Donate at least $500 for Ban Immunity

He's currently in Tibet with no wifi.

 

I agree that the line must be drawn somewhere, but I think it should've been drawn before this incident.

Deciding after a case is presented to draw your line in the sand allows you a one-time "Get out of jail free card" to hand to a friend before setting your limit and creates uncertainty. I'm sure the staff could handle solving one old case before the new rule goes into effect. You've probably already spent more time replying to posts here than it would've taken to handle the case. It's not even really much of a case, just reporting an outstanding debt.

 

When determining rules we look at the worst case scenario so just like you bring up that allowing stale claims would turn a bulwark to a sword, I mentioned that creating rules reactively gives you (or whoever's making decisions) the power to hand out favors and results in uncertainty. It doesn't matter if you've spoken to won_gold or not, what matters is that you're giving people a reason to be uncertain.

 

Also I/most don't care about the guy and whether or not he gets paid. What's ridiculous is that you're letting won_gold to continue to operate without question while he has an outstanding debt of that size.

 

The law allows debts to be reinstated past the statute of limitations. A worker acknowledged the validity of the debt. You're straying from common law here and I haven't heard a reason for doing so besides "It sounds like he's planning on paying him back anyways" along with the other scenarios you've described which, again, were not strong enough reasons to disallow the reinstatement of debts past their expiration

 

It looks to me like they've already searched and confirmed that the money never arrived in the customer's account, is that not true?

That's precisely why I said I don't care if he gets paid back or not and only care that won_gold gets off with not even a warning. Just an "I'm sure he'll pay it back"

 

Except Won_gold gave the guy a fake bank number(Which has been confirmed by staff - It's not a Chinese number let alone a banks) - Delayed him for over a year and then rebranded and vanished preventing the claim from being filed lol.

But lets just forget that part >.>.

I've asked the guy to file the report on osbot/pb/other forums in the meantime.

 

@Divine you are autistic as fuck.

 

Justice4won, Gotta take care of our chinese goldfarmers.

 

So in deciding what is just/fair/ought be done here, I'll just refer to the equitable defense of laches. Technically laches only applies to equitable actions (it is an equitable defence), and this is a breach of contract with no equitable relief sought (just basic damages). However we can put that to the side and just look at the elements anyway since they are useful.

With laches, one thing to note that mere delay in itself is not sufficient to establish the defence. The key part is, in this context, is that there must be delay coupled with prejudice to the defendant (ie delay by ss1212 causing prejudice to won_gold in being able to defend their case); one would also look at the acts done by ss1212 in the relevant interval.

To describe what prejudice may be in a general sense, witnesses can die, evidence can be lost, ones' memories may be even less useful than they already are. So for example, if you have a claim against someone, and a key witness for them is very old, and you wait for that witness to die, and then you bring your claim, laches would probably apply since their was delay, and that delay caused prejudice to the other party because a key witness died.
​

So there are a couple of things to look for under the following headings:

When did ss1212 learn about his cause of action:

• This one is easy, when the alleged scam took place, so 5~ years ago.

In the interval between when ss1212 learnt about their cause of action, and when ss1212 filed their cause of action, what did ss1212 do?

• Based on what Divine is saying, and ss1212's report, it appears that ss1212 tried to resolve the problem directly with won_gold. This was obviously unsuccessful.
• Then, I am unsure as to what ss1212 has done in the interim until the May 2018 report.

As a result of this delay and/or ss1212's actions, what prejudice/detriment did won_gold suffer as a result of ss1212's delay:

• It appears that loss of business records has occurred on the part of won_gold, as, based on what video says won_gold said, their bank closed, they no longer have MSN, and so can no longer track the money (I am assuming this is true). They also maintain actually having paid ss1212. This evidence, for obvious reasons is quite relevant to assessing the merit of ss1212's action.

I should probably speak to the bluesky rebranding/hacked event and the fact that ss1212 apparently did not know that bluesky was won_gold for 5~ years based on what Divine is saying. ss1212 should still have filed a report on Sythe, and if bluesky/won_gold does not answer, then at least some form of default judgment could have been entered into, and won_gold would have notice of this (since the report would be in the public domain).

So, on balance, I tend to agree with Sythe, a laches-type argument can be made on the basis of the detriment won_gold has suffered, namely, in the loss of business records, and that combined with the delay seems to justify a laches-type defence; it should be noted that this defence is procedural, so its possible merit isn't relevant at this point.

NOTE: if the point about the business records being lost is not true, then there is no prejudice/detriment in my opinion based solely on the delay alone, and so laches would not apply, although that does not exclude a limitations period defence, but that's another matter.​

@Sythe

 

I furthermore want to point out, the number they provided to the guy is not even a chinese number.

Im assuming you read the report, I did some research into chinese area codes, the guy(Person reporting) states that the number they provided lead to some personal cell and that the guy demanded he only accept half the payment right?

Screenshot - 55520f1bc91eabfe64fd7e21a672fb32 - Gyazo

This is the number they provided him;
Screenshot - a1302189ad9e481b5836e4dcf4973013 - Gyazo


In the report (See the above link) the guy says he called that number they provided him and it sounded like a personal number and a guy tried to get the victim to only accept half the payment, then further on in the evidence you can see the guy ask Won_gold why the "banks" number he provided was not even responding/returning calls(over a long period).

Won literally gave that dude a fake phone number to call that is not even Chinese and attempted to extort him.

There's so many offences in this report Won broke its almost a joke.


^^^ That was copy + pasted from a conversation I had with a administrator (Pm me if u care which one), their aware its a fake number from what I understood.

 

Please note that i send Admins $2500 a month split between them to remain on this website.