MM's Not allowed to Vouch Traders

[malakadang]

The difference was that you recognized what Sythe has to offer to say the least. That scamming wasn't the way, and that building up trust would earn you WAY more then one could earn in a scam. The endless ways to profit despite the occasional chargeback. The great community and even the CA section (/highfive, your application looks great) but others don't, especially when first joining.

I didn't know Sythe to be a good community after I'd been scammed twice, and a month into my time here. The only difference was my personality. (Thanks xD.)

New users are probably used to systems that are like "feedback" like ebay, or other forums (See PBNation, love their system). The closest thing we have to that is vouches, which technically are signs of trust. A vouch is something that we'd find in a MM thread, like yours or mine, but it has evolved into something that we have in our vouch thread saying "Vouch for *** we swapped accounts" and then we count them all up, and stick that number in our signatures and say "245356256 Vouches" and stuff like that. What this is trying to do is make a vouch = a trade, not to protect new users although I feel if this happens it would greatly.

I understand completely where your coming from. However I just think that people should learn from there mistakes, as opposed to being guided on their way in a cocooned like world.

I agree with you that new users can be mislead by quantity over quality. However what about users who sell/buy minute amounts of gold, 1m, and bam theres a vouch.

I'll elaborate a tad more on my standpoint.

Your proposed idea may reduce some scams, not a lot but a few. Now all those users that haven't been scammed, what happens? Well they'll believe that Sythe is relatively scam free, and as in Billy's case, they would need be scammed in order to unearth the desire to scam.

So they go about their ways, and boom one day they get scammed. They have amassed a reputation, they have numerous vouches, and now the amount they can scam will be greater.

Now depending on how strong there desire to scam is over the possible benefits of the community, there will be people that side on both ends of the spectrum. The people that decide screw it I'll scam, are now in a better position to scam, and can scam more. Take Classics for example, yes his case was much different, but he had the ability to scam much more than 300m.

So in the end, people don't end up learning because they don't experience mistakes. You learn from your mistakes, and I just cannot agree in taking that learning process out, despite the small good it may yield, the greater good lies in educating those people.

 

[Beefchrist]

Don't support, vouch means that you did a succesfull trade and you are satisfied with. If both the MM and the other person did a good job, you can vouch them both.

 

[CashMan]

i think a vouch is sorta important even when middlemain in some trade's like a gold seller, i could vouch him to show other';s he does actually have the gold and is willing to use a MM there for he is legit on that sence

my grammar is suck F.YU

I agree with this

The only person who should be vouched after a middleman service is the middleman. The middleman is, after all, the only person to have been trusted with anything.

But then I also kinda agree with this

It's a tough subject, so I think it should be left down to the MM whether or not they want to vouch for the parties involved in the trade.

 

[CMotDibbler]

I think it's up the individual to decide whether or not one should leave a vouch. If a middleman deems a transaction vouch worthy, and that both players acted legitimately throughout the trade, then I think they have the right to leave a vouch

 

[Rsaccounttrader]

This is not a good suggestion because many old members have received vouches from MMs and given vouched as MMs. Implementing this suggestion would make old members seem more vouched and therefore trusted when compared to a member who started trading the day this suggestion was implemented yet had more trades than the older members.

 

[Karl]

The simple fact is that vouching is optional, you dont have to vouch, a trade doesnt have to happen if you vouch someone either, its just a sign of trust, telling people when they can and cant vouch (except for Graphics, for many different reasons) will get complicated and will make alot of older vouches obsolete.

 

[john cleese]

I have a vouch from an MM in my thread, its not to inflate my vouch count but merely to show that I have used an MM and the trade went smooth.

 

[x339]

Honestly I think that the MM should be given two vouches while the players also vouch each other. This is because the MM is being trusted by two different idividuals. Double the trust should = double the vouches. I also think the players should vouch each other because they did do a trade even tho an MM was involved for added security.

 

[john cleese]

Honestly I think that the MM should be given two vouches while the players also vouch each other. This is because the MM is being trusted by two different idividuals. Double the trust should = double the vouches. I also think the players should vouch each other because they did do a trade even tho an MM was involved for added security.

Lol, I dont think you understood the thread, its not against traders vouching MMs but against MMs vouching traders.

 

[Pockets]

I agree. When I look at someone's vouch page and just see "MM'd a trade for him. went smooth..."
x100
it doesn't make me trust them any more at all.

 

[Imagine]

Vouches aren't ONLY for trustfulness or whatever. They are for smooth trades and everything.
If you are buying something, and both the MM and the seller make it smooth by having everything ready, I think they should deserve a vouch too.

 

[Ulti not]

I only vouch a trade when I feel the person(s) deserved it. I don't just vouch, if they tell me to. This is my rule and will never change. You must deem yourself trusted to me, in order for a vouch. Same for MMing. When I MM, I do not vouch all trades I MM, I vouch for the ones I feel are legit.

 

[iDung]

No need to discourage the use of MM's. Stupid idea.

 

No need to discourage the use of MM's. Stupid idea.

I don't understand how it would be possible to discourage people from using MM's. MM's are used for a safe trade, not two vouches, basically what I've been saying this whole thread.

 

[iDung]

Scammers will then have an excuse to not use an MM.

"No, I won't use an MM."

"Why?"

"Because I want the vouch for this trade."

How can you not understand that...?

 

Scammers will then have an excuse to not use an MM.

"No, I won't use an MM."

"Why?"

"Because I want the vouch for this trade."

How can you not understand that...?

I'm saying the other trader vouches, but the MM doesn't, resulting in only one vouch (from the other trader) with the MM not vouching the traders (so only one vouch is received, not two).

I suppose if the person refuses to use a MM for the sole purpose of not getting two vouches then you shouldn't be using that person in the first place as the are obviously acting fishy.

 

[wackywamba]

Agreed ^. Only one vouch should be received by all parties, whether it be from the other trader or MM it shouldn't always be 2 otherwise you're going to have a huge list of vouches from doing only half the amount of work.

 

Bump.

 

[PurePwn]

Support,
If you multiply using MM's - i.e ,

Trade 1 = 2 vouches using MM

2vouchesx10trades = 20 ... like damn

 

[Kid.Ink]

I don't support, even though you used the MM it still shows that you wasn't going to scam the other party.. if trade goes well they all deserve to vouch.