Repetitive Scamming - Idea

[Archie]

Hello MC-Market

I recently had an idea to stop repetitive scamming, this idea came to me when a friend of mine was the victim of repeat scamming.

I think that scam reports should have a "ticket" style report system, where you enter the MC-Market username of the person, and fill in all the boxes - then a staff member / scam resolver is informed of the thread.

Now, I think that when this report is made, the person who is being reported should get a tag next to their name (approved by the scam moderator, e.g. by clicking a button or something), something like "Report open", but sum that up in one word - obviously.

The user should only get the scam report if the proof shows that the person could have scammed - and therefore is "dangerous".

http://www.mc-market.org/threads/72521/

Bold has been online and not replied, this would also make people reply to their scam reports to get the badge off of their profile.

M6 didn't take kindly to my idea.

I hope you do .


http://www.mc-market.org/threads/72521/ - example.​

 

[Ajdin]

But I understand, you don't care because it's not your money, that's 100% fine with me.

It's not my money indeed. Even worse, it's the forum's reputation which is partly ran by me.

Most of them are.

Not even half of opened scam reports end up with the accused person getting banned.

Spoiler

 

[Nic]

I dont like the tag thing

 

[Archie]

It's not my money indeed. Even worse, it's the forum's reputation which is partly ran by me.


Not even half of opened scam reports end up with the accused person getting banned.

Spoiler

Whatever you say, I give up with trying to persuade you. Some of those closed reports will be wrongly closed.

Obviously you won't put Corey on a warning as people know him, but new members who aren't premium?

Whatever.

 

[Rypeo]

This is not a bad idea at all. I actually really like it.

The user should have a userbar (something like this) on their profile for the duration that a dispute is open against them:

Note: I used nara as an example.

 

[Archie]

This is not a bad idea at all. I actually really like it.

The user should have a userbar (something like this) on their profile for the duration that a dispute is open against them:

Note: I used nara as an example.

Thank you

 

[Overlord]

Most of them are.

But I understand, you don't care because it's not your money, that's 100% fine with me.

Good day.

Most of them are.

But I understand, you don't care because it's not your money, that's 100% fine with me.

Good day.

I could buy better logic from Poundland.

Most of them aren't. Your definition of 'scamming' must be wrong.[DOUBLEPOST=1455065465,1455065400][/DOUBLEPOST]

Whatever you say, I give up with trying to persuade you. Some of those closed reports will be wrongly closed.

Obviously you won't put Corey on a warning as people know him, but new members who aren't premium?

Whatever.

Most of the 'solved' ones were wrongly solved.

Yeah, the whole system is a mess. This is why you contact objective LAW ENFORCEMENT and not children.

 

[Archie]

I could buy better logic from Poundland.

Most of them aren't. Your definition of 'scamming' must be wrong.[DOUBLEPOST=1455065465,1455065400][/DOUBLEPOST]
Most of the 'solved' ones were wrongly solved.

Yeah, the whole system is a mess. This is why you contact objective LAW ENFORCEMENT and not children.

Most of the solved ones are solved because there is enough proof.

There has to be a reason for the person opening the report IN THE FIRST place - so the people are indeed fishy as there is a reason for the report.

 

[Overlord]

Most of the solved ones are solved because there is enough proof.

There has to be a reason for the person opening the report IN THE FIRST place - so the people are indeed fishy as there is a reason for the report.

You're either naive or ignorant. That's all I have to say.

 

[Archie]

You're either naive or ignorant. That's all I have to say.

No, I'm correct.[DOUBLEPOST=1455121548,1455121042][/DOUBLEPOST]Go and read the current scam reports, you can see where people could have been applicable to wearing the earning badge - no?