Swapping FC Liability

[Apith]

He'd refund them $250. They're looking for limited liability. If by saying "Host X can only trade up to $250, don't trade him more than $250" and someone ignores that and trades $500 and gets scammed, they would still only be liable for the $250 because of the previous statement.

Which I agree with.

If it's as simple as this, then I'm pretty sure that's how it already works. If a host has limits, and someone breaks the limits and gets scammed in return, R2P would only pay the limit the victim should have traded him.

Now if r2p meant the owner of the rsn decides to scam a bunch, and he'd be liable for X amount, then it doesn't work that way if you will choose to endorse it. Buy the name, and let someone you trust handle it if you want to endorse it. You have to realize by endorsing it you are essentially giving him the power to scam a lot of money, there will be that risk.

 

[R2Pleasent]

Yeah guessed it but Xiero didn't specify so I was just double checking.

I don't think this is unreasonable, support.

It's these types of limits that we need to be able to establish on Sythe to avoid ridiculous situations. By being able to limit liability, we can take on more projects.

For example, if I open a LoL boosting service with someone, I shouldn't need to trust that person with $10,000. No trades through my LoL boosting service should be over $500 in value, so I should be able to limit my liability in the partnership to $500 trades. If someone on Sythe is foolish enough to do some crazy $500+ trade with some LoL boosting partner of mine, I don't see why I should be responsible.

Essentially, I should be able to say, listen: If you trade this guy for over $500, that's your risk. I trust him with $500 worth of trades, so that's all I'm willing to cover if he decides to be a douchebag and run. I don't know him IRL, I don't claim to know him IRL, and I have no control over his actions. He's a good LoL booster though from everything I have seen, and I'll insure your trade with him up to $500.

But the current Sythe rules are the following:

I run a joint LoL boosting service with him. Someone comes to our LoL boosting chat and sends him $10,000 in BTC. I am liable for all of it. It's absolutely ridiculous.

 

Do you really think a rank in an in-game swap fc could scam $2,500?

 

[Apith]

It's these types of limits that we need to be able to establish on Sythe to avoid ridiculous situations. By being able to limit liability, we can take on more projects.

For example, if I open a LoL boosting service with someone, I shouldn't need to trust that person with $10,000. No trades through my LoL boosting service should be over $500 in value, so I should be able to limit my liability in the partnership to $500 trades. If someone on Sythe is foolish enough to do some crazy $500+ trade with some LoL boosting partner of mine, I don't see why I should be responsible.

Essentially, I should be able to say, listen: If you trade this guy for over $500, that's your risk. I trust him with $500 worth of trades, so that's all I'm willing to cover if he decides to be a douchebag and run. I don't know him IRL, I don't claim to know him IRL, and I have no control over his actions. He's a good LoL booster though from everything I have seen, and I'll insure your trade with him up to $500.

But the current Sythe rules are the following:

I run a joint LoL boosting service with him. Someone comes to our LoL boosting chat and sends him $10,000 in BTC. I am liable for all of it. It's absolutely ridiculous.

This I agree with if it goes on Sythe. I don't see a downside to it, unless someone is foolish enough to go beyond the limit.

But if you're talking about the FC, I've given my opinion above.

 

[Apith]

Do you really think a rank in an in-game swap fc could scam $2,500?

He could mean the user that owns the RSN R2Pleasent. And would it be $2,500 per scammer, or in one event, like if 5 people scammed $1k each, you pay only half maximum.

 

[R2Pleasent]

Do you really think a rank in an in-game swap fc could scam $2,500?

I agree, they couldn't. But if they set up a fake trade, they could fabricate a trade for well over $2,500 and I would be pressured to reimburse it. Once again, check out Count Vidal's report against Arcus from Powerbot. He claimed Arcus' website being hacked resulted in him downloading a RAT, and losing $10,000 USD worth of gold.

If you look at the report today, it's CLEAR that this scam report was bullshit.

 

I agree, they couldn't. But if they set up a fake trade, they could fabricate a trade for well over $2,500 and I would be pressured to reimburse it. Once again, check out Count Vidal's report against Arcus from Powerbot. He claimed Arcus' website being hacked resulted in him downloading a RAT, and losing $10,000 USD worth of gold.

If you look at the report today, it's CLEAR that this scam report was bullshit.

On the flip side, what is to stop you giving somebody the means to scam $10,000 under a fabricated partnership, paying back the $2,500 and then splitting the other $7,500 between you.

If an employee of yours scams $10,000 worth of gold from somebody selling via your livechat, you would assume full responsibility for that right? If you partner with somebody for a LoL boosting service, and you create a thread 'R2P's LoL boosting!' and within the thread you list 'My partner's skype; r2partner' then a customer is contacting that skype under your reputation, if they then scam it is on you.

I understand that it is hard because its not the same as irl, if you partner with somebody irl and they 'scam' you can take them to court and find justice that way, but online they will most likely get away with it and leave you to clean up their mess, but this is the environment we operate in. We have chosen this market with the knowledge that the majority of the people you deal with would screw you over given a sufficient chance.

 

[Runkel]

I agree, they couldn't. But if they set up a fake trade, they could fabricate a trade for well over $2,500 and I would be pressured to reimburse it. Once again, check out Count Vidal's report against Arcus from Powerbot. He claimed Arcus' website being hacked resulted in him downloading a RAT, and losing $10,000 USD worth of gold.

If you look at the report today, it's CLEAR that this scam report was bullshit.

coould you tell me why its so clear that the report is bs?

 

[Grave]

Great way to start out a swapping fc, by asking if it can be shitty