Open discussion on rules for trading with scammers (Part 2)

[Pixxi0us]

Hello. 

 

I dont think the rule should be removed at all, I mean, what would we benefit if the rule gets removed? That will just motivate scammers to scam even more since now they are free to trade with. Scammers get banned on BP.tf but not instantly on marketplace, unless someone reports it, and they can easly leave bp.tf and drop on marketplace all the hats for good deals and sell everything within 1h or so without getting caught. 

 

Of course theres still people using other methods to trade with them whether is trough site bots, alts or even marketplace or steam market since that doesnt require back ground check. 

 

In the other hand we still see people that that denies huge deals just because they are marked and dont want to get banned they own selfs. I think that the rule should stay cuz that prevent a lot of other trades and if we allow that this would be a monopoly of trades with scammers and a lot more scams will happend. 

 

 

Editing :

I have been reading the new comments which made be change my opinion a bit. 

Many people get banned without knowing or just because they didnt Check properly who they are trading with. Myself got banned 2 times without knowing I was trading scammers and I think that happends to many other people (high traders / people that just trade to keep, etc) and they can ruin their trading carrer with small mistakes. 

 

 

Plus from what I see many people who get permantly banned dont give a fuck anymore and keep trading them constantly, "im banned already what can I lose if I trade scammers" - of course they can still get a tag of scammer fence (which is punishable too if we trade those people) - not even to mention the ones that turn into scammers themselfs. 

 

At this point I will stay neutral and I will agree whether the decision is removing or keeping the rule. 

 

I have not read all those comments above so im sorry if i am reapeating something that was already said. 

 

Thanks. 

[Serpentine]

So a few things, just opinions. 

 

1. Knowingly trading a scammer should remain a perma-bannable offense, the rule is neither outdated nor overstepping. While BP isnt the trade police, having measures in place to minimize a fraudulent user's trade pool is always worth it. In addition; repeatedly knowingly trading / gambling a scammer should constitute fencing and a "do not trade" tag; from what I've seen the perma ban is rarely enough to deter them. 

 

2. Unknowingly trading a scammer for initial offenses should be a warning rather than a 2/3 day ban, but subsequent offenses should scale more severely than they currently do. 

 

3. More than anything i'd like to see retroactive bans in place; being, trading a scammer before they're marked should be bannable on the first offense (maybe not perma; but more than a warning). Especially if more than 1 trade takes place; regardless of it was two-way or not. 

 

4. As someone else mentioned, in addition, anyone with a private inv / friends only profile should receive a caution-tag (similar to the one SR applies, but maybe a bit more visible) and any offenses they commit should have increased severity when punished. 

 

But if nothing else; the current system is good enough and doesnt really need changing. Whether knowingly or not; trading a scammer supports them; and repeatedly doing so is arguably worse than a single act of scamming itself. 

[Sniper Noob]

Personally, I wouldn't like to see the rule removed entirely. That said, I think there are two main categories of trades with scammers that are going on in the community:

 

1) People who unknowingly trade with scammers, either because they didn't check or because they don't know any better. 

I don't think there should really be much punishment, if any, for these cases. While I don't think anyone here supports the idea of freely trading with scammers, low-level cases like this aren't the heart of the issue. Someone who accidentally buys some craft hats or paints from a scammer isn't doing a lot of damage to the community in the long run.

 

2) People who knowingly trade with scammers or are doing so specifically to get good deals on expensive items.

I think we all know of people in the community who trade unusuals or other expensive items, and have gotten into the habit of doing repeated trades with scammers to get them for pennies on the dollar. In my opinion, these people should still face the full-fledged rule in place right now, as they are contributing much more to the issue of scammers being able to dump off large numbers of valuable items.

 

Speaking as the head of another community, we do look to you when we get reports of players on the server who are perma-banned on backpack.tf either for scamming or doing repeated trades with scammers. And in the cases where the evidence is there, we do in fact ban for that. As a community that, at least in the context of your current rules, shares your stance on trading with scammers, it is valuable to us that you still take action on these sorts of things. So from that standpoint, I would be a little disappointed if you removed the rule entirely.

 

All that said, if you feel it's taking up too much time from your mods and they're unable to handle other reports, then I would support your decision to prioritize other aspects of your community. 

[Scott Bakula]

We won't ever truly win the war against scammers until Valve themselves starts stepping in (and only if they actually fight the problem, unlike how they handled CS:GO trading). But what we can still do is keep making things as inconvenient as possible for scammers, so keeping rules in place is for the best.

[Torb]

59 minutes ago, Teeny Tiny Cat said:

Hello all. I have been thinking a lot recently about the feedback we received previously in this thread as well as this topic as a whole. I am putting serious consideration into whether or not this rule still has any place in our community. We are the only large site that actively enforces it. I don't believe that nowadays it really impacts scammers ability to sell their items that much. And, while this is a private site and we are not the police, the law doesn't even prohibit buying stolen items unless you're aware that you're doing so to a reasonable doubt.

 

What do you think? Is this rule outdated/archaic? Is this rule still needed? Would you get rid of it, or prefer to modify it in some way? If you believe it's still needed, what practical purpose do you feel it serves?

 

I may or may not participate here a lot, I would like to give the community time to discuss and feedback. If you have any specific questions for me, @ me. 

 

I feel like times were different when these rules first came into play. Back when steamrep was banning for it, there were far fewer places to sell scammed goods. Often nowadays they just get offloaded to trade bots. Nowadays there are way more places to sell such as scrap, bitskins, scm, marketplace, various bot sites like swap.gg, tradeit.gg, stn.tf and more. Many scammers will just sell to places like these and since they don't interact with bptf it's pointless to ban the bots. I wouldn't agree with a full repeal of the rule, but as of now it really is more of annoyance than a deterrent. It really feels like luck whether people get banned over it, some people go months without being reported. I feel that if people are knowingly/repeatedly buying from scammers there should be punishment, but not just for slip ups.

[zol]

Its exactly what i tried to convey on last thread... Now differrent "automated" time, but we still have this rule with 3 strikes. Thats mean every trader can be permanetly banned for 3 trades with 20 keys hats, do you rly think its solution? How you make "community" better and clearer by banning traders again and again? You can say smth like "We wont you to help scammers"...stop rly? Scammer can easily go to marketplace/scrap/tradeit/swap and sell ALL their stuff with few clicks... As I understand this rule have to be agains scammers but its againts traders lol, so I dont think this rule still needed. But i also think that knowly deal with scammers/tagged scammers is still bad and can be reason to ban, but without 3 strikes...just 1 week ban every time you prove it, i think its enough.

I think every trader who understand smth and use backpack actively will vote for change/remove this rule

Hope you understrand what i mean xd

 

I'm glad that you are thinking on this outdated rule and not going by outpost steps..

[Wrein]

Hi,

 

I'm actually only half surprised to see this discussion but I'm probably one og the only fews who feel like this is just opening up more the market for scammers.

 

I'm been playing this game since 2009, made my way up and down the since and got scammed in 2011 of like 100$ ish.

 

I tracked the person who scammed my stuff and made it an effort to ruin is reselling, this wasn't very hard back then due to SR Marks and outpost. (This was before BP.TF was a thing btw)

 

Some people will argue here that opening the market to where you can trade with scammers without retaliation would open up the market on "lost" hats. I don't agree with that part at all, first if the accounts is a "lost" one ie bonzo rack, hellfire? war pig and so on. If the accounts are dead, they''ll stay dead. Also if you really want a hat to wear and not just for trading, just take the ban and enjoy your pixels.

 

As for the more common scammed items, whatever the means and what they cost to buy, I'd still feel bad for the person who got scammed and I don't think helping them resell more easily is gonna be good for the community as a whole. I can't stop capitalism so if you don't have remorse then go for it.

 

If we traders choose to accept trading with scammers and not face some "punishement" for it then we might aswell start scamming because it the end we're the ones profiting from another fellow trader's demise.

 

I'm gonna use a recent example "Major Dickhead" was a recent scammer who ended up getting a few grands of stolen items in a few days.
While most people traded with him before he got banned and got some goods for dirt cheap others lost a tremendous amount, yes he had ways to sell after he got banned, yes he sold most of his stuuf but did he get what we would consider "full bp price" on each item NO he didn't because we as a community decided not to trade with him ? Yes but NO, our rules made us not trade with him and he knew that.

I ended up with one of said scammed item and felt time for the user who got scammed out of it during my time having it and never wore it due to that.

 

As for bot owners, I wasn't here anymore when trading became mostly bots but I believe that you still make profit each day without trading with scammers, most of you deal with low tiers (8-100 ish keys) and this is where the users are most exposed to scamming in my mind. Would that increase low tier scamming ? I'd say yes.

 

I made reports on people who dealt with scammers, now I won't anymore because having to prove that one very aware of how trading works can just say
" OOppss Sorry, I bought this on mplc.tf and didn't check who was the seller" 
Isn't something I believe but if mods believe it then so be it.

 

If backpack.tf doesn't want to deal with scammers just unban them, but I believe other users deserve unbans before the SR Marked ones.

 

If you want to change your system and be more lenient then here's what I have:

 

SR MARKED - PERM (you're fault for not checking at all)

 

Gambling, I'd would still consider the item's worth and how knowing the person is of the scammed item

                  - 1 Week 
                  - 1 Month

                  -  Perm

 

Trading with scammer who are not SR Marked

 

- 3 Day

Repeated offense with the same user - Perm

 

 1 Repeated offense within 6 months - 1 month

 

>3 offenses within 6 months Perm

 

If one non SR marked trader is advertising that you can trade with him at low risk of being banned then this because "Knowingly trading with scammer" and should be permed in my mind.

 

I know I'm probably one of the only few with that mind but this is the only thing I'm OK with and I don't expect anyone to fully agree on this.

 

-Wrein

 

 

[rafiozol]

imo it should work like current system with sharking - gather evidence and if there is unusual pattern like fencing, possible knowing of trading with a scammer, flipping scammed items fast to fly under the radar then permamently ban the person with a possibility to appeal after a year or so.

 

- banning people for trading with currently marked scammers should remain, doesn't take any guesswork or witchcraft to understand somebody is a scammer.

- make sure to warn/educate first offenders that they traded with an (alt of) marked scammer, could be like linking to some guide about this on main site.

- if somebody is a possible candidate to a permanent ban but with not enough evidence they should either get a message from admins or get a month ban with possible extension to permament ban if they continue to trade with scammers.

- gambling with scammers should be treated the same as trading with them, punishment per case from gathered evidence.

- differentiate active traders that could sometimes fail to make an educated guess from people that do not give a flying fuck with who they trade items.

 

tldr: educate newcomers but not scare them, get rid of people profiting from scammed items.

[Sprekt]

I want this rule to be completely removed. Right now the big site owners have a sweet monopoly on trading with scammers, since they don't get affected AT ALL by a ban here on backpack.tf. A normal trader's career WILL be ruined in case of a backpack.tf ban, and it will occur cases where all the three offenses was in fact a slip up or a 50/50 situation in terms of judging whether it is a scammer alt or not. There's no way every situation can be judged and punished fairly with these rules. Basically, you could get a permanent ban on the only major trading website for regular traders for doing less than $100 worth of trades with scammers during a span of years WITHOUT the knowledge that it is a scammer you're trading with. Compare that to someone that maybe do $10000 worth of trades with scammers on purpose and get the same punishment. Fair? No. The scammers will sell their items eventually so who cares? 

 

At least do not punish us for trading with users that actively trades with scammers, because that's just insanely stupid. That's just like banning us for buying shit from marketplace.tf or any other big site. Still don't know how this rule is a thing. How is this justified? I mean, a trader actively doing trades with scammers isn't trying to avoid the fact that they are buying stolen goods but big site owners are fully aware that scammers can use their site and will only take action when it's already too late, when they feel like it or get called out for it. I honestly see no difference - both parties are open to trading with scammers, they just do it in different ways.

 

And no, changing the length of bans depending on value and time-span won't help, it will just make it confusing and exploitable. Keep it unfair and punishing to normal users or get rid of the rule altogether, a rework like that will only make it more frustrating.  

 

Also, more revenue from premium users that don't get banned. From a moral standpoint, it might feel better for the backpack.tf owner to earn money for a good website instead of scammers unloading their goods to the owners websites

[redbackpacktf]

2 hours ago, gilga said:

What are the BENEFITS of removing this rule...? That's all I have to ask.

The largest benefit (in my view, but if this isn't true, someone please correct me) is that this would open a large amount of time up for mods to deal with things like scam reports, as the current system takes up a lot of time, when in reality, a bp ban does little-to-nothing in the way of preventing scammers from selling items. They can sell on the community market, mptf, scrap, or any other site from an alt account, or just sell directly to users from an alt account. I see it as a rule that consumes a lot of moderator time with minimal benefit at most to the community, as selling items is not hard whatsoever for scammers who are marked. It's really just treading water.

[Soju]

We should definitely ban people for trading with banned scammer accounts, but please don't ban people for trading with what the staff calls suspicious scammer alts. No more of this "make sure you check the users inventory, TF2 hours, account age, inventory history, etc." nonsense. The concept of a "suspicious scammer alt" is too vague to be enforced properly imo. 

 

All that being said, I appreciate OP for thinking about current state and future of this website and letting the community see her thought process. Thank you Teeny Tiny Cat.

[mastikhor]

nope im good with the current rules. i would just swap the perma ban with a 3 month ban instead. abolishing the rule would just result a crazy hike in scammer numbers /activity because imo the majority of scammers still have trouble selling their scammed items for a decent price 

[Nicklason]

I think the rules for trading with scammers should be kept, no user should be allowed to trade with people known to be a scammer / fence. But requiring users to do background checks to determine if an account is of bad faith is unnecessary and should be removed, both because the rules are not clear and everyone has different opinions, but also because the items can be sold on other sites. If people want to hunt for these accounts, then that should be rewarded, but it should not be required to perform these checks before a trade.

[leftyy]

2 hours ago, HyperOmega said:

block fucking private inventories and inventories with no real worth or profiles with less than 100 hours on the game lmao its 🅱retty easy mang

While this is a good point. I'd like to point oout that like @Random Coffee Table said earlier, just because their inventory is private doesn't mean they're a scammer, take darth chicken gaming for example (the player with the biggest bp for those who don't know) his whole profile is nearly always private.

[Hhanuska]

In my opinion, the rule shouldn't be completely removed, but it does need to be reworked.

 

Trading with SR marked scammers / people banned on bp.tf for scamming should still have the same consquences as before.

The main problem for me and probably most people is checking for obvious scammer alts, there's no clear "definition" of what an obvious scammer alt is.

Most people nowadays have some sort of script/bot for accepting trades and it's really annoying to miss good offers because you aren't available to complete background checks 24/7.
It's more inconvenient for real traders to get an item from bots, than it is for scammers to sell their items, because they have to wait ~24-48 to get whitelisted on the major bot services before they can complete the trade.

Possible solutions:

• Increase the threshold for trading with obvious scammer alts (keep it at 15 for marked scammers). I'd say anything under 100 keys is incredibly easy for a scammer to get rid of on other trading sites / scm for quite a reasonable price, so that could be the threshold.
• Remove the need for background checks completely if they aren't banned.
• Clearly define what an obvious scammer alt is. This would obviously allow more scammer alts to get through, because the rules couldn't be so vague anymore, but it would make it possible to automate the checks reliably.

[Pixxi0us]

2 hours ago, Ashannabuda said:

If trading with scammers is allowed that wouldn't be very good, you'd be allowing people who scammed items to sell to someone else and make profit for their horrible actions

They can sell the items anyway, they just need to buy an account with high level, some cs go trades (to look legit accounts) and still sell their items. Besides this method theres still other ways such as selling on other sites. 

[Danny | QB Backpacks/Spell]

6 minutes ago, Hhanuska said:

Possible solutions:

• Increase the threshold for trading with obvious scammer alts (keep it at 15 for marked scammers). I'd say anything under 100 keys is incredibly easy for a scammer to get rid of on other trading sites / scm for a quite reasonable price, so that could be the threshold.
• Remove the need for background checks completely if they aren't banned.
• Clearly define what an obvious scammer alt is. This would obviously allow more scammer alts to get through, because the rules couldn't be so vague anymore, but it would make it possible to automate the checks reliably.

after reading through all the current replies I think your proposed solution would definitely be the best way forward. The only issue I have is removing background checks because I feel like it would conflict with the 3rd point you made of clearly defining obvious scammer alts.

[Keks]

Its a double edged sword IMO

 

Think about the halloween unusuals that unboxed by newbies and were scammed and never to leave their backpack again. However, it will encourage scammers to scam even nore when they realize they can get away with scammijg and make profit

[Hhanuska]

8 minutes ago, Danny | QB Backpacks/Spell said:

after reading through all the current replies I think your proposed solution would definitely be the best way forward. The only issue I have is removing background checks because I feel like it would conflict with the 3rd point you made of clearly defining obvious scammer alts.

I meant, one of those 3 should be done. But I guess if both the 1st and 3rd point gets accepted it would work too.

[Sprekt]

1 hour ago, Hhanuska said:

In my opinion, the rule shouldn't be completely removed, but it does need to be reworked.

 

Trading with SR marked scammers / people banned on bp.tf for scamming should still have the same consquences as before.

The main problem for me and probably most people is checking for obvious scammer alts, there's no clear "definition" of what an obvious scammer alt is.

Most people nowadays have some sort of script/bot for accepting trades and it's really annoying to miss good offers because you aren't available to complete background checks 24/7.
It's more inconvenient for real traders to get an item from bots, than it is for scammers to sell their items, because they have to wait ~24-48 to get whitelisted on the major bot services before they can complete the trade.

Possible solutions:

• Increase the threshold for trading with obvious scammer alts (keep it at 15 for marked scammers). I'd say anything under 100 keys is incredibly easy for a scammer to get rid of on other trading sites / scm for quite a reasonable price, so that could be the threshold.
• Remove the need for background checks completely if they aren't banned.
• Clearly define what an obvious scammer alt is. This would obviously allow more scammer alts to get through, because the rules couldn't be so vague anymore, but it would make it possible to automate the checks reliably.

Your solutions might sound good, but doesn't make any sense to me. So you should be allowed to do higher valued trades with scammer alts than with scammers? What stops me from hitting up a scammer, tell him to do an alt to sell the item to me other than a potential permanent ban if any moderator ever finds out that it was intentional? How will they find out? This is just a big no-no from me. (Scammers do own their alt accounts so I don't get it why you'd be allowed to trade more with alts - makes absolutely no sense)

 

Secondly, this suggestion doesn't make any sense at all looking at your viewpoint on the situation. You want it to be okay to be rewarded for being lazy, you want it to be acceptable to trade with scammers as long as you won't have to do any research? Basically means that you do not have ANY problems trading with scammers as long as you can get away with it, but you still want a rule that punishes trades with scammers. Interesting. 

 

Thirdly it is very hard to determine a scammer alt in some cases hence why this rule is stupid. It also conflicts a bit with your second suggestion since this will not mean anything looking at what you proposed. If I don't need to background check I couldn't care less how to determine what a scammer alt is, if I don't see a red line I will accept the offer. Sounds like a waste of time to me.

 

Edit!

Saw that you didn't meant that those three suggestions should be combined, but still. Neither of them makes any sense on their own. To summarize - First one is easy to exploit, and doesn't solve anything. Same annoying and unfair bans will still be there. Basically, traders that does mistakes gets unfairly punished compared to traders with intention to profit out of stolen goods, which in my opinion is one of the biggest flaws with this whole rule.  Second one is just absurd to propose if you like the current rules regarding trading with scammers. You should get punished HARD for trading with marked accounts but should be allowed to trade with their alts if you are lazy? Thirdly, this won't help anything. It will still be cases where it's subjective while determining whether it's an alt or not. One might agree that it is, one might not. Who is right/wrong? You don't have all the time in the world to ask for advice, seek up moderators, make a judgement etc. The deal might be long gone already.

[FeelZ]

My opinion is a bit complicated. Personally, I see the attempt to police trading with scammers as a somewhat fruitless attempt to shovel water back into the ocean, if our goal is to try to stop scammers from offloading them. As trading has evolved there has been a vast proliferation in the number of ways thieves can fence stolen goods. And I think that inconsistent enforcement that acts on the act of the transactions instead of the goods is often pointless, as it mostly only catches the careless and the clueless, while actual bad actors can work around the system with a modicum of effort. It's more or less a open secret right now that you can evade bans by selling on the big sites or the SCM.

 

However, I do believe that the current rule does limit scamming to an extent in that it makes it much more inconvenient to fence items, given that the cash market of this game likely moves slower than the item for item trading market. People are lazy, scammers included, and if fencing is made easier then more scammers will jump into the business. What I would propose would be to track items than have been reported stolen, and take notice of 

 

However, in order to do this you would need to rework much of how trading on this site works

• First, you would need to be able to mark specific items with a publicly visible notice that the item is stolen and should not be traded for. How long this notice lasts is something I won't speculate on right now. I would be in favor of having to manually appeal to having items in one's possession having marks removed.
• Honestly, it's too difficult to determine if a person "knowingly" traded with a scammer. I would just vote for blind, automatic punishment without consideration of intent. At that point, the site would need to make it clear that it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to check the background of your trades, and that ignorance will not be accepted as an excuse. However, in order to balance this out, I would make the system only trigger for trades for items above a certain value, and increase the number of suspect trades allowed before consequences trigger. Consequences should be based on the value of the stolen items traded for, and how often the user is engaging in trading with scammers or fences.
• You would also need a system that automatically marks accounts that have many of the hallmarks of scammer alts (like low tf2 hours, young accounts with sharp increases in backpack value, items that have been reported stolen, etc). This would give people a heads up to pay more attention to the trade. I would also mark their items with a "suspected alt" specific mark.
• There also needs to be an element of public shame for people that consistently trade for stolen goods. Perhaps a mark on their profile that doesn't ban them from trading but puts other traders on notice that something is fishy.  
• Given that this sort of system places responsibility on the users, bp.tf should devote some effort to educating people on the hallmarks of scams and scammer accounts. Perhaps have a mandatory training section to be completed as a requirement for being able to use the classifieds or any other basic trading services.

 

TL;DR: Blacklist stolen items and the items of people that frequently engage in buying stolen items, give players tools to be able to easily determine if said items are stolen or from suspicious accounts, make sure they understand how these tools work before allowing them to use trading features, punish them for acquiring said items as they are now being careless if not actively malicious

[Nicklason]

15 minutes ago, Sprekt said:

Your solutions might sound good, but doesn't make any sense to me. So you should be allowed to do higher valued trades with scammer alts than with scammers? What stops me from hitting up a scammer, tell him to do an alt to sell the item to me other than a potential permanent ban if any moderator ever finds out that it was intentional? How will they find out? This is just a big no-no from me. (Scammers do own their alt accounts so I don't get it why you'd be allowed to trade more with alts - makes absolutely no sense)

 

Secondly, this suggestion doesn't make any sense at all looking at your viewpoint on the situation. You want it to be okay to be rewarded for being lazy, you want it to be acceptable to trade with scammers as long as you won't have to do any research? Basically means that you do not have ANY problems trading with scammers as long as you can get away with it, but you still want a rule that punishes trades with scammers. Interesting. 

 

Thirdly it is very hard to determine a scammer alt in some cases hence why this rule is stupid. It also conflicts a bit with your second suggestion since this will not mean anything looking at what you proposed. If I don't need to background check I couldn't care less how to determine what a scammer alt is, if I don't see a red line I will accept the offer. Sounds like a waste of time to me.

How can you say that he has no problems with trading with scammers?

 

All his ideas are good. Either increase the threshold for background checks, remove them completely, or have better guidelines for what a scammer alt is.

[Sprekt]

8 minutes ago, Nicklason said:

How can you say that he has no problems with trading with scammers?

 

All his ideas are good. Either increase the threshold for background checks, remove them completely, or have better guidelines for what a scammer alt is.

If this user doesn't feel like checking if it's a scammer alt or not while trading and think it should be okay to not do that, indirectly means they do not give a shit about if it's a scammer or not, as long as they don't get banned. Maybe sounds a bit weird to point out since it doesn't really contributes to the discussion but combined with the old rules(get banned for trading with scammers) this makes no sense as I explained above.

[Nicklason]

6 minutes ago, FeelZ said:

My opinion is a bit complicated. Personally, I see the attempt to police trading with scammers as a somewhat fruitless attempt to shovel water back into the ocean, if our goal is to try to stop scammers from offloading them. As trading has evolved there has been a vast proliferation in the number of ways thieves can fence stolen goods. And I think that inconsistent enforcement that acts on the act of the transactions instead of the goods is often pointless, as it mostly only catches the careless and the clueless, while actual bad actors can work around the system with a modicum of effort. It's more or less a open secret right now that you can evade bans by selling on the big sites or the SCM.

 

However, I do believe that the current rule does limit scamming to an extent in that it makes it much more inconvenient to fence items, given that the cash market of this game likely moves slower than the item for item trading market. People are lazy, scammers included, and if fencing is made easier then more scammers will jump into the business. What I would propose would be to track items than have been reported stolen, and take notice of 

 

However, in order to do this you would need to rework much of how trading on this site works

• First, you would need to be able to mark specific items with a publicly visible notice that the item is stolen and should not be traded for. How long this notice lasts is something I won't speculate on right now.
• Honestly, it's too difficult to determine if a person "knowingly" traded with a scammer. I would just vote for blind, automatic punishment without consideration of intent. At that point, the site would need to make it clear that it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to check the background of your trades. However, in order to balance this out, I would make the system only trigger for trades for items above a certain value, and increase the number of suspect trades allowed before consequences trigger. Consequences should be based on the value of the stolen items traded for, and how often the user is engaging in trading with scammers or fences.
• You would also need a system that automatically marks accounts that have many of the hallmarks of scammer alts (like low tf2 hours, young accounts with sharp increases in backpack value, items that have been reported stolen, etc). This would give people a heads up to pay more attention to the trade.
• There also needs to be an element of public shame for people that consistently trade for stolen goods. Perhaps a mark on their profile that doesn't ban them from trading but puts other traders on notice that something is fishy.  
• Given that this sort of system places responsibility on the users, bp.tf should devote some effort to educating people on the hallmarks of scams and scammer accounts. Perhaps have a mandatory training section to be completed as a requirement for being able to use the classifieds or any other basic trading services.

Your second point is already how it works on backpack.tf, only difference is that it is not automated. I think having an automated system would only make it more confusing.

[Nicklason]

6 minutes ago, Sprekt said:

If this user doesn't feel like checking if it's a scammer alt or not while trading and think it should be okay to not do that, indirectly means they do not give a shit about if it's a scammer or not, as long as they don't get banned. 

The problem is that the rules are very vague and outdated, which is the reason to why this discussion was started in the first place. The background checks only make it more difficult for people to buy or sell their items, while scammers can just go to a different site and sell.