perm ban for fake vouching

[silab king]

i think it would be more suitable for fake vouches to be a perm ban because in my eyes its just as bad as scamming someone because there tricking people into thinking there trustworthy for there own gain maybe for new members a temp ban would be still apropriate but for people who have used the site for awhile they should know better

 

[x339]

I do not support this, there must be a reason why it is not perm otherwise it would be. I think temp banning them is a good warning, because its not always malicious. Some newcomers do it because no one will trade with them otherwise. They may not have had malicious intent but a temp ban is a good warning to make sure it doesn't happen again.

 

[ll champion]

Well it wouldn't exactly be fair to people with no intentions to scam, but just trying to get a headstart over other newer members. Although I do agree self-vouching is bad, but it's already a 3 month ban which is pretty long on it's own.
I don't support this, sorry.

 

[silab king]

I do not support this, there must be a reason why it is not perm otherwise it would be. I think temp banning them is a good warning, because its not always malicious. Some newcomers do it because no one will trade with them otherwise. They may not have had malicious intent but a temp ban is a good warning to make sure it doesn't happen again.

you didint read the full post for new members a temp would still be apropriate but for members whos been on the site for ages they should no better

 

[BraedonOnRS]

I support what x339 said.
In order to even begin trading on this site you need to buy 10 or-so things going first each time with the possibility of being scammed.
I've never given or received fake vouches but perm ban is a bit much.

 

[x339]

you didint read the full post for new members a temp would still be apropriate but for members whos been on the site for ages they should no better

Well members who have been on the site for ages wouldn't do that kind of thing, they would have no reason too. And if something like this happen the same rule would apply, they wouldn't get special treatment. I did read your full thread btw.

 

[theGuitarist]

Fake vouches are currently 3 month ban. I believe that is an appropriate punishment. If they do it again they get perm ban anyways. It's like giving them a second chance to redeem themselve. It's not like they are scamming someone or phishing.

Edit: Ok for older members, I believe possibly a temp ban wouldn't apply. So I would support possibly a longer ban for older members or somewhere the sort.

 

[Cami3532]

How often are older members found fake vouching though?

 

[ll champion]

How often are older members found fake vouching though?

Not very often, don't think they'd need a vouch from somebody who has 1 post and joined a few months ago. The only case I can think of is plznate, and he wasn't given any special treatment, just the regular 3-month ban. Honestly it wouldn't be a bad idea to increase the self-vouching consequence on older members decided by a case by case basis, or some specific guidline. Highly doubt this would be implemented however, just because this isn't the top priority; something that doesn't have to be done right now. I think for now it's fine.

Edit: wait wasn't plznate's case the one that set the bar to 3 months?

 

[x Paranormal x]

It was perm before, and it was changed into temp for a reason, because its just not serious enough offence, and also temp bann lasts quite a while.

 

[SuF]

It was perm before, and it was changed into temp for a reason, because its just not serious enough offence, and also temp bann lasts quite a while.

It was changed based on a flawed community vote that was most likely swayed heavily by people creating accounts just to vote. Nate's dilemma was what caused that vote to happen and that too made the vote more bias towards a more lenient punishment.

Essentially, the way I see it is that there are two kinds of fake vouching, malicious and non-malicious. People either fake vouch to scam or to gain a reputation to more easily make legitimate trades. The type of fake vouching should determine the type of punishment, with a perm ban for malicious people and a temp ban for non-malicious people.

Now, how would you go about determining whether or not a user is malicious? First, check to see if they are ban evading and if they are, ban them for that. Secondly, check for open scam reports or suspicious market behavior. Thirdly, temp ban them and warn them that if they ban evade they will receive a perm ban. If they ban evade, they are most likely a scammer so they get a perm ban. If not, they are just an idiot who made a mistake and after a month ban can try to gain a reputation legitimately. Then you just need to watch their actions to make sure that they are indeed legit and not just a determined scammer.

 

[FireZ]

Denied, sythe held a poll awhile ago for this