Having issues with moderator after being scammed yesterday

[jordanbone0]

Hi guys, I was scammed for 500m osrs money yesterday by Bawsy's rental service - [2M/HR] Bawsy's OSRS Max Main Rental Service [RSGP/BTC/ETH] [Bulk Hours Cheap]

Here are the gyazo's of proof of being hit offline and not being able to get back on, It's pretty clear to me that i was scammed as you can see him not replying during the hour that was agreed to be paid for, and afterwards replying only sarcastically -
Gyazo - b675227ba0a6df3b834a7735de70ba06.png
Gyazo - d3e8df85b6e5263ce9bc504d5467bb62.png
Gyazo - 4a6ed703ca995022457a582e21004c38.png
Gyazo - 6abea3c2beda7d09d13b005e853827ab.png

I was contacted by a moderator named Chloe - Chloe
and i was told that i do not have sufficient evidence to continue and my post on his post was deleted meaning he's allowed to continue scamming people, Chloe has then failed to respond to my messages sending her multiple links of proof of skype conversations where it's clear during the first hour of what i'd paid for in services was scammed.

I see this as a complete injustice because in my eyes you're just going to let a moderator turn a blind eye to scamming someone for $750 and let him do it even when presented with evidence, If there isn't something done about this i'm going to plaster all of my screenshots of everything including the moderator interaction all over reddit and other media platforms.

 

[ryanboyd]

Hi guys, I was scammed for 500m osrs money yesterday by Bawsy's rental service - [2M/HR] Bawsy's OSRS Max Main Rental Service [RSGP/BTC/ETH] [Bulk Hours Cheap]

Here are the gyazo's of proof of being hit offline and not being able to get back on, It's pretty clear to me that i was scammed as you can see him not replying during the hour that was agreed to be paid for, and afterwards replying only sarcastically -
Gyazo - b675227ba0a6df3b834a7735de70ba06.png
Gyazo - d3e8df85b6e5263ce9bc504d5467bb62.png
Gyazo - 4a6ed703ca995022457a582e21004c38.png
Gyazo - 6abea3c2beda7d09d13b005e853827ab.png

I was contacted by a moderator named Chloe - Chloe
and i was told that i do not have sufficient evidence to continue and my post on his post was deleted meaning he's allowed to continue scamming people, Chloe has then failed to respond to my messages sending her multiple links of proof of skype conversations where it's clear during the first hour of what i'd paid for in services was scammed.

I see this as a complete injustice because in my eyes you're just going to let a moderator turn a blind eye to scamming someone for $750 and let him do it even when presented with evidence, If there isn't something done about this i'm going to plaster all of my screenshots of everything including the moderator interaction all over reddit and other media platforms.

Hello i just read your statement and i think as a normal member i can help you with this. First off do you have video of you staking and then dcing on the account with the 500m. When staking this much money you would take extra care of your money. As you can see the most this dispute would help you with is getting back 4m 07. You have not provided any evidence that there was 500m 07 on the account. To conclude you do not have enough evidence that you where ddos.

Also what is your proof i didn't see any. All the pictures show is you talking badly to another person. To be honest you need more information this what is shown here

 

[jordanbone0]

It's pretty bloody clear i would of thought WHAT motivation to i have to lie about the amount i was scammed for, EVEN if i can't prove it (which i stupidly cannot as i wasn't recording) THERE IS STILL clear evidence that the guy has scammed me which is easily readable by the way that he hasn't replied to me within the hour and the only replies i got were sarcastic.

While i agree he hasn't said "I SCAMMED YOU" the evidence is right there that he did.

if you're going to sit there and say "everythings above board" to this then you're part of the problem.

 

[ryanboyd]

It's pretty bloody clear i would of thought WHAT motivation to i have to lie about the amount i was scammed for, EVEN if i can't prove it (which i stupidly cannot as i wasn't recording) THERE IS STILL clear evidence that the guy has scammed me which is easily readable by the way that he hasn't replied to me within the hour and the only replies i got were sarcastic.

While i agree he hasn't said "I SCAMMED YOU" the evidence is right there that he did.

if you're going to sit there and say "everythings above board" to this then you're part of the problem.

I dont see howim part of the problem if this case gets review the only thing you going to see if you win is the 4m 07 back and that is it. Im sorry to tell you this but its just a fact. And also to add when you are on someone else's account with 500m 07 then you should have recorded just for your safety. I know its sucks but you live and learn.

Chloe can't make decisions for the life of him. Just repost and hope someone else replies. But tbh, I don't think you'll be seeing the 500m.

Also nice to know that you are talking about @Chloe this way. You know chloe is a live chat person that deals with thousands of trades a day. Chloe is smart and she knows by how much evidence is show that there is not enough evidence to show for it. So just saying this will not go any further then the 4m 07 being returned. That fact is you do not have enough evidence. its that simple. boom done

 

Without evidence that you had GP on the account there's nothing we can do.

I don't know why people are jumping to the conclusion that we now ban without SOLID evidence, it's honestly annoying.
I understand you're frustrated and that you may or may not of lost GP, but unless you recorded something or you have proof of 400m/GP on the account there is nothing we can do.

We even had a case recently where the person said "Thanks for the GP" and they didn't get banned because there was no solid proof. If this was all the proof needed to ban someone, almost all rentals would be framed.

So before you talk shit about me, think about it from a logical and court perspective.
If you provide more proof I'm happy to look at it.