Either corrupt staff or regression in quality of staff

Why do you guys expect Sythe staff to be fair? Richard himself is not fair and has no problem with that being pointed out.

If this site was unbiased then dropperz would have had his pardon at the very least VIEWED.

 

How can he pardon if he doesn't exist.

 

Direct quote from Dr0pperz on the situation:

"Is this the real life or Is this just fantasy? Caught in a landslide, No escape from reality, Open your eyes look up to the skies and see... I'm just a poor boy I need no sympathy, Because I'm easy come, easy go.."

Edit: I don't feel like making any more posts but I implore you guys to stop looking at specific cases and instead what they stand for or try to understand the implications of the decisions surrounding these reports and how they will affect future cases. Thats why they are being so picked apart to begin with. These example cases and the decisions surrounding them could cause serious problems for the future of Sythe.

 

Well if you ever Doxed/ddosed/scammed and you want your pardon to pass just donate 23k$ to repayment fund and your past will be forgiven.

Joopii - Approved - February 24th, 2021

Omega Lo!

 

I don't think this should be looked at from that point of view.

He was willing to send 23k to repayment which shows that over time that was eating at him mentally. He didn't want to come back to Sythe and clearly has no interest in being on Sythe.

It makes sense to approve the pardon here because his risk to the Sythe community is minimal.
Why would someone refund 23k and turn around and be malicious? That doesn't make sense at all.

 

You can also look at it from the perspective of him scamming an equivalent of 100coins at the time of the scam occurance, and repaying less than 0.5

In turn he repaid less than 1% of what he scammed in btc equivalent.

 

Scams are valued at a USD amount at the time of the scam - rightfully so.

The same logic is used with GP scams. You don't give someone more or less USD value in repayment due to the price of GP being different.

 

just cus his gambling site is profitable and he made millions from bitcoin doesnt mean all this cant go south and he become poor again and starts scamming ddosing doxing but ya w/e


[edit]

not saying he will but rules should apply for everyone same if someone like time crunch has to pardon 5 times to get approved for some bs sht i really dont see reason why someone like joopi should get insta approved [or even approved at all based on his past] even if he is not interested to be part of this site

 

Wow thats fucking wild, how do you view the fund?

 

I know what you're saying and I don't disagree with that logic, however, as I said, I feel like the pardon makes sense because the risk is MINIMAL not 0%

 

Ya let's take into consideration inflation aswell based on the usd value/pp in 2010 vs 2021? No.

 

Sure thing, he was asked to repay much less than he repaid in the first place. Lets throw the inflation in there then and he still refunded more.

 

Asked to repay just over 12k and provided almost double.
I'd say that accounts for your inflation and interest if you wanted to be that sticky about it.

Joopii - Making things right.

 

Still not sure how I feel about this, because if it was originally done in Bitcoin, and it's paid back in Bitcoin, it's at least exactly what was stolen, but of course you are then forcing the scammer and victim to essentially stay invested in Bitcoin which could sound pretty crazy. Except you're doing the same thing when you do it with dollars, what if the victim or scammer kept that money in Bitcoin and the value changed/would have changed relative to the dollar? Then, what about interest?

I was scammed a rare account on Runescape, and the scammer paid back what it was potentially worth today and/or a larger amount accounting for interest. I wouldn't feel as if I was repaid if he just paid back the original amount 10 years later. That would mean he took out a free loan, and he took away my investment from me as well.

I think it should essentially be "declared" very early on. If they say 10K USD, paid via Bitcoin, then it's USD. If they say 1 BTC, it should be 1 BTC.

With all that said, I think in this case the person's good intentions are very clear. It's still a good chunk of money that he did not need to provide, and there's no indicator that he did it to come back and scam for more or hurt the community. And remember, even in the real world, debt collectors will often settle for less money than you owed because it's better than nothing and they call it even, so it doesn't necessarily need to be higher than the amount that the investment would have been today or even close to that for there to be a good intention.

Even if it was to clear his conscience, it's more like a donation to the repayment fund (or staff wallets) at this point. If there's no risk of people being further hurt, it's fine. Perhaps he should come forward and request an SRB at this point if he does not intend on using the site, or the staff could have given him TWC until he appeals that and actually wants to trade. At that point though, people have gotten away with removing their DNT and it seems like scamming and then becoming a moderator or even a highly trusted trader here, without paying such a large amount and most definitely to come back and make more money... so I think he deserves to have a clean account that people know at some point scammed (from looking up the name) rather than having him come back as a ban evader (not that he's coming back.)

I don't think this guy's case is really relevant to the conversation here in terms of staff making a blatantly wrong or biased decision, but maybe I'm missing something here.

 

Add in most of the staff just completely ignoring this thread. Such a luxury they have, being able to not respond while they force @White to dox to prove his innocence, and @Ethereumtrader to give up all his privacy to report someone. I've even been banned for pleading the 5th in the past when the burden of proof was not on me, but all these staff members can continue reading these concerns and they clearly do not care.

Perhaps they're afraid of looking stupid like the staff members that did reply here, but at least the ones that did have some courage.

 

While I see what you're saying, it's treated the exact same way GP scams are treated.

Hypothetically if I scammed say, @Dev Zach for 100M in 2018, do you think it's fair that I return 100M to him today when it's less than half the value?

If we value scams at USD at the time of the scam and do whatever currency conversion is required, it should be like that across the board. I don't think it would be right to pick and choose where that applies.

 

I'd just like to point out, that a user being rude, aggressive, or the whole nine yards of a douchebag, doesn't make their claims or reports disingenuous, or unwarranted. Quite a few times (not so much recently, which is good) I've seen reports deliberated over based on how accommodating a user was, or how rude they were. Feelings are irrelevant. Look at the facts objectively. Your role as staff is to be impartial, and provide everyone with fair treatment. Whether or not these users are fair, nice, and just with you, is completely irrelevant; you must be with them. Staff should always maintain (or at the very least, attempt to) an unbiased perspective - and if as a staff member you can't honestly admit to yourself and see where bias may come into play, and excuse yourself from whatever the case may be, then I feel that's another issue to be solved.

To note - I'm not saying the above is an issue any particular staff member faces, but over the years, these issues have been relatively reoccurring.

 

GP is not an appreciating asset and it's also not a currency that is either backed by a government or limited in supply. So it would make sense to treat it as such, if money was involved (as in I was trying to sell my gold for cash one way or another.) But again, my point was that it's all relative. For GP, it's a little easier to make the determination since it always just seems to go down over time. For everything else, not really.

Just as you believe it would be unfair for someone to scam, let's say 1B @ $400 and then pay back 1B when it's $100, some people might see a person scamming 1 BTC @ $10 and then paying back $10 when 1 BTC is 50K as what you could consider the flip version of your GP example.

And if someone states at the time of the trade that they want 1 BTC and do not mention the dollar value whatsoever, it could make more sense that the person is logically owed that 1 BTC they wanted, and I'm not saying whether or not that's the rule on Sythe.org. It would just be what's fair.

Yep, pretty sad that a staff member used this fallacy and actually seemed to believe in it as a legitimate reason for invalidating their claim.

Right, so this did actually happen right on this thread somewhere, I believe Lebgh0st messaging a staff member and them specifically stating that this could essentially have been a factor.

 

Well that should never be a factor.

 

I just want to say that all RS Gambling Servers/Sites are scammers just letting everyone know