More time invested in scam reports.

To open, let me ask you a question of preference: After being scammed, would you rather the user be banned or you get your money back?

In the past few weeks I've been paying much attention to the RaS section and have noticed the general approach taken by most moderators: show proof and the user will be banned. This allows for efficient and *relatively* easy to mark reports. Still, though his lust for vengeance has been sated and the criminal will do no more scamming, the victim's wallet has not been refilled.

What I'm proposing is a different approach to the RaS reports; namely, show proof and the user will be notified of his conviction and that - if he does not refund the victim - he will soon be banned. I think many of the scammers are acting in an illusion that their crime has been committed with impunity; confrontation with cold, hard evidence and their imminent ban can change that. In addition, it would also allow the accused to be able to respond if there has been confusion or a mistake. I am painfully aware that, if adopted, the whole process will turn into quite a daunting one, but I believe it is worth it for scammer reports to take a bit longer to be dealt with if this procedure is used. What is better, quantity or quality?

More specifically, the system could work like this:
-If there is insufficient proof but still some clear basis for the claim, a PM is sent to the person in question asking him if he can shed some light on the matter (this is optional, though).
-If there is sufficient proof, he will receive the PM I earlier stated and will receive some kind of instant user title notifying what's going on (i.e. Convicted Scammer). An immediate market ban could even be instated.
-If it can be seen that he has/will be scamming many others he should be immediately banned.


Overall, I think that incorporating such a method would allow for a much better outcome for scam victims and reduce scamming significantly (at least after the accused has been notified).



Thanks for surviving the wall of text .

 

I am not going to lie, I just opened user suggestions to make the excact same suggestion..I think

- If the proof is sufficent enough, the scammer should be contacted to reply in his defence or be forced to give a refund.

- If the proof is insufficent, don't just close it and say 'no proof' - If you pm the scammer, and he knows he's scammed, he might try and defend himself which will reveal more proof.

- If the user is a threat to go on a scamming rampage (for example he has several vouches, and many people would go first to him) only then should he be instantly banned.

Why Pm then, give them a chance?

- If a scammer gets a chance, he has a second think about whether he really wants to be banned or be a legit member and continue with sythe. It obviously wouldn't be 100%, but I know quite a few people will just give a refund, which will satisfy the victim alot more.

- Another thing, although this is VERY RARE. If the (scammer) happens to disconnect in the middle of a trade, legitly, and he was not scamming, the proof is posted, he'd be instantly banned. When he could've actually disconnected and would've paid or whatever the scam report was for.

SUPPORT!

 

I don't think I could ever support not banning scammers instantly, but I think unbanning people who pay back what they owe could work.

 

Currently the users are banned if found guilty, and then they are UNBANNED only if they are found to be hacked and refund all of what was stolen.
We ban them instantly to prevent the accused user from scamming any other members - if we gave them the chance to refund and prolong the ban for another day or two, it could mean they have the chance to scam a few more members - without any intent to pay it back once banned.

 

As Alteranz has said, if you tell a scammer, "refund him or you'll be banned soon," the scammer will hear, "you're going to be banned soon; quick, try to get another scam in!"

Scammers know – or at least accept the possibility – that they're going to be banned in advance. Since it's fairly easy to create a new account, the majority of them don't care. Rebuilding their post count is a minor annoyance. If anything, giving them another a chance would only allow them to better choose the scam they go out on: if someone provides enough proof on a pin scam, they may pay that back only to go for something bigger.

A scammer is a scammer, pure and simple: they are out for themselves, and they have no place here. If you want your money back, you'll need to find your own method of getting it, and be more careful in the future.

This is false. Users are only unbanned if they were hacked at the time, and repay the loss. If they scammed, they don't get another chance.

 

Whoops sorry, yes I forgot about that point. They're only unbanned if they are/were hacked and refund all of what was stolen - I edited my first post with this point.

Although- people consistently claim that their MSN was hacked, and considering that noone can actually prove that it wasn't ,we just assume that it was - so scammers could pull the "my MSN was hacked" card, repay the money, and come back to do more damage. This is a small flaw in the system....

 

thats a bit like law

 

That's why we have the "you must repay those scammed before your case will be looked at" clause. It discourages many scammers from disputing with the hacked excuse, since it would force them to gamble their loot.

Also, no one's simply unbanned just because they say they were hacked. Most such disputes get ignored; the rest are usually managed via MSN. At the least, the IP has to support it (preferably with an indication of who was actually on the account.)

 

I thought about it for a bit and came up with some of the same problems you guys were posting. As such, I've made a few variations.

 

The scammer can be temp banned. If he is not refunding, then permed.

 

We aren't going to allow scammers to repay what was scammed and allow them back, it doesn't work like that. Banning scammers immediately prevents them from scamming anyone else, and if it was a simple misunderstanding they can use the dispute forum.

Everything else I was about to say has already been said:noworry:

 

The key here is, Don't get scammed. You can always use an OMM. If they disagree and don't want to use an OMM then most likely its a scam. I think the mods also spend a good amount of time in the scam reports. On another note if you scam in real life, If you repay them do you get a "get out of jail free card" I think not. Disagree with your suggestion. Sorry.