Required Donations?

[Andre8Johnson0]

So I'm browsing around Sythe, and I go to the "User Center", and to "Sythe Verified."

"Woops, you're not eligible for SytheVerified. To get SytheVerified, you must be at least a $25+ Donor."

The point of making yourself SytheVerified is so that you provide personal details to the website, that will be used to attempt to reimburse the victims of scamming. In other words, you are trying your very best to NOT be a scammer.

I am REQUIRED to DONATE 25 dollars for that. I feel like those two words shouldn't be in a sentence together, unless the word "not" is between them.

Stop calling it a donation if it's required for something as simple as verifying your account, or else take the required donation away.

 

[Tyler]

The point of making yourself SytheVerified is so that you provide personal details to the website

Actually alot of the information you give can be faked, regardless.


Becoming a SVU on this forum is not a right, we do not require people to become SVU, if you dont want to donate, then choose not to donate.

 

[Andre8Johnson0]

1. Sure, but that's hypothetical. That doesn't take away from the fact that the point of SytheVerification is to prevent scamming. I understand other perks, such as Custom user images, which are very unncessary luxuries. But Sythe should be encouraging people to veryify; the current process does not.

2. I'm aware it's not a right. It requires a 25 dollar donation.
Runescape membership is not a right. It requires ~10 dollars a month in payment.
Those two scenarios sound quite similar to me.

 

The point of making SVU a donation perk is to limit it's accessibility. I don't think I have to explain why keeping it's access restricted is a good thing.

 

Just like RuneScape membership, you are not REQUIRED to upgrade. No one is saying you have to. However, if you'd like certain perks, you need to pay for them. Donations, in theory, are meant to support the site. They have evolved into a form of trust. If someone has a 100$ donor, they are usually seen as more trustworthy than someone without any donor tag.

I imagine the reason for requiring a form of donation, plus a certain post count to be Sythe Verified is to prevent people from just putting in random details to amount a form of false trust, so that they are not able to scam under the false pretense that they are then trusted.

 

[BamZam]

Perhaps you can look at the $25 'donation' as you put it, a way to keep the site running and as a sort of a one-time fee.

Like Bleuskittle mentioned, personal information can be faked. So, the $25 that you would be paying in a way acts as a second deterrence to those who might abuse the SVU for their own personal gain.

 

[Andre8Johnson0]

Thanks to everyone for responding. I see the dividing line in how I'm thinking and how others are thinking:

My original thinking is that requiring a donation is just a way to sucker users out of 30 dollars (Which I'm sure is the case sometimes).

The responses suggest that SVU information is too often faked, so we should only allow the trusted to become SVU, and what better way to prove you're trusted than donating a lot of money and investing in your account.

However, since the point of SVU is to protect users against scamming, then it seems to not serve a point (except preventing scam-quitting), if only the trusted can activate a feature that makes theirself more trusted. So the chances of them scamming, with SVU, goes from slim to none, essentially.

Seems like SVU is kind of a waste, and that dunworry2 is correct in his thread that SVU should be deleted.

 

Thanks to everyone for responding. I see the dividing line in how I'm thinking and how others are thinking:

My original thinking is that requiring a donation is just a way to sucker users out of 30 dollars (Which I'm sure is the case sometimes).

The responses suggest that SVU information is too often faked, so we should only allow the trusted to become SVU, and what better way to prove you're trusted than donating a lot of money and investing in your account.

However, since the point of SVU is to protect users against scamming, then it seems to not serve a point (except preventing scam-quitting), if only the trusted can activate a feature that makes theirself more trusted. So the chances of them scamming, with SVU, goes from slim to none, essentially.

Seems like SVU is kind of a waste, and that dunworry2 is correct in his thread that SVU should be deleted.

Not deleted, but changed so to more accurately portray what it really is, so that it is not misleading. Glad you see that though, it's something that needs to be addressed imo

 

[Andre8Johnson0]

Deletetion or major reform would do the trick, deletion is just easier.

 

[Superfluous]

it's not a required verification, which is why it's an optional donation perk. you can do your very best not to be a scammer for free. if you want to get the SVU badge, it's $25 for the ability to get it and a further $5 for the verification and the rank that you can show off to others for whatever that's worth.

 

Yes, SVU is fkn retarded. The personal information isn't intrusive enough to be useful, and even if it was you'd be stupid to submit it over sythe. I've heard of very few cases of SVU information being released after a scam, let alone being useful and accurate to the point that the person recovered their money.

The thing to keep in mind is that SVU isn't really $30. Its actually $5, and supposedly covers the text based verification system cost. It does have a donation requirement, but so do a number of donation perks. And I think its a fine one, keeps newcomers from getting sythe verified with fake info again and again.

Whatever, cheap rank.

 

[Sept]

Becoming a SVU on this forum is not a right, we do not require people to become SVU, if you dont want to donate, then choose not to donate.

This.


This has to be the dumbest suggestion I've seen in a long time. If you use the market so much that you want to get Sythe verified, you can chip up a petty $25.

 

Hi there,

The Sythe Verified User system was released as a BETA test originally and therefore was only added as a donor perk to the 25$+ group to stop a large intake of users. The plan was to react to feedback and release more stages/versions/levels of SVU. However, Matthew hasn't further developed these things yet. The 5$ charge, on the other hand, covers the cost of the SMS and set up fee for Sythe Verified User verification of identity and is necessary.

This is all sourced from Matthew's posts here and here. You can also contribute any thoughts you have in this suggestion post. I've also moved your post to the feedback forum!

I'd also like to add that SVU is the easiest way to remove Two Factor Authentication from your Sythe account should you lose your phone and/or backup code.

Thanks!

 

[omgkings]

The point of making SVU a donation perk is to limit it's accessibility. I don't think I have to explain why keeping it's access restricted is a good thing.

Wouldn't the entire point of the rank be to to ensure the people with the rank are actually verified from a personal standpoint? I mean, if anything the argument "Paying for something makes it more secure", is null because anyone can donate for it.

Here's an analogy. If anyone knew about Gaming Gutter, you knew that it came with a special rank that was extremely difficult to obtain[The Underground], however with it, came mutual trust with the staff and members of the forum. The rank could not be donated for, however the implications to get the rank were extremely subjective and intricate. The system in place was so concrete, that most people donated hundreds, if not thousands of dollars and still denied the rank, and at the same time very few actually held the rank, if not most of the holders were staff members themselves.

Anyone can donate 25$, act like so and so for a few months, and then scam. That's the risk anyone takes when dealing with online transactions.

 

[uJesternWind]

Wouldn't the entire point of the rank be to to ensure the people with the rank are actually verified from a personal standpoint? I mean, if anything the argument "Paying for something makes it more secure", is null because anyone can donate for it.

Here's an analogy. If anyone knew about Gaming Gutter, you knew that it came with a special rank that was extremely difficult to obtain[The Underground], however with it, came mutual trust with the staff and members of the forum. The rank could not be donated for, however the implications to get the rank were extremely subjective and intricate. The system in place was so concrete, that most people donated hundreds, if not thousands of dollars and still denied the rank, and at the same time very few actually held the rank, if not most of the holders were staff members themselves.

Anyone can donate 25$, act like so and so for a few months, and then scam. That's the risk anyone takes when dealing with online transactions.

I don't think that's the point of this thread, though I totally agree with what you said and you should voice your opinion here as well:
http://www.sythe.org/suggestions/1855813-svu-requirements.html

 

Wouldn't the entire point of the rank be to to ensure the people with the rank are actually verified from a personal standpoint? I mean, if anything the argument "Paying for something makes it more secure", is null because anyone can donate for it.

Here's an analogy. If anyone knew about Gaming Gutter, you knew that it came with a special rank that was extremely difficult to obtain[The Underground], however with it, came mutual trust with the staff and members of the forum. The rank could not be donated for, however the implications to get the rank were extremely subjective and intricate. The system in place was so concrete, that most people donated hundreds, if not thousands of dollars and still denied the rank, and at the same time very few actually held the rank, if not most of the holders were staff members themselves.

Anyone can donate 25$, act like so and so for a few months, and then scam. That's the risk anyone takes when dealing with online transactions.

The personal information given in that "verification" can be falsified. I rather have it's access restricted than make it available for everyone to follow suit. It needing to exist is a different matter.