Infraction Again? This is Silly.

[Spyike]

You know as I review the postings that show up here each and every day, I find it easy to understand why Finn must come in here and reverse infractions. There are just too many Mods are there with "personal" reasons and/or lack of reviewing reports. Harp was just in here over something clearly in the wrong and then I find my own infraction. The Infraction I was issued by Skele_Master was just plain silly... If someone will take a close look at the thread and the Sythe member selling you'll find my infraction was clearly unjust. It seems silly that some of the "good" members are now in worry of when they will get banned. Most of us are the loyal and yes sometimes we do deserve an infraction, however at this rate you will have only the Scammers left. We need a little understanding of what is due an infraction. I hate to say it and I'm sure this blows even a remote chance of getting a reverse, but we are in need of a change of leadership and/or someone to provide specific guidance; Mods are running wild. Finn I know you see it and I've seen it in some of your posts. We have Mods that clearly are not mature enough to be doing this job. We need your help, We need your Guidance.

 

[Skele]

This is where you dispute infractions, if you have a problem with certain staff then make a feedback thread/PM an admin, but anyways you posted this:

I spoke with Revo in chat and offered above his asking price for both shield and egg. Revo dropped off with no response in chat or here when it was time to do the purchase. Hmmmmm Best of luck.

You are implying that he's a scammer without proof.

 

[Spyike]

This is where you dispute infractions, if you have a problem with certain staff then make a feedback thread/PM an admin, but anyways you posted this:



You are implying that he's a scammer without proof.

Not more than a week ago R2 attempts to purchase as I did a Half-Wine. The kid drops off from msn as R2 is about to be shown the item.. R2 temp bans him and then eventually the kid receives a TWC because he is unable to show proof he had the wine? Now I'm just sort of throwing this out there to ask, What's the difference? Me and him chat in msn and go all the way to the point of trading and he disappears and still fails to respond? Something is wrong when you take someone this far and fall of the face of the earth. I think I was very nice in informing what happened.. Look at the thread activity? This kid did not have the items he was representing when we were going to trade. Guess how much he wanted? Only $55.. Now anyone ingame would know this is a little low. Guess if I would have been R2, I could have just temp banned him? Funny thing is the kid that did the same thing to R2 is TWC because he failed to prove he was not a scammer? Hmmm Sorry guess these rules only apply to Mods... Lastly, take a close look at Revo's image..

 

[Skele]

The rule(s) is in place to prevent people from making false claims. For example say you were selling something and I came to your thread and posted how you're most likely a scammer as you disappeared from msn and didn't leave any proof.

 

[Spyike]

The rule(s) is in place to prevent people from making false claims. For example say you were selling something and I came to your thread and posted how you're most likely a scammer as you disappeared from msn and didn't leave any proof.

You know Skele, I think you're totally correct and I do understand the rule.. However, what is the difference between what happened with me and R2? I think for someone to blindly jump on a thread and yell Scammer is a rule breaker.. I do not think it is against the rules for someone to post an experience such as mine with the seller; much the same as R2. The seller walked me all the way to a purchase and dropped of msn and upon returning to msn would not respond to my message attempts? I posted exactly what happened. R2 had a little more power than me and banned his seller that did the same to him... Respectfully, explain the difference? Thanks for spending the time to coach me on this.

Lastly.. The exact example you listed is what happened to R2.. The kid still has a TWC because he did not show proof he had the Half-Wine.

 

[SuF]

You implied he was a scammer without showing any proof. That is against the rules. What R2 did was completely different.

 

[SuF]

You know Skele, I think you're totally correct and I do understand the rule.. However, what is the difference between what happened with me and R2? I think for someone to blindly jump on a thread and yell Scammer is a rule breaker.. I do not think it is against the rules for someone to post an experience such as mine with the seller; much the same as R2. The seller walked me all the way to a purchase and dropped of msn and upon returning to msn would not respond to my message attempts? I posted exactly what happened. R2 had a little more power than me and banned his seller that did the same to him... Respectfully, explain the difference? Thanks for spending the time to coach me on this.

Lastly.. The exact example you listed is what happened to R2.. The kid still has a TWC because he did not show proof he had the Half-Wine.

R2 is a staff member. You are not. End of discussion.

 

[Spyike]

R2 is a staff member. You are not. End of discussion.

Thanks SUF.. That is all you had to say. See this is my point. Some Sythe Mods have their own set of rules... They run wild through these forums doing whatever they want making the rules up as they go or see to their best personal interest. Oh and god help anyone that questions their actions or higher powers. Your response is sad to hear but hey, I gotta give you an A+ for honesty. I'm almost 100% sure Sythe and perhaps Finn & Sinn would disagree with your posting... Lock it and let it go.. These type of posts and actions from our Mods are killing the motivation of some of your best supporters. So the game continues... You're Right, We're Wrong.

 

I spoke with Revo in chat and offered above his asking price for both shield and egg. Revo dropped off with no response in chat or here when it was time to do the purchase. Hmmmmm Best of luck.

Under the current rules, the infraction was technically warranted. If you had posted pictures of some sort, Spyike, I would have allowed that post personally. It's my own opinion that we need to review the accusing of scamming without proof infraction. Too many people are infracted when they're issuing legitimate warnings, as in the accused is banned in a few days.

I think we should focus more on deleting these types of posts, the ones without pictures, instead of infracting. Right now scammers have an immense advantage as it's hard to put any sort of negative feedback on their threads. You're right that we are angering some core members.

A possible solution would be to allow feedback posts, ie "the OP refused to use an OMM, be careful" or your warning as long as screenshots are posted as well.

 

[Skele]

Under the current rules, the infraction was technically warranted. If you had posted pictures of some sort, Spyike, I would have allowed that post personally. It's my own opinion that we need to review the accusing of scamming without proof infraction. Too many people are infracted when they're issuing legitimate warnings, as in the accused is banned in a few days.

I think we should focus more on deleting these types of posts, the ones without pictures, instead of infracting. Right now scammers have an immense advantage as it's hard to put any sort of negative feedback on their threads. You're right that we are angering some core members.

A possible solution would be to allow feedback posts, ie "the OP refused to use an OMM, be careful" or your warning as long as screenshots are posted as well.

That would allow people to make false claims for whatever reason. Say both you and I run pin businesses, I'd want to go around making false accusations about you so I'd get more business.

 

That would allow people to make false claims for whatever reason. Say both you and I run pin businesses, I'd want to go around making false accusations about you so I'd get more business.

No... The person making the accusations would have to provide the MSN conversation.

 

[Skele]

No... The person making the accusations would have to provide the MSN conversation.

Isn't that what we already have:huh:

 

[Spyike]

Lock the thread and leave my infraction.. There are some respected Mods I would rather not drag into this. Hey, eventually I'll be banned and life will go on. Thanks

 

[Skele]

Locked.

 

You won't be banned... it's extremely hard to get 5 infractions per 30 days... even then it's only a 2 week ban.