff member who handled the report decided that the alleged party was indeed somehow using a third-party client to some extent, and my guess is that he placed a DNT on them because they had not made any changes to their ToS regarding the client they were using.
The decision is being disputed at the time of this post here -
https://www.sythe.org/threads/4348137.
In light of the above, I would like to make two points:
1. This is not scam related, I'm not aware of any actual damage done, and AFAIK Sythe's stance (don't quote me, I'm the defendant in this case) is that we allow paid ads to expire in the event that the offense is not scam related, there is no debt, and the advertised party is not actively malicious.
If you dig hard enough, you will find some applicable precedents to support this claim. Even Sythe.org as a forum advertised DNT users in the not so distant past in at least one of the 4 banners (2 top, 2 bottom).
2. This is very recent (and ongoing), is currently being disputed, and I think I'm reasonable in my assertion that the accused party will very likely resolve this matter one way or the other, but not in a way that would require a DNT.
Best regards,
BlackBlasses
