Terms of Services Changes

Hey, because at the moment Terms of Services is everything, i think a change is needed to make it fair for both parties. Be honest, currently ToS is to save the service provider if things go south while it doesn't help the client at all.
Right now it's pretty much blindly trusting the service provider. It's almost impossible to make a negative feedback and for that reason the client wont see any red flags. Buyer sees many positive feedbacks, high donation, the fancy stuff.
You could say it's a risk buyer takes, because they are breaking rs rules anyways, if we are speaking about rs etc. but my main point here is to make trades safer and easier and more fair for the buyer.
How? With a better ToS system.
This suggestion will focus on rs training services and becuase i think gp trades are a completely different thing, this suggestion wont touch that part of trading.
Rather than the current system where the seller copy-pastes you a large list of rules (and bullshit which saves him even when it's not fair you as a buyer) and buyer must agree to that, both parties should come up with a common/joint agreement, point by point, one by one.
The service provider could still have his old rules but the buyer could suggest his own rules / changes to the existing rules. They would agree to the rules one by one and at the end the seller would send a message with all the rules to the buyer to confirm.
This would help the ironman cases aswell, they would have an agreement before anything bad happens. The current copy-pasted ToS telling irons to remove their wealth before the worker gets on their account and things like that. What? How?
If the changes apply the buyers know what happens after the unbeliveable happens. They can agree on partial refunds / no refunds at all etc. before the deal.

Also the changes would bring a few new, easy rules for more safety and less chaos:

Even if the ToS changes suggestion gets denied, i want these new rules to be added for rs training services:
- Make sure the provider has enough info about the account(s) they would train. Get proof (not written proof) of the accounts value, including stats, quests, diaries, bank etc. before starting the work on the accounts.
- Make sure the buyer has changed password before using the services. (Just ask/tell the buyer to change password)
- Make sure the buyer has changed his bank PIN before using the services. You can change bank PIN in like 10 seconds after you used your current bank PIN correctly. (Just ask/tell the buyer to change bank PIN)

Pros:

- Both parties have a clear picture about the ToS and it makes the communication better.
- Gives safety for seller and buyer.
- Less drama in the RaS for the staff, it's easier to handle reports if the rules are clear since the beginning.
- More responsibility from the sellers/providers.
- Helps the ironman cases.

Cons:

- Takes a few extra minutes to set the rules.
- Less RaS drama for the public.

This suggestion sounds dumb, i know, but if the ruling is based on the ToS then the ToS system should be clear and fair for everyone. I see sellers taking advantage of their rules while i see naive buyers who would never think about things going wrong, because of the fancy stuff they see.

This suggestion should apply for services and account/software etc. sales.

 

Honestly TOS protect the provider too much because some providers hire random employees for cheap without any filtering.

I've been doing services for 2 years without 1 dispute or lost account because #1 I did services myself and #2 any employee that touches a clients account has proven they are responsible enough to do so.

TOS rules do need a change butttt its hard to protect both parties from bans. Items missing is another story especially if its regarding an ironman. Ironmen wouldn't pay $500 for a service then take $50 worth of accounts off of it.

Support a change but would need to be a poll and further more in depth discussion.

Yellow Hat

 

Let me start off by saying that customers should definitely enjoy more protection, but definitely not through the means of more rules. If Sythe would enforce the things you're proposing providers would take their business elsewhere where the circumstances are more favorable for them. Sythe should remain a free market and only, when absolutely necessary, should Sythe impose limitations to contractual freedom.

I posted this elsewhere, but it also applies here:

Two things need to happen to increase customer protection in services:
1. Regarding ToS: there's a ToS sticky thread, I feel that thread should be expanded. For instance, when you agree to the ToS and in further negotiations, you deviate from the ToS and the provider agrees with that deviation, that specific deviation overrules the ToS (lex priori derogat lex posterior in fancy latin). To most of us, this feels super instinctive, but to a lot of customers, it doesn't. Think of it like this, how many times do you walk in the supermarket and discuss the ToS when buying basic products. For a customer it can often feel like ToS are just fixed statues that are invariant and not prone to negotiation, this should change.
1.1 In the light of the latter, I would like added that buyers should be encouraged to negotiate ToS with their provider.
2. Just like there is a ToS guide, I feel like the service section deserves a service guide. This shouldn't include the enforceable rules that we currently have only, but also trading habits that are encouraged. For instance, always share a screenshot of your bank and have the provider (or visa versa) verify it when allowing access to the bank (referring to this discussion: Are we in the process of allowing ironman accounts to get cleaned?.)

TLDR:
1. Agree with the problem, customers should enjoy better protection
2. Not through enforcement of more rules because a. it well makes Sythe less attractive of a platform b. Sythe is a free market and customers are always free to negotiate terms
3. Awareness amongst customers: In light of b. traders should not only be made aware of the fact that they can and should negotiate terms with big boys but also of how to avoid headaches pre-emptively by avoiding trades (services) go wrong by documenting some important stuff and establishing some basic things. In 90% of the situations when a trade goes wrong, this could have been prevented had one of the parties acted more pre-emptively and acquired/documented some important info or established/demanded things in a more favorable manner for him. This should really be encouraged and highlighted.

 

okay firstly, the idea that creating some rules about what must be required of a TOS for it to be enforceable for sythe reports will make providers leave sythe is ludicrous. Sythe is the largest RS open market forum that there is, few providers can afford to leave it for any reason at all. if Sythe created some rules about TOS I imagine every single service provider even those unaffiliated with sythe would eventually adopt it as a general market practice because it would become the standard, instead of the shit standard we have in the market now.

This statement I think goes more against your argument than you think for three reasons:

1. The power imbalance between an individual customer and a large provider service with thousands of feedback and hundreds of workers and managers. If they are both negotiating in their own self interest the provider will end up with more freedoms and powers than the individual. That's like an individual trying to come to a fair agreement with a corporation IRL, it just doesn't happen due to the power structures, so it's silly to think that a customer negotiating has equal power to create a favorable agreement as the service providers does.

2. Everyone is NOT going to look out for themselves. I'm not sure if you think this is wall street and everyone here has a degree from the school of fair TOS, but this is a runescape black market. Most of these are kids looking to level up their videogame character and the idea that they have the same knowledge of the market and TOS as the service provider is ridiculous. You can say you want to expand the stickies and make people aware but the truth is thousands of these 'customers' are just kids with no idea about tos and just want some strength levels or a twisted kit. You can say it's on them to learn all the rules to protect themselves but equating a customers knowledge about TOS to a providers, is like equating a citizens knowledge of the law to a lawyers. It's NOT sythe's job to create a more hospitable and safe environment for customers, but WHY WOULDN't we want to. These are just a bunch of kids trying to spend a quick buck to level up their videogame characters if we can make it easier for them, we A get more business and B aren't fucking douchebags

3. this is a BLACK MARKET, the self interested of most people here is scamming lmfao, if you allow the market entities to tend towards their self interest they'd just be scamming people, and for that reason it is NOT a free market( here is your statement: " Sythe is a free market" that is plain old bullshit cap) and does in fact have plenty of rules and regulations already. Pretending it's a free market where business entities interests all somehow create a functioning economic system is fucking stupid, no offense.

expanding stickies will never work for any significant portion of the population because they just don't know any better. we have stickies about not getting scammed and yet every week the RAS section is filled with users buying maxed accounts off 0 post count plain as day ban evaders. instead of making all the right calls about TOS and putting them into stickies for providers and customers to ignore, lets just make it a rule lol

Also I've heard many times that if a customer doesn't like one providers handling of TOS they can just move somewhere else, but sadly poor TOS practices are a market standard, almost every provider has a similar TOS which is provided in a similar way and that needs to change. Providers may all handle situations better or worse or be higher quality or worse quality, but they all have similar dealings with actually creating and providing a TOS for customers, so that structure needs to change

I support stricter rules for what must be required of a TOS for it to be valid so that customers aren't left vulnerable and exposed by their own lack of knowledge and lack of power when it comes to TOS'

 

The changes and/or the new rules in my OP aren't that bad. If the customer and the provider don't want to spend a few minutes before the deal to make sure everything goes well and safe then neither of them should do any business ever.
Educating the buyers is a good idea, but stickies are not the solution for that, people ignore those and the RaS section is the perfect explanation for that.
Honestly, i don't think the changes and new rules would make anyone quit services and Sythe.

 

Hi, thanks for responding

There's a more subsidiary way to achieve this: competition. Providers with better ToS simply outcompete the other ones.

1) This is a fair point to make to be honest, but I believed it's completely nullified by three mechanisms:
a. Considering nobody has a monopoly in this market, competition solves this: let me give an example to illustrate this.
Provider A and B do the same job. They cost the same and have a similar reputation. Trust me, if the ToS of A are shittier than B (for instance, if A offers no refunds after the job starts) everyone is going for B. The power imbalance is nullified by competition.
b. Feedback. Most big boys have spread feedback all over the internet, not just Sythe vouches. You can google "Providers X scam" and you'll find dirt if there is anything.
c. And is it really an obligation to spoonfeed customers? I'm sorry but if anything, customers should be encouraged to do their own research on who's better. That's not a self obligation of a provider. See my reaction under point 2. for more on this

2) Uhm, no offence but you're shooting yourself in the foot here. This is a black market. Most of the stuff that goes on in the RS section isn't really in line with what Jagex wants. That in combination with the paranoia not to get scammed generally makes people in the Runescape scene pretty cautious (I mean it's Runescape that we're talking about. The mother of all slickeries). So yes, I disagree with the notion that customers are analphabetic hobo cavemen. c

Ironically, most legal systems assume that citizens know what is and what is now allowed (lex certa in latin, another fancy word). And yeah, this is even true when dealing with super complex tax lax. So why should Sythe assume that people are unable to read and understand simple sticky rules that are written in the most basic language?

Also, customers are too dumb to read stickies but are not dumb enough invoke their rights under the proposal Rune Dragon (these rules are also written somewhere)? You can't have one but not the other here...

3) This is really a stretch and completely false. There's a difference between self-interest and doing illegal / amoral stuff. By your assumption, because a shop-owner has self-interest in that he's trying to make profit, he's also capable of stealing

Don't get me wrong, I think your points are sympathetic substantively and I support most of your ideas, however, I think they should never be enforced through obligatory rules. Let providers compete with each other on who has the best conditions and reputation. After all, doing a good job for a customer is not just about finishing the job and cashing in money, a provider has also a pretty big incentive to leave a good impression so that the customers can refer their friends to you. That's free advertising through good work

 

Another pretty big thing: Enforcing obligatory terms excludes providers who cannot comply with these terms and customers who are open to carry some risk for a cheaper price.
In other words, it prevents Sythe to function as a marketplace for a provider who cannot comply with these terms but who compensates this in a different way (very cheap price for example) and a customer who is willing to work with shittier conditions (and thus carry some risk) for a reduced price. It would take away the freedom of choice of the customer

 

If it's not enforced then we will see these weird cases

I think this is true and i haven't thought about this.
After this i think my suggestion is worthless and no further discussion is needed here.

 

TOS is to protect people like me who sell accounts and 4-5 years later someone says the account was recovered and I have no clue who they even are or if the account was even recovered. It's happened to me in the past numerous times. It's a free and open market. If you dont want to agree to someone's TOS than take your business elsewhere or negotiate better terms. The current rules are much clearer and easier to manage. Yes the buyer is at a disadvantage but it's better than what we used to do around here 5 years ago.

 

Fair enough.

I also think this is an important post:

While ToS are not ideal in every situation, they're a hell of a lot better than nothing at all.