Publicize users date of donation

[riwu]

I have recently been charge back
http://www.sythe.org/report-scammer-archive/1809392-sellinanbuyinrsgold-chargeback-78-a.html
The user's join date is 13-03-12 and is a $50 donor so i thought he's not likely to scam $78, but afterwards i was told that he charge back on the donation too...if i knew that he only donated the sum recently i might not have traded with him.

Can a donation history (date and amount) be added to the user profile (or on a thread) for all donations that haven't elapse for at least 6 months (the max possible date for filing charge back)?

This would discourage scammers from donating to gain trust then scamquitting.

 

[rebirth2316]

The solution is only accepting donation methods that are nonretractable.

 

You'd also have to show the payment method. If they donated yesterday via RSGP then that is probably more trustable than 1 month ago via PayPal. But anyways, I doubt this will happen.

 

[Tyler]

There is a log of all donations ever made but it involves having to have admin/bond management in the usercenter.


All bond holders have this feature for obvious reasons because we process donations but I can't see information like this being released to the public.

 

[riwu]

The solution is only accepting donation methods that are nonretractable.

Then everyone has to pay $35 for $25 rank etc due to having to use bond holders...

You'd also have to show the payment method. If they donated yesterday via RSGP then that is probably more trustable than 1 month ago via PayPal. But anyways, I doubt this will happen.

Good point, showing payment method would help

There is a log of all donations ever made but it involves having to have admincp in the usercenter.


All bond holders have this feature for obvious reasons because we process donations but I can't see information like this being released to the public.

I dont see how publicizing date and method of donation can be a problem. Why would any non-scammers be unwilling to let others know their date of donation? besides it can be removed after 6 months has elapsed.

 

[Khaini]

You have a valid point here. Support.

 

[Moes]

I'll support this. A temporary PayPal rank that'll switch to a normal rank after 6 months. However I don't think Matthew will approve this suggestion.

 

[riwu]

I'll support this. A temporary PayPal rank that'll switch to a normal rank after 6 months. However I don't think Matthew will approve this suggestion.

Dont need for a temp rank, would be hard to distinguish a 1-year-old $100 + 1-day $200 from a 1-day $300 then?

BLEUSKITTLE mentioned that there is a donation log, make that public perhaps? I honestly dont see how a 6 month period donation history infringe one's privacy.

 

The user's join date is 13-03-12 and is a $50 donor so i thought he's not likely to scam $78

That was your own mistake. A users join date, and the time in which that person donates is of little importance. Making donation timetables public serves no effective purpose.

 

[riwu]

That was your own mistake. A users join date, and the time in which that person donates is of little importance. Making donation timetables public serves no effective purpose.

Kindly explain on your points?
A chronic scammer that donates to gain trust then scams and charge back everything wont even lose the donation spent on the account, but if his donation is 6 months old he would at least lose the donated amount.
Also, we should leave the users to decide whether a user's join date and donation date is of significance. What sythe should do is to provide as much information about the users without compromising their privacy (which don't in this case)

 

Kindly explain on your points?
A chronic scammer that donates to gain trust then scams and charge back everything wont even lose the donation spent on the account, but if his donation is 6 months old he would at least lose the donated amount.
Also, we should leave the users to decide whether a user's join date and donation date is of significance. What sythe should do is to provide as much information about the users without compromising their privacy (which don't in this case)

You won't know that person is a scammer until that person scams.

Why is a users join date of little importance? A person can make an account here at sythe 8 years ago and go on a 7 year hiatus, only to return and scam. It has no significant value that should interfere with your decision making.

Why is a users donation date of little importance? It has no definite correlation to anything. This would only lead to interpretation which isn't a precise source of judgment.

If a donation date sways you more than the quality of a persons vouches, then you are at fault from the start.

 

[riwu]

You won't know that person is a scammer until that person scams.

so the point of this statement is?

Why is a users join date of little importance? A person can make an account here at sythe 8 years ago and go on a 7 year hiatus, only to return and scam. It has no significant value that should interfere with your decision making.

most scammers are not smart and farsighted, and a decision to scam is usually impromptu rather than planned over 8 years. (eg. ppl who didnt plan to scam 8 years ago wouldnt have created several acct 8 years ago)

Why is a users donation date of little importance? It has no definite correlation to anything.

I have just explained about that above.

This would only lead to interpretation which isn't a precise source of judgment.

uh what...? everyone makes their judgement based on their interpretation, obviously no one can claim that their judgement is always accurate.

If a donation date sways you more than the quality of a persons vouches, then you are at fault from the start.

nobody in this thread claimed that donation date is more crucial than quality of vouches?

 

Support clickable ranks that show donation history. Dates and type.

 

A chronic scammer that donates to gain trust then scams

You won't know a person is a scammer until that person scams.

most scammers are not smart and farsighted, and a decision to scam is usually impromptu rather than planned over 8 years. (eg. ppl who didnt plan to scam 8 years ago wouldnt have created several acct 8 years ago)

Thanks for proving my point. By the way, I never said anything about planning.

I have just explained about that above.

No, you haven't. How does that even correlate?

uh what...? everyone makes their judgement based on their interpretation, obviously no one can claim that their judgement is always accurate.

Staff do not ban users for scamming based on interpretation, they use facts. No one should be inherently judged negatively for donating, as we do not know their intentions for doing so. Putting users on display for public ridicule isn't ideal, or serves a precise purpose.

nobody in this thread claimed that donation date is more crucial than quality of vouches

The user's join date is 13-03-12 and is a $50 donor so i thought he's not likely to scam $78, but afterwards i was told that he charge back on the donation too...if i knew that he only donated the sum recently i might not have traded with him.

First things first, you are suggesting an automatic system that details the current status of a persons donation rank. That would require coding for an unnecessary process. You state that if you knew he retracted his donation, you would've thought twice about trading with him. The last thing he did was chargeback all payments he made, which means it was unavoidable.

 

Donation level =/= trust

 

[Tyler]

First things first, you are suggesting an automatic system that details the current status of a persons donation rank. That would require coding for an unnecessary process.

Also before you say "well the system is already in place just let everybody see it"

We couldn't give normal users access to the bond/admin user center management because it also includes:

- Users contact information
-Ability to donation payment status





Riwu, I'm sorry you got scammed. But let this be a lesson about trusting somebody based on their donor rank, Rather than hatred for a system that does fine on its own.

 

[rebirth2316]

Support clickable ranks that show donation history. Dates and type.

This is a simple, good idea.

I support this idea.

 

[Dunsford]

I support this, good idea! Might put off some scammers

 

[riwu]

Staff do not ban users for scamming based on interpretation, they use facts. No one should be inherently judged negatively for donating, as we do not know their intentions for doing so. Putting users on display for public ridicule isn't ideal, or serves a precise purpose.

they interpret facts. a few centuries ago Earth being flat is commonly accepted as a fact.
which post here said one 'should be inherently judged negatively for donating'?

You state that if you knew he retracted his donation, you would've thought twice about trading with him. The last thing he did was chargeback all payments he made, which means it was unavoidable.

Where have i stated that if i 'knew he retracted his donation, i would've thought twice about trading with him'?
the OP blatantly states that: 'if i knew that he only donated the sum recently'

Donation level =/= trust

exercising/diet != being fit, higher education != higher salary. It is often a combination of several complicated factors that contributes to a cause.

Riwu, I'm sorry you got scammed. But let this be a lesson about trusting somebody based on their donor rank, Rather than hatred for a system that does fine on its own.

I did not trust him based on his donor rank alone, neither do i hate the current system. I'm merely suggesting an improvement to the current system.


Why do ppl keep putting words in my mouth???

 

Where have i stated that if i 'knew he retracted his donation, i would've thought twice about trading with him'?
the OP blatantly states that: 'if i knew that he only donated the sum recently'

if i knew that he only donated the sum recently i might not have traded with him.

It's the same exact thing. I paraphrased it for the sake of clarity and shortage. This suggestion won't be approved for many reasons already stated. The fact that you're showing contempt says you won't take no for an answer no matter which way it's worded. Good luck.