Mandatory OMM

Support I was actually thinking about this for the past couple days, well how about that.

 

If I have 50 vouches, and someone has 5 vouches.
And requires me to go first, I won't.
If they require me to use a OMM, I won't bother to waste my time.
Why would he even want a OMM in that situation?
And the 50 vouches I'm speaking of is 50$+ of them going first.
While his are pin sales.



I do like the idea though.

 

What if this requirement was only placed on persons with a certain vouch level or lower?

 

I can vouch you 100 times, for getting me 100k xp for 1$.

Or I can vouch you 10 times for going first on 1k trades

 

ChristmasCracker has a good point. There are some people out there with 30+ vouches, yet nearly all of them are $3 upgrades/40-50 powerleveling/any trade below $10, so that wouldn't really work.

 

Money + Vouch requirements then.

 

Not trying to get off topic but upgrade sales aren't just $3. A lot of my vouches are from them, but I was trusted with accounts, not just $3.

Anyways, I still hold true on my stance with this. We should have the right to trade how we want.

 

OFC he says that, even though i totally agree.

Also when will people get the responsibility and just say no trade then and thats the end of it instead of having another thing to deal with... At some point your going to have to learn not to get scammed in life... is it better on the internet when its 100 bucks or real life when its a few thousand just sayin...

 

if the buyer/seller has a MM ready then it should be no problem

 

How are people going to complete MM apps if the only MMs people are allowed to use are already OMMs?

 

Well, completing apps might take longer, but as we've said with this new suggested idea, OMMs will be mandatory if a user agrees to pay the fees. Not everyone wants to pay fees, so people will still use free MMs.

 

OMM is mandatory IF asked for by one party
People may still use MM if they agree on it

 

And what if for some odd Reason 300 people are looking to trade(150 trades in 10mins and for some bizaar reason all requesting OMM's, yet only 3 OMM's are online. Do we wait in cue or get banned) Also if this example happened the Account traders are going to get bumped back which is bias and unfair. I doubt this would happen im just saying it could.

 

That would rarely happen, and if both traders are willing to wait, they can. However, if the member does not wish to wait, he doesn't have to. BUT, if the person who refuses to wait does not find another buyer/seller by the time the other member does find an available OMM, he must go through with the trade.

 

Forcing people to forfeit their right to deny a fair trade does not seem right to me. Just as how skill trainers are allowed to reject job offers that meet their prices, traders should be allowed to reject trades that they do not wish to take part in. Additionally, the extra conditions you're proposing relating to possible vouch requirements just complicates this unfair law.

As many have mentioned time and time again, it is the user's responsibility to be careful when trading. If another person does not wish to use an OMM, then find someone who does. The other party should not be forced to use one just because it is offered.

 

I can't agree with this idea.

First off because not everyone here is wiling to pay the rates, omm will run the market here charging whatever they please.

Second off not everyone uses paypal here and most omm only take paypal a select few have other methods.

Third off it would be the end of sythe due to slow trading and waiting and waiting.


However I'm against omm but some kind of way to balance trades I'm not against, just most omm fee's are out of the question and I don't know alot of people who are willing to pay someone to make sure a trade is smooth.

 

Regarding the negative results out of this. There will always be a solution for them, don't worry. I kind of like this idea.

 

How does this effect shifty people? With me for example I refuse to take unverified paypal for trades over $15 Bar a few people. Also They could simply say OMM and invite one in. Sometimes I ask if their paypal is verified they say yes and it's not so I have to refund. Does it still have to follow the traders terms?

Oh and also I would most likly refuse Dingo as an MM because I have no idea who he is lol(nothing personal).

 

I'm like you, I would rather stay safe than sell quickly, etc. The majority of the trades are usually younger or don't know much about safety, so they just go ahead with the trade if the other person doesn't want to use an OMM. This update would allow those who are trying to be safe to be safe.

Think of it as a kid who is brainwashed by all those anti-drug ads and wants to avoid smoking weed. This would allow him to resist the peer pressure.

 

Its a good idea on paper but most likly would fail, you'd need atleast 2x the OMM's we have now to fill the gaps and on top of that using an OMM doesnt prevent chargebacks and disputes, that is something that needs looked into.