My suggestion is simple, allow common viewers of Sub forums such as 'Configuration', or 'Development' become verified for that Sub forum. It will prove who is qualified to accept a commission in that sub forum, and will also allow verified users and their 'Offering' threads (or shop threads) to become more legitimate.
In order to prevent unverified people from losing business, they'd have to prove themselves worthy by showing their portfolios, vouches and etc. I don't think this system would burden too many people. We already have an incredibly high amount of offering threads compared to requesting threads, they wouldn't just dissapear.
You may be wondering, what's the verification process? Ally made a great point about this, so here's my answer. Verification is determined by a quick and easy ticket. The ticket would include proof of x amount different requests completed in that section and the total $$$ amount made in that section. To not burden staff with so many of these tickets, it filters at x amount of different requests, and your total. If you don't reach a certain threshold your ticket never makes it to staff. For the amount staff does end up seeing, the time this takes would allow the amount of verified users to climb slowly. Verification would be a time consuming thing, but if the time spent resolving avoidable scam reports by implementing this system went to working this system a lot more people would be happy.
The second point Ally made was that the individual requesting the service can easily make judgement based off of a portfolio of the user offering to fulfill the request. She is right, but too many people are lazy enough to completely disregard portfolios and etc, by adding this system it allows the lazy people to make a good decision quicker, if they are in a rush or are too lazy.
The third point Ally made was that if this system existed, everyone would be pressured to be verified, eventually leaving everyone that's mediocre in the section to become verified. I understand the concern about this, but the qualifications for becoming verified can easily fluctuate, and they won't be easy to reach. In the section configuration, there are only 3-6 people I personally would consider worthy of configuration. The requirements would be strict.
The fourth point Ally made was that exit scams can happen at any random moment, and I have no counterargument to this. Like the hundreds of other downsides of this site, this would have to be one.
The fifth and final point Ally made was that this doesn't exactly solve much, but I strongly disagree. It may not solve problems like exit scams, but it does solve problems regarding scam reports. If this system was implemented, it would allow decisions to be made about a candidate much faster, based off of other peoples experiences with them. We'd have less scam reports if people chose verified people more often then not. That's a big problem solved if you ask me.
I'll be reading this thread to accept constructive criticism, and if you make a good point or suggestion I will edit my original post above accordingly.
EDIT 1 (Responding to some points Ally made):
In order to prevent unverified people from losing business, they'd have to prove themselves worthy by showing their portfolios, vouches and etc. I don't think this system would burden too many people. We already have an incredibly high amount of offering threads compared to requesting threads, they wouldn't just dissapear.
You may be wondering, what's the verification process? Ally made a great point about this, so here's my answer. Verification is determined by a quick and easy ticket. The ticket would include proof of x amount different requests completed in that section and the total $$$ amount made in that section. To not burden staff with so many of these tickets, it filters at x amount of different requests, and your total. If you don't reach a certain threshold your ticket never makes it to staff. For the amount staff does end up seeing, the time this takes would allow the amount of verified users to climb slowly. Verification would be a time consuming thing, but if the time spent resolving avoidable scam reports by implementing this system went to working this system a lot more people would be happy.
The second point Ally made was that the individual requesting the service can easily make judgement based off of a portfolio of the user offering to fulfill the request. She is right, but too many people are lazy enough to completely disregard portfolios and etc, by adding this system it allows the lazy people to make a good decision quicker, if they are in a rush or are too lazy.
The third point Ally made was that if this system existed, everyone would be pressured to be verified, eventually leaving everyone that's mediocre in the section to become verified. I understand the concern about this, but the qualifications for becoming verified can easily fluctuate, and they won't be easy to reach. In the section configuration, there are only 3-6 people I personally would consider worthy of configuration. The requirements would be strict.
The fourth point Ally made was that exit scams can happen at any random moment, and I have no counterargument to this. Like the hundreds of other downsides of this site, this would have to be one.
The fifth and final point Ally made was that this doesn't exactly solve much, but I strongly disagree. It may not solve problems like exit scams, but it does solve problems regarding scam reports. If this system was implemented, it would allow decisions to be made about a candidate much faster, based off of other peoples experiences with them. We'd have less scam reports if people chose verified people more often then not. That's a big problem solved if you ask me.
I'll be reading this thread to accept constructive criticism, and if you make a good point or suggestion I will edit my original post above accordingly.
EDIT 1 (Responding to some points Ally made):
- Type
- Suggestion
- Status
- Implemented
Last edited:
