[DENIED] Runescape Do Not Purchase List

[Online]

I suggest.. the do not purchase list has been sadly neglected and I believe there is no good reason for it. Here are some steps to make this easier for buyers and mods with the amazing benefit of making the forum a safer place to trade.

1. Have as one thread, the stickies can all link to this thread thus making it easy to edit and have no discrepancies as currently the lists appear to be different.
Exhibit A, 655 accounts - List of accounts NOT to purchase; click to report recovered accounts!
Exhibit B, 672 accounts - List of accounts NOT to purchase; click to report recovered accounts!

2. Have be common practice for mods to add every account dispute that closes without resolution to the DNP list.

To make this easy on the mods alongside suggestion #1

Account recovery template, add a line "Account Login", of course sufficient evidence will need to be included in the proof of trade for the account to be added to the list.


A do not purchase list is a simple, yet effective way to curb scams. From my vast experience many of the accounts on the market are recovered and sold again, I would suggest a multitude of times. I am sure that is pretty common knowledge. Though many may not look at this list and get scammed, let's help those who do due diligence in their account purchases not buy from serial scammers. Chur.


Edit: Help catch vaders too

 

[Obamaphobic]

Definitely would be useful, it’s a shame it’s out of date. I saw a website sprout up recently as a database for these accounts but not sure how useful it is yet.

 

Would be useful as Obama said, would be nice for account buyers to have this utility to have though, support.

 

[DabsWax]

definitely seen something of its sort before, would be hard but nice to be able to have a more accurately compiled list.

 

[Online]

definitely seen something of its sort before, would be hard but nice to be able to have a more accurately compiled list.

Where would the difficulties be?

 

[DabsWax]

Where would the difficulties be?

Yes you could do all the ones currently out there, but for the thousands of people who get scammed and don't say anything, or don't make a report or never mention the login name or other critical info, itd be hard to attain it from them. Yes I'm sure a list could easily be compiled of 50k+ or even 100k+ email/login names. But theres so many people had that they've forgot if its not in use anymore is what I was getting at. Obviously the new rule would fix that, but it would be a long building process.

Also, how do we know infull that this info in full is accurate, some of the accounts might of been hacked and the original owner recovered, (I cant think of any other cases where recovery wouldn't be a problem), but also, when buying accounts, almost all are recoverable, no? I mean, if it gets locked, you want to be able to recover it right, obviously these are scammed back, but "recoverable"

All in all I agree it would be nice if it was updated and something was able to be done, just a lot of work.

 

[Online]

Yes you could do all the ones currently out there, but for the thousands of people who get scammed and don't say anything, or don't make a report or never mention the login name or other critical info, itd be hard to attain it from them. Yes I'm sure a list could easily be compiled of 50k+ or even 100k+ email/login names. But theres so many people had that they've forgot if its not in use anymore is what I was getting at. Obviously the new rule would fix that, but it would be a long building process.

Also, how do we know infull that this info in full is accurate, some of the accounts might of been hacked and the original owner recovered, (I cant think of any other cases where recovery wouldn't be a problem), but also, when buying accounts, almost all are recoverable, no? I mean, if it gets locked, you want to be able to recover it right, obviously these are scammed back, but "recoverable"

All in all I agree it would be nice if it was updated and something was able to be done, just a lot of work.

I am suggesting how we handle from now on. For those reports which are clearly evident. Not asking to go hard after it but get what we can, is better than nothing.

Yes there are issues of the account was hacked / stolen.
Imo would rather have these on the list than not.

I don't know what you mean by all are recoverable? Yes they are in theory, not asking for accounts to not be recoverable.

 

[Superfluous]

This would be great in an ideal world. Everyone on staff would update it, and everyone trading accounts would check it. "Blacklisted" accounts would make the list once and then no one would buy them ever again. The issue is that people don't read stickies, and we have tons of off-site users that buy accounts from Sythe users without a second thought. Literally dozens a day.

My issue with this boils down to fairness. What do we do when A sells an account to B, then A recovers it (happens like 95% of the time) + the account gets added to the list, then A resells it to C, and then C tries to sell it to D and can't because it's on some list that they didn't know about and they bought the account thinking it was "clean?" This happens all the time. C is not at fault for the fact that A recovered an account, but C has lost the ability to resell their account. This is not fair and why I don't support.

 

[Online]

My issue with this boils down to fairness. What do we do when A sells an account to B, then A recovers it (happens like 95% of the time) + the account gets added to the list, then A resells it to C, and then C tries to sell it to D and can't because it's on some list that they didn't know about and they bought the account thinking it was "clean?" This happens all the time. C is not at fault for the fact that A recovered an account, but C has lost the ability to resell their account. This is not fair and why I don't support.

Just so it can be recovered from D? Which C probably claimed he was OO.
Where is the fairness, just passing an unsafe account around.
It is a never ending problem.. but like I say, help those who do due diligence buy safer.

It's certainly not 95% of the time, have some faith in humanity. I very much believe it's the minority creating the majority by recovering and reselling.

 

[Online]

Also if people don't read stickies, then C can certainly still sell it.
@Superfluous

 

[Superfluous]

Also if people don't read stickies, then C can certainly still sell it.
@Superfluous

... and then they would get reported for selling an account on the DNP list, reported for suspected evasion of A, etc.

I don't see a good solution to this problem, but, like I said earlier, if we can get around it somehow I'm all for having a DNP list because I agree that folks having more information is generally better.

 

[Online]

... and then they would get reported for selling an account on the DNP list, reported for suspected evasion of A, etc.

I don't see a good solution to this problem, but, like I said earlier, if we can get around it somehow I'm all for having a DNP list because I agree that folks having more information is generally better.

I mean there is currently a DNP list, what is current procedure?
I see DNP as more of a guideline. Not in anyway punish people. In which giving leads to potential vaders, don't see that as a bad thing? Shouldn't be reported which only evidence of having an account on DNP list though.

I wouldn't want that to get in the way of having a DNP list, like I say. More of a guideline to potential buyers than anything.
If you are a buyer, someone is selling an account and see it on the DNP list. You can ask them questions at least, cover all bases - have you ever sold the account / attempted to sell / ever had to recover the account / had anyone else gain access to the account. If the answer is no.. then something is up? Whatever the case you probably don't want to be trading them.

 

When I updated that list all stickies were redirect link to one main thread so just one needed to be editted

 

[Online]

When I updated that list all stickies were redirect link to one main thread so just one needed to be editted

Ah did you just miss RS3? Check my examples

 

Ah did you just miss RS3? Check my examples

logins are the same for rs3 and 07 so they still should be in 1 thread

 

logins are the same for rs3 and 07 so they still should be in 1 thread

Yea, I had thought I had seen this before. I think it's more of an issue now of just keeping it up to date. To go with what @Online suggested, maybe it could be wise to also have this list posted on the Sythe Discord as well.

 

Yea, I had thought I had seen this before. I think it's more of an issue now of just keeping it up to date. To go with what @Online suggested, maybe it could be wise to also have this list posted on the Sythe Discord as well.

this list is pretty much pointless.
Sellers dont want to provide login before trade because of risk of ban
Scammers use that as excuse
This way only dealing with MM guarantees it will be checked for past recoveries
Of course asumming someone already got scammed for that account and someone actually paid an effort to report it, I think less than 1% of recoveries are reported.

 

[bababablacksheep]

I don't support this simply because account recoveries happen too often, and the fact that people purchasing accounts should make themselves more aware of the recovery process regardless of any means the OO can recover that account.

Most people do not even read the account sales stickies;
A recovery test is irrelevant + a MM in an account sale because that said account can be recovered regardless

Also if the account has not been added to the list in time and another account buyer is buying that account prior to that entry being added to the DO NOT BUY list, they are still going to get scammed simply because some of these notorious scammers will have 4 sales of the same account lined up for the ridiculous cheap price to scam.

it is also too easy to make a fresh account and train it up, so maybe they get 5 scams out of one account name, and get no more it would not take the scammers long to rebuild an account.

This puts more work on sythe staff, the report a scammer process can be sometimes in depth to make right decisions so i think this will still not prevent all scams.

 

I’m in favor of combining the threads but you won’t get staff to update it. Your argument that it would help catch vaders is also invalid considering the staff team is more in favor of having them around. They are more about educating the market so it functions by itself rather than them actually moderating it. And this isn’t me dragging the staff team through the mud, it’s just the way it is.

 

I support this. Just because people don't read stickies as much as they should, a lot of people still do. So I don't like that reason in arguing against it. It should be updated by staff and stickied and people will use it. Especially middlemen.