Allow the user to specifiy how long the "scammer" has to respond in a scam report.

[Tofty]

User has been given 24 hours to respond.

Let's name the person the scam report is against as the "scammer".
The "scammer" could be away, and if he bans them after 24 hours and closes the report, the person filing the report loses everything. We should allow the user who filed a scam report to allow for a certain time for the "scammer" to reply, but set some limits.

Minimum - 24 hours
Maximum - 7 days

I would be interested to hear everyone's opinion on this matter, as well as Doge and M6Gaming's.

 

[Fire]

The longer the scammer is left unbanned, the longer they have to scam more people. I see your point, but too long, could have negative consequences. I don't really agree, or disagree with this. Could be as much a bad thing as a good thing.

 

[0Chills]

There would be absolutely no reason to have a minimum. Lets say for example someone already had the money scared before the 24 hours why would he wait a day to pay him back?

 

[Justis]

I'd be interested to hear their opinion as well.
My thoughts are... A user could very well specify an amount of time most likely to get the other user banned..
Or the user could be being thoughtless, and specify a long time, enabling the user to scam more..

On the one hand, as it is currently, the user would have only had 24 hours anyway, and would end up banned before they can respond.
On the other, the user could have been more thoughtless and not filed a scam report at all..

I'm not sure I feel comfortable letting some user decide how long another person has to respond to the scam report they made on them, but at the same time, it couldn't hurt could it?

 

[Zeiyon]

Personally, I always thought Scam Resolvers never gave enough time to the 'scammer'.
Sometimes, I am away for 24 hours, what do I do then?

But, it seems the 24 hours rule has been in effect for a long time, and seems to work fine. Although it would be just better to extend it, I don't think its a must.
Plus, M6 has been a Scam Resolver for a long time, and he know's what he's doing.

 

[Ivain]

No. This is not your call. The scam resolver makes this call using their own judgement. Sometimes a member has not been online since the report was made. In such a case they usually get a bit longer to respond.
The scam resolver may have other reasons to give someone more or less time to respond. It's not your decision, you're not the one who is judging the report.

 

[M6Gaming]

The "scammer" could be away, and if he bans them after 24 hours and closes the report, the person filing the report loses everything.

The goal of a scam report is to resolve the issue, and remove a potential risk from this site so others aren't in danger. Majority scam reports are cases of miscommunication, or disagreement in an action which they'd like a decision for.

Users are very rarely banned within 24 hours of a report being submitted, although the report can be closed if: the user they are reporting is already banned, the issue has been resolved, etc. The only time when they are banned within the 24 hours of a report being submitted is when the intentions were clear, and they are causing continuous excessive harm whilst the report being accepted and notified to them for immediate response. However, as I mentioned - quite rare.

We should allow the user who filed a scam report to allow for a certain time for the "scammer" to reply, but set some limits.

Minimum - 24 hours
Maximum - 7 days

A limit of 48 hours is given for a response, this has been the limit since late 2015. Further action from that point forward depends on a report to report scenario. Exceptions of that limit as I mentioned above if there is excessive harm being done, and there is no longer a point in waiting for a response sincerely because of it.

The message you quoted at the start: "User has been given 24 hours to respond".
Is given when the user being reported has been online, viewed the scam report, or may be posting in other sections. If the user hasn't logged in since the report created, I push my best to maintain contact with the user being reported. If none is maintained, and the proof is quite conclusive - that's when a ban is placed.

Let's mention that we have an improved appeal system now. If there are valid arguments from the user whom was banned, the case may be re-opened and looked upon once again if there is confronting evidence which can change the output of the case.

Allowing the original poster to set the time limit can be easily abused to have the user they are reporting banned faster, that won't be added into your authority to set nor decide. If you'd like to give a user more time (in cases of you both agreeing to a new due date) the report is marked as closed and you may PM us to have it re-opened as the due date is approaching or the due date was not met and we'll take further action from there.