Snow Partol's scams

[Im Solo]

So I know I'm a little late to the party on this one, however this is definitly something that has to be brought up on behalf of the victims.

When you think about an OMM it is someone that has been granted special privileges by ultimately the staff, I know there is a process and its voted on by the current omm team, but in the end it is the staff that actually give the title OMM it's meaning. This being said the rank is basically the site saying that you can and should trust this person to conduct your trades. It's not like the title of mod where it has nothing to do with the market, OMM is directly tied to trading. If the site itself endorses certain people to be trusted enough to wear a rank directly linked to trading then how can staff simply turn a blind eye when that person scams.

To further my case I would like to direct your attention to this post.

Sythe.org Official Middleman Application Process [Updated 9/26/15]

My main argument lies with rule/point number 4

4. Get your staff member/veteran member to vouch for you in your thread. This member's vouch will be deemed either appropriate or inappropriate by the Head Middleman. If deemed inappropriate, your application will not be processed until you have acquired the fundamentally important vouch from a trusted member/staff member. Remember, if you ever choose to scam, the member who has vouched for you will be punished.

It clearly states that "if you (the OMM) ever scam" that someone is liable. Whoever vouched for Snow Patrol knew that his vouch bound him to all scams performed. No where in this post does it say that the trade had to be conducted as a Middle man. It clearly reads any scam conducted by the OMM the person that vouched will be punished.

It may also be said that Snow Patrol was hacked, but that does not excuse SP it is still seen as a scam on his account. Therefor no matter how you look at it the person that vouched for SP is liable for anything that account did.

If staff find that my report holds no grounds and everything I just said is bullshit than I would request the discontinuation of Official Middle Men, if the very rules for OMM can not be upheld and a OMM can scam just the same as any other user then there is not need for the rank. The site is endorsing these people then leaving scam victims high and dry, that's absurd. Your rules say someone is liable, then someone is liable end of story.

@Rswap @Ace @Searchy

@Sythe @Shin

You can't tell people it's safe to trade with someone then back out on it, that's just wrong and misleading.

 

[Aroxez]

So I know I'm a little late to the party on this one, however this is definitly something that has to be brought up on behalf of the victims.

When you think about an OMM it is someone that has been granted special privileges by ultimately the staff, I know there is a process and its voted on by the current omm team, but in the end it is the staff that actually give the title OMM it's meaning. This being said the rank is basically the site saying that you can and should trust this person to conduct your trades. It's not like the title of mod where it has nothing to do with the market, OMM is directly tied to trading. If the site itself endorses certain people to be trusted enough to wear a rank directly linked to trading then how can staff simply turn a blind eye when that person scams.

To further my case I would like to direct your attention to this post.

Sythe.org Official Middleman Application Process [Updated 9/26/15]

My main argument lies with rule/point number 4

4. Get your staff member/veteran member to vouch for you in your thread. This member's vouch will be deemed either appropriate or inappropriate by the Head Middleman. If deemed inappropriate, your application will not be processed until you have acquired the fundamentally important vouch from a trusted member/staff member. Remember, if you ever choose to scam, the member who has vouched for you will be punished.

It clearly states that "if you (the OMM) ever scam" that someone is liable. Whoever vouched for Snow Patrol knew that his vouch bound him to all scams performed. No where in this post does it say that the trade had to be conducted as a Middle man. It clearly reads any scam conducted by the OMM the person that vouched will be punished.

It may also be said that Snow Patrol was hacked, but that does not excuse SP it is still seen as a scam on his account. Therefor no matter how you look at it the person that vouched for SP is liable for anything that account did.

If staff find that my report holds no grounds and everything I just said is bullshit than I would request the discontinuation of Official Middle Men, if the very rules for OMM can not be upheld and a OMM can scam just the same as any other user then there is not need for the rank. The site is endorsing these people then leaving scam victims high and dry, that's absurd. Your rules say someone is liable, then someone is liable end of story.

@Rswap @Ace @Searchy

@Sythe @Shin

You can't tell people it's safe to trade with someone then back out on it, that's just wrong and misleading.

How do you determine how that said user is punished? This is more of a suggestion than a report.

I think it needs to either be confirmed or not whether Snow Patrol was actually hacked or not. With that being said, if he is confirmed to be hacked, how do you justify that someone is subjected to being punished for a hacking? It just so happens that user vouched for him, but, I don't think we can really punish another user for someone being hacked.

All my opinion, I just see it as a very technical rule that needs more guidelines around it.

 

[Aroxez]

So I know I'm a little late to the party on this one, however this is definitly something that has to be brought up on behalf of the victims.

When you think about an OMM it is someone that has been granted special privileges by ultimately the staff, I know there is a process and its voted on by the current omm team, but in the end it is the staff that actually give the title OMM it's meaning. This being said the rank is basically the site saying that you can and should trust this person to conduct your trades. It's not like the title of mod where it has nothing to do with the market, OMM is directly tied to trading. If the site itself endorses certain people to be trusted enough to wear a rank directly linked to trading then how can staff simply turn a blind eye when that person scams.

To further my case I would like to direct your attention to this post.

Sythe.org Official Middleman Application Process [Updated 9/26/15]

My main argument lies with rule/point number 4

4. Get your staff member/veteran member to vouch for you in your thread. This member's vouch will be deemed either appropriate or inappropriate by the Head Middleman. If deemed inappropriate, your application will not be processed until you have acquired the fundamentally important vouch from a trusted member/staff member. Remember, if you ever choose to scam, the member who has vouched for you will be punished.

It clearly states that "if you (the OMM) ever scam" that someone is liable. Whoever vouched for Snow Patrol knew that his vouch bound him to all scams performed. No where in this post does it say that the trade had to be conducted as a Middle man. It clearly reads any scam conducted by the OMM the person that vouched will be punished.

It may also be said that Snow Patrol was hacked, but that does not excuse SP it is still seen as a scam on his account. Therefor no matter how you look at it the person that vouched for SP is liable for anything that account did.

If staff find that my report holds no grounds and everything I just said is bullshit than I would request the discontinuation of Official Middle Men, if the very rules for OMM can not be upheld and a OMM can scam just the same as any other user then there is not need for the rank. The site is endorsing these people then leaving scam victims high and dry, that's absurd. Your rules say someone is liable, then someone is liable end of story.

@Rswap @Ace @Searchy

@Sythe @Shin

You can't tell people it's safe to trade with someone then back out on it, that's just wrong and misleading.

How do you determine how that said user is punished? This is more of a suggestion than a report.

I think it needs to either be confirmed or not whether Snow Patrol was actually hacked or not. With that being said, if he is confirmed to be hacked, how do you justify that someone is subjected to being punished for a hacking? It just so happens that user vouched for him, but, I don't think we can really punish another user for someone being hacked.

All my opinion, I just see it as a very technical rule that needs more guidelines around it.

 

[video]

Our rules by no means say that we will repay people if OMMs scam. We also don't say anywhere that OMMs will never scam people. The rank is awarded if you meet the requirements and if you pass a staff vote. We have no obligation if an OMM or mod or admin or any other user chooses to scam that's simply not the fault of the site itself. I don't know what you are proposing we do here, if you think we need to explicitly state that "We are not responsible if an OMM scams" I personally think that's pretty ridiculous but you're welcome to make a suggestion thread for that. Assigning someone an OMM rank doesn't mean that they will never scam, or that the site is responsible if they do, and there's not a single statement anywhere on this site that says otherwise

As for punishing the veteran/staff user who "recommended" Snow Patrol I think that would also be ridiculous given that the recommendations posted were well over 5 years old at this point. I don't even see a particular recommendation in the application being designated as the required recommendation for the application, I and about 20 other people all posted recommendations in that app if @Sythe wants to punish us all then he's free to do so