Opinion: Paying in a spycrab should not warrant a +trust on backpack.tf

[Wade loves keys]

When I look for trust from a TF2 trader, I always go straight to the users trust page to check out their cash trade history/who they have traded with. I feel like having +trusts from paying up in a spycrab shouldn't be a thing, as it can allow scammers to build up trust on their backpack.tf page without doing a single cash trade, thus appearing as a trustworthy trader to other lesser experienced traders.

 

Example:

https://backpack.tf/trust/76561198972015511 (this user is an obvious scammer, yet their trust is at 0 due to irrelevant +trusts from spycrabs.

https://backpack.tf/trust/76561198886563850 (this user could easily get back to 0 trust or even higher into the positive numbers by doing some spycrabs, giving a false image of what they are really like.

 

Let me know what you think of this!

[Zeus_Junior]

They are still a form of trust. You both agree to a bet and after the crab they paid up, keeping true to their word.

2 minutes ago, Wade loves keys said:

it can allow scammers to build up trust on their backpack.tf page without doing a single cash trade, thus appearing as a trustworthy trader to other lesser experienced traders.

I agree that the total number of trusts may be incorrect due to a bunch of spycrab trusts. But you should always check what the trusts were left for. Never just take the number and go for it.

If you are doing a cash trade, check what cash rep the other party has. If you are doing a crab, check what crab rep the other party has

[h21]

Well if they run they get -trust so trust system based on crabbing also shows the kind of person they are based on -trusts.

Also if you see a person with a lot of crabbing trust but its for low amounts, it takes a bit of common reasoning to warrant a bit suspicion if they suddenly want to start doing cash trades (and they have no cash rep), like above said checking what the trust says is more important.

 

Scammers also build up trust with small cash ($1-$100) amounts (+30 to +50) then do big exit scams in the end. Someone heavily invested in the TF2 trading scene (has items in third party seller sites), has a wide variety of items they are selling (from items less than fifty cents to over $500), and has a long period of doing cash trades with maybe only +30 rep is way more trustable than someone with a 2 year old account with +50 rep who hardly plays the game and would not suffer from losing their reputation when being marked as a scammer (they can just switch to another account and repeat the process, quicksell all the scammed items and use that money to build rep again on another account).  I'd say there are other considerations to see whether a person is trustable or not that's why reading the trust and seeing account details is also important.

[humann]

Most scammers build rep by making a bunch of cash trades going first with trusted traders, then once they reach a good amount of +trust they start asking for the other party to go first and once they get a big trade they make their move, or they align a bunch of cash trades to a X hour and then they scam everyone at the same hour.

Paying a big spycrab lose says more about a trader than having rep for going second. But yeah a lot of people just use the spycrabs to farm rep while gambling insignificant amounts, but the same happen with some cash trades and with lending items to close friends.

[D.Alex]

Two posters above are completely right, easily farmable cash trades is the main issue with the current trusts system.

 

You main question before cash trade should be "what do they have to lose if they run?"

If it's not 5+ years of trading, 500+ BPTF snapshots of their backpack, recognizable name and a lot of listings in classifieds then the answer is "nothing".

 

As for the examples on top, the pages that you should definitely check are these:
https://backpack.tf/issues?text=76561198972015511

https://backpack.tf/issues?text=76561198886563850
Unfortunately BPTF admins refused to put these links on profile pages so one has to do it manually or with a userscript.

[LaughingLollipop]

With the current state of the rep system its about as useful as profile rep

I'm not sure what its intended to be, I'm sure it isn't one singular thing.

The instructions seem to imply its for cash trading, but uh... well there are reps for all kinds of stuff that isn't that

 

You get spycrab, brokers, item loans, people holding items, cash trades, etc.

 

And of course, literally none of the cash reps I've seen include screenshots showing cash and item movement.

[Cedarium]

Number of trusts doesn't matter, imo: the thing I would check for is number of trusts where the party went second and the price point of said trades.

 

Trusts for going first don't mean anything, because the person going first takes all the risk, whereas the person going second is the one who is proving themselves to be trustworthy after the transaction has completed.

 

Volume also matters: someone with trusts for tiny transactions suddenly wanting to make huge transactions is a potential red flag.

 

Basically, you care about trusts that have detail: what was traded that required trusting, what was the type of trade (cash, loan, crab), and who went first/second. 

[FP jh34ghu43gu]

6 hours ago, LaughingLollipop said:

With the current state of the rep system its about as useful as profile rep

The point is it's moderated by a third party instead of the user. Leagues more useful than profile rep. It's meant for literally any trusting activity (as stated by some admin somewhere "any trade where trust is involved").

[LaughingLollipop]

3 hours ago, FP jh34ghu43gu said:

The point is it's moderated by a third party instead of the user. Leagues more useful than profile rep. It's meant for literally any trusting activity (as stated by some admin somewhere "any trade where trust is involved").

 

 

Yeah 3rd party that'll remove a -rep with proof of a fake c/o in screenshots but think its totally cool to post 'I sold him 5 keys and I went first' and have that constitute something meaningful