Private Arbitration at sythe.org

Ok, basically this is the exact same thing as the report a scammer section, except now it gives the "scammer" time to share their input before they are banned rather than having to file a dispute to explain it.

It just rearranges the report timeline. I like it, however, I think staff is too heavily crushed with things to do now, just think about later...

I spoke to Sin in a PM about a week ago and she proceeded to tell me that each time she signs into MSN or gets on sythe she is pounded with requests and things to do. This would only get worse...

Ways to fix it I guess would be to increase the amount of staff members, or maybe just make Arbiters (much like the "Middleman" rank).

Just some input.

 

With regard to notion 3a, the staff doesn't have the will/manpower to do these cases. I have no doubt they'd be just as difficult as report a scammer threads.

 

The minute i saw Arbiter i thought of halo.

Anyways i like this system. Sucks to be albert though lo.

 

I am primarily equivocal in regard to whether someone who has scammed will:

A.) Stick around for the process
B.) Be willing to pay such an arbiter

In a real world scenario, I feel this is more successful a system as an offender will obviously forfeit some of his rights should he be found guilty. This is particularly undesirable for an offender, which is why they naturally employ a lawyer, etc. Here, on Sythe.org, however, he can only really be banned. For a lot of scammers (the type with 10 posts and those who have just joined for a quick scam) will not be particularly phased by said ban, and likely will not proceed to pay an arbiter when, realistically, he can just make another account and scam again, cost-free.

From having observed the market and scamming here for a few years now, this is my opinion.

 

I just don't feel this is right, the way things are at the moment are fine, scammers are getting banned, they may bitch but they are getting banned for a reason doing things like this may sound like they'll improve it but i guarantee it just makes things more complicated.

 

-support

though maybe you should think of making a team of people dedicated to being arbiters, they would apply in the same way as you would for an OMM or whatever, and if accepted be given the rank of 'official arbiter' and be automatically sent cases to review...etc..etc...they would be the main and only [other than staff] people to handle the cases, so you kind of know that it will all go well...idk...just a thought

 

Actually Finn you're totally right. I like how you think outside the box these days

I feel like it would work but be used minimally.

 

Speaking hypothetically, if someone were to scam another user, then report them for scamming, even though they are the one who scammed, why would the scammer that got the innocent man banned agree to a arbiter? He knows he scammed him, and got him banned, why would he agree to a judge?

As sin said, Clearly there is going to be a lot of cases of corruption from users. If a users intent is to scam, when they first come to sythe, why would they agree to a arbiter, and also pay? His intent is to scam, so why would he agree to something that he knows will stop him and get him banned?

If this is to be released, please, make it so only Official Middle Men and Staff can be the arbiter. This case is theoretically giving every single user staff powers.

 

I think this would suit serious sellers, who would want to keep their Sythe account and reputation. This suggestion would give accused scammers a better chance to prove what really happened.

If the scammer doesn't respond, and there is good evidence against them, they could just get banned as usual.

The verdict could be approved or denied by a staff member. I think a quick look at the evidence would be enough in most cases since the arbiter would've checked it more thoroughly before making his decision.

 

Great idea, I hope it happens...!

 

I think this should be put into place.
It's a great idea.

 

The real problem with this is bribing. If one of the people (Paul or Albert) in the case, was to pay the arbiter to be biased then the whole system would fail.

 

Except.. there's always room for that, even in the staff system. The reason why staff are staff is because their trust exceeds the norm.