Whole of Staff Feedback

ruff ruff !! keep up the good work !

 

Lmao since when were you nutsacks so scared of having someone see you remove posts?
Don’t remove my stuff that’s valid thank you.

 

I am sorry but I do not agree with you, I believe that staff input along with the community is very good input, and I don't see a reason why they should hide their ideas from the public.

 

Agreed, staff are almost considered “experts” in subjects involving the forum. They could say why something would work and why something would fail that not everyone else sees. This could lead to further brainstorming amongst the community for improvement purposes.

 

Echoing that point, half the reason I post on most suggestions threads is to stir up conversation; the other half is to remember what I was thinking when we discuss things as a staff team.

I personally feel both are productive.

 

Good job cleaning out the suggestions section. I like how it was done as a collective rather than one or two staff members picking up all the slack.

In the past, I felt like suggestions were often denied for arbitrary reasons, and even simple suggestions were hamstrung by red tape. However, looking through the recently closed threads, the staff gave concise explanations for denied suggestions, and promptly implemented practical ones.

 

I don't understand this decision.

He still plagiarized, though? He only edited his service discord after getting caught. Does this mean users can plagiarize, but as long as they immediately alter their thread, discord, etc. when they get caught, there won't be any repercussions?

In theory, but if you look at what @Viking provided, it's a blatant copy and paste (icons, formatting, etc.).

If you look at this very similar case, the accused was temporarily banned for plagiarizing @Exxistential's discord, which @Pirate agreed Sythe's plagiarism rule covered. What's the difference?

 

Good job staff - site looks clean and operating smoothly.

 

Who made the Sythelib dev funrank? It’s possibly the ugliest funrank I’ve ever seen.

 

i see what you did there.

 

Yeah we were making fun of it yesterday. Here was my (less?) shitty alternative:

 

Pardon

Scam victim was last active less than 2 months ago, yet is considered inactive and you guys be like “thank you come again”. I know it’s hard for you all to take feedback from me but for the sake of your community, can you please reach out to scam victims and give them a longer period of time to get back to you? We all know that without any effort coming from the staff team those scam victims won’t get repaid. I’m also certain that after the community repayment funds nobody would be like “hey I see this user pardoned, can i have my money back?”. If I’m incorrect then please proof me wrong by providing cases where the scam victim was repaid after he reach out to the staff team in regards to the community repayment fund.

 

I’m aware that you and others are neglected to take any feedback and adjust possible wrongdoings - I’ve seen this particular pardon indeed and was surprised aswell as thankful of it happening. I also know that staff’s stance is to collect as many stolen money as possible. Scammers repaying imposters has never really happened and if it did it quite frankly is the scammers’ own fault. What I fail to understand however is; why do we insist so much on scammers repaying the community repayment fund when ultimately the majority of the pardons get denied anyways? The pressure on repayments is something since last year yet it seems to have no other effect than filling Sythe’s wallet out of which once in a while a couple hundreds of dollars get raffled between scam victims which note: even have to apply to the repayment funds.

I see way more value in having the scammer reach out to the scam victim. This way they can talk out any issues, possibly even apologise and perhaps restore their connection so that they can continue where they left of in terms of business. While pardoning they need to provide proof of repaying their scam victim which can weigh in heavily for staff members to vote on. If the wait for them to get in touch with their scam victims isn’t worth it then frankly they shouldn’t be allowed back as they possibly took away days, weeks, months maybe even years of working days of the scam victim. After like a week or two when they provide proof of contacting their scam victims with no response THEN you can take it in community repayment funds.

I get that the majority of people here care about the money only, but if you as a staff member teach that that’s the only thing that really matters then quite certainly it’s no surprise the market is full of scammers and ban evaders.

 

I don't see why this is controversial. As you said, the focus is on repayment. We'd rather a scammer repay the community repayment fund and have that stolen money benefit a separate scam victim than not see any of that stolen money at all. Returning victims whose scammers repaid the community repayment fund can also contact any staff member to get refunded. Our pardon voting reflects this "repayment first" mindset, and the fact that many pardons are denied is not related to this process.

Contrary to popular belief, Sythe is not in the business of encouraging users to hug it out; we want to get people repaid and made financially whole. In my eyes, it is more important that we have a system in place to help people get their money back than a system in place to leave people feeling good about their scammers/victims.

tl;dr - Leaving people with full hearts is less important than leaving them with full wallets.

 

I'd like to say thank you to all of Sythe staff you guys are all always very friendly and helpful .

 

Good job fellas. Also, my condolences for having to work with Video. Quite the geezer he is.