King's Feedback Thread

second best mod after @Wortel !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
would be better if he wasnt the same color as a gorilla =]

first best mod after @ No_One !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
would be better if he wasn't a bot. Chilled out person. Easy to talk too. If you ever scam, goto him to get unbanned.

 

He is not a good moderator at all. Most of his decisions are biased due to the fact he holds close affiliations with certain users.

 

[King]

He is not a good moderator at all. Most of his decisions are biased due to the fact he holds close affiliations with certain users.

Can you provide any examples to help me improve? I don't recall being bias, ever. You implied most decisions of mine are bias as if this is a re-occurring issue with me, and that I'm not a good mod at all as if I do a lot wrong. If you can elaborate on both of those with examples/ways I can improve, then perhaps that may help.

 

Can you provide any examples to help me improve? I don't recall being bias, ever. You implied most decisions of mine are bias as if this is a re-occurring issue with me, and that I'm not a good mod at all as if I do a lot wrong. If you can elaborate on both of those with examples/ways I can improve, then perhaps that may help.

Absolutely. So I have filed a few reports and the majority of them have been handled by Pendulum however here are some examples of some you have handled.

Ok cool so that means just because you have MMed and traded with him yourself that means he is automatically trusted? I'm a little bit confused. What you're essentially saying here is that because you know him yourself my report is automatically invalidated due to the fact that I haven't dealt with him. OK.

Report 2: False advertisement

In this thread made by Video (a Sythe Admin), it states that all thread titles and bodies should always contain the correct information:

Imgur

So when someone false advertises, this is your response?

So basically what you're saying here is that certain users are able to put competitive pricing in their thread EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE NOT OFFERING COMPETITIVE PRICING???? I even provided proof of the user in question not being able to provide any proof that their competitor was offering a rate which was higher than theres. Its not a "tactic to boost sales", its more like "time wasting 'false advertisement' tactic"

Again, just because you know these users/closely tied in with them, this has meant that you have made ridiculously biased decisions and I am not impressed by it at all.

 

[Panda]

@Management not gonna lie, usually i dont bother with feedback threads other than my own but King really is anything but biased. He's about as honest as they come IMO, though his wording might be wacky at times which in turn may cause some confusion. Real good person, give him a 2nd chance!

 

@Management not gonna lie, usually i dont bother with other feedback threads other than my own but King really is anything but biased. He's about as honest as they come IMO, though his wording might be wacky at times which in turn may cause some confusion. Real good person, give him a 2nd chance!

I think that if there is an improvement in the way that he handles his reports (i.e. including opinions in reports less frequently) in the next couple of weeks then a second chance will be given.

 

[King]

Absolutely. So I have filed a few reports and the majority of them have been handled by Pendulum however here is an example of some you have handled.

Ok cool so that means just because you have MMed and traded with him yourself that means he is automatically trusted? I'm a little bit confused. What you're essentially saying here is that because you know him yourself my report is automatically invalidated due to the fact that I haven't dealt with him. OK.

Not at all. Your report is on the basis that because he's selling a large amount for a more expensive price that we should restrict him from the market until he shows proof of him having that GP in his possession. We're not going to harass users in doing so as this is a free market, although like I said in the report if he was selling for a price way lower than the current gold price, then that'd be a completely different story here. If you did your own research you'd realize he's had these threads for a long time and him being here for 7 years without any issues + having many vouches for buying/selling GP on top of stating he's comfortable with an MM too makes me question how is he a threat in anyway with all that being taken into consideration?

Report 2: False advertisement

In this thread made by Video (a Sythe Admin), it states that all thread titles and bodies should always contain the correct information:

Imgur

So when someone false advertises, this is your response?

So basically what you're saying here is that certain users are able to put competitive pricing in their thread EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE NOT OFFERING COMPETITIVE PRICING???? I even provided proof of the user in question not being able to provide any proof that their competitor was offering a rate which was higher than theres. Its not a "tactic to boost sales", its more like "time wasting 'false advertisement' tactic"

Again, just because you know these users/closely tied in with them, this has meant that you have made ridiculously biased decisions and I am not impressed by it at all.

Your whole basis here is to punish someone because they state they state that they offer "competitive prices". In that case we might as well punish everyone in the market, right? It's unreasonable to punish them for something like this as they aren't guaranteeing a rate in which they can't supply/purchase at, nor are guaranteeing that they're beating anyone elses rate, merely just stating that they're rate is fair in the market. For a website they have pretty competitive rates imo. If you still disagree with me you're more than welcome to re-report the thread to seek another opinion.

Side note: The person who you reported in the 2nd part (won't say names to avoid any issues it may cause between you two) I've never spoken to before, so I'm confused as to why you think I'm closely tied with him (or both for that matter). I'm not closely tied to either in anyway (no offense to them ofcourse, just saying though).

 

Not at all. Your report is on the basis that because he's selling a large amount for a more expensive price that we should restrict him from the market until he shows proof of him having that GP in his possession. We're not going to harass users in doing so as this is a free market, although like I said in the report if he was selling for a price way lower than the current gold price, then that'd be a completely different story here. If you did your own research you'd realize he's had these threads for a long time and him being here for 7 years without any issues + having many vouches for buying/selling GP on top of stating he's comfortable with an MM too makes me question how is he a threat in anyway with all that being taken into consideration?

Thats not actually the case. You're saying that because he's been here for 7 years and done lots of trades that automatically makes him invalidated to be asked for proof? People have to be asked for proof of vouches but not proof of gold? Also, so that means if someone is selling gold for so cheap that means that they have to provide proof of them owning the gold but when someone sells for an extremely high price then they don't. Ok, so basically people can join the market claim to sell 7b 07 for $1/m, a customer pays them $700 for 700M worth of gold and they never login to be seen again. Do you not see a flaw in that system?

Your whole basis here is to punish someone because they state they state that they offer "competitive prices". In that case we might as well punish everyone in the market, right? It's unreasonable to punish them for something like this as they aren't guaranteeing a rate in which they can't supply/purchase at, nor are guaranteeing that they're beating anyone elses rate, merely just stating that they're rate is fair in the market. For a website they have pretty competitive rates imo. If you still disagree with me you're more than welcome to re-report the thread to seek another opinion.

Side note: The person who you reported in the 2nd part (won't say names to avoid any issues it may cause between you two) I've never spoken to before, so I'm confused as to why you think I'm closely tied with him (or both for that matter). I'm not closely tied to either in anyway (no offense to them ofcourse, just saying though).

People should not put competitive pricing in their titles or threads unless they truly are offering it.

Definition of competitive pricing:

So if I go to a website that claims to offer competitive pricing and I ask them how their prices are competitive then they should be expected to show at least one site which offers the same pricing as them.

Since most sellers don't understand what competitive pricing is, its just a term used to false advertise to get people to buy from them.

And also the rate isn't fair if you cannot name a competitor selling at the same rate rate or a higher rate.

In fact, if you ask half the community what the definition of competitive pricing is, they will tell you that it simply means beating rates, so if people don't even know the definition of the word then why are they including it in their threads? It is simply to waste peoples time and get an edge over other sellers who are not false advertising.

 

[King]

Thats not actually the case. You're saying that because he's been here for 7 years and done lots of trades that automatically makes him invalidated to be asked for proof? People have to be asked for proof of vouches but not proof of gold?

You said that isn't the case, but it is. I'm not saying everyone is immune to being asked to show proof of these things (gold, vouches, etc) as it really can be a case-by-case basis. It is a free market, however in certain scenarios I'd understand where you're coming from. In this scenario specifically I see no reason to unless you thought the user in question was hacked. He did nothing shady, and he has a solid reputation here. In scenarios where we asked users to show proof of vouches and what not it would be in cases where a user usually just joins and has a couple people already vouching for him that haven't posted from a home IP (usually after opening service threads up and/or a shop), although like I say and will continue to say it's case-by-case.

Also, so that means if someone is selling gold for so cheap that means that they have to provide proof of them owning the gold but when someone sells for an extremely high price then they don't. Ok, so basically people can join the market claim to sell 7b 07 for $1/m, a customer pays them $700 for 700M worth of gold and they never login to be seen again. Do you not see a flaw in that system?

Think about it like this. If someone is selling GP for such a low price (lower than re-seller buy price), but is refusing to deal with any of them or go first by any means, then usually you'd suspect that user is trying to scam, which is reasonable, and would warrant proof of stock forsure. This is also due to the fact that if you're trying to sell lower obviously people will try to do business with you over other people. If someone is trying to sell for a price above the usual re-seller sell price, then how are they a threat? If anything they're just attracting themselves to more people that would be trying to scam them if anything. People who sell that high are less likely to get any legit customers. I'm trying to say that in the nicest way possible because all this argument really comes down is common sense if you really read what I'm telling you further, then you'll understand. I'm not trying to be rude at all when I say that, but I hope you understand, and if you'd like further clarification you're more than welcome to PM me.

People should not put competitive pricing in their titles or threads unless they truly are offering it.

Definition of competitive pricing:

So if I go to a website that claims to offer competitive pricing and I ask them how their prices are competitive then they should be expected to show at least one site which offers the same pricing as them.

Since most sellers don't understand what competitive pricing is, its just a term used to false advertise to get people to buy from them.

And also the rate isn't fair if you cannot name a competitor selling at the same rate rate or a higher rate.

In fact, if you ask half the community what the definition of competitive pricing is, they will tell you that it simply means beating rates, so if people don't even know the definition of the word then why are they including it in their threads? It is simply to waste peoples time and get an edge over other sellers who are not false advertising.

In regards to this I don't believe it's against the rule itself, although I understand that you might think it's deceiving sort of. I've seen numerous people claim they have cheap, competitive prices, etc etc, but I don't recall people punishing them for it because I'd imagine it'd only have to do with advertising false prices/payment methods, and a couple other things, but I was always under the assumption that saying you offer cheap/competitive services that it'd be okay. I see that it may possibly be misleading though, so perhaps asking a higher up or asking for the rule to be revised could help. If I'm wrong, then I apologize for denying the report.


Aside from the above I don't really have much else to add other than asking for further clarification on this:

He is not a good moderator at all. Most of his decisions are biased due to the fact he holds close affiliations with certain users.

I've handled hundreds of reports/disputes, so to say most of my decisions would be biased is an exaggeration. I try to be a person for the people, and am usually a very reliable person when I'm on/someone needs help (or at least I'd like to consider myself that), so if there's anything I can do to improve from being poor aside from these issues, then let me know. In these cases specifically I've mentioned that I have no correlation/close affiliation with both users (haven't spoken to one ever, and last time I spoke to the other was 6-8 months ago probably?), so I believe that clears up the whole bias issue. Me putting my opinion on the report on FPLA was merely to help you understand the situation in more context originally when I closed the report.

 

You said that isn't the case, but it is. I'm not saying everyone is immune to being asked to show proof of these things (gold, vouches, etc) as it really can be a case-by-case basis. It is a free market, however in certain scenarios I'd understand where you're coming from. In this scenario specifically I see no reason to unless you thought the user in question was hacked. He did nothing shady, and he has a solid reputation here. In scenarios where we asked users to show proof of vouches and what not it would be in cases where a user usually just joins and has a couple people already vouching for him that haven't posted from a home IP (usually after opening service threads up and/or a shop), although like I say and will continue to say it's case-by-case.

Think about it like this. If someone is selling GP for such a low price (lower than re-seller buy price), but is refusing to deal with any of them or go first by any means, then usually you'd suspect that user is trying to scam, which is reasonable, and would warrant proof of stock forsure. This is also due to the fact that if you're trying to sell lower obviously people will try to do business with you over other people. If someone is trying to sell for a price above the usual re-seller sell price, then how are they a threat? If anything they're just attracting themselves to more people that would be trying to scam them if anything. People who sell that high are less likely to get any legit customers. I'm trying to say that in the nicest way possible because all this argument really comes down is common sense if you really read what I'm telling you further, then you'll understand. I'm not trying to be rude at all when I say that, but I hope you understand, and if you'd like further clarification you're more than welcome to PM me.

Right lets deal with this here.

Look at these two people:
QUICK SALE SELLING 4BILLION GP MUST MOVE NOW UNTRACEABLE
SELLING 4B OSRS ASAP! NEED IT ALL GONE VERY SOON!

Both of these users are the same person. One is a 2013 account and the other is a 2018 one.

So they are selling large amounts of gold for a high rate.

Do you not see anything sketchy with this at all?

You can claim its a free market however it is not really the case anymore. It's a partially free market. Some threads have to be approved. So if they were to get a large trade, they would end up making more money than if they were selling at normal market rate making it an incentive for them not to pay out.

In regards to this I don't believe it's against the rule itself, although I understand that you might think it's deceiving sort of. I've seen numerous people claim they have cheap, competitive prices, etc etc, but I don't recall people punishing them for it because I'd imagine it'd only have to do with advertising false prices/payment methods, and a couple other things, but I was always under the assumption that saying you offer cheap/competitive services that it'd be okay. I see that it may possibly be misleading though, so perhaps asking a higher up or asking for the rule to be revised could help. If I'm wrong, then I apologize for denying the report.

As for this point, I'll talk to Video on this matter since he wrote the false advertisement post.

 

Closest staff friend I have. Amazing person. Love this dude to death. Hope he gets promoted soon because he deserves it so much. Thanks @King

 

[Pendulum]

+1 this guy is awesome

 

[Rodman]

Stand up guy, turns out he was a major part in resolving an issue that put me out of work for 2 days, I know I have already thanked him personally but want to do it again publicly. Cheers my man!

 

ONE WORD: My Nigga. Don't tell me thats 2 words or you're blocked

 

[KingDowner]

Great mod, a friendly mod too a rare thing to find these days, would like to see him as global mod in the near future, good guy.

 

when he says he is only on sythe for 1 hour a day, i almost didn't believe him as he does so much work. after he stated this, i observed that he LITERALLY does all the work he does in an hours time. he basically cleans up RAS and archives all reports he handles in this time. also him and @Wortel are usually always first to handle my post reports. Can't say anything negative about this stud

 

My bae. I'm proud and hyped you got Global. Please stay around awhile longer brother. I hope to join you someday. Well deserved is an understatement. All love, forever and always you freak <3

 

Hey bud gz, maybe someday you can be a real rebornking? :winkyface:

 

[SodQ]

Looks like a nice dude but that was before he wrongfully banned me without trying to hear my side of things.
Posted a Dispute and was responded to with accusations and disrespect.

Keep it up!

 

My favorite global <3 I've known King way before he got his mod rank, and this guy dedicates so much time on sythe that it's unbelievable. keep up the good work homie.