To open, let me ask you a question of preference: After being scammed, would you rather the user be banned or you get your money back?
In the past few weeks I've been paying much attention to the RaS section and have noticed the general approach taken by most moderators: show proof and the user will be banned. This allows for efficient and *relatively* easy to mark reports. Still, though his lust for vengeance has been sated and the criminal will do no more scamming, the victim's wallet has not been refilled.
What I'm proposing is a different approach to the RaS reports; namely, show proof and the user will be notified of his conviction and that - if he does not refund the victim - he will soon be banned. I think many of the scammers are acting in an illusion that their crime has been committed with impunity; confrontation with cold, hard evidence and their imminent ban can change that. In addition, it would also allow the accused to be able to respond if there has been confusion or a mistake. I am painfully aware that, if adopted, the whole process will turn into quite a daunting one, but I believe it is worth it for scammer reports to take a bit longer to be dealt with if this procedure is used. What is better, quantity or quality?
More specifically, the system could work like this:
-If there is insufficient proof but still some clear basis for the claim, a PM is sent to the person in question asking him if he can shed some light on the matter (this is optional, though).
-If there is sufficient proof, he will receive the PM I earlier stated and will receive some kind of instant user title notifying what's going on (i.e. Convicted Scammer). An immediate market ban could even be instated.
-If it can be seen that he has/will be scamming many others he should be immediately banned.
Overall, I think that incorporating such a method would allow for a much better outcome for scam victims and reduce scamming significantly (at least after the accused has been notified).
Thanks for surviving the wall of text
.
In the past few weeks I've been paying much attention to the RaS section and have noticed the general approach taken by most moderators: show proof and the user will be banned. This allows for efficient and *relatively* easy to mark reports. Still, though his lust for vengeance has been sated and the criminal will do no more scamming, the victim's wallet has not been refilled.
What I'm proposing is a different approach to the RaS reports; namely, show proof and the user will be notified of his conviction and that - if he does not refund the victim - he will soon be banned. I think many of the scammers are acting in an illusion that their crime has been committed with impunity; confrontation with cold, hard evidence and their imminent ban can change that. In addition, it would also allow the accused to be able to respond if there has been confusion or a mistake. I am painfully aware that, if adopted, the whole process will turn into quite a daunting one, but I believe it is worth it for scammer reports to take a bit longer to be dealt with if this procedure is used. What is better, quantity or quality?
More specifically, the system could work like this:
-If there is insufficient proof but still some clear basis for the claim, a PM is sent to the person in question asking him if he can shed some light on the matter (this is optional, though).
-If there is sufficient proof, he will receive the PM I earlier stated and will receive some kind of instant user title notifying what's going on (i.e. Convicted Scammer). An immediate market ban could even be instated.
-If it can be seen that he has/will be scamming many others he should be immediately banned.
Overall, I think that incorporating such a method would allow for a much better outcome for scam victims and reduce scamming significantly (at least after the accused has been notified).
Thanks for surviving the wall of text













