Nom Nom

Scammer's profile link: nom nom
Explanation of the trade:
Nom Nom approached me via skype offering me traffic from his website, youtube, and skype group filled with people who are interested in selling gold.
We agreed my site, crimsgold.com would be the specific place he recommended his following to sell their gold.
How they scammed: As shown in screenshot [1] and [2] (below), Nom nom offered me exclusive rights to buy gold from his goldfarmers for 1 month, for the price of $10, and he'd advertise me on his youtube, site, and skype chat.
Because this was a very active skypechat, I used /alertson Crim and forgot about it for the month. Today he sent a message to the chat publically telling everyone I'd be kicked in a few hours [6], which I disputed because he started the advertising a month ago on the 25th, with today being the 24th.
After I was alerted by my trigger, I decided to go through the chat and see if he kept to our agreement[1][2], which he clearly did not.[4]
Because I paid for exclusive rights to his traffic, and then was undermined by himself, he's crippled any potential clients I would've had the opportunity to deal with.
Not only was I not the only person advertising with Nom nom, but so were other people, who he probably conned into paying as well. [3]
Infact, Nom and his helpers were trying actively promoting themselves rathe then me. [7]
After I confronted him about it, I was swiftly kicked from the chat before our 1 month period was even fulfilled, and was then targeted by Nom's followers for harassment. [5]
Linking his skype account to his sythe account: Here's his thread which shows his skype name. Here's a picture with his skype showing I was talking to that skype. Archive, image1 image2 in the event he edits.
Skype profile ID & conversation pictures: here
Other relevant trade screenshots:
[1] Non nom's offer to me
[2] Nom nom stating he would only advertise a specific site
[3] Nom nom letting someone else advert
[4] Nom nom attempting to buy his own gold, thereby violating the fact I was supposed to be the "specific site" he recommended people to. 1st time, 2nd time, 3rd time, 4th time, and there's been more, which I can provide if required.
[5] Nom nom trying to get his following to harass me; which really shows his character. [5.1] [5.2] Troll's image
[6] Nom nom saying I'd be kicked in 4 hours, triggered my skype alert.
[7] Nom nom and his helpers advertising his service rather than mine, violating our contract.

 

so is the complaint that he terminated your deal a day early? if so, you never agreed that it would be exactly 31 days until the end of the advertising deal. i think a 30-day month is reasonable.

i just don't see what you want from all of this? your $10 back because the exclusive right he offered you wasn't exclusive?

 

The issue isn't that it was terminated a day early.
The issue is Nom nom said he would only be promoting a specific site, and that hasn't been the case.
There's no point in me advertising with someone who's already filling this position for their own following, and really it's just $10 down the drain because the original deal wasn't upheld.

 

i honestly don't think this is worthy of a ban. it's a very strange thing to sell on sythe (the right to have someone advertise a specific site for you in general terms), and the whole advertising in a skype chat thing doesn't make it a clearer situation.

i think the best thing for you to do here is terminate your business relationship with nom and move on. it's a shitty situation, yes, but i don't see anything ban-worthy here

 

I didn't realize there was a minimum amount required to be lost in order for a scam to be "ban worthy".

And while I can appreciate this isn't a situation that happens all the time, I would appreciate it being held to the same standards any scam is. This is literally why justice is supposed to be blind. It's supposed to apply to everyone equally.

It's just very strange in my eyes that I've provided proof our agreement has been breached, which would constitute as a scam, but leave me without any recourse.

The judicial question here really is "was the deal arranged with Crimson and nom nom violated?" and if you agree with that, why does it matter how little/confusing the trade was?

Surely this is less confusing than the playerauctions case the staff ruled on.

 

going to go with my original decision and close this after taking no action. feel free to pm another global+ about it if you want a second set of eyes, but i don't see banning over this as a reasonable response.

sorry that things didn't work out in your favor; that's just how i see this case

 

An agreement was made, money exchanged hands, and that agreement was broken. Banned until he refunds you