[DENIED] Disallow 'X$+ Traded'

I wasn't referring to vouch count. I was referring to the actual vouches left by users in someone's vouch thread. Which are in fact easier to verify than self-report of total trade value. Trust is subjective. Donor ranks exists. OK. How does that relate to this? The onus is on the customer. Sure. Again, how does that relate to this suggestion? Total trade value can be a huge, eye-catching number that may specifically attract new users under the false impression that this value is directly correlated to trustworthiness. This number proposes several limitations of verification beyond other figures such as vouch count ... that's a fact, right? I believe, therefore, that this practice should be disallowed in the market. Saying that the market shouldn't be regulated, well, OK. That's not a valid reason. Instead, try stating WHY the market shouldn't be regulated. Specifically, why should the market not be regulated in this fashion?

I think you're missing the point of the suggestion.

The suggestion is to remove this as a title option entirely, due to the fact that it can imply the person is trustworthy. I oppose this, as I don't think its a worse indicator of trust than other eye-catching statements, assuming the number is accurate. Donor amount, vouch count, and occasionally number of years on sythe are used to the same effect. It is very clear that these are not good indicators of trust in some cases, due to reasons previously stated. The same is true for X amount traded. How do we come to the conclusion we can trust someone? By doing research. Looking into vouch count, checking the value of the vouches (which is essentially what this thread is about), looking at current scam reports, checking alerts in discord. The onus is on the customer to do their research, follow stickied threads, etc before deciding who they will trade with.

I never said the market shouldn't be regulated - however, I do think it shouldn't be regulated to this degree. Do you really think removing this is going to stop these new members from falling for scams? No. It only requires more effort/time on the part of the mods, with little "reward".

I mentioned accuracy, which seems to be a key variable here. I understand your point that this value is difficult to confirm. So is vouch count. So is vouch value, if you want to phrase it that way. Offsite trade values are an example of trade values, but the suggestion is not to disallow those. It is to disallow ALL "X Amount Traded" claims. I'd be in favor of a rule that a $ amount traded would have to refer to Sythe trades/vouches specifically, but that will never happen, as it is simply too much work to verify/monitor.

 

[norfwest]

I think you're missing the point of the suggestion.

The suggestion is to remove this as a title option entirely, due to the fact that it can imply the person is trustworthy. I oppose this, as I don't think its a worse indicator of trust than other eye-catching statements, assuming the number is accurate. Donor amount, vouch count, and occasionally number of years on sythe are used to the same effect. It is very clear that these are not good indicators of trust in some cases, due to reasons previously stated. The same is true for X amount traded. How do we come to the conclusion we can trust someone? By doing research. Looking into vouch count, checking the value of the vouches (which is essentially what this thread is about), looking at current scam reports, checking alerts in discord. The onus is on the customer to do their research, follow stickied threads, etc before deciding who they will trade with.

I never said the market shouldn't be regulated - however, I do think it shouldn't be regulated to this degree. Do you really think removing this is going to stop these new members from falling for scams? No. It only requires more effort/time on the part of the mods, with little "reward".

I mentioned accuracy, which seems to be a key variable here. I understand your point that this value is difficult to confirm. So is vouch count. So is vouch value, if you want to phrase it that way. Offsite trade values are an example of trade values, but the suggestion is not to disallow those. It is to disallow ALL "X Amount Traded" claims. I'd be in favor of a rule that a $ amount traded would have to refer to Sythe trades/vouches specifically, but that will never happen, as it is simply too much work to verify/monitor.

Na. I read the OP carefully and interpreted OP's meaning despite what may be challenges with English. Yes, I think that option should be disallowed entirely. The issue is not merely whether it's a particularly good indicator of trust. A large component of the issue is methodological ... how can one verify this indicator of trust? One cannot. One can verify the number of vouches on a vouch thread, or join date, or member since date. Further, the large monetary values presented in these titles light up the brains of members, perhaps especially newcomers who may incorrectly infer that the total value traded represents the value that the poster may be trusted with. Instead, users should be encouraged to review vouch quality in the poster's vouch thread. Implementation of this suggestion will at least reduce one eye-catching, unverifiable, and misleading aspect of thread titles which is a step in the right direction towards fostering habitual use of vouch quality examination. Yes, in that light, I think it may reduce scams. And get real, if this suggestion were implemented, I doubt this would be a sustaining issue for moderators.

 

Na. I read the OP carefully and interpreted OP's meaning despite what may be challenges with English. Yes, I think that option should be disallowed entirely. The issue is not merely whether it's a particularly good indicator of trust. A large component of the issue is methodological ... how can one verify this indicator of trust? One cannot. One can verify the number of vouches on a vouch thread, or join date, or member since date. Further, the large monetary values presented in these titles light up the brains of members, perhaps especially newcomers who may incorrectly infer that the total value traded represents the value that the poster may be trusted with. Instead, users should be encouraged to review vouch quality in the poster's vouch thread. Implementation of this suggestion will at least reduce one eye-catching, unverifiable, and misleading aspect of thread titles which is a step in the right direction towards fostering habitual use of vouch quality examination. Yes, in that light, I think it may reduce scams. And get real, if this suggestion were implemented, I doubt this would be a sustaining issue for moderators.

This seems to assume a lot about the mindset of the hypothetical scam victim in this scenario. Who's to say that seeing "$1000s Traded", "10k+ Traded" etc would "light up the brains" of these people more than "300+ Vouches" or "$100 Donor"? In this scenario, you're assuming this person would automatically assume the scammer is trustworthy, and continue trading them without any research. I'd argue the same could be said for vouch count, donor status, etc.

If the victim would not do their research in your scenario, I'd bet they wouldn't in mine. Or lets say they did do their research and looked into the vouches of someone claiming "$1000s Traded". I'd wager it's pretty easy to tell within 5 minutes whether that value is relatively accurate. If its not, and the person goes on to trade them anyway and gets scammed, I'd say they need to be more careful/thorough in the future.

At the end of the day, Sythe is a free market and these restrictions on the market tend to get denied anyway.

 

Support.

You have users who can come and buy 10-20b in the first week of their time.

Then donate $200 and list $200 donor 20b traded "TRUSTED" and then proceed to scamquit far above their $200 donor just because they bought and sold 20b to trusted without themselves being trusted with anything.

Someone who trades isn't always the one with the trust they could never go first and still claim this.

YH

 

It's like the testimonials and claims every offer has, trust is subjective> i think everyone needs to check vouches and do a due diligence. I agree that there are people undercutting everyone with the intentions to scam but there will always be lazy buyers i guess who will fall a victim. Just check the @Bezos reports lately lol. He got banned, 5 reports against him = every single day new people scammed because they didnt check anything

 

It's like the testimonials and claims every offer has, trust is subjective> i think everyone needs to check vouches and do a due diligence. I agree that there are people undercutting everyone with the intentions to scam but there will always be lazy buyers i guess who will fall a victim. Just check the @Bezos reports lately lol. He got banned, 5 reports against him = every single day new people scammed because they didnt check anything

You're right in a lot of this.

However that being said there aren't just "lazy people" some people are just ignorant and don't understand the trading model in place.

Lets say someone new comes buys donor, buys 20b and claims 20b+ traded that can be extremely false to certain users especially ones who just found sythe of google without an idea of how the site operates.

There are still a large number of people coming into the black market that have never once used any of this and still have ignorance within.

A standard should be in place to protect those who aren't within this circle.

YH

 

[Sebast]

Some people use in their threads these

• "SAFE"
• "FAST"
• "EASY"
• "CHEAP"
• Symbols in titles

and people who use

• x$ Amount traded
• x$ in trades done

Basically, this is just advertising. A marketing strategy. To attract a user.
I don't get why everyone is making a big fuss about it.

 

Some people use in their threads these

• "SAFE"
• "FAST"
• "EASY"
• "CHEAP"
• Symbols in titles

and people who use

• x$ Amount traded
• x$ in trades done

Basically, this is just advertising. A marketing strategy. To attract a user.
I don't get why everyone is making a big fuss about it.

Because some people who haven't done actual 50k+ traded that holds any real value compared to those who have been trusted with 100k worth of payments upfront to complete services or sell gold have.

Those selling gold aren't "trusted" unless someone paid them for gold first.

It's about who gets paid for w,e first and then delivers even though they already have a payment.

Advertising can be false and in most of these cases it is.

YH

 

[Sebast]

Because some people who haven't done actual 50k+ traded that holds any real value compared to those who have been trusted with 100k worth of payments upfront to complete services or sell gold have.

Once again, free market.. He's advertising just as everyone. It's up to the buyer/seller if he wants to trust the title or not.

Those selling gold aren't "trusted" unless someone paid them for gold first.

?

What's your definition of trust because it defers from one to another. On here, I only trust people who I know. I don't care if he paid first or not.

It's about who gets paid for w,e first and then delivers even though they already have a payment.

Irrelevant. You're talking about something else right now that is now "Disallow x$ traded".

Advertising can be false and in most of these cases it is.

I agree, but as I said before. There's a reason on why Sythe is a free market forum.

Point is; I don't care from where you're getting your customers or how. I only care whether you can complete this trade and both sides are happy.

 

[S]

Those selling gold aren't "trusted" unless someone paid them for gold first.

The same logic applies to amassing vouches, and stating said vouch number in ones title.

If we disallow one, why would we permit the other - same underlying notion.

Provided the '$X+' is accurate, leave it as it.

There is no need for constant market intervention and over regulation.

 

[Rico Bronson]

So there have been a lot of similar suggestions like this one.
However, this suggestion is just for this specific tag that users use to advertise their threads.

I think, for example, '$10.000+ Traded' looks somewhat trustworthy for people that don't know the market well. This however is of course no way of trust, as this user could just have bought/sold gold to a trusted User. It is used as a trust Symbol, just like a lot of other tags, but I think this specific one is less subjective, and newer users find this more trustworthy than simply using the word 'Trusted'.

A tag as [X Donor] or [ Mod ] are tags that are at least some indicators of trust, where [ $10.000+ Traded ] is no form of trust.

Agreed its an issue, but its the same issue with "X Donor" its NO symbol of trust because I donate 300$ to sythe I should be able to say hey I'm trusted and not a scammer, NO.
If you do away with X amount traded it falls into the same category as X Donor which in your suggestion you want to remove?, if so then you are asking to remove X Donor also.

Personally I don't agree with Sythe being open to new members who can just donate 500$ off rip no validation or anything its a worm hole that keeps Sythe going but also allows members to disregard vouches and donate instead, which at the end of the day is going to lead to more scammers donating / scam quitting because of donar ranks. Its a "Fake trust" In my eyes, you don't receive their donation money when they scam quit, I'm seeing more and more people donating with their new accounts then asking members with 100x their vouches/ time on sythe to go first E.G. "I'm 300$ donar" "I'm 500$ donar", in which case you might say "use a MM" Yes use a MM to prolong a trade that should of only took 7 mins is now 20 mins and I'm paying a fee.
I just want to see a system in place that actually rewards people for "Trading on sythe" and not for rewarding people because their pockets are deep.
Sorry for going a bit off topic

 

[ariabot]

I'm seeing more and more people donating with their new accounts then asking members with 100x their vouches/ time on sythe to go first E.G. "I'm 300$ donar" "I'm 500$ donar", in which case you might say "use a MM" Yes use a MM to prolong a trade that should of only took 7 mins is now 20 mins and I'm paying a fee.
I just want to see a system in place that actually rewards people for "Trading on sythe" and not for rewarding people because their pockets are deep.
Sorry for going a bit off topic

I also find people believing donor == trust to be extremely toxic, but one can't blame Sythe for wanting to foster that belief, because he massively profits from it. For every goldfarmer who is disadvantaged by this, there's 10 @StickTalk, @PAK, @Bezos, etc who will shell out a couple hundred bucks each to appear trusted.

 

May as well get rid of donating as well then tbh because it’s the same thing. Many people donate to sythe right upon joining to appear trusted with the goal to scam out. As long as it’s not ridiculously over exaggerated it shouldn’t be an issue at all.

 

[Pest]

No thanks, it's a free market

No support!

 

[Pendulum]

We have a system for users advertising amount traded in their titles - you must be able to back up your claim with easily verifiable evidence (Staff discretion is used here).

If you are unable to provide enough proof you will be subject to false advertisement punishments. There will be more serious punishments for users who are grossly misrepresenting their amount traded.