Jump to content

Discussion About Trading With Scammer Rules Re. Manncostore and other existing loopholes


HarryG

Recommended Posts

Recently after coming across this item history https://backpack.tf/item/8378350523 I learned that one cannot report a user for trading with a scammer if the item in question was purchased off of the Manncostore website. Myself and a few other users pointed out a plausible loophole in this line of thinking (which is based on the fact that a user has to knowingly trade with a scammer to be reported); namely, that a user could easily add a scammer, ask to purchase an item off of manncostore (where item history is not always displayed from what I understand) and get away with it assuming the scammer (who has no incentive to do so and in fact has incentive not to do so in order to continue selling their items) does not report that user. Therefore the question at hand is: are the current rules regarding trading with scammers harsh enough? Particularly with this apparent loophole/caveat in the way the rules work in their current iteration, I feel like there are ways in which the rules can be abused to allow users to get away with trading with scammers without fear of retribution. This thread is intended for open community discourse in how the rules work and recommendations/suggestions/opinions on how they could conceivably be changed/altered if at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't the seller have to cough up a percentage of the price for the sale of the item?   I never used that site so I dont know but, Id assume the seller/scammer would want to maximize his profit so, not sure they would go that route but, people do strange things when it comes to money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mrs TS said:

Wouldn't the seller have to cough up a percentage of the price for the sale of the item?   I never used that site so I dont know but, Id assume the seller/scammer would want to maximize his profit so, not sure they would go that route but, people do strange things when it comes to money.

 

mannco.store has a 5% commission 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think stuff like this is harder to catch and pin. From what I’ve seen people avoid people who aren’t even scammers but -1 trust like the Black Plague. I think it’s an issue with Mannco that can be fixed by not allowing sellers with SteamRep bans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This could definitely be exploited, however I don't think it is that big of a deal. If you knowingly bought from a scammer through this method, then you should be banned accordingly (if there is proof). Of course in most cases there will be no proof, but if a user is repeatably buying these scammed items from the same scammers then it speaks for itself and the user in question should be banned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Xergoyf said:

This could definitely be exploited, however I don't think it is that big of a deal. If you knowingly bought from a scammer through this method, then you should be banned accordingly (if there is proof). Of course in most cases there will be no proof, but if a user is repeatably buying these scammed items from the same scammers then it speaks for itself and the user in question should be banned.

This! The only concern id have is if someone was making sets or something of that nature and bought a variety of items from the site. The issue arises in the instance where some of them being from the same scammer(s) and being marked without knowledge of why. I do think sparta should take action here as it fixes this potential "grey" area but hey thats just an opinion of mine so it doesnt mean much :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

The reason we don't ban for this is mostly because it's unrealistic to expect most users to know how to check item histories on most cashout sites. Very regular community members might know how, but most people won't, so they're the people who are gonna be hurt by banning for it, not the people doing it intentionally. Anyone trying to get around the rules is always going to find ways to do so, the rules are designed (with user feedback) to be the fairest they can be to the average user.

 

I'd say your time would be better spent petitioning cashout sites to prevent marked scammers selling on them, rather than trying to get us to prevent it via site bans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thing to keep in mind is that the scammers/alts on the history of the item you're referring to are not marked on SteamRep, but rather banned only on backpack.tf. Even if the buyer was to check SteamRep as recommended, they wouldn't see anything there. All they would get is a ban on backpack.tf, and have the reasonable justification of saying "I checked SteamRep like everyone says to do, how was I supposed to know?". It's hard enough getting the average trader to check a centralized site for checking reputation, good luck getting them to check additional sites, especially when the aforementioned has no tag on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What? Why? Huh?

You pointed something out there what i know already since the change.

And to be honest, this whole rule "Trading is allowed with Alts" is quiet... pointless..., you could have changed the rule into "you are allowed to trade with scammers" would end up in the same way. Why?

 

BECAUSE if you would decline a trade from an alt for an example, those items end up in bots who are spamed on whole backpack.tf (and trust me! they will do, i have watched it a few times and a bot doesnt know if its an alt or not), or on various websites where even a freaking SteamREP ban doesnt matter and if it does, do you know what happens next?? Teeny Tiny Cat said it too, they create a new ALT, costs nothing and can trade without any restriction.

 

Please dont get me wrong, i hate scammers too like everyone else but just to make a rule for something what nobody is gonna obey anyways is pointless.  

 

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...