Jump to content

Adding a new rule about guaranteed information


AsrielDreemurr544

Should there be a new rule regarding information toward item value and knowledge of the trader (mostly thinking about low backpack value users)? Taking account of the recent abc/mogger/cmp report  

41 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you think it would be essential and worth adding a rule like this to reduce the amount of unbalanced trades?

    • Yes
      17
    • No
      24


Recommended Posts

Banning/limiting premium will greatly benefit people using private scripts of similar features and will unfortunately likely make things worse

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, the cmp case give me a headache . We missed our chance to find evidence of sharking due to nobody asking for full conversations. All we know now is that he says “Im the highest buyer” when referring to buy orders. This implies buy orders determine value. However, new or really high tier items usually do not have buy orders at all, or when they do they are not a good reflection of the potential “real” value. We could interpret that as misleading. But, that is a really fine line. Perhaps, clarifying this fine line/ grey area by adding phrases, examples, or in general suggestive terms would help.

 

Another solution would be if we just all put fair, but still profitable, buy orders on everything new. Not like I expect this to ever happen, but would fix it

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dominant said:

Also, the cmp case give me a headache . We missed our chance to find evidence of sharking due to nobody asking for full conversations. All we know now is that he says “Im the highest buyer” when referring to buy orders. This implies buy orders determine value. However, new or really high tier items usually do not have buy orders at all, or when they do they are not a good reflection of the potential “real” value. We could interpret that as misleading. But, that is a really fine line. Perhaps, clarifying this fine line/ grey area by adding phrases, examples, or in general suggestive terms would help.

 

Another solution would be if we just all put fair, but still profitable, buy orders on everything new. Not like I expect this to ever happen, but would fix it

Soo about that ive contacted the guy with celestial lid that got sharked and got a full convo. The thing is (and i hate that im defending him in this case) he said to pick whatever he wants but the Buyer wanted to get a quick buck so he didint do His reasarche and Well it sold for about 625 mixed... Tommorow i can drop the convo between them 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Murasaki said:

fuck it, blow it all up, steamrep is garbage and isn’t reliable, premium is a scam and extremely abuseable, anyone smart enough with enough connections could just make their own private searching tool anyways, instead of trying to fix a problem with bandaids and temporary solutions we should just remove features entirely and start taking away privileges, history database has been wiped once already, what harm would it do if we just stopped recording inventories in general? dupes don’t matter, first person in history doesn’t matter, owned by so and so, these are just sales pitches to make ape people feel better about their unsellable items.

I heavily agree with the steamrep one, its so fucking bullshit of how you get one chance at clearing the scammer tag from what ive heard, or else it follows you around like a felony. And it doesnt mean 5 dog craps either because big bps are constantly buying from scammers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...