TWC Disputes not strict enough

[Aria]

quality over quantity, and I whole heartedly agree with your point there.

plus, most people who just accumulate relatively pointless vouches after a TwC you would imagine are doing it simply to have it removed - rather than it being about repentance/proving you no longer merit it.

 

[funbox]

were* and no. Apart from posting outside the market regularly, any time an upper staff member posts support, it's almost like an obligation to follow suit.

I understand that it is part of your personality to act like an impulsive, belligerent douchebag wherever you post, but you lack one thing, and it's rationalism.

I can say with confidence that more than 1,950 of my posts are not spam. If you don't know what spam means, i'll let you know.

Definition of spam - irrelevant or inappropriate messages sent on the Internet to a large number of recipients.

All my posts are detailed, and hold reason to each topic, unlike yours.

The spam you're talking of is a stereotypical version which means posting a lot.

Me being community active should not count towards a support. I was never a risk to anyone here, which is why I'm back.

who the fuck was talking about your posts?
read my post again.

and the majority only supported you to be unbanned is because you where "community involved" .

You can deny it all you want but i've seen the posts myself.

 

who the fuck was talking about your posts?
read my post again.

and the majority only supported you to be unbanned is because you where "community involved" .

You can deny it all you want but i've seen the posts myself.

I read it, and you made the reference of relativity.

I don't have time to deal with you right now.

 

[Donald Duck]

who the fuck was talking about your posts?
read my post again.

and the majority only supported you to be unbanned is because you where "community involved" .

*Were. Also, capital A, R and W for the start of each sentence.

Apart from posting outside the market regularly, any time an upper staff member posts support, it's almost like an obligation to follow suit.

Not exactly relating to this thread, but I strongly agree with this bit. Ever since I came here, in a huge amount of pardons (and other things, such as scam reports), it has been extremely rare to see a sectional or global post the opposite, or disagree with someone higher than them.

 

Not exactly relating to this thread, but I strongly agree with this bit. Ever since I came here, in a huge amount of pardons (and other things, such as scam reports), it has been extremely rare to see a sectional or global post the opposite, or disagree with someone higher than them.

Welcome to the real world. There isn't a place where this isn't true.

 

[Grave]

Honestly, if someone ever deserved to get a trade with caution, they deserve to always have it, and we need to be more strict on who we hand out the trade with caution to in the first place. And if it is ever disputed, it needs to be on the level of a pardon.

 

I think they're handled fine. But I don't understand how they're given out.

 

[TradeFortress]

Case by case basis takes a totally new meaning when there's different moderators deciding the outcome every time. It'd be fine if one moderator handled it but with more than one someone with a twc might have their twc appeal denied where as if they posted it a day or two before it might of been handled by a different mod and removed. I've seen a lot of staff don't really pay attention which leads to bad judgments or going off the general consensus so having set rules for TWCs and then making determinations off that would benefit the site. Plus the process people go through takes way to long and there's really no reason to have to wait for approval when all the disputes get approved anyway.