REMOVE RULE 9.2

[ANIME LOVER]

THIS RULE IS THE BIGGEST PIECE OF SHIT, so much people exit scam and get SPAM negged the fuck out of which they deserve, however this shitty rule lets them continue an exit scam and doesn't allow the community to band together to indicate some piece of shit scamming.

 

[ANIME LOVER]

But it could also disadvantage people who haven't exit scammed or done anything wrong. Which is why it was put there to begin with.

In the form of a marketplace, scenarios should purely be GUILTY until proven innocent, its common sense that people will remove negs if you ask them provided evidence and closed scam reports.

 

[ANIME LOVER]

If everyone is guilty until proven innocent, what is there stopping me to say you're an exit scammer without any proof.

WHO said anything about no proof here? you brought that up? OBVIOUSLY proof is required

 

[ANIME LOVER]

But you're guilty because you have nothing to prove you're innocent.

holy shit are you losing track of what you're saying? you said they're being prosecuted with no evidence, then you're saying evidence for the opposing party. IF you have evidence proving otherwise present it, i have no fucking idea why you're just saying shit out of the blue, everyone on this forum is likely ok with conversation so explain any evidence you have?

 

[Zacey]

But you're guilty because you have nothing to prove you're innocent.

In the form of a marketplace, scenarios should purely be GUILTY until proven innocent, its common sense that people will remove negs if you ask them provided evidence and closed scam reports.

SCENARIOS

 

[ANIME LOVER]

I was stating the flaw with the system. There are ways to prevent users getting conclusive evidence to prove their statement. With an "Guilty until proven innocent" system, you can get someone banned regardless of whether they have been restricted access to evidence or not. This leads to various false bans. Sort of like the Nazis used in WW2.

With an "Innocent until proven guilty" system, it rules out the possibility of false bans due to the outlook of the resolver.

Do you want to go back to Nazi Germany, or use the same system that's been working fine to get people banned for the past 3 years of the site.

i didnt fucking talk about scam reports at all and getting people banned retard im talking about fucking reputation

 

[ANIME LOVER]

I don't see the advantage of "spamming the shit out of people with neg rep" when it can happen to innocent people when you remove the rule.

thats why reputation disputes exist? thats why we have a staff team?

 

[ANIME LOVER]

It inconveniences the staff team when they could be doing more important shit. At the moment rep disputes take weeks.

implying the staff do much important shit other than kram doing scam reports and other staff lazily doing other reports

 

[rekt]

implying the staff do much important shit other than kram doing scam reports and other staff lazily doing other reports

Let's say Sytex scams me for x dollars for the account y. I show actual proof he scammed me and people negative reputation spam him. We will return to this in a bit.

Let's say you scam me for z dollars for the account a. I don't show proof you scammed me and people negative reputation spam you. You later prove your innocence and now (THOUGH IT MAY BE REMOVED) have tons of negative reputation that wastes staff's time trying to remove it. We will return to this in a bit.

Now let's say Sytex says sorry it was an accident and pays my debt for the account. He now has a lot of negative reputation for something he tried to solve. Every now and then you reach someone who is a scammer, but sometimes they aren't scammers and you ruin their reputation.

In both these scenarios, innocent people are given negative reputation for no reason. The system is in place, so people can get banned fairly. This is how law in the United States and other countries work. The law breakers are given a better chance to prove themself innocent and the law makers have to use their laws to figure it out. This is to save innocents from being fucked too.

If anything, I'd fight for 1. more scam resolvers or for 2. a system to mark someone as a (potential) scammer (meaning you are the one being scammed and not hopping on a band wagon), and only gain access to it after a month. If you abuse it you automatically lose access to it for a year because you are warned before use.

This is just what I think.

 

[ANIME LOVER]

Let's say Sytex scams me for x dollars for the account y. I show actual proof he scammed me and people negative reputation spam him. We will return to this in a bit.

Let's say you scam me for z dollars for the account a. I don't show proof you scammed me and people negative reputation spam you. You later prove your innocence and now (THOUGH IT MAY BE REMOVED) have tons of negative reputation that wastes staff's time trying to remove it. We will return to this in a bit.

Now let's say Sytex says sorry it was an accident and pays my debt for the account. He now has a lot of negative reputation for something he tried to solve. Every now and then you reach someone who is a scammer, but sometimes they aren't scammers and you ruin their reputation.

In both these scenarios, innocent people are given negative reputation for no reason. The system is in place, so people can get banned fairly. This is how law in the United States and other countries work. The law breakers are given a better chance to prove themself innocent and the law makers have to use their laws to figure it out. This is to save innocents from being fucked too.

If anything, I'd fight for 1. more scam resolvers or for 2. a system to mark someone as a (potential) scammer (meaning you are the one being scammed and not hopping on a band wagon), and only gain access to it after a month. If you abuse it you automatically lose access to it for a year because you are warned before use.

This is just what I think.

again quoting my previous satetement, EVIDENCE is required, as per say the new system in place.

 

[rekt]

again quoting my previous satetement, EVIDENCE is required, as per say the new system in place.

But my point that they could still regain their innocence makes that point invalid.

 

[ANIME LOVER]

But my point that they could still regain their innocence makes that point invalid.

remove the negatives from people not affected by the deal, and keep those who did, they had a shitty deal, obviously keep the negative rep, thats common sense

 

[rekt]

remove the negatives from people not affected by the deal, and keep those who did, they had a shitty deal, obviously keep the negative rep, thats common sense

Then again, that makes your points invalid because it's wasting time of staff. Though you technically can negative rep people (if you're part of the deal) 9.1.1 Do not make any claims within your review which you are not also providing conclusive evidence to prove.

 

[ANIME LOVER]

Then again, that makes your points invalid because it's wasting time of staff. Though you technically can negative rep people (if you're part of the deal) 9.1.1 Do not make any claims within your review which you are not also providing conclusive evidence to prove.

9.2 states you have you make the Scam Report