dont auto-close the thread... =\

I am talking about something like this.

Pardon User: Blah blah blah im sorry for what i've done I want to return. yadda yadda yadda
I will pay back my victim(s) when I can

Mod 1: No support
Mod 2: First pay back the users in question.
Mod 3: No support
Mod 4: Support, IF paid back

He's basically getting the answers BEFORE paying back the victims, which is unfair if you ask me. After all, you are only eligible for a pardon after paying back everything you took.

 

[n4n0]

Whether or not the person pays back(or doesn't) isn't going to change someone's opinion. They'll support (or not) support the pardon regardless of whether the person plans on repaying, or already has repaid.

 

[Alex_J_Leon]

Is your argument that the person will know whether or not enough mods support the unban and he can make a decision whether or not it's worth paying back the money?

I totally agree with you, thought your thread title is confusing, lol.

Something like.. pay back bla bla then we'll consider your pardon.

 

Whether or not the person pays back(or doesn't) isn't going to change someone's opinion. They'll support (or not) support the pardon regardless of whether the person plans on repaying, or already has repaid.

Correct, however I had it happen to me, two times even, a pardon denied before the person even paid me back.
By just forming a united front and waiting for him to pay back the victims before posting (not making, posting) a decision the victim will have his money back.
If the guy doesn't bother refunding him in x amount of time and simply walks away, we do not want people like that in the community anyway, so there is no loss.

Is your argument that the person will know whether or not enough mods support the unban and he can make a decision whether or not it's worth paying back the money?

I totally agree with you, thought your thread title is confusing, lol.

Something like.. pay back bla bla then we'll consider your pardon.

FireZ closed my last thread immediately after posting, this title is a response to that. Thnking he would post within 10 minutes I didn't think it would mind.
http://sythe.org/showthread.php?t=1408995

 

[stui]

I totally agree, you shouldn't be allowed to create a pardon until you have paid the banned members back, unless you have tried to make contact and can't

 

[Pushing Limits]

Whether or not the person pays back(or doesn't) isn't going to change someone's opinion. They'll support (or not) support the pardon regardless of whether the person plans on repaying, or already has repaid.

WELL IT SHOULD. paying someone back atleast shows some change of character!/ the person being geniune anyone can write a bunch off bullshit over the forums, people have different realitys online..

stupidist comment ever,.

 

[Karl]

personally, they have a fucking nerve posting 'I'll pay back if necessary', because thats just obvious that if they seem to be getting support and a chance of unban then they'll pay them, and if they don't get support they won't bother.. it sickens me


I want it to be mandatory that the scammer has paid back the scammed people BEFORE submitting his/her pardon, otherwise they should be denied instantly.

 

[cosrob97]

I support that a pardon shouldn't be considered when the user has to pay back members. And if they can't get it touch with the victims, its their fault for scamming.

 

[Sypherz]

I definitely support this, as it would help some of those scammed get paid back when in the first place they may not have been.

 

[FireZ]

It will be discussed in staff lounge soon.