[DENIED]Clarify server owner liability

[WFAF]

That would probably be an open trading platform, which is something that can't be advertised on Sythe anyway. We also won't really interfere with those either.

One could argue the server at the centre of this post operates as a trading server, selling accounts on behalf of other people?

 

This can't be a serious reason is it?

 

[WFAF]

This can't be a serious reason is it?

Given past / probably future influence certain sites still have on mods would suggest it was serious.

 

One could argue the server at the centre of this post operates as a trading server, selling accounts on behalf of other people?

If you're referring to my server, no it's not open trading.

 

[WFAF]

If you're referring to my server, no it's not open trading.

Wasn’t referencing your server… centre of the post being OP.

 

[Okamikun]

If you're referring to my server, no it's not open trading.

Referring to ours as we have listed worker accounts for sale before. But I don’t believe this is open @WFAF as we middle man all these trades and warranty the accounts and trading p2p is not allowed.

 

[WFAF]

Referring to ours as we have listed worker accounts for sale before. But I don’t believe this is open @WFAF as we middle man all these trades and warranty the accounts and trading p2p is not allowed.

Correct me if I’m wrong but you’ve also listed accounts and taken a % as commission before?

I’m not sure if you have recently but I do remember seeing something surrounding it a while back.

 

[Okamikun]

Correct me if I’m wrong but you’ve also listed accounts and taken a % as commission before?

I’m not sure if you have recently but I do remember seeing something surrounding it a while back.

I believe peanut has in the past but same process middleman and warranty by us.

 

Given past / probably future influence certain sites still have on mods would suggest it was serious.

So sythe CAN be bought.
Interesting,

We established they're for sale, now all it takes if finding a price

 

[Utopia]

The owner should always be held liable if one of their workers scams an amount over the amount they themselves were insured for (if the worker is unable to/refuses to pay back the amount scammed). It is the owner’s fault if a worker is even able to deal with trades above the insured pot. If the worker wants to handle trades of higher value, he/she/they must increase the insured amount they initially paid to start working.

If this is too hard or difficult to understand, then you shouldn’t be operating as an owner. This is basic knowledge for trust-based business practices.

 

The owner should always be held liable if one of their workers scams an amount over the amount they themselves were insured for (if the worker is unable to/refuses to pay back the amount scammed). It is the owner’s fault if a worker is even able to deal with trades above the insured pot. If the worker wants to handle trades of higher value, he/she/they must increase the insured amount they initially paid to start working.

If this is too hard or difficult to understand, then you shouldn’t be operating as an owner. This is basic knowledge for trust-based business practices.

The issue isn't the staff

The issue is the client placing a bet / order way beyond the handling persons deposit and/or the staff member faking a giant bet/order to claim it from owners.

 

[Utopia]

The issue isn't the staff

The issue is the client placing a bet / order way beyond the handling persons deposit and/or the staff member faking a giant bet/order to claim it from owners.

That is still a worker related issue. As an owner of a business, if you allow procedural misconduct to occur then it falls on you. It’s really that simple. You want Sythe to police issues that are in-house and that itself is impossible as Sythe operates as a market platform.

 

[Okamikun]

That is still a worker related issue. As an owner of a business, if you allow procedural misconduct to occur then it falls on you. It’s really that simple. You want Sythe to police issues that are in-house and that itself is impossible as Sythe operates as a market platform.

Again this issue is when something happens when you are not online to police the issue and it happens with workers that have never had an issue before. What then are you supposed be online watching everyone at all times? If that’s the case why even hire staff??

 

[Utopia]

Again this issue is when something happens when you are not online to police the issue and it happens with workers that have never had an issue before. What then are you supposed be online watching everyone at all times? If that’s the case why even hire staff??

Hire more trusted workers. In the real world under similar circumstances, the owner would pay out, fire the worker, hire a more trustworthy worker and increase the threshold pot for insurance bonds/create failsafes to ensure this wouldn’t happen again.

 

[Okamikun]

In the real world businesses are protected against gross negligence. You can’t hire people that are trusted if they are a new hire they start out with no trust and earn it overtime. We can’t hire 20 year olds with 18 years working experience things don’t work that way.

 

[Utopia]

In the real world businesses are protected against gross negligence. You can’t hire people that are trusted if they are a new hire they start out with no trust and earn it overtime. We can’t hire 20 year olds with 18 years working experience things don’t work that way.

In the real world businesses have insurance policies. The insurance bond is a similar policy. The only real solution for dealing with this on an online trust-based domain is simply to hire more established workers or increase the bond exponentially. You can’t run an online business under these circumstances and assume no fault when these incidents occur. Sets a terrible precedent.

 

[Okamikun]

In the real world businesses have insurance policies. The insurance bond is a similar policy. The only real solution for dealing with this on an online trust-based domain is simply to hire more established workers or increase the bond exponentially. You can’t run an online business under these circumstances and assume no fault when these incidents occur. Sets a terrible precedent.

Who said no fault? I said fault should be equal to the insured deposit of the worker that is the point of the deposit.

 

[Okamikun]

The point of the matter is we shouldn’t Have to pay for a customer putting a fork in an outlet when we say hey don’t put a fork in this outlet…….a business would have to pay irl, but we are held to that standard.

 

[Okamikun]

In the real world businesses have insurance policies. The insurance bond is a similar policy. The only real solution for dealing with this on an online trust-based domain is simply to hire more established workers or increase the bond exponentially. You can’t run an online business under these circumstances and assume no fault when these incidents occur. Sets a terrible precedent.

If I go to Walmart right now and hand the cashier $100k cash for my candy bar and they take my cash and don’t give me change who has to pay that money back Walmart of the clerk????

 

[Utopia]

The point of the matter is we shouldn’t Have to pay for a customer putting a fork in an outlet when we say hey don’t put a fork in this outlet…….a business would have to pay irl, but we are held to that standard.

If the amount scammed exceeds the amount of the bond, then it should be paid on top of it.

If I go to Walmart right now and hand the cashier $100k cash for my candy bar and they take my cash and don’t give me change who has to pay that money back Walmart of the clerk????

If you go back and the clerk is still there, then you should get the money back in the event one can prove that was the amount given and the deduction you received. If the clerk wasn’t there and you sued, Walmart (the business) would be held liable for the payout.