[Denied] Another post about "default warranty"

hey all,

i know, this topic has been adressed a few times at this point.
recent events (resolved) make me want to adress it once more though.

for those who did not follow the report:

an account was sold off-site with a ToS agreement "if the OO (Sythe user) reclaims the account, full refund for lifetime"
the person purchasing the account claims to have his registered email to the account hacked after ~ 1 year of the purchase, losing access to his account.
in the report, it was established that the OO did not take the account, and is unable to recover.
the seller in question was unable to recover.

ruling ended up being, a refund is owed because of the "unspecified warranty period"

because of this, i'd very much like to see a update to the rules of basic warranty and ToS specifically also stating the requirements to be able to claim the warranty period.
When can off-site transactions be ruled under Sythe warranty periods / regulations?


At this point, it seems that ANYONE who has ever bought an account on ANY website, where not a specific TOS has been agreed to, is able to simply claim "hey i lost access to my account" in order to get a free shot at a refund, as long as the owner/seller has a Sythe profile.

Also, i feel that, as long as the ToS complies with the minimal Sythe standards, interferance of Mods should be bound to defined parameters.
Since, in the above mentioned report, a ToS was in place, which effectively was overruled by the handling moderators.

Why should a seller set up a ToS, when in the end it may just be overruled anyhow?


TL;DR

- Specify the requirements to get the "2 year warranty period" applied to a transaction.
- Specify when and how Mods may overrule ToS which has been agreed on for a transaction.

 

[Divx]

In all honesty, i feel like this topic needs to be heavily clarified.

Being judged by Sythe in a scam report, submitted to Sythe for something that happend off-site, is the same as violating the laws of United States and getting prosecuted in UK under their laws.

Further more, altering the Terms of Service to Sythes version is just odd, when this case named if OO recovered account, being changed to 24 month default.

This would be fair if the trade had happen on this site, but off-site? Nah.

 

I was really shocked when the mods gave the ruling they did honestly. I figured because there were ToS in place stating he had a lifetime recovery if Corby took it back, that would be the agreed upon terms.

He made it clear that he wasn't the OO and who the OO was. The guy even admitted that it was a mistake on his part losing the account after 12 months. It seemed odd to me that we then ignore the (perfectly reasonable) ToS that were agreed upon and uphold some different on-site ToS in place of them, for no real reason.

As Primal said, this just means that anyone that bought accounts off-site without concrete ToS matching Sythe ToS in place (within the last 2 years) can now come to site and claim they've lost access to the account. If the user can't get it back, which a lot of them won't be able to after a long period, they owe them the full amount for the account. Very open gate for people to come and use this to scam legitimate sellers of their money back and get to keep the accounts.

Support that when the ToS are concrete enough for an off-site sale, Sythe shouldn't enforce their own ToS ruling to override the others. And once again support that if this has to stay in place, then make the guidelines extremely clear on what warrants this being the case.

 

I'd support/agree that there shouldn't be default sythe terms of 2 years for off-site sales. Places like PA/Eld that are automatic check-outs don't have a period where someone would 'agree' to terms of less or any set terms. There's a warranty period built into these sites & after that that's basically it.

 

[Superfluous]

- Specify the requirements to get the "2 year warranty period" applied to a transaction.
- Specify when and how Mods may overrule ToS which has been agreed on for a transaction.

It's not clear to us what your suggestion is. If you'd like us to consider this further please make a new thread.

We think it's probably best for us to continue to decide on these individually; the ToS sticky outlines some of these points intentionally vaguely, since if we write them too specifically that will be equally abused.