Rollbacks/Resets for repeat offenders

I have just been reading one of Wortel's suggestions regarding extending the cooldown period for appeals.

I have noticed a lot of suggestions are related to anti-scamming, my comments and suggestions included in this.

I'm going to compare this to the Runescape ban system interestingly enough.

Jagex rollback and reset botter's accounts, and mute scammers and spammers. Now if a ban evader and/or scammer wishes to appeal, why not have a percentage of their vouches reset? I was initially thinking to suggest a rollback on their donation rank (if any) but I realise not every offender would be a donator, and I also assume there would be complications with this due to the financial nature of donations.

At this moment I cannot think of how removing a percentage of vouches would be unfair, especially if exceptions were made for those rare occasions in which somebody has genuinely been hacked.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts both supporting or opposing this idea, and why. Personally, I think it would be very effective and make people think twice before scamming another user. It would also stop the possibility of some users taking the piss with loopholes and scams and appealing over and over for years on end.

I understand the main flaw with my proposal is that compulsive ban evaders such as the fraud guys and the fake gold sites would not be even phased by the limitation, as they are never going to stop unless Sythe.org pioneers some next level system to prevent such users making alts. However, I think it could help give the market a marginal clean up.

 

I have just been reading one of Wortel's suggestions regarding extending the cooldown period for appeals.

I have noticed a lot of suggestions are related to anti-scamming, my comments and suggestions included in this.

I'm going to compare this to the Runescape ban system interestingly enough.

Jagex rollback and reset botter's accounts, and mute scammers and spammers. Now if a ban evader and/or scammer wishes to appeal, why not have a percentage of their vouches reset? I was initially thinking to suggest a rollback on their donation rank (if any) but I realise not every offender would be a donator, and I also assume there would be complications with this due to the financial nature of donations.

At this moment I cannot think of how removing a percentage of vouches would be unfair, especially if exceptions were made for those rare occasions in which somebody has genuinely been hacked.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts both supporting or opposing this idea, and why. Personally, I think it would be very effective and make people think twice before scamming another user. It would also stop the possibility of some users taking the piss with loopholes and scams and appealing over and over for years on end.

I understand the main flaw with my proposal is that compulsive ban evaders such as the fraud guys and the fake gold sites would not be even phased by the limitation, as they are never going to stop unless Sythe.org pioneers some next level system to prevent such users making alts. However, I think it could help give the market a marginal clean up.

So the vouches I earned aren't earned because of what? My lack of ability to speak about my previous encounters? This is a market, not a video game. Things are based on the performance users put in, and get out. Don't get me wrong, I see where you are coming from, and if I weren't in the situation i'm in it might be a different opinion, but for now, no support. What users earn is what the earn, not to be changed due to other circumstances. Good suggestion though King.

 

So the vouches I earned aren't earned because of what? My lack of ability to speak about my previous encounters? This is a market, not a video game. Things are based on the performance users put in, and get out. Don't get me wrong, I see where you are coming from, and if I weren't in the situation i'm in it might be a different opinion, but for now, no support. What users earn is what the earn, not to be changed due to other circumstances. Good suggestion though King.

Yeah I understand it's harsh. But If it had been a rule from day one there is a possibility less people would have ended up in similar positions as your self. I'm not suggesting all vouches be removed. Just a percentage.

 

Only way i could see this work is if the vouch system is reworked to a number value (think like a credit score), your score would be reduced with things like inactivity, delays in services etc. Until something like that happens, cant really support this

 

Resetting a percentage of vouches would never work. There's people who don't even record their vouches so that would be counter-productive. Secondly, it wouldn't change the fact that the trade still occurred. Third, it would be far too much work to keep track of every user, their vouch count, and any other statistic that would be used to determine this.

I'll leave this open for a bit more discussion but I don't see how this would ultimately solve the problem.

 

The idea sounds nice, just not ideal for a forum. Its too complicated and erasing history of past trades isn’t equivalent to rolling back statistical accomplishments.

 

[gambling_babz]

I have just been reading one of Wortel's suggestions regarding extending the cooldown period for appeals.

I have noticed a lot of suggestions are related to anti-scamming, my comments and suggestions included in this.

I'm going to compare this to the Runescape ban system interestingly enough.

Jagex rollback and reset botter's accounts, and mute scammers and spammers. Now if a ban evader and/or scammer wishes to appeal, why not have a percentage of their vouches reset? I was initially thinking to suggest a rollback on their donation rank (if any) but I realise not every offender would be a donator, and I also assume there would be complications with this due to the financial nature of donations.

At this moment I cannot think of how removing a percentage of vouches would be unfair, especially if exceptions were made for those rare occasions in which somebody has genuinely been hacked.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts both supporting or opposing this idea, and why. Personally, I think it would be very effective and make people think twice before scamming another user. It would also stop the possibility of some users taking the piss with loopholes and scams and appealing over and over for years on end.

I understand the main flaw with my proposal is that compulsive ban evaders such as the fraud guys and the fake gold sites would not be even phased by the limitation, as they are never going to stop unless Sythe.org pioneers some next level system to prevent such users making alts. However, I think it could help give the market a marginal clean up.

I support this. Back in 2013 when I traded on my other account that eventually got banned, I opened this account. Eventually I officially pardoned and was accepted. I was allowed to trade on this account, from a fresh start, as opposed to my other account with a 2013 tag. Starting from scratch was inevitably harder, but it was well deserved. In addition to that, users should have a title bar saying "Formerly known as, xxxxxxxxxxxEnter some bullshit herexxxxxxxxxx" with a link to their pardon
Thoughts?

The idea sounds nice, just not ideal for a forum. Its too complicated and erasing history of past trades isn’t equivalent to rolling back statistical accomplishments.

Don't roll back accounts / etc. just have said future member create a new account.

Only way i could see this work is if the vouch system is reworked to a number value (think like a credit score), your score would be reduced with things like inactivity, delays in services etc. Until something like that happens, cant really support this

Not sure if you're suggesting the vouch system be a credit score. That'd be odd. Vouches should be how they are with a recommended validity format on them to approve valid trades. Read what I said above about what should be done;tl;dr, fresh account

 

[tMoon]

Not feasible to enforce & donor ranks exist outside of trading status + a user already loses access to them if they're DNT'd.

 

[Panda]

Not feasible to enforce & donor ranks exist outside of trading status + a user already loses access to them if they're DNT'd.

Resetting a percentage of vouches would never work. There's people who don't even record their vouches so that would be counter-productive. Secondly, it wouldn't change the fact that the trade still occurred. Third, it would be far too much work to keep track of every user, their vouch count, and any other statistic that would be used to determine this.

I'll leave this open for a bit more discussion but I don't see how this would ultimately solve the problem.

The above sums it up quite nicely