1. SteamRep is shutting down at the end of 2024. See announcement.

Rejected 76561198038542882 Russian Agent , Twilight (SR Scammer)

Discussion in 'Archived Appeals' started by Russian Agent, Jul 6, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Russian Agent

    Russian Agent New User

    Messages:
    36
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:0:39138577
  2. Chrysalis

    Chrysalis New User

    Messages:
    39
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:0:38653965
  3. HelenAngel

    HelenAngel Retired Staff

    Messages:
    4,572
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:1:8627755
    Chrysalis, please stop commenting on other people's appeals. Thank you.
  4. Russian Agent

    Russian Agent New User

    Messages:
    36
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:0:39138577
    This is his new account. His old one was banned.
  5. Russian Agent

    Russian Agent New User

    Messages:
    36
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:0:39138577
    If a user connects to a VAC-Secured server from a computer with identifiable cheats installed, the VAC system will ban the user from playing on VAC-Secured servers in the future. While server admins may choose to ban specific players, server admins cannot VAC ban players. The VAC system is automated - contacting Steam Support to report cheaters is not necessary, nor will Steam Support act on any information provided. The VAC system reliably detects cheats using their cheat signatures. Any third-party modification to a game designed to give one player an advantage over another is classified as a cheat or hack and will trigger a VAC ban. This includes modifications to a game's core executable files and dynamic link libraries.

    Even if your marked as a scammer you still cant get banned.
  6. Russian Agent

    Russian Agent New User

    Messages:
    36
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:0:39138577
    I also agree with you Chrysalis that a person can just create a fake screensot with a friend and apparently i have 2 people on my friends list who want me banned and one of them is Excyte. What do you think admin?
  7. Russian Agent

    Russian Agent New User

    Messages:
    36
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:0:39138577
    Is there any admin who is taking care of this thread out there?
  8. Scalia

    Scalia Retired Staff

    Messages:
    332
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:0:6523098
    You will need to wait for an appeals admin to review this case. Currently there is a month backlog. We review cases first come first served. Please be patient and wait your turn.

    Locking this thread for now.
  9. Noobinator

    Noobinator Retired Staff

    Messages:
    873
    SteamRep Admin:
    STEAM_0:0:12759940
  10. atom-

    atom- Retired Staff

    Messages:
    708
    SteamRep Admin:
    STEAM_0:1:19172005
    I will be taking this appeal up, sorry for the wait.

    Please respond so I know that you are watching your appeal!
  11. Russian Agent

    Russian Agent New User

    Messages:
    36
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:0:39138577
    Yes, I am still watching this appeal. I was gonna respond yesterday but it was locked so I couldn't yesterday.
  12. atom-

    atom- Retired Staff

    Messages:
    708
    SteamRep Admin:
    STEAM_0:1:19172005
    Appeal denied.

    Appellant has not actioned requested information for 2 weeks. The claim that the screenshot was a fake has not been substantiated and I have not found information which would back this claim. However, I do believe that there was a relationship somewhat between the reporter and the appellant. First account (reporters) was VAC banned, new account (the reporters) was then subsequently added to his friends. Mutual friends are shared with no reason as to why according to the reporter. The time period which the two were on friends is longer than what a 'random add' would entail.

    Appellant has denied this screenshot but I tend to believe he had said this in chat. That said, I believe that he did this as a result of the 'relationship' which he had accrued with the reporter. There have been no subsequent reports of Russian Agent offering hacks to other users to change their hats to unusual. Just the reporter. The idea is quite preposterous. If he genuinely wanted to use this as a scam attempt, if he had failed with the reporter he would have moved on, to the next and the next until he hit pay dirt. I believe he had not. That said it can be equally argued that he had built some 'trust' with the reporter to launch the ruse.

    Either all, neither party reporter and appellant has been forthright with me. I am operating on the judgement that this chat has occurred. An equitable decision here is that the tag will stay pending a conditional period where it may be possibly downgraded. For now, the tag is justified.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.