Larger value scam reports prioritised....

[Proudly]

My suggestion, even through it's pointless as it won't get implemented for years but to prioritise scam reports based on value.

Surely a $500 scam report is more valuable to deal with than wasting hours approving $5-$20 scam reports?

Not saying to not approve lower value scam reports, but just prioritise higher valued ones.

ty

 

[MarkFreak]

How does one scammer differ from another? They both scammed someone and should be punished.

 

[Proudly]

How does one scammer differ from another? They both scammed someone and should be punished.

Not saying they shouldn't be treated any different... The value impacts a lot of the severity of the situation.

For example, if someone steals a lolipop from a store and gets caught, obviously they're going to not get arrested or anything, however if someone robs a $10k watch from a store, they will get arrested. May seem extreme but it's still the same concept.

 

[blob]

My suggestion, even through it's pointless as it won't get implemented for years but to prioritise scam reports based on value.

Surely a $500 scam report is more valuable to deal with than wasting hours approving $5-$20 scam reports?

Not saying to not approve lower value scam reports, but just prioritise higher valued ones.

ty

I disagree
If a person has been scammed $15.00 and has been waiting 2 months, and another has been scammed $300.00 and only waiting 2 days, to me it basically says the person who was scammed more is more of a priority. Not someone who has been waiting quite a while (Not sure if I worded this to the best it could be)

 

[Proudly]

I disagree
If a person has been scammed $15.00 and has been waiting 2 months, and another has been scammed $300.00 and only waiting 2 days, to me it basically says the person who was scammed more is more of a priority. Not someone who has been waiting quite a while (Not sure if I worded this to the best it could be)

I know what you mean yeah. Obviously there would have to be some balance with them to keep it fair-ish however theres no point in implementing this system until scam reports are up-to-date anyway as there are probably scam reports months old. Personally, I've had one open since 8th september with 10 views, so they have time to look at the reports, just not respond and approve them.

 

[imagamer]

The larger sums should be prioritized. You would want to find out where your clients $500 dollars went before your other clients $5. You aren't disregarding the lower sums, they are still a part of the picture, but the larger sums of money need to be addressed immediately as well... it's a lot of money.

 

[imagamer]

If someone scams a small amount and knows the scam report won’t be at the front of the queue then they will probably be able to scam more

If someone scams a large amount and knows the scam report will be behind other ones in queue that could also motivate them to quickly steal some more bank. It's a lose lose situation unless you can find a good balance between the two regarding the queue pricing difference (Eg. $500 or $5 of course)

 

[Viking]

A scam is a scam in the end, no matter its value is situated at 1$ or 1000$. It is the fact that gets you banned, not the sum of money.

 

[Risk]

How about this. If a user has multiple scam reports on them they are prioritized? Then if a user had 5+ the rest can be removed if one gets solved. Just an idea, probably not the best haha.

 

[PurrfectMistake]

Doesn't matter bud. Either way, the user wont get their money back, no matter if its a $1 scam or a $1000 scam, the scamers will be punished the same way and the victim will still lose their products / money.

Let the mods do their thing.

 

[imagamer]

Doesn't matter bud. Either way, the user wont get their money back, no matter if its a $1 scam or a $1000 scam, the scamers will be punished the same way and the victim will still lose their products / money.

Let the mods do their thing.

If you had to choose to sort out FIRST (meaning you are still going to go through with the same meticulous manner as the other report) a $5 dollar scam, or a $500 dollar scam? You would want the more expensive sum of money dealt with first, as not only do you want an issue with a large sum of money is so resolved as soon as possible (and not every scam report is a scam; miscommunication and issues that legitimately get in the way of these funds), but you want to exert your complete effort to help communicate between the two clients to resolve the issue or resort to reprimanding the guilty. This sum of money still has a chance to end up where it should be if a scam report is dealt with, and of course, you want the larger sum of money in the bank first rather than the small sum which will still be dealt with, with the same meticulous manner as stated before, but just after the paramount issue is resolved. After all, the small and large sum queue issue is little more than a theory or assumption, the small sum in the end is never shrugged off. You'd fight long and hard for $500 dollars, where for MOST (not all, but in the broad spectrum it makes a difference efficiency-wise) people on this forum would contrarily put less effort into the $5 dollars in the first place. This does not signify that all reports with the higher and lower sums are literally discriminated against regarding the effort put into getting their money back, but it's really that the broader view in general is that these larger sums of money could take absurd amounts of time to resolve, and legitimate counters can be brought up, whereas the smaller sums of money CAN take quite a long time to resolve, the broader spectrum speaks more towards the average that at a certain price tag, on average we can see it takes longer to solve (see for yourself, look at scam reports).

 

[Zeiyon]

I would agree with you, except the fact that $10 could be a lot to someone, and nothing to someone else.

 

[imagamer]

I would agree with you, except the fact that $10 could be a lot to someone, and nothing to someone else.

I mean in the broader spectrum.. And in the end they would still have their report resolved, but wouldn't it be best to resolve the larger sums of money to prevent large scale fraud and scandals as well, contrary to smaller ones? This activity on a larger scale is paramount to the smaller scale activity.

 

[1337]

My suggestion, even through it's pointless as it won't get implemented for years but to prioritise scam reports based on value.

Surely a $500 scam report is more valuable to deal with than wasting hours approving $5-$20 scam reports?

Not saying to not approve lower value scam reports, but just prioritise higher valued ones.

ty

yet another reason this would be a bad idea is that there's about a 99% chance people will start making up scam amounts/increasing accusations just to get their reports prioritized

 

[Boo]

I disagree from this completely. 5-20 may be a lot to some people. And it is COMPLETELY unfair for someone with a higher amount skip that line. Yes, 500 is a lot more than 20, however, you still have to think about others. In the regard, that they also have been scammed similar to the 500 dollar person.

 

[Zeiyon]

I mean in the broader spectrum.. And in the end they would still have their report resolved, but wouldn't it be best to resolve the larger sums of money to prevent large scale fraud and scandals as well, contrary to smaller ones? This activity on a larger scale is paramount to the smaller scale activity.

Yes, but scam reports aren't really made to get you your money back. They're made to get the person banned.
If he pays you back, good. If he doesn't, banned. It doesn't matter how much you were scammed, they will still have the same punishment.