No PM = No compensation.

[hero spec]

Make it sort of like a visa thing? Anything said to be scammed under $200 is not accountable for but anything over that must be thorougly investigated

 

[FireZ 2]

I "let" my account get hacked eh... tbh I could post an announcement about my MSN being hacked then just go scam on it and still make thousands of dollars from it and I dont. If you think sellers like me allow our emails to get hacked, or dont take steps to keep them secure, then you are an idiot.

Word, we dont ask to be hacked

 

Make it sort of like a visa thing? Anything said to be scammed under $200 is not accountable for but anything over that must be thorougly investigated

All that will do is cause a horrific loophole in a seemingly effective system.

It can't go both ways. As horrible as this sounds, ultimately you have to trust both the staff's judgment and morals. If they want to mastermind a scam badly enough, rest assured they'll pull it off.

 

[SuF]

I "let" my account get hacked eh... tbh I could post an announcement about my MSN being hacked then just go scam on it and still make thousands of dollars from it and I dont. If you think sellers like me allow our emails to get hacked, or dont take steps to keep them secure, then you are an idiot.

Word, we dont ask to be hacked

Hey idiots, (Nate called me one so I am following his great moderator example) learn to read.

If you let your account get compromised its partly your own fault.

The plain and simple fact is: You are trying to change the rules so that you make more money at the expense of newcomers. That is not okay.

Oh, and I apologize for my word choice. You both will make great politicians someday.

 

[Sacro]

Hey idiots, (Nate called me one so I am following his great moderator example) learn to read.



The plain and simple fact is: You are trying to change the rules so that you make more money at the expense of newcomers. That is not okay.

You. My hero list. Asap.

 

[hero spec]

The only solution would then be, as Giddy said, not having your msn publicly stated. Finn didn't have his msn publicly stated as first if I remember, he would also request a pm and then respond with his msn. Not having your msn publicly stated would require a pm from the seller so you can get their msn to do the trade. Now the loophole was that people would just hastily trade the msn once added once, not considering it could be hacked. The only solution would then be as Nate said, requesting a PM every single trade. IF there are no publicly stated msns and pms are required every trade then their cant be no scamming. if people choose not to request a pm then it is simply their fault as Nate has been saying.

tl;dr - Take away publicly displayed msn's, and always require pm's before trades

 

[The Pkkid V6]

Honestly support =/ Good points from both sides, but support the idea.

 

[Usa - sadistic vampire]

http://sythe.org/showthread.php?p=8233705#post8233705

Nate, the way I see it this just means that video actually faked the hacking? (and indeed isn't coming back) rather than somone faking he got scammed, my head exploded as everyone elses, who would this rule benefit in any of the 3 cases
video is scammer
scammed is fakeing
hacker hacked video and scammed.

 

The only solution would then be, as Giddy said, not having your msn publicly stated. Finn didn't have his msn publicly stated as first if I remember, he would also request a pm and then respond with his msn. Not having your msn publicly stated would require a pm from the seller so you can get their msn to do the trade. Now the loophole was that people would just hastily trade the msn once added once, not considering it could be hacked. The only solution would then be as Nate said, requesting a PM every single trade. IF there are no publicly stated msns and pms are required every trade then their cant be no scamming. if people choose not to request a pm then it is simply their fault as Nate has been saying.

tl;dr - Take away publicly displayed msn's, and always require pm's before trades

That doesn't prevent someone from pretending to purchase a service just to get their MSN.

 

[Accounts For Accounts]

Its a bit weird when it gets hacked every other month. I'm not going to lie and say mine has never been hacked, but when it was, I did everything necessary to get it under control, and not one person was scammed or even claimed to have been scammed. Most other mods/trusted people never get their msn hacked and if it does happen, I'm sure they are willing to repay the victims. The problem is, most people wont bother with a PM or take proof because they have either used you before, or found your msn linked to a thread. Even if they do get a PM, they probably wont take necessary proof since they fully trust you.

10000000% agree, it really is weird how they get hacked every other month.

No support.

 

[Plznate]

Hey idiots, (Nate called me one so I am following his great moderator example) learn to read.

Ok, so if it is PARTLY cause of an unsecured email (which we have ruled out), then what is the other cause?

http://sythe.org/showthread.php?p=8233705#post8233705

Nate, the way I see it this just means that video actually faked the hacking? (and indeed isn't coming back) rather than somone faking he got scammed, my head exploded as everyone elses, who would this rule benefit in any of the 3 cases
video is scammer
scammed is fakeing
hacker hacked video and scammed.

Can you please clarify what it is you are talking about here?

 

[sneaky82]

I like the idea as it will force users to ask for a pm but at the same time I hate it because it won't hold users responsible as they could say they got hacked so I don't support this

 

[hero spec]

Farcast, traders always have to be willing to risk that the person who pmed them has bad intentions... I don't see why this problem is just coming up now. It's been happening for years supposedly. It's always going to end up the way the cookie crumbles.

I remember a previous topic where I believe Finn (Correct me if I'm Wrong) was discussing how those who should be pardoned weren't pardoned and vice versa. You have to remember that scamming is not the only reason people are banned. Say Nate scammed someone 50m, if the evidence was sufficient enough then we can't act like he'd be banned. There would be a lengthy investigation into it and it would be up tot he staff as a collective group to determine his punishment even if he claims he didn't scam.

I really think the hacked person should then be responsible until proven innocent. A second time would be a no no and an instant ban without the option to pardon possibly...?

 

[Plznate]

Farcast, traders always have to be willing to risk that the person who pmed them has bad intentions... I don't see why this problem is just coming up now. It's been happening for years supposedly. It's always going to end up the way the cookie crumbles.

I remember a previous topic where I believe Finn (Correct me if I'm Wrong) was discussing how those who should be pardoned weren't pardoned and vice versa. You have to remember that scamming is not the only reason people are banned. Say Nate scammed someone 50m, if the evidence was sufficient enough then we can't act like he'd be banned. There would be a lengthy investigation into it and it would be up tot he staff as a collective group to determine his punishment even if he claims he didn't scam.

I really think the hacked person should then be responsible until proven innocent. A second time would be a no no and an instant ban without the option to pardon possibly...?

How would the hacked person be able to prove innocence though?

 

Farcast, traders always have to be willing to risk that the person who pmed them has bad intentions... I don't see why this problem is just coming up now. It's been happening for years supposedly. It's always going to end up the way the cookie crumbles.

I remember a previous topic where I believe Finn (Correct me if I'm Wrong) was discussing how those who should be pardoned weren't pardoned and vice versa. You have to remember that scamming is not the only reason people are banned. Say Nate scammed someone 50m, if the evidence was sufficient enough then we can't act like he'd be banned. There would be a lengthy investigation into it and it would be up tot he staff as a collective group to determine his punishment even if he claims he didn't scam.

I really think the hacked person should then be responsible until proven innocent. A second time would be a no no and an instant ban without the option to pardon possibly...?

That's exactly my point... you won't ever be able to solve this problem; only mitigate it slightly. I think their efforts are better spent elsewhere, arguing here is pissing in the wind.

 

[SuF]

Ok, so if it is PARTLY cause of an unsecured email (which we have ruled out), then what is the other cause? Go back to playing with horses in your tights.

You really are an asshole who does not deserve his position in the slightest. The point is it may not be your fault that the person was scammed. It was also not their fault. You are responsible for everything at Sythe. Thats the way it is to protect buyers from getting scammed. You make more than enough money to cover the people that get scammed IF you account gets hacked. People can not afford to get scammed. You can afford to pay them back. Its really that simple.

 

[Accounts For Accounts]

You really are an asshole who does not deserve his position in the slightest. The point is it may not be your fault that the person was scammed. It was also not their fault. You are responsible for everything at Sythe. Thats the way it is to protect buyers from getting scammed. You make more than enough money to cover the people that get scammed IF you account gets hacked. People can not afford to get scammed. You can afford to pay them back. Its really that simple.

^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[Plznate]

You really are an asshole who does not deserve his position in the slightest. The point is it may not be your fault that the person was scammed. It was also not their fault. You are responsible for everything at Sythe. Thats the way it is to protect buyers from getting scammed. You make more than enough money to cover the people that get scammed IF you account gets hacked. People can not afford to get scammed. You can afford to pay them back. Its really that simple.

And you really are one of the most immature users on the forum who likes to pick fights at any opportune moment.

The over generalizations you are making in the above statement are large. And this thread is not about ME personally, it is about anyone who is victim of a hacking. Closing this now because kids turn what could be a simple intelligent discussion into a flame war, and dont think this would have enough upper level support to make any progress anyway.