Woifi The Viking Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 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 It's not about the amount of profit. It's the % difference in price that matters (at least it seems so). 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? I mean that would be such a ridiculous reason to ban but it falls under the 20% "rule" obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Bucket Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 It's not about the amount of profit. It's the % difference in price that matters (at least it seems so). I mean that would be such a ridiculous reason to ban but it falls under the 20% "rule" obviously. Is it really? People who shark cancers never get banned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liddojunior Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 Jon used a system to find these bps and if he were after unusuals then this would be 100% wrong. But he was gettin chem sets, sets that i would give out for free/cheap if i got them. They're extremely subjective and on the same scale as craft nos I dont know the value of these items and it always depends per set. And just 20% off the item value is not sharking. If you get a 10 key item for 8 keys. No one would care. Even if you went and found the trader using bp search such as bptf premium. Anyone who uses premium to find craft nos and unusuals and get them with a 20-25% discount are going to be banned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AwesomeMcCoolName Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 But the principle still applies, so if it is done on profit; what is the limit till it is regarded as sharking? thats honestly a hard question to answer.... Its hard to rationalize banning a shark who sharked a craft hat for 1 weapon, but its easy if its a 10 key item for like a key. IMO the value doesn't really matter, if its clearly a shark, and done multiple times than it deserves a ban. shark: someone who takes advantage of a lack of knowledge and offers a fraction of the actual worth (so, sure, 20% works fine). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AwesomeMcCoolName Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 And just 20% off the item value is not sharking. If you get a 10 key item for 8 keys. No one would care. Even if you went and found the trader using bp search such as bptf premium. its not 20% off, its 20% of the worth (so 80% off). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woifi The Viking Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 Is it really? People who shark cancers never get banned Feel free to report them then: I quote the rule here btw: #6 No 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). We participate in a network of trading sites that do not tolerate taking advantage of other users for personal gain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Bucket Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 Feel free to report them then: I quote the rule here btw: hmm valuable is a word there. so your weapon and craft hat example wouldn't really work. also, the chem sets arent that valuable, are they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liddojunior Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 hmm valuable is a word there. so your weapon and craft hat example wouldn't really work. also, the chem sets arent that valuable, are they? They arent. Theyre wayy to subjective. And they go all over the place even for the same item It only should matter on unusuals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AwesomeMcCoolName Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 hmm valuable is a word there. so your weapon and craft hat example wouldn't really work. also, the chem sets arent that valuable, are they? Sharking is sharking. If you only shark a craft hat once or twice then its nothing, but if you continuously go out and target people because of their lack of knowledge and continue to shark (even a craft hat) then i'd say you deserve a ban. The whole idea behind sharking, imo, is either sharking big items occasionally or sharking a lot of small items. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woifi The Viking Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 hmm valuable is a word there. so your weapon and craft hat example wouldn't really work. also, the chem sets arent that valuable, are they? Oh I just re-read them and yeah. My example would not work. So are chemistry sets valueable? Most are like ~ keys. Archimedes is the only really valueable one. According to steamrep a bills was always the border for trading with scammers. But I guess if he did buy 10 of those archimdedes chem sets cheap that's too much. And since he doesn't want to stop doing this.~ Sharking is sharking. If you only shark a craft hat once or twice then its nothing, but if you continuously go out and target people because of their lack of knowledge and continue to shark (even a craft hat) then i'd say you deserve a ban. The whole idea behind sharking, imo, is either sharking big items occasionally or sharking a lot of small items. The rules are only for valueable items. You don't get banned for trading paints with scammers for example, even if trading with scammers is not allowed. Are you a bad person if you trade paints with scammers? Are you a bad person if you get 1 ref profit out of craft hats? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AwesomeMcCoolName Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 But I guess if he did buy 10 of those archimdedes chem sets cheap that's too much. And since he doesn't want to stop doing this. Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woifi The Viking Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 Exactly. Yeah I guess that's the final consense. Well that's it I guess. Also before people dig that out, he closed this suggestion for a higher price with an interesting reason: http://backpack.tf/vote/id/5252ed164dd7b82d1c8b4568 Maybe he wanted to buy them cheap a little bit longer? (Just saying, imo it's a bit paranoid to accuse him of anything here. xd) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatch Rawer Beryl Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 Can you say drama? Anyway, from my perspective, a logical argument could be made for either side in this case. On the one hand, Jon did kind of target uninformed and inexperienced users on a daily basis in the interest of profit. However, on the other hand, the people he bought from might never have bothered trying to sell their strangifiers or find out what they're worth. They might even have sold for less than what Jon offered. So in that way, it was beneficial to both parties. Regardless of what happens, I will be watching with great interest. Have an obligatory gif: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjjon123 Posted November 14, 2013 Author Share Posted November 14, 2013 Yeah I guess that's the final consense. Well that's it I guess. Also before people dig that out, he closed this suggestion for a higher price with an interesting reason: http://backpack.tf/vote/id/5252ed164dd7b82d1c8b4568 Maybe he wanted to buy them cheap a little bit longer? (Just saying, imo it's a bit paranoid to accuse him of anything here. xd) That was when I first realized that there was a value. I didnt pursue any of this business until after that suggestion. And the reason I closed was that it was obvious they were worth more, there was evidence in the comments and even in the proof of higher offers and sales. If this whole ordeal ends up with me being perm. banned from outpost and perhaps other sites as well and stripped of moderator privileges, then so be it. It might be that this whole situation will let me phaze out of tf2 trading easily and painlessly. I don't feel wronged or the urge to check my trades like I normally would in a ban situation. It is like I am leaving with a sense of purpose and closure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puddingkip Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 I don't think Brad knew about it until today Was talking about today. That brad should have given him a warning, not demote him. Saying its not illegal per se, but that it wasn't a smart move as a leader of tf2community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woifi The Viking Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 Can you say drama? Anyway, from my perspective, a logical argument could be made for either side in this case. On the one hand, Jon did kind of target uninformed and inexperienced users on a daily basis in the interest of profit. However, on the other hand, the people he bought from might never have bothered trying to sell their strangifiers or find out what they're worth. They might even have sold for less than what Jon offered. So in that way, it was beneficial to both parties. Same would apply to a 30 bud unusual lying around in a bp. He may not even really play tf2 any longer. If I pay him 100$ that's 100$ he would have probably lost because he would never sell it until tf2 dies. Still a shark. Was talking about today. That brad should have given him a warning, not demote him. Saying its not illegal per se, but that it wasn't a smart move as a leader of tf2community. Well if we compare it with the other jon (outpost admin (how fitting)), he got a warning first. But reputation is that important on bp.tf so I'm not sure if that's ok here. But atm nothing is final btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AwesomeMcCoolName Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 Was talking about today. That brad should have given him a warning, not demote him. Saying its not illegal per se, but that it wasn't a smart move as a leader of tf2community. the problem with not demoting him immediately is that it makes bptf look like an accomplice, which it really doesn't need. Bptf already takes a lot of shit about mods being manipulators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puddingkip Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 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. I was talking about random people with no intention to sell them, guess I wasn't clear enough. He didn't select them on lack of knowledge. He added all owners of good sets (at least that's what he claims). So by buying 100 sets he bought 20 off uninformed people. Sadly we live in a free world so I think I have to deal with it that you think its ban worthy, I for sure don't think it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puddingkip Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 This is more akin to assisted suicide. Both parties agree, so should it be okay? It should be (and is, if you're a doctor) completely legal. But topic, here we come, climbing back on you as we have drifted off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AwesomeMcCoolName Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 I was talking about random people with no intention to sell them, guess I wasn't clear enough. He didn't select them on lack of knowledge. He added all owners of good sets (at least that's what he claims). So by buying 100 sets he bought 20 off uninformed people. Sadly we live in a free world so I think I have to deal with it that you think its ban worthy, I for sure don't think it is. I have an over 80% success rate for those who accept my request. You're not going to get an 80% success rate unless you carefully pick and choose your targets. I.e. he clearly avoided traders if he was getting 80%+ success rates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HusKy Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 Looks more like a witch hunt. No proper rules set, yet people are getting banned. Trying to regulate virtual open market is weird. and btw. Youtube video inside a signature, seriously? Why is that even allowed? edit. Didn't notice the small X in the corner. Much better now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puddingkip Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 Looks more like a witch hunt. No proper rules set, yet people are getting banned. Trying to regulate virtual open market is weird. and btw. Youtube video inside a signature, seriously? Why is that even allowed? Just hide signatures. And somebody else has it. And I'm friends with a lot of mods and brad so I can do what I want. I'm a strong independent black woman. And just hide my/all signatures. That's what I do Oh and Woifi brought the video under my attention claiming it should be chancellor's song but I stole it because he's a (jk lub u chancellor) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woifi The Viking Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 Just hide signatures. And somebody else has it. And I'm friends with a lot of mods and brad so I can do what I want. I'm a strong independent black woman. And just hide my/all signatures. That's what I do Oh and Woifi brought the video under my attention claiming it should be chancellor's song but I stole it because he's a (jk lub u chancellor) Edited your sig. <3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoDoRiN Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 If Outpost is banning people from buying NORMAL ITEMS, Outpost is sort of going too far on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AwesomeMcCoolName Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 If Outpost is banning people from buying NORMAL ITEMS, Outpost is sort of going too far on this. If it was once in a while i'd agree, but if you're using a script and targeting inexperienced traders then you're seriously asking for trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.