Can Outpost mods do this?

[jelly jiggler]

Michael, I hope you know that I respect the hell out of you and Toughsox. I'm not questioning the bans. I'm not questioning your research. I know you guys do incredible research - more than I do - when you hand down your bans. And Toughsox actually talked to me about Frost's case to get some help with it. I know that he has been warned before. Like I said, if someone has been warned to not commit this kind of trade, it's completely fair to ban them.

 

The point I'm making is that maybe you need to reconsider the rules themselves (not the enforcement of the rules). If 90% of the traders on outpost would have no qualms with trading with this guy, if 15-20 seasoned traders with lots of cash trading experience don't think twice when they see his profile, then maybe we need to rethink what it means to be an "obvious" alt. Clearly this alt wasn't so obvious.

 

Think about this broadly. You have acknowledged yourself that you are probably missing some (probably a lot) of people who should be banned by the same criteria. Obviously you can only deal with what gets reported to you - even that alone is a lot of work. But doesn't it seem arbitrary to ban these people just because they were reported? When 90% of the community would have traded with this guy, doesn't it seem problematic to just ban the cases that you can see on the surface? Honestly, it's not actually arbitrary - people who commit more trades are more likely to be banned.

PREACH

[AmazingRussian]

At this point you'd be expected to achieve the same level of perfection DNA replication has, 1 mistake out of a billion.

 

Some standards, in my opinion

 

Just make sure its not 2 out of a billion or you'll be perma-banned.

 

Unless you own a website of course, then the rules don't apply and you can help however many scammers you want. I don't get why the volume reasonability is there for websites (as sirploko said himself outpost can't possibly check 1,000,000+ profiles) but not there for high volume traders. Any single website related to tf2 or csgo trading has helped scammers unload goods a hell of a lot more than all of us high volume traders put together.

 

You would think that someone who avoids scammers in 99.5%+ of their trades would be praised, but instead we get banned.

[zirune]

I am not in the rule making business, I am in the enforcing business. The rule in question is not an Outpost rule per se, it is right there in the SR FAQ. We are a partner community and we pledged to uphold and enforce these rules (as every other SR partner community should do as well).

 

If your issue is with the rule, that needs to be adressed at SR. We take our job very seriously and even if I sometimes think a ban might be harsh, it's not my place to question it beyond its factual merit.

 

- snip -

 

If the community thinks that these rules need to be revised, then please go ahead and start with their origin. But just as I can't ask you to ban these people here as well, since they did trade with a scammer alt whose account was brand new, I can not accept pleas for leniency from you or other community admins. If there is a divide about how we apply Steamreps rules, they are weakened and may be in need of change. But until that change happens, we will follow them by the letter.

 

No. This doesn't need to be addressed at SR. SR has their own problems, including the source of this, but this is very much an OP problem. These traders are all banned on OP, not on SR.

 

"We're just doing what we're told" is not an excuse. You choose to enforce the rules. Outpost can, at any time, choose their own path. Like the higher-ups in Nazi Germany, you're still responsible for what you do, even if you're simply following orders. You have a brain that you can use to determine right from wrong.

 

The only reason SR has any weight is because SR has weight. People obey its guidelines not because they're inherently just or moral, but because not doing so results in nearly immediate banishment from the community and all of its websites. If you want to trade, you have to obey SR, because not doing so is not an option. If SR were a police department, you'd be able to take them to court to challenge unjust laws... but we can't do that. There is no oversight for SR. What they say goes, because they say it, and if you disagree, that's too damn bad.

 

Even if there is something that needs to be changed in SR (and boy, is there), there is no impetus for them to do anything with complaints from users. Users have no power. As was posted a few posts before this, a staff member of Steamrep resigned in October of 2013 for a lot of the same reasons people like myself are angry. It's obvious that nothing has changed since then, so why would they change now?

 

In order for there to be change, somebody has to start. I can't do it, because if I stop following SR (and start trading with people who were banned for trading with scammers, for example), I get banned and that's the end of that. I and other individual people have no say in the matter. Outpost can do something. Community admins can do something.

 

Instead of following orders you might disagree with, speak up and do something about it.

[Cookie Monster]

Just make sure its not 2 out of a billion or you'll be perma-banned.

 

Unless you own a website of course, then the rules don't apply and you can help however many scammers you want. I don't get why the volume reasonability is there for websites (as sirploko said himself outpost can't possibly check 1,000,000+ profiles) but not there for high volume traders. Any single website related to tf2 or csgo trading has helped scammers unload goods a hell of a lot more than all of us high volume traders put together.

 

You would think that someone who avoids scammers in 99.5%+ of their trades would be praised, but instead we get banned.

Go find those trades that site owners have done and report them

[DyRusky]

Jesus H Christ, with your statements, sir, you're telling us that all traders must hold a Degree in TF2 Trading Forensics. I do agree we must do our accustomed background checks, and that there are some faults we must be on the lookout for, but when a user begins to perfectly balance out on over half of your Guidelines of spotting an obvious scammer/alt, where even some veteran traders and mods for that matter can agree that they, the user in question, checks out as legit, then theres a problem.

 

 

If a user who has had a Steam account for a while now just start playing and trading in TF2 and already has some high-value items, it's sketchy at best, but there are explanations. The user simply got some serious money in from an actual job and wants to tread the rocky waters of the TF2 Economy, they cashed out from a long-time trading in CS:GO/DOTA 2 and now has switched over to TF2, or they got lucky in the various lotteries that have opened in bp.tf and sweepstakes.tf.

 

The first lotto I took part of in bp.tf I wagered a B.M.O.C and won it, one of the items I won was an Unusual, should I check to see if that and all the items I've won in that lotto were passed or was wagered by a Scammer? If so, should I be banned? I didn't have control over this, I certainly couldn't back out of the lotto, but by your logic, that's not my problem, too bad so sad.

 

We aren't perfect, your rules sure as hell ain't perfect, so don't expect us to conduct the perfect background check, we have no access to every trader's Browser History, SSN, Blood Type, etc.

[sirploko]

Why is he doing this? Idk. To teach everyone a lesson and set an example out of these traders? To show everyone he's a new hotshot mod with great detective skills? To remove every large reputable trader from the community to make it easier for scammers to find targets? Beats me what he's hoping to accomplish here.

 

I have been with Outpost for 16 months now, I believe. Neither am I new, nor do I have to prove anything. I have paid my dues and I am not a mod anymore either. I was sent a report, investigated it, discussed it with every member and (recent) ex-member that is more senior than me (bar Helen who is not around much lately) and delivered the consensual verdict. I have no problem being the 'face' of the bans, as I not only issued them, I also fully support them.

 

This was not a one-man show, the whole of Outpost, at least the part that deals with these kind of reports, was involved in the process. You can stop your ad-hominem bullshit there, it will not lead anywhere and you already proved that you are beyond having any intelligent conversations.

[DyRusky]

You're asking us to do a elongated check of every user with limited time OP expects us to have an Unlimited amount of.

[CřٱΜΣ@]

you already proved that you are beyond having any intelligent conversations.

 

Same applies to you sir.

[sirploko]

 

..but you have to remember that to a certain extent you police the community with the consent of the community.

I don't think you know what you are talking about. I volunteer for a privately owned trading website, not the community. I enforce the rules, that every user who signed up agreed to follow, in the spirit and to the extent that I was taught when I started. Interpreting Outposts rules is a game that people like to play every once in a while, but guess what, if your name is not Sneeza, your opinion is not of any interest to me.

 

You may have noticed that very, very few SR tags are issued by Outpost. So to say that we have an impact on the community when we ban someone is hypocritical at best. These people are refused access to our site, nothing more nothing less. If other communities decide to issue SR tags based on our findings, it is hardly only us who interpret the rules the way we do.

 

Again, Outpost may be the largest TF2 trading site in existence, but it is not community-run or community-owned. It belongs to ZAM and Sneeza is the person responsible for maintaining the technical and operational flow. We are the volunteers that do what we were told to do. Our loyalty lies with Outpost, not what some users claim to be the "community" or some high-profile traders.

[AmazingRussian]

I have been with Outpost for 16 months now, I believe. Neither am I new, nor do I have to prove anything. I have paid my dues and I am not a mod anymore either. I was sent a report, investigated it, discussed it with every member and (recent) ex-member that is more senior than me (bar Helen who is not around much lately) and delivered the consensual verdict. I have no problem being the 'face' of the bans, as I not only issued them, I also fully support them.

 

This was not a one-man show, the whole of Outpost, at least the part that deals with these kind of reports, was involved in the process. You can stop your ad-hominem bullshit there, it will not lead anywhere and you already proved that you are beyond having any intelligent conversations.

 

I've proven I can't have any intelligent conversations? Am in dream world right now or is this real life...

 

With every post you make it's pretty apparent you will ignore any valid point anyone brings up in this thread, generally only addressing semantics for the resemblance of an intelligent discussion.

[Дебра]

So where exactly is the line between newbie and scammer? Or are all newbies scammers?

If you can only trade with people with 500+ hours in CS and TF2, years of TF2 trading experience and no life whatsoever wouldn't that make entering the TF2 economy near impossible?

[`Yahiamice]

Meanwhile, ret0rd could be sitting on his computer chair, sipping a cuppa' tea, reading this very thread , and laughing at the massive shitstorm that is currently happening due to his insane hiding skills.

[sirploko]

Alright, we came to the inevitable point where people just reiterate the same moot points over and over, just because they did not want to read the whole thread. I will leave it at this, the people affected know where to appeal, everyone else can circlejerk themselves to sleep here.

 

If you ran out of reading material, look up the groovypanda thread, you will find it is basically the same stuff.

 

tl;dr:

 

• Ret0rd is an obvious scammer alt by the SR FAQ definition
•  
• People who traded with him did so ignoring red flags
•  
• Our rules are not subject to change via bp.tf poll
•  
• If you want "justice", go make your own Outpost with Blackjack and hookers

[fmca]

I don't think you know what you are talking about. I volunteer for a privately owned trading website, not the community. I enforce the rules, that every user who signed up agreed to follow, in the spirit and to the extent that I was taught when I started. Interpreting Outposts rules is a game that people like to play every once in a while, but guess what, if your name is not Sneeza, your opinion is not of any interest to me.

 

You may have noticed that very, very few SR tags are issued by Outpost. So to say that we have an impact on the community when we ban someone is hypocritical at best. These people are refused access to our site, nothing more nothing less. If other communities decide to issue SR tags based on our findings, it is hardly only us who interpret the rules the way we do.

 

Again, Outpost may be the largest TF2 trading site in existence, but it is not community-run or community-owned. It belongs to ZAM and Sneeza is the person responsible for maintaining the technical and operational flow. We are the volunteers that do what we were told to do. Our loyalty lies with Outpost, not what some users claim to be the "community" or some high-profile traders.

 

 

And I think your manner of argumentation is a joke, but there we go. Your "privately owned trading website" has a big impact on the tf2 community, it really doesn't matter whether you deny it. And yes, your site does have a community of traders and buyers, primarily due to its current traffic flow, particularly in the higher end of the TF2 economy.

 

I think the majority of posters on this thread would agree with me when they said that the cases under discussion here have alienated a significant part of that community. Your condescending attitude doesn't help "if your name is not Sneeza, your opinion is not of any interest to me": seriously, bro? Where do you get off? With that kind of tone it feels as if you're going on a power trip, and have forgotton the only reason people use your site is because it's convenient and in general a good service. Do you seriously think your application and interpretation of these rules is going to get you more users? You rely on your users, and in many cases your customers in order to actually be relevant in the first place. Simply saying "well we don't give a flying f**k what the users think" sounds think a really good way to expand your business, right? I'm trying to do you a favour here buddy by pointing out that in this case, your application of the rules and the contempt it shows for the people who use your precious website is not going to help that site in the long run.

 

And no, it's not hypocritical at all to state that an outpost ban has community effects. As Gren has said, an Outpost ban makes his trading much harder and he feels he will simply give up at this point. Hopefully that will change if, say, Bazaar is capable of eating up your market share. The anger over this issue is real given the market position you (currently) have. If your loyalty lies with Outpost, then your loyalties also lies with your clients and user base. It's not hard to get your head around, although in your case you appear to be blocking your ears with cotton wool. I honestly cannot believe your attitude. Perhaps you guys ought to hire a PR guy or something.

[fmca]

 

Alright, we came to the inevitable point where people just reiterate the same moot points over and over, just because they did not want to read the whole thread. I will leave it at this, the people affected know where to appeal, everyone else can circlejerk themselves to sleep here.

 

If you ran out of reading material, look up the groovypanda thread, you will find it is basically the same stuff.

 

tl;dr:

 

• Ret0rd is an obvious scammer alt by the SR FAQ definition
•  
• People who traded with him did so ignoring red flags
•  
• Our rules are not subject to change via bp.tf poll
•  
• If you want "justice", go make your own Outpost with Blackjack and hookers

 

 

Yeah, we're just "circlejerking". We don't have any valid points at all. Ok, sure mate.

 

"If you want 'justice', go make your own Outpost with Blackjacks and hookers". Because it's so hard right? Good god man, have you ever heard of client relations in your entire life? I used to respect you, but you just come across as utterly, ridiculously inflexible and condescending. That last little point shows us precisely what you think of our legitimate concerns. We're not advocating for some kind of wild west. You're truly absurd. Get someone else next time to defend Outpost's reasoning, you're clearly not up to the job.

[DyRusky]

And thus there goes any possible fair and equal support from a once reliable Trading Site. Here's to more unanswered questions and neglected users unfairly banned because one staff's definition to a word is completely different than the rest of the world.

[Gren]

 

You may have noticed that very, very few SR tags are issued by Outpost. So to say that we have an impact on the community when we ban someone is hypocritical at best. These people are refused access to our site, nothing more nothing less. If other communities decide to issue SR tags based on our findings, it is hardly only us who interpret the rules the way we do.

 

 

 

That's simply not true sirploko.  An OP ban has a very real impact on the community.   You (meaning OP here) get by far the most traffic.  For example, look at this: 

 

http://bazaar.tf/trade/1354752

 

This is my Bazaar trade, opened 3 days ago.  As you can see, the trade has received only 22 views, no bookmarks and no offers.  These aren't shit hats.  These would have received numerous offers,bookmarks and easily 100+ views on OP by now.  As I said earlier, an OP ban is basically akin to a symbolic end to trading careers for people like me, who aren't ready to be super proactive and add people to trade left right and center (again, I work 40-50 hrs a week, I couldn't do that if I wanted to).   I relied on OP to advertise my hats while I was at work, so I could sort through the offers in the evenings and initiate the trades if I saw something I liked.  I have experience with bazaar and bp and know for a fact that it will be extremely difficult to get any offers at all and if I do, they probably won't be worth considering.  

 

These bans take traders out of the community, because there just isn't much point in continuing without access to the community's biggest trading hub.  Removing high tier traders by means of an OP ban most certainly has a very real impact on the community.   Sure, it's not as bad as an SR mark, but it's probably the next worse thing that can happen to you in TF2 trading.  

[fmca]

 snip 

 

He doesn't care mate. And if he actually speaks for all Outpost moderators then they definitely need to hire someone to deal with PR disasters like this.

 

Don't get me wrong, I generally like the service, but I think it's plain to many in the high end of TF2 trading that this market needs more competition with other websites. Maybe then they'll sit up and listen, and sirploko might not be allowed to denigrate the community's view of the site he works for. I get his zealousness and inflexibility, but boy he should not deal with incidents like this.

[sirploko]

And I think your manner of argumentation is a joke, but there we go. Your "privately owned trading website" has a big impact on the tf2 community, it really doesn't matter whether you deny it. And yes, your site does have a community of traders and buyers, primarily due to its current traffic flow, particularly in the higher end of the TF2 economy.

 

I think the majority of posters on this thread would agree with me when they said that the cases under discussion here have alienated a significant part of that community. Your condescending attitude doesn't help "if your name is not Sneeza, your opinion is not of any interest to me": seriously, bro? Where do you get off? With that kind of tone it feels as if you're going on a power trip, and have forgotton the only reason people use your site is because it's convenient and in general a good service. Do you seriously think your application and interpretation of these rules is going to get you more users? You rely on your users, and in many cases your customers in order to actually be relevant in the first place. Simply saying "well we don't give a flying f**k what the users think" sounds think a really good way to expand your business, right? I'm trying to do you a favour here buddy by pointing out that in this case, your application of the rules and the contempt it shows for the people who use your precious website is not going to help that site in the long run.

 

And no, it's not hypocritical at all to state that an outpost ban has community effects. As Gren has said, an Outpost ban makes his trading much harder and he feels he will simply give up at this point. Hopefully that will change if, say, Bazaar is capable of eating up your market share. The anger over this issue is real given the market position you (currently) have. If your loyalty lies with Outpost, then your loyalties also lies with your clients and user base. It's not hard to get your head around, although in your case you appear to be blocking your ears with cotton wool. I honestly cannot believe your attitude. Perhaps you guys ought to hire a PR guy or something.

 

And I think your manner of argumentation is a joke, but there we go. Your "privately owned trading website" has a big impact on the tf2 community, it really doesn't matter whether you deny it. And yes, your site does have a community of traders and buyers, primarily due to its current traffic flow, particularly in the higher end of the TF2 economy.

 

I think the majority of posters on this thread would agree with me when they said that the cases under discussion here have alienated a significant part of that community. Your condescending attitude doesn't help "if your name is not Sneeza, your opinion is not of any interest to me": seriously, bro? Where do you get off? With that kind of tone it feels as if you're going on a power trip, and have forgotton the only reason people use your site is because it's convenient and in general a good service. Do you seriously think your application and interpretation of these rules is going to get you more users? You rely on your users, and in many cases your customers in order to actually be relevant in the first place. Simply saying "well we don't give a flying f**k what the users think" sounds think a really good way to expand your business, right? I'm trying to do you a favour here buddy by pointing out that in this case, your application of the rules and the contempt it shows for the people who use your precious website is not going to help that site in the long run.

 

And no, it's not hypocritical at all to state that an outpost ban has community effects. As Gren has said, an Outpost ban makes his trading much harder and he feels he will simply give up at this point. Hopefully that will change if, say, Bazaar is capable of eating up your market share. The anger over this issue is real given the market position you (currently) have. If your loyalty lies with Outpost, then your loyalties also lies with your clients and user base. It's not hard to get your head around, although in your case you appear to be blocking your ears with cotton wool. I honestly cannot believe your attitude. Perhaps you guys ought to hire a PR guy or something.

You said that I would police the community with the consent of the community. That may be a valid description of Steamrep, but is not applicable to Outpost at all. I am not in a position to change Outposts rules, nor do I want to be.So the only person that has any bearing on how I go about my job is Sneeza. Sure, some people would like to see change, but it really, really does not matter to me. I am not Obama, change is not my business. This is a thankless job, but I knew this when I signed up. I did it for the superb company and because I have a strong dislike of scammers. But that also means that you have to form a coherent team and defend and explain the decisions you make as a team. Outside opinions will not penetrate this sphere, if they are factually wrong. All I heard today, was "it would take me too much time to check someone out". Guess what, I spent 30 hours a week checking people out for you, so you won't fall prey to them. All this whining makes me really disappointed, but then again, I am probably too old to empathize with it anyway.

 

If I had a scrap for every time people threatened to leave Outpost, boycott Outpost, go to bazaar, etc. Frost would not be the #1 BP. People are opportunists, all the guys who said they would leave after groovy, Tiensto, BigMac, you name it, were banned, are alive and well, bumping their trades as we speak. This high and mighty attitude of people demanding (the nerve) from us to adhere to their opinion of our rules, is tiring. So that may be the reason my replies were getting considerably more pointed. But I stand by the core message of everything I said here.

 

Wanna change Outposts rules? Join the team, pay your dues and do it from within. Look at the stuff we deal with and tell me in a year that there should be 50 shades of trading with scammers.

[Dan Cаstellanetа]

I feel as if I should give my 52 cents on this, despite me not even being a trader.

While I do feel something was justified, I don't feel a permanent ban was justified, especially with Frost. He's human. He's done a truck-load of high-tier trades and thousands of PayPal trades, and he's messed up 5 times out of... what, 7,000? He's human, once again. And personally, 5 out of 7000 is really good in terms of how much he's messed up and his total trades.

If an Outpost mod feels if he should be banned, at least reduce it to 2 weeks, or whatever you feel. 

Also, about the ret0rd person being an "obvious alt", if you have to dig for evidence for him being an obvious alt, then he's not an obvious alt.

[fmca]

You said that I would police the community with the consent of the community. That may be a valid description of Steamrep, but is not applicable to Outpost at all. I am not in a position to change Outposts rules, nor do I want to be.So the only person that has any bearing on how I go about my job is Sneeza. Sure, some people would like to see change, but it really, really does not matter to me. I am not Obama, change is not my business. This is a thankless job, but I knew this when I signed up. I did it for the superb company and because I have a strong dislike of scammers. But that also means that you have to form a coherent team and defend and explain the decisions you make as a team. Outside opinions will not penetrate this sphere, if they are factually wrong. All I heard today, was "it would take me too much time to check someone out". Guess what, I spent 30 hours a week checking people out for you, so you won't fall prey to them. All this whining makes me really disappointed, but then again, I am probably too old to empathize with it anyway.

 

If I had a scrap for every time people threatened to leave Outpost, boycott Outpost, go to bazaar, etc. Frost would not be the #1 BP. People are opportunists, all the guys who said they would leave after groovy, Tiensto, BigMac, you name it, were banned, are alive and well, bumping their trades as we speak. This high and mighty attitude of people demanding (the nerve) from us to adhere to their opinion of our rules, is tiring. So that may be the reason my replies were getting considerably more pointed. But I stand by the core message of everything I said here.

 

Wanna change Outposts rules? Join the team, pay your dues and do it from within. Look at the stuff we deal with and tell me in a year that there should be 50 shades of trading with scammers.

 

No, I can tell that seeing change happen does not matter to you. You've made that quite clear. With that in mind I find your invitation to change Outpost from within somewhat laughable. Along with your total confidence in the site as a viable going concern over the long term, not that I can predict anything, but the point is you already have competitors. Why give them free market potential? I truly don't understand it. And your assertion that "in a year there should be 50 shades of trading with scammers"... well all I can really say is your worldview is so black and white you're essentially blind. It doesn't merit further comment. 

 

We all have a strong dislike of scammers. But in my opinion you've allowed that to blind you to wider trading contexts that have already been mentioned. I don't see the need to go over them again.

 

This is not about facts actually, it's about definitions, in this case your definition of "obvious" versus everyone else's definition of "obvious". With the facts at hand, "obvious" was the conclusion you reached and "not obvious" was a conclusion a significant number of traders reached. Clearly, sirploko, you are unwilling to concede that your version of the truth does not generate the kind of general assent that the term "obvious" usually implies.

 

We all spend time checking out the people who we trade with as much as possible. But there is an already a clear discrepancy between your attitude towards Outpost, and towards large traders in particular. Outpost cannot possibly remove all scammers from the site. Big traders however, are expected to only be allowed a single error before the permaban-hammer strikes on the second error. It does not take a great logical leap to see how this can be labelled double standards, no matter what your intentions or limitations are.

 

Yes, I suspect you are unable to empathise with this so-called "whining". Again, you betray your contempt for us. I would categorise it as the raising of objections. But if you seek to reduce us to mere children, upset that our toys have been thrown out of the pram, I would again recommend you find someone who actually knows how to operate in PR situations. I'm sure the company can afford it.

 

You're quite the one to complain of people demonstrating a high-and-mighty attitude. Ironic, really.

 

We're not demanding you adhere to our opinions of your rules, we're making it clear that your rules require serious reform and clarification. Again, you seek to portray us as doing something we are not. Perhaps you should think on that. Given what you've said so far, I can only hope that you will.

[sirploko]

That's simply not true sirploko.  An OP ban has a very real impact on the community.   You (meaning OP here) get by far the most traffic.  For example, look at this: 

 

http://bazaar.tf/trade/1354752

 

This is my Bazaar trade, opened 3 days ago.  As you can see, the trade has received only 22 views, no bookmarks and no offers.  These aren't shit hats.  These would have received numerous offers,bookmarks and easily 100+ views on OP by now.  As I said earlier, an OP ban is basically akin to a symbolic end to trading careers for people like me, who aren't ready to be super proactive and add people to trade left right and center (again, I work 40-50 hrs a week, I couldn't do that if I wanted to).   I relied on OP to advertise my hats while I was at work, so I could sort through the offers in the evenings and initiate the trades if I saw something I liked.  I have experience with bazaar and bp and know for a fact that it will be extremely difficult to get any offers at all and if I do, they probably won't be worth considering.  

 

These bans take traders out of the community, because there just isn't much point in continuing without access to the community's biggest trading hub.  Removing high tier traders by means of an OP ban most certainly has a very real impact on the community.   Sure, it's not as bad as an SR mark, but it's probably the next worse thing that can happen to you in TF2 trading.  

Gren, you have been very polite and reasonable during this ordeal, that is something I appreciate very much. I understand that for someone like you, an Outpost ban is like a death sentence when it comes to the visibility of your trades. But put yourself in my shoes for a moment. We have a guideline that we follow when it comes to reports. Clear cut cases are solely up to our discretion and we deal with dozens of those every week, if not hundreds.

 

This case had been sitting for a while before it was brought to my attention. It was discussed at length by everyone involved at OP and a decision was made. That decision is what is important to me. I did not make that decision, nor did I campaign for a certain outcome. I have nothing to gain from banning anyone, so the result was up in the air until a consensus was reached.

 

We mainly looked at one case and it was determined that this trade was in violation of trade rule #8. Now imagine I would have banned that user alone and did not take action against the other people. We have a strike system and if one user gets a strike, we can not let other users get away with the same. Many people disagree with our ruling that ret0rd was obvious, but we have had similar cases like him before and we have to draw the line somewhere. That's why we look at the facts only and once we determine an outcome, it will lead to bans or not.

 

We know that it will inevitably lead to an uproar from the more outspoken users, and since I was the one doing the banning, I took it upon myself to do the explaining as well.

 

At that point however, there is no point in discussing the procedure or the validity of the ban. The people who make that decision put in their time and effort and no matter what some users might say or claim, it will not (or at the very least rarely) affect the outcome. If we made mistakes determining who traded with ret0rd, we are all ears and willing to correct misplaced bans. But for the ones that did trade with him, the results are in. I could give you a who is who of people that we banned against public opinion and I can guarantee you that the most outspoken critics are often the ones who are the most ill-informed.

 

Having said that, I think that you and one or two other users who received a permaban, should be allowed back as soon as our appeals admins see fit. Your ban history with us is not bad at all, disregarding the 2 scammer trades and I highly value your calm and sensible demeanour. Please do consider appealing and if the appeal gets closed due to not much time having passed, there will always be the option to open another appeal in a few months time.

 

This is by no means the end of your Outpost journey if you decide that you will do your time and come back.

[BankingBot]

We do not cast aside anyone lightly, but we owe it to our other users and ourselves, that we keep our integrity. With your record with us, it is very likely that you and some of the other users banned this week will get another chance, so don't think an appeal will be useless. This recent ban may not be overturned, but we did and will continue to accept back users that were permabanned after some months have passed.

 

Of course, if you feel slighted by us and don't want to come back ever again, that is not something to hold against you. But we are reasonable when it comes to having a second look at a user that had a few missteps. Garry accepted countless second and third appeals, when he thought enough time had passed and the user learned his lesson.

 

 

"learned his lesson"? I don't get why people has to wait months for a mistake on your part though. My first ban for ban evasion is supposed to let me learn a lesson when my original ban wasn't even legit. Also, the user below was marked wrongly and skial removed his mark in a day but he has to wait  for his outpost appeal since he needs to undergo a punishment for something he hasn't done in order to learn his lesson. Recently, napolean @ bazaar.tf added me to investigate some stuff, even he says that "i don't know what the outpost staff are thinking"

http://forums.backpack.tf/index.php?/topic/41594-need-help-tf2-outpost-ban-appeal/

http://i.imgur.com/LyKfZ2g.jpg

 

edit: he has been unbanned after a week though he added an admin to ask about it.

[sirploko]

 

 

This is not about facts actually, it's about definitions, in this case your definition of "obvious" versus everyone else's definition of "obvious". With the facts at hand, "obvious" was the conclusion you reached and "not obvious" was a conclusion a significant number of traders reached. Clearly, sirploko, you are unwilling to concede that your version of the truth does not generate the kind of general assent that the term "obvious" usually implies.

 

 

I am still not sure if you just want to argue about this or if you did not read what was written before. This is not "my" decision I am defending, this decision was made by the whole of Outpost that deals with these matters, and even 2 ex-members I consulted for advice.

 

The obviousness does not get determined by a coinflip, it is judged by the SR FAQ guideline. You will find my drawn out check of these guideline against ret0rds profile a few pages back. If it was everyone elses opinion of obvious that mattered, or rather the opinion of the users who got caught, I'm sure there would be no such thing as a scammer alt. But just for you, I will show that picture of the guideline once again:

 

This is from the page that defines "obvious" in our context. If you think that having a few games and Steam level 40 makes a person legit, you are sadly mistaken. Furthermore, most of you have no experience when it comes to these matters. Apart from Polar I don't think I have seen a reply from a community admin or mod yet. So, sure, you are entitled to your own opinion, but please don't assume that it has any weight in this discussion. I would wager a bet, that you have not even read the SR FAQ before, it's just a hunch though.

 

 

We're not demanding you adhere to our opinions of your rules, we're making it clear that your rules require serious reform and clarification. Again, you seek to portray us as doing something we are not. Perhaps you should think on that. Given what you've said so far, I can only hope that you will.

 

What's the bloody difference?

 

"we're making it clear that your rules require serious reform and clarification"

 

Who are these "we" people and why do you think they have a say when it comes to the application of Outposts rules? Or rather Steamreps rules, since rule #8 is a direct mirror of SRs policy. Again, it is your prerogative to disagree, but you have no say in these matters whatsoever, that's what I meant when I said only Sneezas opinion about this matters to me. Even if I did agree 100% and were determined to change our rules, who do you think would have to approve of that?

 

There is no right to access Outpost, it has become a cornerstone of the trading community, but that does not make it the property of said community. If you had a pub and I were a guy who likes to start fights, you could refuse service to me at any point, even if all of my mates agreed that I am a good guy deep down who does not seek trouble. Hell you don't even need a reason to refuse your service and guess what, neither does Outpost (apart from maybe for premium members who have not broken any rules).

 

The fact that we ARE so black and white should not be a bad thing in your eyes, if we weren't, there would be a lot more room for abuse and favouritism. I am proud of the work my colleagues are doing and we owe a lot of it to the uncompromizing integrity of BSOD, our former head of staff and the creator of many of our guidelines. Our work follows his stellar example and because we adhere to his mantra of facts and proof, we do not have to be ashamed of our decisions ever.

[Gren]

 

Having said that, I think that you and one or two other users who received a permaban, should be allowed back as soon as our appeals admins see fit. Your ban history with us is not bad at all, disregarding the 2 scammer trades and I highly value your calm and sensible demeanour. Please do consider appealing and if the appeal gets closed due to not much time having passed, there will always be the option to open another appeal in a few months time.

 

This is by no means the end of your Outpost journey if you decide that you will do your time and come back.

 

Thanks mate.  I will let some time pass and see where it all leads.  Nice to know that the door to an appeal is open.  

 

Cheers