- Joined
- Mar 22, 2020
- Sythe Gold
- 356,005
- Messages
- 284,687
Link to/reason for TWC/DNT/Ban: Resolved
Link to your vouches: Worthy’s vouches
Detailed description of the events that took place and why you disagree with the decision: See below
Link to previous disputes: Not applicable.
Anything else you wish to say:
I would like the admin team and @Sythe to take a look at this dispute.
I am disputing the recent disciplinary action taken against my company. While I acknowledge the importance of maintaining a fair and just environment, it is disheartening to note the disparity in the severity of the consequences for a first-time offense. We have thousands of vouches and have never had an issue with operations like this. Others who have accumulated multiple reports have taken significantly longer to receive similar disciplinary actions, which we will be diving into later.
First let’s discuss my employee’s incompetence during the aforementioned order, which unfortunately led to the customer losing their hardcore Ironman status.
“Dying on hardcore Ironman in a relatively safe activity: This whole issue could have possibly been avoided if the worker had used an escape crystal (a new item) or a ring of life.”
I am sure she ran out of waterskins and either DC’d or went afk. Nevertheless she should have used a ring of life to help mitigate any risk. Her termination (this occurred before this incident was concluded) serves as a clear message that our customers accounts are valuable to us, and customer satisfaction is of the utmost importance.
Next I would like to address the second point:
“The horrendous customer service: There were nasty attitudes displayed towards the customer, and they were treated horribly to the point of being tilted.”
Upon being notified of the death by the worker, the customer began trashing our worker referring to her as “a shit worker”, a “shit bag” and even claiming she was botting! Which he has no proof of and even admitted to during the report. The customer even began threatening our manager with a scam report after being informed that we were on vacation and would not be back for a week.
“Furthermore fuck that actually ima jus wait a week for worthy to get back and in meantime il make the thread on sythe get some advice off of other ppl”
Once we responded he continued to threaten us with a Sythe report and we told him to open one and we would respond once we returned from said vacation. He began to attack us.
“Worthy you needa pipe your mrs better
Shell have less of an attitude
Griann il shout u when im online for the refund”
The customer's behavior towards my wife was disrespectful, and in the report he admits this. I own that our responses to his disrespect towards our worker and us, by trolling and responding with further disrespect was inappropriate and only made the situation worse. It is my responsibility to maintain professionalism and provide a great customer service experience, regardless of the situation, as we have for thousands of orders.
It is worth noting however, that despite the customer's remarks, we got the ball rolling of resolving this issue by refunding the customer the next morning and giving him the ticket transcript.
Now, let’s dive into the most perplexing and vague aspect of this verdict, which not only holds significant importance but is also the primary reason for my receiving a Trade with Caution.
“Bad trading practices: There were issues with the trading practices that were deemed unacceptable.”
What was unacceptable? He was refunded in less than 24 hours. Is this concerning the trolling? Should we address the TikTok’s and YouTube videos posted on the report? Furthermore, I question why no infractions were handed out despite the report becoming a free-for-all with third parties posting, including instances of foul, derogatory language being used. And mods were even laughing in voice with us about it. The fact is this line is seemingly the only valid reason we have a trade with caution, and it’s ambiguous at best. We paid the agreed upon account devaluation as soon as he gave us a bitcoin address. It is challenging for anyone to draw any meaningful lessons from this report beyond the suggestion of using a "ring of life," as the verdict seems vague and lacking in substance.
I appreciate seeing a solid and clear reasoning for the TWC, how else would I ever be expected to pardon for this?
In closing: I request a review and reconsideration of this decision, as it seems unjust to penalize a first-time offender with such severity while leniency is shown to those with a history of repeated offenses. Equal treatment and fairness should be the guiding principles in fostering an online community and marketplace.
By ensuring equality, the staff fosters an environment that upholds fairness, and inclusivity. It prevents favoritism and bias, and creates a level playing field for all members. Valuing these principles enhances the overall reputation of the online marketplace.
Over the span of fourteen months, a total of nine reports have been filed against a single company. It is worth noting that the second report was deemed significant enough by the moderator to warrant a "Trade with Caution", yet this disciplinary action was not taken until the fifth report.
Resolved
-April 5, 2022 DNT then removed not paying tabs #1
resolved
-Sept 29, 2022 ”TWC WORTHY” worker with small deposit stole 3b+
https://www.sythe.org/threads/4241568/resolved/
-April 11, 2023 stern warning for selling botted accounts?
Resolved
-April 17, 2023 false advertisement #1
chicks bad business practice and holding money again
-April 19, 2023 not paying tabs #2 FIRST TWC
Resolved
-April 25, 2023 Not paying tab #3
resolved
-May 16, 2023 not paying tab #4
Chicks gold advertising stock they don't have AGAIN
-June 11, 2023 false advertising #2
”Warnings were given and they were not listened to.”
resolved
-June 14, 2023 account recovered no action taken
Thank you for your time and please let me know if you have any questions
Regards,
Worthy
Link to your vouches: Worthy’s vouches
Detailed description of the events that took place and why you disagree with the decision: See below
Link to previous disputes: Not applicable.
Anything else you wish to say:
I would like the admin team and @Sythe to take a look at this dispute.
I am disputing the recent disciplinary action taken against my company. While I acknowledge the importance of maintaining a fair and just environment, it is disheartening to note the disparity in the severity of the consequences for a first-time offense. We have thousands of vouches and have never had an issue with operations like this. Others who have accumulated multiple reports have taken significantly longer to receive similar disciplinary actions, which we will be diving into later.
First let’s discuss my employee’s incompetence during the aforementioned order, which unfortunately led to the customer losing their hardcore Ironman status.
“Dying on hardcore Ironman in a relatively safe activity: This whole issue could have possibly been avoided if the worker had used an escape crystal (a new item) or a ring of life.”
I am sure she ran out of waterskins and either DC’d or went afk. Nevertheless she should have used a ring of life to help mitigate any risk. Her termination (this occurred before this incident was concluded) serves as a clear message that our customers accounts are valuable to us, and customer satisfaction is of the utmost importance.
Next I would like to address the second point:
“The horrendous customer service: There were nasty attitudes displayed towards the customer, and they were treated horribly to the point of being tilted.”
Upon being notified of the death by the worker, the customer began trashing our worker referring to her as “a shit worker”, a “shit bag” and even claiming she was botting! Which he has no proof of and even admitted to during the report. The customer even began threatening our manager with a scam report after being informed that we were on vacation and would not be back for a week.
“Furthermore fuck that actually ima jus wait a week for worthy to get back and in meantime il make the thread on sythe get some advice off of other ppl”
Once we responded he continued to threaten us with a Sythe report and we told him to open one and we would respond once we returned from said vacation. He began to attack us.
“Worthy you needa pipe your mrs better
Shell have less of an attitude
Griann il shout u when im online for the refund”
The customer's behavior towards my wife was disrespectful, and in the report he admits this. I own that our responses to his disrespect towards our worker and us, by trolling and responding with further disrespect was inappropriate and only made the situation worse. It is my responsibility to maintain professionalism and provide a great customer service experience, regardless of the situation, as we have for thousands of orders.
It is worth noting however, that despite the customer's remarks, we got the ball rolling of resolving this issue by refunding the customer the next morning and giving him the ticket transcript.
Now, let’s dive into the most perplexing and vague aspect of this verdict, which not only holds significant importance but is also the primary reason for my receiving a Trade with Caution.
“Bad trading practices: There were issues with the trading practices that were deemed unacceptable.”
What was unacceptable? He was refunded in less than 24 hours. Is this concerning the trolling? Should we address the TikTok’s and YouTube videos posted on the report? Furthermore, I question why no infractions were handed out despite the report becoming a free-for-all with third parties posting, including instances of foul, derogatory language being used. And mods were even laughing in voice with us about it. The fact is this line is seemingly the only valid reason we have a trade with caution, and it’s ambiguous at best. We paid the agreed upon account devaluation as soon as he gave us a bitcoin address. It is challenging for anyone to draw any meaningful lessons from this report beyond the suggestion of using a "ring of life," as the verdict seems vague and lacking in substance.
I appreciate seeing a solid and clear reasoning for the TWC, how else would I ever be expected to pardon for this?
In closing: I request a review and reconsideration of this decision, as it seems unjust to penalize a first-time offender with such severity while leniency is shown to those with a history of repeated offenses. Equal treatment and fairness should be the guiding principles in fostering an online community and marketplace.
By ensuring equality, the staff fosters an environment that upholds fairness, and inclusivity. It prevents favoritism and bias, and creates a level playing field for all members. Valuing these principles enhances the overall reputation of the online marketplace.
Over the span of fourteen months, a total of nine reports have been filed against a single company. It is worth noting that the second report was deemed significant enough by the moderator to warrant a "Trade with Caution", yet this disciplinary action was not taken until the fifth report.
Resolved
-April 5, 2022 DNT then removed not paying tabs #1
resolved
-Sept 29, 2022 ”TWC WORTHY” worker with small deposit stole 3b+
https://www.sythe.org/threads/4241568/resolved/
-April 11, 2023 stern warning for selling botted accounts?
Resolved
-April 17, 2023 false advertisement #1
chicks bad business practice and holding money again
-April 19, 2023 not paying tabs #2 FIRST TWC
Resolved
-April 25, 2023 Not paying tab #3
resolved
-May 16, 2023 not paying tab #4
Chicks gold advertising stock they don't have AGAIN
-June 11, 2023 false advertising #2
”Warnings were given and they were not listened to.”
resolved
-June 14, 2023 account recovered no action taken
Thank you for your time and please let me know if you have any questions
Regards,
Worthy
