The Flaw of being banned for Trading with scammers

[KingOfHeart]

Don't trade with marked scammers first of all. I only want to talk about the flaw here.

 

Let's say there's 999 honest users & 1 scammer.

That 1 scammer finds an honest user and reports them afterwards for trading with a scammer. So now there's two scammers.

The two scammers then try to target more honest users and report them after their trade is done.

This pattern keeps up, and every oldbie at some point traded with a marked scammer and there's 0 honest users left.

Outpost runs out of honest users, they can't make money, so are forced to allowed scammers who were marked because they traded with one.

 

Steamrep likes to mark traders who traded with scammers, sometimes multiple reports happen. However, repeated mistakes do happen, especially for those who do a lot of trading.

Why are these types of bans perma? What's stopping this from happening?

Yes, I do agree that users should be punished for trading with these types on purpose, but there have been users marked who didn't do it on purpose, just kept forgetting to check the user's steamrep.

 

Something like this, should be a year banning at most. Something to think about!

[Bakgrund]

This just the same thing as saying:

 

There's 999 people in the world.

1 person dies

another person dies

and another person dies.

aaaand another person dies.

Now there's just 995 persons left

The world runs out of people!

 

Don't you hear how stupid it sounds? You might as well just say that all players in tf2 are from 2007...

 

Why are these types of bans perma? Someone has just decided that that is the case, policies in other words.

but there have been users marked who didn't do it on purpose.. yes, and there are alot of people getting executed everyday who are innocent.

 

That's just the reality m9.

[frank mcdank]

by your logic, drug dealers should be given a slap in the face as punishment, and people who buy the drugs get a finger shaken at them

[BlueSpider]

 

Something like this, should be a year banning at most. Something to think about!

 

 

 

Personally I don't like the example you used but this needs to happen ^^^^^.

 

I thought you were gonna go on about how if someone gets banned it hurts the economy because now most of those hats are locked up forever.

[Sasuke200]

That is not how it works because there will be SOME PEOPLE who will never trade with a scammer.

 

That is like saying "One person catches he cold, it spreads to the next person and next person till everyone has it."

[polar]

I have expressed similar concerns here - http://forums.backpack.tf/index.php?/topic/18341-should-i-try-to-appeal-the-bans/page-5?p=204548&do=findComment&comment=204548 - as well as in cases I've run into.

 

I have real issues with banning people 2, 3, or 4 sellers down the line from the original fence / hijacker. We run into issues when person #2 gets marked on SR for trading with scammers and now person #3 gets marked for trading with someone who was marked and then person #4 gets marked for trading with #3 etc. It's one of the things that really annoys me about not being transparent with ban reasons and is one of the reasons I always try to include proof with my bans.

 

And then there are times when none get banned because SR is so slow in taking their reports. The way a lot of bans are handled seems arbitrary. It's hard to determine what we can reasonably expect traders to do with their background checks which have now seem to have evolved into a very elaborate process with SR practically defunct. We handle far fewer reports than other websites, I'm sure, but even in the few we handle, all the mods feel very uncomfortable with how to handle situations like these.

 

Obviously doesn't apply for the person trading directly with the scammer / hijacker, especially someone knowingly doing so.

[LaughingLollipop]

Noh Mercy for the scammers.

 

Knowingly taking goods from someone who is SR marked is just as bad.

[>Sneaks]

Something like this, should be a year banning at most. Something to think about!

The punishment isn't as severe for a first time accidental offense. I've seen people get a short (few days) ban.

But for the people who continuously buy scammed stuff, yeah, they are deserving of the permaban.

 

Also, there are new people getting into trading everyday. We won't run out of honest traders.

[F CHARLIE]

I thought they had to prove you knowingly traded with a scammer and how do you ban the next person one removed from the scammer?

[Aearsears]

then we're all scammers

[TheMightyPotato]

So wait, someone would ADMIT to knowingly buying a scammed hat SCM? Couldn't they very easily deny it?

[FlamingKick -SB-]

What confuses me here is WHY they are perm'd. I mean, sure it's a scammed hat, but does that make it permabannable???

[KingOfHeart]

I tweaked my example.

I basically changed it to those who are marked for trading with a scammer, get revenge by targeting honest users and reporting them anytime they slip up and forget to check.

Repeated mistakes can easily happen.

 

 

Also, yes for certain rare items, it gets kind of annoying that it can't make it's way back into the market. If a burning team captain gets into a scammers hand, it's gone for good unless if you want to be marked.

[FreeZie hc™]

by your logic, drug dealers should be given a slap in the face as punishment, and people who buy the drugs get a finger shaken at them

unusual hats are not illegal. trading is not an illegal activity. flaw with your logic

[Status Update Nazi]

Also, yes for certain rare items, it gets kind of annoying that it can't make it's way back into the market. If a burning team captain gets into a scammers hand, it's gone for good unless if you want to be marked.

Id still buy the fuck out of it

[KingOfHeart]

Does admitting to a future trade with a scammer enough to be marked? Or by admitting the statement above, does he now get a ban if caught for trading with a scammer for any item worth 6 keys even if he says later on that he did not know?

[♠Derpeh♤]

Does admitting to a future trade with a scammer enough to be marked? Or by admitting the statement above, does he now get a ban if caught for trading with a scammer for any item worth 6 keys even if he says later on that he did not know?

Knowingly trading with a scammer is pretty clean cut and you get a perma ban. It depends on how the evidence is many times when people get banned they try to weezle out of it even when he evidence is pretty clear

[Usurper_King?]

Also, yes for certain rare items, it gets kind of annoying that it can't make it's way back into the market. If a burning team captain gets into a scammers hand, it's gone for good unless if you want to be marked.

Damn Id buy it anyways. Id be happy with a burning TC

[F CHARLIE]

It seems to me that it is very hard/rare to ban people for knowingly trading with a scammer. If you see a deal, you just take it and unless someone can provide screenshots of a conversation you had that displays you being told an item was scammed or saying the same then you cant get banned. I think I quickbought a scammed hat once but didnt become aware of this until the scammed user added me to ask for informational help. He didnt ask me for the hat at any point. There is no way I could be banned for that. Honestly, it should be rare to get the fence ban unless you so regularly trade with scammers that the scammed person, in an effort to get the hat back before it goes into the marketplace, actually is able to warn you ahead of time. Cranwell had a habit of asking if he should do a trade and posting a link to it. That means a red flag was more likely to be given to him by someone. I have done this as well but listened when someone pointed out something was wrong with the seller.

 

Also, I tend to think that the third person removed from scammer shouldn't get marked/banned. Using cranwell's example: he is the first person to benefit from the scammer (not much in this case) he may then sell it for some margin on scm but making it worthwhile to next buyer to fence for him. That person is the second. There really is not that much margin left to say that the next guy is scam profiteering. He might be making a 10-20% margin. The scammer might be selling at half while the next trader (now limited to scm mainly) will sell at 70% and the next 85%. Each one of them could be banned if they knowingly made that trade for scammed material but beyond that people are paying full price and the buyer is not benefiting from the scam at all and that is the point. To reduce scamming by making it nonprofitable. Why buy a hat and get banned if your margin would only be 10-15%. You can get that without getting a scammed hat.

 

Scammer can be banned, fence one and two banned but the next person cleans the hat for trading purposes. All of this needs to be proven ofcourse. I think that part of the discussion has be the margin. Margin is the motive.

[ShadowMan]

 

That 1 scammer finds an honest user and reports them afterwards for trading with a scammer. So now there's two scammers.

The two scammers then try to target more honest users and report them after their trade is done.

This pattern keeps up, and every oldbie at some point traded with a marked scammer and there's 0 honest users left.

 

Thankfully it is not possible, otherwise it would be lethal.

 

And since when reports from scammers for buying scammed items are exist?

[F CHARLIE]

In adding to my above statement, the third "fence" is likely not going to be able to know the hat is scammed as the ban may not have reached the second fence. There is absolutely no justification to ban the third fence or beyond.

[KingOfHeart]

Thankfully it is not possible, otherwise it would be lethal.

 

And since when reports from scammers for buying scammed items are exist?

 

What do you mean not possible? All it would take is an angry marked scammer to get proof that the buyer purposely traded for those items.

Steamrep loves to ban people. Their so swamped with reports they barely listen to what people say. You get one meeting with them, and if you miss that meeting there is no other chance ever.(would not matter if you had prove to show that you were innocent all along)

It also becomes really bad when someone types a report slightly wrong and then gets ignored forever since no one wants to fix that mistake.

 

I bring up this trade with scammer thing as an example because steamrep should not be handling these types of reports when they're swamped with too many reports for them to handle.