Why is this treated differently?

In a current report, having your TOS on your thread is not good enough ( even has it in his server as well ) Slice worker scammed - no full compensation
Now this is understandable, as you can hide any TOS on your thread.

But in this case: [Resolved] it was ruled that the TOS was clear on his thread, so the user did not receive a refund.


Is this being treated differently because there's an exception for GFX? Did a rule change?

 

[Lorenzo]

I had an opinion but actually just going to keep it to myself.

 

Bump

 

[Wolfst]

Having tos is not enough the buyer needs to state he agrees with the tos

 

Considering bleekesgold said he came across the thread that would suggest he read the tos and was aware of it prior to the trade and the final clause would means he agrees with it.

If I had to guess the main reason you need tos agreements is because you can't prove that they saw the thread so in this case this was enough for @video to assume the tos was accepted.

 

I like what’s going on in the Alibaba thread. Alibaba is able to post that the user accepted the TOS via the ticket, so I would side with Alibaba.

I think it’s pretty much how the reporter says he came upon the service like Techie said.