Improve trader feedback system and trading generally with a site trading system

[Overlord]

I suggested this in the past I think (http://www.mc-market.org/threads/59640/)

You should perhaps have a trading area, for private trades involving content you should be able to upload stuff to the site, such as account login details, a .jar file, etc... either for public or private sale. Therefore, all transactions are recorded, staff can intervene in trades as necessary as they're actually conducted on site, and reputation can only be given on actual monetary trades.

 

[lAkjtzAZ0]

I suggested this in the past I think (http://www.mc-market.org/threads/59640/)

You should perhaps have a trading area, for private trades involving content you should be able to upload stuff to the site, such as account login details, a .jar file, etc... either for public or private sale. Therefore, all transactions are recorded, staff can intervene in trades as necessary as they're actually conducted on site, and reputation can only be given on actual monetary trades.

This won't work for a number of reasons. To start, it puts more strain on mcm's server(s), which will cost more and more money. Also, that's the entire point of a middleman, to ensure a trade/sale goes through properly. Of course this is not 100% possible, and people will always, ALWAYS find a way to scam someone if they really want to. Also, this wouldn't be any different than doing a deal on skype. If they upload the file to mcm's servers, person can download and not pay. If the person pays first, other person can not upload the files. There's no way to prevent scamming, just be careful and accept the risk.

 

[Overlord]

This won't work for a number of reasons. To start, it puts more strain on mcm's server(s), which will cost more and more money. Also, that's the entire point of a middleman, to ensure a trade/sale goes through properly. Of course this is not 100% possible, and people will always, ALWAYS find a way to scam someone if they really want to. Also, this wouldn't be any different than doing a deal on skype. If they upload the file to mcm's servers, person can download and not pay. If the person pays first, other person can not upload the files. There's no way to prevent scamming, just be careful and accept the risk.

1. That's false more than it is true. This is not resource intensive at all. That's saying every add-on puts on strain to warrant new servers. This is very lightweight, so that's a more or less false point/
2. They're all 3rd party. You can't prove a transaction happened if it doesn't go through the site. The reputation/trader feedback system has already been abused solely because of this reason.
3. Sure, you can submit false information, but there's at least proof of it. I didn't say it stops scamming.
4. Yeah, you missed the point. You download after you pay. He uploads before payment, but it's not visible by the other party until they pay.

I feel like you're being too critical without understanding the idea, and also assuming it is something it is not. It isn't intended to stop scamming, but make a more fluid and interactive, as well as mature, marketplace.

 

[SoldierAlex]

I love this idea, in fact, I would have agreed. I just have one issue, don't you think this site will have a lot of trouble escrowing money? I mean, I could see so many people charging back on the site. Unless your idea is to never have it process through mcm, which would then make scams a lot easier. For example, a seller could be advertising some server files and then upload a .txt file instead. The buyer, thinking that the seller has uploaded the files he's expecting, pays the seller. The seller has just scammed this guy. I would love to hear your idea as I've seen you around a lot in this section of the forums and I think you're very smart.

 

[Ivain]

This would make the site effectively responsible for the deals being done here. Newsflash: not gonna happen.

 

[lAkjtzAZ0]

1. That's false more than it is true. This is not resource intensive at all. That's saying every add-on puts on strain to warrant new servers. This is very lightweight, so that's a more or less false point/
2. They're all 3rd party. You can't prove a transaction happened if it doesn't go through the site. The reputation/trader feedback system has already been abused solely because of this reason.
3. Sure, you can submit false information, but there's at least proof of it. I didn't say it stops scamming.
4. Yeah, you missed the point. You download after you pay. He uploads before payment, but it's not visible by the other party until they pay.

I feel like you're being too critical without understanding the idea, and also assuming it is something it is not. It isn't intended to stop scamming, but make a more fluid and interactive, as well as mature, marketplace.

1) It is not false. I never said that this alone would put 50% or 75% more strain, however any amount of files you host on a server does indeed take up space. Now this suggestion, combined with the dozens of other suggestions that people have submitted that would require mcm to host file after file on their servers would without a doubt increase the strain on the servers used to host mcm, no questions asked.
2) You can't prove a transaction happened? What? are you high..? I shouldn't have to explain this one.
3) There's proof with normal scams now, why do you think there are so many scam reports that are successful? Because there's PROOF of the scam, and it doesn't go through the site now.
4) I didn't miss the point. Who's to say the user doesn't upload a fake file? Who's to verify the other user paid? If it's the user selling, they could say "nope, didn't pay".

 

[Overlord]

I love this idea, in fact, I would have agreed. I just have one issue, don't you think this site will have a lot of trouble escrowing money? I mean, I could see so many people charging back on the site. Unless your idea is to never have it process through mcm, which would then make scams a lot easier. For example, a seller could be advertising some server files and then upload a .txt file instead. The buyer, thinking that the seller has uploaded the files he's expecting, pays the seller. The seller has just scammed this guy. I would love to hear your idea as I've seen you around a lot in this section of the forums and I think you're very smart.

Yeah. so BeBosny would never agree to escrow payments for this sort of a site, it's too risky as a lot of trades here are balls. So payments would go directly to the seller through the system. Obviously, a seller could do that, to mitigate that you can always show filename, type, a md5 hash and so on, but that doesn't stop them zipping up a text file (fraud is still relatively simple here). It's a given that without human interaction there's not exactly an easy way for a computer to easily see the difference here (it's possible, but expensive and requires a fair bit of work which isn't worth it).

I have a few ideas here... BeBosny has staff members that are volunteers, there are plenty of people that would do the job for free. What sellers can do is have a 'verified' submission, which means they pay a small fee or a percent and a "resource moderator" takes a look at the upload and verifies it to be as described. This makes more income for MCM, which keeps BeBosny happy, and limits scams heavily, which keeps the traders happy. Obviously, account scams are still possible as you can change login details just as the buyer makes payment, but jar files, servers, builds, etc. are all well protected here. Buyers would want to use 'verified' services more, forcing sellers to enter into the system. You can also have verified 3rd party middlemen that the forum trusts to inspect these items, so the seller could grant access to a 3rd party middleman that the two have paid for themselves, or have a free service from, and they can verify the contents of the download as a 3rd party, which saves cost and offers independence.

That's the best way to make this system work as scam free, and really it would be scam free for a lot of things. It is not too hard to code either.

1) It is not false. I never said that this alone would put 50% or 75% more strain, however any amount of files you host on a server does indeed take up space. Now this suggestion, combined with the dozens of other suggestions that people have submitted that would require mcm to host file after file on their servers would without a doubt increase the strain on the servers used to host mcm, no questions asked.
2) You can't prove a transaction happened? What? are you high..? I shouldn't have to explain this one.
3) There's proof with normal scams now, why do you think there are so many scam reports that are successful? Because there's PROOF of the scam, and it doesn't go through the site now.
4) I didn't miss the point. Who's to say the user doesn't upload a fake file? Who's to verify the other user paid? If it's the user selling, they could say "nope, didn't pay".

1) You are arguing with a developer and certified systems administrator on this topic. You've automatically lost. Your point in theory is correct, but relatively is strongly inaccurate and is a horrible reason. You're just trying to stir argument with that.
2) Yeah, you can't prove with screenshots something happened, something was something and the file received was the file sent That's the whole idea behind verifying MD5 hashes, using internal systems and PGP. With all contact off-site, it comes to word for word and screenshots, which aren't 100%. On site transactions make it much easier to prove records.
3) I've already shared philopshipy on the scam reports system. The transactions on this site are all technically off-site, MC-Market is more of a listing section, like craigslist, rather than a marketplace. Transactions cannot be verified or shown by staff to be 100%. Though, people are careless and childish so the reports system is generally effective, but it is not appropriate. PayPal should be the ones dealing with all the reports.
4) Finally a good point, however my idea wasn't initially meant to be for resolving scams. If you read the first half of my post, you will find your answer, though.[DOUBLEPOST=1474829031][/DOUBLEPOST]

This would make the site effectively responsible for the deals being done here. Newsflash: not gonna happen.

Sorry, I forgot you did a course in law. No, it doesn't add any liability to the site. If anything, it reduces liability. Read every word in every post I made again, then respond to me. Tell me how much liability related systems such as eBay, PayPal, etc. have. And you already increase your responsibility and liability with a screwed up scam reports system.

 

[lAkjtzAZ0]

Yeah. so BeBosny would never agree to escrow payments for this sort of a site, it's too risky as a lot of trades here are balls. So payments would go directly to the seller through the system. Obviously, a seller could do that, to mitigate that you can always show filename, type, a md5 hash and so on, but that doesn't stop them zipping up a text file (fraud is still relatively simple here). It's a given that without human interaction there's not exactly an easy way for a computer to easily see the difference here (it's possible, but expensive and requires a fair bit of work which isn't worth it).

I have a few ideas here... BeBosny has staff members that are volunteers, there are plenty of people that would do the job for free. What sellers can do is have a 'verified' submission, which means they pay a small fee or a percent and a "resource moderator" takes a look at the upload and verifies it to be as described. This makes more income for MCM, which keeps BeBosny happy, and limits scams heavily, which keeps the traders happy. Obviously, account scams are still possible as you can change login details just as the buyer makes payment, but jar files, servers, builds, etc. are all well protected here. Buyers would want to use 'verified' services more, forcing sellers to enter into the system. You can also have verified 3rd party middlemen that the forum trusts to inspect these items, so the seller could grant access to a 3rd party middleman that the two have paid for themselves, or have a free service from, and they can verify the contents of the download as a 3rd party, which saves cost and offers independence.

That's the best way to make this system work as scam free, and really it would be scam free for a lot of things. It is not too hard to code either.


1) You are arguing with a developer and certified systems administrator on this topic. You've automatically lost. Your point in theory is correct, but relatively is strongly inaccurate and is a horrible reason. You're just trying to stir argument with that.
2) Yeah, you can't prove with screenshots something happened, something was something and the file received was the file sent That's the whole idea behind verifying MD5 hashes, using internal systems and PGP. With all contact off-site, it comes to word for word and screenshots, which aren't 100%. On site transactions make it much easier to prove records.
3) I've already shared philopshipy on the scam reports system. The transactions on this site are all technically off-site, MC-Market is more of a listing section, like craigslist, rather than a marketplace. Transactions cannot be verified or shown by staff to be 100%. Though, people are careless and childish so the reports system is generally effective, but it is not appropriate. PayPal should be the ones dealing with all the reports.
4) Finally a good point, however my idea wasn't initially meant to be for resolving scams. If you read the first half of my post, you will find your answer, though.[DOUBLEPOST=1474829031][/DOUBLEPOST]
Sorry, I forgot you did a course in law. No, it doesn't add any liability to the site. If anything, it reduces liability. Read every word in every post I made again, then respond to me. Tell me how much liability related systems such as eBay, PayPal, etc. have. And you already increase your responsibility and liability with a screwed up scam reports system.

I personally do not care that you are a "developer" and a "certified systems administrator" (I quote those, with no disrespectful intentions, because the vast majority of "developers" on mcm are little kids with no knowledge of developing. That term is used so loosely it's not even funny. If you are, then cool.). That's like me saying "I'm a car salesman, I automatically win every argument about cars". And I am not wrong, my point is 100% valid and factual. Any amount of file storage on a server will in fact increase the strain and space taken up on that server. That is 100% a fact and can not be argued in any way.
2) You CAN prove a transaction in a number of ways. Screenshots of bank account/paypal sent and received transactions. Alternatively, giving a Transaction ID for verification through a bank and/or paypal. On site transactions would mean more staff need to be hired and work more, as they not only have to deal with what they deal with now (which is a lot), but also an entirely new system. Not to mention the time and money that has to go into making it in the first place.
3) Yes, while the transactions on the site are technically off-site, they all (in most cases) come from one source, mcm. Most deals, while done off site, are considered to be done through mcm, as both users met and agreed upon a deal on mcm. Also, paypal should be dealing with reports regarding retrieving lost/stolen money. The entire point of mcm reporting is NOT to get your money back, but to inform the community that the user is a scammer, and to get him banned to prevent further scamming on mcm. MCM can do nothing to get your lost money back, that's paypal/whatever payment method you used's responsibility.
4) and my last suggestion was not for resolving scams either? It was mentioning that people could scam just as easy, maybe even easier using your suggestion rather than off-site deals. Also, what's the point of implementing a new system if it doesn't prevent/resolve more scams than the previous system? There isn't one.

Regardless, I am done replying. The fate of this suggestion is not in my hands, rather in bebosny's. Have a nice day.

 

[Mick]

This is interesting. I think I'll move this to pending for now to keep in mind and I'll certainly bring this up in the next staff meeting thing that is held.

Thanks for the suggestion, Overlord.

 

[Mick]

While an idea like this sounds interesting, it is simply out of the scope of what we are trying to achieve within our marketplace. The idea has been pending for 2.5 years now and I don't think it's something we're ever really going to get around to implementing considering how many other projects we have.

I'll move this to denied, thanks for the suggestion.