[denied] Remove/change the 1 month account responsibility rule

I hope this TOS pass because too many scammers been popping and they find loopholes to mess legit sellers… like the current two reports is clearly that for walsu acc the scammer fked up and got his user name flagged as for Spya clearly the scammer found a way to get free acc and his gold back. I just hope Yoshiki open his eye and read the whole thing and not just quote rules left and right…

the market is scrambling and if ya make hard for legit seller they will just walk away to others projects. Ya mods/admins/owner should get a way to keep legit people afloat not burry them… without these legit services/accs seller, sythe and others platform will go into smoke and everything left will be a bunch of scammers. Try not to push legit provider because there is a bottom limit to everyone. We old providers are moving to other stuffs irl the ones coming are the future of these market so try to help them…


and for those fking scammer they are basically like the communism that don’t like to work and like to live by stealing from others.

typed this from my phone xD

 

EDIT:
Well I have had one interesting week that has basically proven me wrong with personal experiences. I no longer believe all of the statements I made below.

I had an account locked 9 days after delivery. I successfully unlocked it because it was one made from my home IP. The worker was on the newer end so I made the accounts myself. The interesting thing is the account sat for 6 months before being sold, and it still got locked. I verified no botting or suspicious behavior before returning it. So that tosses my whole "jagex wont lock if you let them sit long enough" statements. It may help to let accounts sit, but its not certain I guess.

Also had a worker recover a non-locked account via proxy at the customers request. Customer claimed the worker stole it back but that was clearly not the case.

Both were fixed quickly on the first attempt
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No e-mail set accounts are designed with the smallest amount of recovery information available intentionally to make recoveries difficult and I have also experienced this with my workers and myself. Depending on the IP address used you can get some recoveries out of it but they stop accepting them eventually. Same for e-mails it seems like repetative e-mails get black listed like IPs can be. In one instance due to events I think a recovery attempt caused a chain-ban after jagex looked back at other accounts created on that IP. Thats why I stopped making accounts on my home IP and started making them on proxies/VPN's. Each account gets its own IP then. After a while I got lazy and started tasking the workers I trusted with creating them on the proxy which is what got me DNT'd.... Unique IP's for each account was my goal. Me creating the accs on a proxy and passing both the proxy and my acc to workers = acceptable but passing my workers the proxy and having them creat the account is no bueno.

Its impossible to verify if the customer botted or not when it is locked. You can only check the ban status after the account is unlocked. I have had dozens of customers admit to botting and they get themselves unbanned but locked and alot of the time when I try it doesnt work. Ive had SOME success but its really a shot in the dark.

I cant simultaneously make accounts with the smallest amount of recovery information AND provide a recovery guaranty. Often I cant fix it so I just have to refund or replace the account, and people are figuring that out sadly. I would very much like to be able to put in my ToS that I am not responsible for fixing issues after purchases after 10 days instead of 30. 30 is just excessive when my accounts are intentionally made to be difficult to recover. The way I see it, if a customer follows my instructions they should set an e-mail and add all sorts of identifiable information after delivery. If the account gets locked within about a week its fairly likely that its due to the IP swap. I used to see this alot before I started letting accounts sit a while before selling them. You can get around this by letting accounts sit for lengthy periods of time. After a certain point when you log in you get a pop-up saying "Welcome back!" and i cant imagine when that happens the IP swapping will make a difference. 30+ days really seems to help prevent IP based locks from selling accounts. Having the IP swap from the US to the UK in a 24hrs can obviously trigger issues.

However, when people start getting into the 20-30+ day range, its increasingly unlikely the jagex looked back and decided that the account was compromised so long ago. It is increasingly more likely with each day that the customer botted and got banned. There has to be a trigger somewhere or a way they get flagged and it doesnt make sense to be flagged for activities or behavior performed 20-30 days ago. Thats just too far for an employee to not review a "ticket/flag" to an account believe to have been hacked. It is much more likely (and history has shown that) the customer bought the starter account with only a handful of desireable features, and was too cheap to purchase additional services from the vendor. So they tried to bot a few things here and there and got slapped. If they get caught within 30 days the vendor has to refund. Lets say that the customer hired a different vendor to do additional work after they bought the account from me. First off thats their choice to go elsewhere I shouldnt have to pay for another vendor causing a lock/ban. Second, why would Jagex see a new IP log in and decide that the e-mail set 20-30 days ago from a different IP address is also a hacker? It doesnt make sense. The only logical explanation to when a customer reports a locked account after 30 days is that they were botting and got unbanned but locked. Its unfair to refuse sellers the ability to manage their own ToS to put a warranty period they feel comfortable with. Vendors will compete with whoever can offer the best warranty anyway there shouldnt be a need to enforce a minimum. As I said earlier I personally would like to offer only 10 days of warranty for my purchases but if peole want to offer zero I say let them.

Well that entirely defeats the purpose of advertising accounts as NO EMAIL SET. The purpose of no email set attached accounts is you can know for 100% certainty the person you are buying it from has a good personal connection to the person if they are not the OO. The password cannot be changed until an e-mail is set, and accounts can sit for months before finding a new owner. Workers dont like to wait 3-5 months to be paid, they get paid on completion. I have just short of 500 accounts for sale, and each one has been paid for but the password not changed. There is inherent trust that after I pay my worker for the job they wont go to another vendor and sell the account a 2nd time while there is still no email attached. If they are going to scam they scam long before the customer gets their hands on the account. There is no e-mail that can be used in the future to say "hey look i used to own this account with this email and now i cant access it anymore". You are paying for the knowledge that there is intentionally very little recoverable information from the person selling it to you. So why should you then expect the seller to fix your issues if you get locked out? When accounts have an e-mail registered there is no longer that guaranty. How many people owned the account before the new customer? Its easy to lie, no e-mail set is verifiable proof.


Congrats for reading this massive wall, give urself a cookie, u earned it.

TL;DR

No Email set accounts should have a 10 day warranty.

Accounts with an e-mail attached should keep the current 30 day warranty being enforced.

 

After seeing the shitstorm occur with Spya’s report, the rules 100% need reworking and I support.

I think Corby summed it up nicely with 0 confusion with his TLDR

 

I support, what president proposes, im not a account seller, but i wanted to give it a try but the way the rules are right now is really risky for a seller to sell accounts, like president said if the customer agrees to your terms of service that should be enough, and yes this is a free market, i usually see the reports and where is againts an account seller it usually ends ruling againts the seller like in corby case. Thats my opinion as a non account seller.

 

I have always seen unregistered accounts as "somewhat" more secure

If let's say in this example it was a 99 firemaking hardcore, quite simply put they have no registered email and are done extremely fast you put your email on it + auth etc, and slap bam boosh it's pretty much yours and although it could be recovered, chances of that are very slim, especially for such a small loss just to sell the account for what $10-15 due to the crates being looted

I'll post the link here, but i'll report it in case staff want to remove due to it being another website (don't want to advertise without permission) Dbuffed scam

in the reality, I was selling accounts with 76 fishing that I had botted up myself and sold for like $10 per account if not mistaken. User in question comes up to me a month or so later, stating I had hacked his gmail account somehow to gain access to this $10 account and was trying to report me for it lol

Claimed he had my IP (which i'm not even from the US) and all in all got closed, in such examples of this it's just sad that people are trying to extort people, and the same with the @Spya and @WalsuGold reports because the person doesn't get their own way

I said before I believe many of the rules should be looked into again, that was denied but I still have a place in my head that says that is still the right move to an extent, maybe ask the community feedback on certain rules see what they feel could be tweaked

 

Yeah, my DNT affects more than my ability to sell accounts on Sythe. I cant bump my gold buying threads now either for 3 months until my next Pardon because the first one has been denied. I dont have connections for regular OSRS gold so I guess I just wont profit off OSRS gold sales for 3 months now on top of losing an unknown number of account sales on both Sythe and elsewhere because people will see my DNT rank and not make purchases elsewhere maybe as well. This really sucks. I was told conditional pardons are not a thing which is why I was not offered a TWC with my denied pardon despite a TWC making much more sense in my mind as a punishment for my mistakes.

 

Agree with you and others on this forum. Rules should be changed to protect account sellers from scammers. There needs to be some system in place in which current rules can be looked at and tweaked to some capacity. Especially when you suddenly have sellers that have been on Sythe for years without a problem suddenly become victim to these people.

The recent incidents in which account sellers have had to refund obvious scammers is ridiculous. Especially the Spya/Walsugold one's which looks like it was from the same person who was a known scammer. It should not be so easy for these brain dead individuals to find a way to beat the system and extort well respected members of the community. When multiple people can see that their is a potential way to scam account sellers through an exploit in current guidelines, then it is something that needs to be addressed. Even if there is no proof that these are alleged scams, the fact that these rules can be so easily utilized by scammers is reason enough to at least go over some sort of review process with staff.

I have been on Sythe for 10+ years and although I am not very active, this issue is something I feel like I need to use my voice for to protect the integrity and future of the forums. If staff refuse to acknowledge that rules are being taken advantage of (not something that is actively happening, I have found Sythe staff usually are on top of things), then members/sellers/buyers of the community are going to lose faith in operating their business here. Lets not forget a lot of people's livelihoods are made on these forums. Sellers, especially those with a huge positive track record, should feel protected from scammers and at least have the option to operate their own business accordingly (more freedom in their own ToS, in which they cannot be taken advantage of).

 

Did you know you can also request from Jagex only letter communication which makes email automatically denied found this out when I request from Jagex to block all in-game payments (bonds) some scammer community targeted me a few years back with stolen credit cards and leave unpaid balance for my accounts.

 

@Zora did explain to me privately the other day some other methods to create accounts, but it involves potentially linking 50+ accounts to a single IP address. I am going to be trying this soon, my post above is my current opinion based on my own experiences and business practices. At some points last year (or was it 2 years ago...) I was making 2-300 accounts a week. Alot of people were interested in cheap $20 pking accounts. I had chain ban issues. If users want to do 1 IP address ti 1 account the proxy/VPN route does not really make recoveries very easy.

EDIT:
Well I have had one interesting week that has basically proven me wrong with personal experiences. I no longer believe all of the statements I made below.

I had an account locked 9 days after delivery. I successfully unlocked it because it was one made from my home IP. The worker was on the newer end so I made the accounts myself. The interesting thing is the account sat for 6 months before being sold, and it still got locked. I verified no botting or suspicious behavior before returning it. So that tosses my whole "jagex wont lock if you let them sit long enough" statements. It may help to let accounts sit, but its not certain I guess.


Also had a worker recover a non-locked account via proxy at the customers request. Customer claimed the worker stole it back but that was clearly not the case.

Both were fixed quickly on the first attempt

 

EDIT:
Well I have had one interesting week that has basically proven me wrong with personal experiences. I no longer believe all of the statements I made below.

I had an account locked 9 days after delivery. I successfully unlocked it because it was one made from my home IP. The worker was on the newer end so I made the accounts myself. The interesting thing is the account sat for 6 months before being sold, and it still got locked. I verified no botting or suspicious behavior before returning it. So that tosses my whole "jagex wont lock if you let them sit long enough" statements. It may help to let accounts sit, but its not certain I guess.

Also had a worker recover a non-locked account via proxy at the customers request. Customer claimed the worker stole it back but that was clearly not the case.

Both were fixed quickly on the first attempt
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Its more about probability. I still cant fix the lock issues, but there is a very small chance the customer botted and got unbanned so quickly. Its probably due to the IP swapping. Almost every time theres a locked account within about a week of delivery if I look back at when the work was completed it was last week or something (less than 30 days for sure). So the account did not sit long enough to safely transfer ownership. Personally, I consider that to be my fault for rushing the selling of it and so Ive been refunding (or replacing the accs of) customers if I am unable to unlock (which is like 9 out of 10 times). I have refunded or replaced thousands of dollars of accounts that fell within my 30 day warranty over the years.

If Im being honest my 10 day suggestion is generous. Whatever flags for potentially hacked accounts get thrown should be expected to be handeled in about 1 work week or 7 days cuz a weekend could be thrown in somewhere. If you use a proxy/VPN you can keep the IP address consistent start to sale. With the method you explained to me privately there is still an IP change when the worker starts the job, with a final 3rd IP swap when the buyer takes ownership. I actually don't see locked accounts very often because the lock either seems to happen right away or after a long time. This supports my theory of the IP based locks within about a week. Most of the time for the accounts that are 20-30+ days after purchase. I can get the customer to admit they botted to get into the situation of being locked. I have such a large inventory of accounts to sell that when one finally sells its usually been sitting for 3+ months. Theres a few accounts I have that have been sitting for sale for almost 12 months now.

Each method has its benefits and drawbacks.

 

In my ToS updates before I got DNT'd I changed my final bullet point to say something like

Please message me the following after you are finished reading all of my ToS.
"I have read and agree to the ToS listed on your sythe thread. I would like to buy (account ID) using (Payment method)"

Would this be acceptable? What about if I changed it to

"I have read and agree to the ToS listed on your sythe thread. I understand my purchase comes with a 10 day warranty, and that your workers create the accounts on Proxy/VPN ip's which makes it difficult to unlock or recover. I would like to buy (account ID) using (Payment method)"

As long as they copy-paste the message I am covered right? Before I got DNT'd the 3 potential customers that contacted me I simply repeated the phrase "please read my terms of service" until they copy-pasted the message I was expecting them to.

 

@President

He did say he would be ok with it under certain circumstances. How about we come to an agreement on execution and everybody walks away happy.