"Caution Trading" Userbar

[Meercat]

I have seen this idea on another site similar to CK and I thought it may be worth discussing, seeing as I have had an experience where it would have been useful.

When there is a dispute being sorted out, it might be of use for both parties involved to have a temporary userbar. One that reads something similar to "Caution Trading: Under Investigation"
Staff would have the decision on whether this was necessary on case by case basis.

The warning would hopefully stop any further people getting involved in the event that said people are scammers and could be removed as soon as the dispute was closed.

Thoughts?

[SmileYaDead]

I like the idea.

[eli]

but what if a user was under investigation and it was found that there was nothing wrong?

[SmileYaDead]

but what if a user was under investigation and it was found that there was nothing wrong?

The userbar will be removed :)

[zxzero]

I like this idea. Could stop people from scamming a bunch of people before they make off with tons of loot. :)

[ShadowCreature]

I like this idea. Could stop people from scamming a bunch of people before they make off with tons of loot. :)

I agree

[Meercat]

but what if a user was under investigation and it was found that there was nothing wrong?

The userbar isn't permanent. If they had a "Caution Trading" bar for a day or two then sure, people will not trade with them for that amount of time. But as soon as it is solved/they are found innocent it'll be and removed they will be okay.
It's not a permanent dent in your reputation such as a bad iTrader score which stays until staff remove it.

[eli]

it's still pretty fucking tight to be labeled as dodgy when you haven't done anything wrong

[SmileYaDead]

But you wont get the userbar unless you've done something dodgy.

[Meercat]

it's still pretty fucking tight to be labeled as dodgy when you haven't done anything wrong

If you are involved in a dispute at all, even if you are just the victim of a scam it would be a safety precaution. It would be up to the Mods modding each dispute whether it would be needed, they can usually see who is in the wrong pretty clearly.

---------- Post added at 10:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:35 PM ----------

Anyway, only a suggestion. :)

[Ryan~]

I'm not sure if I like this, honestly. It reminds me of "The Scarlet Letter". It's like placing blame before anyone is found guilty. You know? It seems like a "too much info" thing since disputes are private anyways.

[Slasher]

I don,t know if it's a good idea. When someone do something really bad = banned.
If you get into a dispute, it's maybe because one of the other haven't clearly given all the details of the transaction, maybe because one have much less experience in trading. Both cases are often not using a middleman.
I would probably not trade with someone rated as cautious trader.

[eli]

But you wont get the userbar unless you've done something dodgy.

if you've been dodgy you'll be banned.. will you not?

[Meercat]

if you've been dodgy you'll be banned.. will you not?

A dispute will often run before a scammer is banned.
In my experience, the scammer conned more people into buying his things in the time between the dispute opening and him/her being subsequently banned.

[Rain]

I think it's a good idea.
Honestly, I've been scammed by someone who was under investigation - around 20mil.
(This was a long time ago, but they had like 20 iTrader back then, I had 10, I trusted they wouldn't scam, so I didn't use an MM, usually it all goes well).

That was because they scammed someone, and the site was too slow to ban them / was still checking it up, and they were on a scamming rampage.

In all honesty, I don't think it'll dent your reputation.
I mean, if someone has had the bar, then it's gone, I honestly won't remember.

If you're worried about someone scamming, use a Middleman, simple as that.

[Nodochi]

I'm going to agree with Meercat here

If someone is doing something dodgy, and is scamming people, there is STILL A DELAY between when he commits the crime and when he gets banned.

Between this period, he could scam a multitude of people. Its just a way to keep people safe. There's no reason someone can't wait until AFTER a dispute is cleared before trading, if they really didn't do anything wrong.

[Ryan~]

Bottom line in my head, use a middleman. There is no need to have to label someone as a possible crook because someone else scammed them because they didn't use a middleman.

While you all raise valid points, you have to trust staff to do their job and to do it quickly. I can see where the whole "scam multiple people" comes in. But, use a middleman, that's what they're there for.

Good idea, though.

[Kristin]

Or you could just use a middleman EVERY TIME like you're supposed to. :)

[SmileYaDead]

If we used a middleman for EVERY SINGLE TRADE on site, it would just be too slow. I have used a middleman twice, twice, with my 35+ trades. Middlemen are people as well, they can't stick around every single minute of every single day to help us with trades. There are 12 middlemen at the moment and it still takes a lot of time to get one to help you. For example: [Only registered and activated users can see links] Do this with all the trades, are you kidding me? I'd prefer to do bigger trades with MM, but to bother someone for a $10 transaction, please.

[zxzero]

I have to agree with smileyadead, I don't use a MM for lower transactions, I still do send them a legal binding contract but using a MM is to much of a hassle to do every time you need to trade. Also like he said MM aren't ALWAYS online and sometimes you need the money quite quickly for things.

I see where you are going with the scarlet letter thing bammeh, and yes it does seem a bit unfair to be judged fora short period of time, but also people know that it is only temporary and once it is gone you know it is safe to trade with them again.

Also while we are on the topic visit [Only registered and activated users can see links] to help with those small transactions and the big ones. :)

[SmileYaDead]

I think Rain just saw my post and went to MM it :D

[Demo]

The original idea is a TWC sign for people who are a liability to the market and MAY scam.

TWC = Trade with Caution.

[Rain]

I do agree that everyone should use a MM.
Despite that though, many only use it for larger trades. I know people are willing to risk smaller amounts in exchange for efficiency. It's all good to say, "Well if they're not patient enough to wait, then it's they're fault, they deserve to be scammed," but even as a Middleman myself, as our aim is to reduce the amount of scamming, I think this is a great idea.
I don't think it's too big a hassel - as long as those in Scamming Investigations, and Moderators have access to adding/removing bars. If they see a thread, but don't have time to have a good look at it, I think they should just put on the bars straight away. Like people above have said, we are all human and certainly there will be times where cases will not be looked at for quite a while. A single day, a few hours can make a difference between 1 person getting scammed, and 3.

It is only a precaution.
It won't do any actual harm, in my opinion. (Except hurt people's pride for a few days, until the issue is resolved.) If people have doubts of X and Y person, then just use a Middleman. Besides, that's what we want right? People to use MMs.

I think it all boils down to what our aims are, how troublesome it is, and whether it will make a difference.
It certainly follows our aims of reducing scamming; it may be a bit troublesome (extra work for SI mods, and for those involved in the issues), but I think ultimately, it'll make a difference. Scammers, even under investigations, like Meercat said, will do most of their scamming the moment they start to scam, till the moment they are banned. They will overoffer, cheat and lie, steal and do everything they can to make the most of the time they have left.

That being said, I have never worked in Scamming Investigations, nor as a Moderator, I don't know how this whole thing works.
From the outside, I think it is a good idea. From the inside, perhaps things are different.
Just my one cent. <3

[Nodochi]

Bottom line is, if you wanted every trade to use an MM, you would need at least 50 MM, and at least 10 online at any time of the day.

This is almost NEVER the case. So no, the simple idea of saying USE AN MM EVERY TRADE is simply not efficient nor is it effective. Unless you don't mind doing a 5dollar trade and carrying it out over hte course of 3 days, while having other trades to deal with, and scheduling an MM for each becuase none of them are online when you are actually able and willing to make the trade.

[Carrot]

Bottom line is, if you wanted every trade to use an MM, you would need at least 50 MM, and at least 10 online at any time of the day.

This is almost NEVER the case. So no, the simple idea of saying USE AN MM EVERY TRADE is simply not efficient nor is it effective. Unless you don't mind doing a 5dollar trade and carrying it out over hte course of 3 days, while having other trades to deal with, and scheduling an MM for each becuase none of them are online when you are actually able and willing to make the trade.

Middlemen can be used for every trade. If it was noticed that there weren't enough middlemen online for this, joe would add new MM. The sad truth is that most people do not use middlemen.

[Slasher]

Couldn't we only remove the access to trade section while fixing the dispute?

[SmileYaDead]

^ doubt that'd help.

[Slasher]

It could. Just freeze the trading topics of the persons involved in the dispute.
I would be more suspicious to trade with someone if he had had a cautious status. Just block the access to the trades would harm less the reputation of a member in my opinion.

[SmileYaDead]

That wouldn't stop the person from trading tho. If they have limited access and no one knows, then they can still do harm to others if they have a topic in the trade section and people PM them.