Can members define their own rules on their threads?

[NullAndVoid]

Let's assume it is a valid thread that doesn't break rules. Can I define rules within the thread, where a member who violates it can actually be punished if he or she is reported and a moderator looks at it?

I've seen it on several threads, and I was just wondering if it carried any weight?

For instance, if I have a thread about selling gold and say anyone who doesn't PM me first before posting will be reported, can I actually report them?

Another instance, if I say to only post about negative reviews of a certain website, and a member posts about a positive experience, can I report them?

Or as long as the post follows Sythe.org rules, the member won't have action taken against them?

Thanks!

 

[x339]

This was a heavy topic of discussion here in the past.

I believe that Sythe himself stated that a user can have their own ToS, as long as they do not infringe upon the rules of sythe.org.

For example, if someone's ToS says that they are not responsible for you losing something after you have purchased it, that is legal. But if your ToS say that if the buyer does not receive the product its not your fault, that is not legal, as it is scamming according to the rules.

(Not the best example, I am sure a staff member will give a better explanation.)

 

[krxe]

I think it differs in each case.

 

[video]

You can say you'll report people for breaking your ToS, but breaking a user's ToS and breaking sythe.org's official rules are very different things. So you are free to report them for breaking your ToS but most likely no action would be taken

 

[FireZ]

If i doesn't break the official rule list, most likely nothing will ever be done about it.

 

Like x339 stated, you can have a ToS as long as it doesn't infringe upon Sythe's official rules. If you stated that you're not responsible for what happens after the trade, that's fine. But, if you state, "if I feel like not delivering the goods, I can do so," that's scamming and it's not allowed.

Also, unless a Sythe member violated Sythe's official rules, action will probably not be taken against them. If you state you can only buy RSGP via MSN, and someone PMs you; it didn't infringe Sythe's rules, so it's not punishable, but if they did, then it is.

 

[NullAndVoid]

Is there any way to simply make it against the rules to have your own rules in the first place?

As a new user myself, it was really confusing when I saw threads that stated their own rules, even though a user could break said rules without breaking any actual Sythe.org rules.

I think setting guidelines or asking users to please refrain from posting certain things is perfectly acceptable and fine. I do not think users who say you will be reported and "infracted" if you do this or this is okay.

It still seems as if there is a grey area, because so far all the answers have been most likely no action, not a definite no action will be taken.

Basically what I am asking is if my post coincides with all Sythe.org rules and forum specific rules, but goes against something the original poster says, is there a chance I may be given an infraction?

If you state you can only buy RSGP via MSN, and someone PMs you; it didn't infringe Sythe's rules, so it's not punishable, but if they did, then it is.

Also, the above makes no sense. My apologies if I'm just not reading it correctly.

 

Is there any way to simply make it against the rules to have your own rules in the first place?

Sure, you can make a suggestion. But, I'd rather just let it state that ToS cannot infringe upon the official rules, and that if someone breaks it, the occurrence will be dealt by on a case-by-case basis. Some people keep the ToS for reassurance, saying things such as "what happens after the trade isn't my fault." Or, you could just include stuff like "I can deny any request I don't feel like doing," "I don't do account trades," etc. Besides, it's not really "rules," it's "terms of service."

As a new user myself, it was really confusing when I saw threads that stated their own rules, even though a user could break said rules without breaking any actual Sythe.org rules.

Well, there's a distinction between official rules, and terms of service.

I think setting guidelines or asking users to please refrain from posting certain things is perfectly acceptable and fine. I do not think users who say you will be reported and "infracted" if you do this or this is okay.

Yes, you could set guidelines asking users to refrain from posting certain things; but if they break it, it's not really against official rules, they wouldn't be infracted anyway.

It still seems as if there is a grey area, because so far all the answers have been most likely no action, not a definite no action will be taken.

It's done on a case-by-case basis.

Basically what I am asking is if my post coincides with all Sythe.org rules and forum specific rules, but goes against something the original poster says, is there a chance I may be given an infraction?

Like I said, it's done on a case-by-case basis, that's why you're receiving many "it's likely no action," because normally moderators wouldn't infract you for that.

Also, the above makes no sense. My apologies if I'm just not reading it correctly.

"If you state you can only buy RSGP via MSN, and someone PMs you; it didn't infringe Sythe's rules, so it's not punishable, but if they did, then it is."

What I'm saying is, if the threads ToS states that you can only trade via MSN, and someone PMs you to trade, you wouldn't be infracted. Though that goes against the ToS, it doesn't against the official rules. I think you got confused at the last part, I meant that if it was against Sythe's official rules, maybe it included a keylogger, flaming, etc., then it would be infractable.

 

[Brendan]

Putting some things in your Terms and Conditions, such as "You will go first" don't really cause any issues because of the traders don't agree with it, they can just walk away from each other, so normally it isn't causing any issues, just letting members know how the trade is going to work, etc.

 

[SuF]

The official word from the God of Sythe (aka Richard):

Staff: If there is disagreement about what valid ToS are, then we should discuss this in the staff lounge.

My take on it is this:
A ToS is just a contract template. If the seller of a good or service can show evidence that the buyer has expressly consented to his conditions, as a contract between them, then that contract is binding -- unless of course it is not a valid contract.

Invalid contracts are ones which:
a) break sythe.org rules;
b) break the law;
c) lack consideration (an exchange of value);
d) are physically or logically unfulfillable; or
e) are made without freely given and express consent of both parties.

In adjudicating a dispute, we will IGNORE any aspect of a contract or ToS that is in contradiction with sythe.org rules. It is the sellers responsibility to ensure their ToS are consistent with the law and the site's rules.

 

[NullAndVoid]

The official word from the God of Sythe (aka Richard):

That definitely gives a clearer picture. I'm not talking about when members post ToS regarding how they trade. I'm only concerned about it when members do something like the following (not meant to call out the original poster):

http://sythe.org/showthread.php?t=1314389

More specifically referring to the following part of the first post:

This thread is only for the POSITIVE feedback to the site, anything negative will be reported and an infraction will be given.

I think the above should be against the rules, as it is clearly misleading and blatantly wrong. To me, a ToS is completely different and separate from thread/posting rules. I have no issues with people who post ToS. The entire motivation behind creating this discussion in the first place was the clear up examples like the above.

Thanks for the responses thus far.

 

This issue came up on my account sales thread, and resulted in me ultimately abolishing my account business.

If I am reselling an account, I make sure to post that the buyer is responsible for the account after the password has been provided. Essentially, it says I am not responsible for the original owner recovering the account. When reselling accounts, I saw no other profitable business model, yet it was deemed against Sythe rules.

 

[Emperor Nero]

This issue came up on my account sales thread, and resulted in me ultimately abolishing my account business.

If I am reselling an account, I make sure to post that the buyer is responsible for the account after the password has been provided. Essentially, it says I am not responsible for the original owner recovering the account. When reselling accounts, I saw no other profitable business model, yet it was deemed against Sythe rules.

There are a lot of issues with that though. You sell account and it gets recovered by 'original owner' then it ends up on another market being sold by the same person. You can't just say I am not responsible if you get screwed over.

 

[Manpons unite]

There are a lot of issues with that though. You sell account and it gets recovered by 'original owner' then it ends up on another market being sold by the same person. You can't just say I am not responsible if you get screwed over.

That makes a lot of sense.

But what if on a thread they say any "low ball" offers will be reported as spam, but they dont give you an idea of what "low ball" is so you end up low balling and getting reported for spam.

 

[Sweetaction]

But what if on a thread they say any "low ball" offers will be reported as spam, but they dont give you an idea of what "low ball" is so you end up low balling and getting reported for spam.

I could see a "low-ball" being counted as spam, $1 offer on most any account is just someone trying to get their post count up.

Then again some threads say "selling account $1" and a $1 offer on that account wouldn't be spam.

Hard to say.

 

I could see a "low-ball" being counted as spam, $1 offer on most any account is just someone trying to get their post count up.

Then again some threads say "selling account $1" and a $1 offer on that account wouldn't be spam.

Hard to say.

It's on a case-by-case basis, moderators can easily tell what offer is just for post count.

 

There are a lot of issues with that though. You sell account and it gets recovered by 'original owner' then it ends up on another market being sold by the same person. You can't just say I am not responsible if you get screwed over.

Obviously, if I put an account up for sale and sell it here, and it is recovered, I should be held entirely responsible if I try to resell the same account elsewhere. Although that should go without saying. If the original owner tries to resell it after on another site... what can we do besides warn future buyers?