Jump to content

Under Outpost Rule #6, I am a shark. Update #2 appeal denied [w/ pastebin]


jjjon123

Recommended Posts

Pastebin of my appeal to helenangel  SORRY ITS OLD, I never posted it.

 

http://pastebin.com/dVNhUU0Y

 

Old post:

 

 

 

UPDATE 1: It appears to me that my ban and also the interpretation of TF2Outpost's guidelines for sharking has been heavily based on the personal options by certain members of the TF2Outpost's moderating staff. Knowing this fact and that a head administrator has come in to present an option to appeal this ban to those higher up has persuaded me to move forward and appeal this. It is no longer about TF2Outpost's view of sharking as a whole but about certain individuals who subjectively interpret those views to fit their own convictions and standards. Once I receive a response from HelenAngel who has invited me to appeal this matter, I will post a copy of my appeal and her response to this issue.

 

For about a month now, I have been purchasing chemistry sets that I find with a certain backpack scanning website. I find users with good chemistry sets (I skip ones like toss-proof-towel, merc scarf, birdman, and camera beard) and manually check thier inventory to see if the inputs are acceptable.

Once the user accepts my friend request, I usually offer them ~1 key for their chemistry set regardless if its for a sight for sore eyes or an Archimedes. I have an over 80% success rate for those who accept my request, I even get people who give me their sets for free because they do not know and frankly do not care what they are for. Some even know they are worth something but do not care anyway.

Regardless, Under outpost's rule #6, I am a shark by the book. In some of my more profitable trades, I pay well under 20%, and even in some cases, 10%. Here is the proof:

Though we have a very specific definition of sharking: "Sharking is defined as manipulating another user into trading/selling a valuable item for 10% or less of its accepted value (or 20% or less for users with less than 200 hours in that game)."

Wait, "manipulating"? When did I manipulate?

http://imageshack.us/a/img203/9687/ynpv.png
http://imageshack.us/a/img24/8340/8ddu.png
http://imageshack.us/a/img132/7055/stnm.png
http://imageshack.us/a/img818/8387/irqm.png
http://imageshack.us/a/img20/2057/1nps.png
http://imageshack.us/a/img843/8577/d1u9.png

Note that this is probably only half of the total under 20% value trades that I have done.

http://imageshack.us/a/img703/9720/olv2.png

Here is my total loot. In addition to this, many have already sold on the market.

In outpost's attempts to regulate "morality" by numbers and figures, I am labeled as a shark. Whether that label is fitting or not, that is for you to decide. I have no plans to appeal this ban as I want to be the example to others of the slippery slope of regulating free market trade.

What promted me to "turn myself" in was this case:
http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showpost.php?p=35082270&postcount=162

Some nobody who just obtained a strange bloodbanker and like a typical outposter, he exaggerated its value putting his b/o at 15 buds and writing in capital letters how rare it was and that it was 1 of 1.

Apparently someone fell for it and traded him a unusual HWNN and the other guy was banned for "sharking". I do not know what kind of persuading went on behind the scenes, but what bothered me is that many people make retarded buyouts and exaggerated claims of rarity and value. Yet in the case that a ignorant player falls for the claims of a over-zealous trader, the trader has the "esteemed moral obligation" to stoop down and explain to newbie the ins and outs of trading?

Let me tell you, and I believe that this would apply to many traders. If someone had a BRAND new item or even an old obscure rarity and they saw the opportunity to sell it to a sucker, they would take that opportunity and run with it. The majority of traders would not take their time to explain the world of trading.

I want this case to be an example of outpost's determination to govern "morality" as it approaches the fringe realm of free market regulation and control.

I do not plan to appeal this decision Nevermind, the ban no longer has any basis! What am I thinking? or to cease from obtaining chemistry sets.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 121
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Seems like a horrible reason to ban.

 

Sharking is if I would add you, and say "hey, you have that ugly moon pith helm. It's really only worth about 5 keys, but I can give you this super awesome hat called "ellis cap", which is worth quite more, but as I really want a pith helm, will you please trade me?"

 

That's sharking.

 

What you did is perfectly fine (well I don't know the chat logs, but it doesn't seem like sharking and I truly believe you'd shark for such a pathetic amount).

 

Outpost needs to rethink its sharking rules

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way it's written, I can't help but agree with the ban.

You used a script to find Chem sets, full well knowing the seller was unaware of their value and offered a fraction of their worth over and over again.

 

The way i see it, there are 3 types of sharks. 

  • Manipulative shark
    • Convincing someone an item is worth more/less.
  • Active shark
    • Going out of your way to find someone who doesn't know any better and take advantage of that lack of knowledge. (i.e. using a script/jumping from server to server looking for a noob). 
  • Passive shark
    • Playing on a game server and someone offers to trade item x for item y in the chat because they really want item y. 

Manipulative/active sharking should be given a ban on the spot, no question; passive sharking on the other hand is more subjective and shouldn't be rewarded with a ban as most people would take a great deal if they were offered it. 

 

 

Seems like a horrible reason to ban.

 

Sharking is if I would add you, and say "hey, you have that ugly moon pith helm. It's really only worth about 5 keys, but I can give you this super awesome hat called "ellis cap", which is worth quite more, but as I really want a pith helm, will you please trade me?"

 

That's sharking.

 

What you did is perfectly fine (well I don't know the chat logs, but it doesn't seem like sharking and I truly believe you'd shark for such a pathetic amount).

 

Outpost needs to rethink its sharking rules

See my post above. If its the way he described it, then he fully deserves the ban. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly don't believe Outpost should ban for sharking. I can agree with banning scammers, as we all can, but to ban someone for getting a good deal is ridiculous. It is up to each trader to know values of items. If you dont know the value of your item, you should not be able to complain when you trade it away for much less than its worth. Jjon played the market as we all do. Its not like he mislead anyone into believing that the chem sets were worthless. He made an offer and the owners of the chem sets agreed to his price. To ban for this, I find ridiculous

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone in a community leading role ( being an admin on one of the most popular TF2 site out there ), I think if you informed the person that their item was worth a certain amount and still negotiated a good price it would've been fine by me and probably the entire community. But from what you wrote above, it seems you exploited the lack of knowledge from others for your own personal benefit.

 

For anyone else reading this, Jon's admin access has been revoked until we reach a decision on this matter within the admin team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly don't believe Outpost should ban for sharking. I can agree with banning scammers, as we all can, but to ban someone for getting a good deal is ridiculous. It is up to each trader to know values of items. If you dont know the value of your item, you should not be able to complain when you trade it away for much less than its worth. Jjon played the market as we all do. Its not like he mislead anyone into believing that the chem sets were worthless. He made an offer and the owners of the chem sets agreed to his price. To ban for this, I find ridiculous

It depends on the type of shark. If you're a manipulative shark or an active shark then you deserve a ban. You're going out of your way to find people with a lack of knowledge and specifically target them. Thats clearly deserving of a ban. If you sharked someone passively--i.e. they came to you (you were on a trade/game server and the person just wanted an item---even if they didn't know its value and offered you item x for item y) then you shouldn't be banned. But the type of shark is crucial in that determination. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is complete nonsense from the outpost accuse you of this !!

What you wrote " I find users with good chemistry sets  and manually check thier inventory to see if the inputs are acceptable " - I was doing the same only on steam market ( I pay steam money) . I collected some strengs - but I bought for myself not for sale ( I do not see any difference for sale or myself  - people want to sell - they got what they wanted ) . Neither I nor you not obliged to provide free lessons tf 2 item trade  for beginners .

I support you mate . You will not stay without chocolate .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was doing the same only on steam market ( I pay steam money) .

 

If they counted the steam market. Cranwell would have had to say good bye to outpost long ago. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way it's written, I can't help but agree with the ban.

 

You used a script to find Chem sets, full well knowing the seller was unaware of their value and offered a fraction of their worth over and over again.

 

The way i see it, there are 3 types of sharks. 

  • Manipulative shark
    • Convincing someone an item is worth more/less.
  • Active shark
    • Going out of your way to find someone who doesn't know any better and take advantage of that lack of knowledge. (i.e. using a script/jumping from server to server looking for a noob). 
  • Passive shark
    • Playing on a game server and someone offers to trade item x for item y in the chat because they really want item y. 

Manipulative/active sharking should be given a ban on the spot, no question; passive sharking on the other hand is more subjective and shouldn't be rewarded with a ban as most people would take a great deal if they were offered it. 

 

 

 

See my post above. If its the way he described it, then he fully deserves the ban. 

 

 

It depends on the type of shark. If you're a manipulative shark or an active shark then you deserve a ban. You're going out of your way to find people with a lack of knowledge and specifically target them. Thats clearly deserving of a ban. If you sharked someone passively--i.e. they came to you (you were on a trade/game server and the person just wanted an item---even if they didn't know its value and offered you item x for item y) then you shouldn't be banned. But the type of shark is crucial in that determination. 

 

Maybe a bad example, but your 3 types are like going to yard sales and you can do 3 things.

 

1. Manipulative. You sell your laptop, don't know what it's worth and I say it's about 6 $, but I will give you 10$ right now because I really need a laptop for my school work

 

2. Active  You travel the whole country and ask people if they have a laptop for sale. You will offer them $250, take or leave.

 

3. Passive. You visit a yard sale and see me selling my new laptop for $200 and you buy it.

 

 

 

1 is illegal (irl too I believe) and I disagree with it. 2 however is something I dislike, and I insta block people that do this (or shut the door in my example), very annoying BUT not illegal 3 is completely fine

 

As he did 2, I wouldn't ban him. Maybe Brad could have told him he didn't approve of what jjon was doing, but as he didn't even use outpost for this, they should NOT ban him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they counted the steam market. Cranwell would have had to say good bye to outpost long ago. 

 

 

This is complete nonsense from the outpost accuse you of this !!

What you wrote " I find users with good chemistry sets  and manually check thier inventory to see if the inputs are acceptable " - I was doing the same only on steam market ( I pay steam money) . I collected some strengs - but I bought for myself not for sale ( I do not see any difference for sale or myself  - people want to sell - they got what they wanted ) . Neither I nor you not obliged to provide free lessons tf 2 item trade  for beginners .

I support you mate . You will not stay without chocolate .

 

Different case. These are sellers. Not even outpost bans for buying a good deal. If I put up a key for 2.33 on outpost, the buyer isn't a shark. Same with a key for $0.50 on market

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe a bad example, but your 3 types are like going to yard sales and you can do 3 things.

 

1. Manipulative. You sell your laptop, don't know what it's worth and I say it's about 6 $, but I will give you 10$ right now because I really need a laptop for my school work

 

2. Active  You travel the whole country and ask people if they have a laptop for sale. You will offer them $250, take or leave.

 

3. Passive. You visit a yard sale and see me selling my new laptop for $200 and you buy it.

 

 

 

1 is illegal (irl too I believe) and I disagree with it. 2 however is something I dislike, and I insta block people that do this (or shut the door in my example), very annoying BUT not illegal 3 is completely fine

 

As he did 2, I wouldn't ban him. Maybe Brad could have told him he didn't approve of what jjon was doing, but as he didn't even use outpost for this, they should NOT ban him

I don't think Brad knew about it until today

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2. Active  You travel the whole country and ask people if they have a laptop for sale. You will offer them $250, take or leave.

Theres also a bit of a difference.

He is targeting non-traders, so its more like walking up to some random person on the street who had no intention to sell the item, and was specifically targeted due to their lack of knowledge. 

 

Either way i still think anyone who goes out of their way to target someone/a group deserves a ban. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly think banning based on sharking is stupid.

 

Traders need to stop being babied and TRADE AT THEIR OWN RISK.

 

This brings a whole new debate on the morality of sharking.

 

Good luck Jon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Traders need to stop being babied and TRADE AT THEIR OWN RISK.

I agree with the personal responsibility part, but thats like saying police shouldn't arrest murderers and just let people take care of themselves. (yes, i'm comparing murdering to sharking :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the personal responsibility part, but thats like saying police shouldn't arrest murderers and just let people take care of themselves. (yes, i'm comparing murdering to sharking :P

The comparison is odd, but I see where you're coming from.

 

Did any of the sharked users complain about being sharked however?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theres also a bit of a difference.

He is targeting non-traders, so its more like walking up to some random person on the street who had no intention to sell the item, and was specifically targeted due to their lack of knowledge. 

 

Either way i still think anyone who goes out of their way to target someone/a group deserves a ban.

Not really.

 

Some of the people ive come across are seasoned traders, they just have no clue what chemistry sets are or what they do.

 

The comparison is odd, but I see where you're coming from.

 

Did any of the sharked users complain about being sharked however?

Nope, never has happened. One guy was even a korean dude. We are now friends, and he often chats with me through google translate. He was flabbergasted when I offered him a key for his archimedes set.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is ludicrous. I have a post in the works that is about the stupid discussion that's been going on for years now. Stay tuned.

I can't wait to see this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the personal responsibility part, but thats like saying police shouldn't arrest murderers and just let people take care of themselves. (yes, i'm comparing murdering to sharking :P

This is more akin to assisted suicide. Both parties agree, so should it be okay?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Tf2OP ban is ridiculous, but I can understand revoking admin rights -- I would expect a prominent figure in any community to be a beacon of light, not a opportunistic snake oil salesman.  Just my opinion, I doubt what I say carries any weight anyways

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well it's something different to shark a 20 bud unusual for 1 bud or to buy an 8 key item for 1 key.

 

Will I get also banned if I buy a craft hat for a weapon (multiple times etc)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well it's something different to shark a 20 bud unusual for 1 bud or to buy an 8 key item for 1 key.

 

Will I get also banned if I buy a craft hat for a weapon (multiple times etc)?

You would have to do that A LOT of time to make the profit Jon did. It's on a much smaller scale, so you would need to do it a ton more times

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will I get also banned if I buy a craft hat for a weapon (multiple times etc)?

 

paying nearly 96% less than what the item is worth?  How ISN'T that sharking, at least if you're the one who offers that deal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You would have to do that A LOT of time to make the profit Jon did. It's on a much smaller scale, so you would need to do it a ton more times

 

But the principle still applies, so if it is done on profit; what is the limit till it is regarded as sharking?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...