Announcement Policy Change: Trades with Scammer Policy, End of Life

We just advice not to. For the items you are trading for from scammers may have been gotten with by fraudulent items. Although the item itself may not have been scammed, the scammed items may have found its way into the trade for the item you are looking for. Would be a shame to get trade bans, item removals etc by Valve once they get caught up with your particular scammer.

Any item you can get elsewhere. No reason to let a scammer profit.

I would like to know, if i was banned by FoG, do i have to appeal on FoG or can i open an appeal on SR aswell?

LOL, SR is talking moral when they treat a penny scammer the same as a scammer that scams for thousand of dollars worth, and they make it a perma marking.

There should really be different levels of scammers marking.
Petty scammers to major ones!

There's going to be a huge wave. (well, then again, huge is an opinion)
These users will test these grey boundaries that SR made with this new policy.
The more users who trade with banned users, the more SR will be backed up, and eventually SR will update this policy!

Not that my opinion means anything here, but here goes.

As far as I understand it, the rule is now that you CAN trade with banned users, but you still probably SHOULD NOT. Just be smart about what you are after, check item history, check what they were banned for, etc. If you are totally sure that the item(s) you are after were not stolen, then I suppose go for it. It's still probably not a good idea to trade a banned user, but that is your call.

That's a rule I could stand more by.
This is what the new rule should be.

"Do not do any kind of cash trading with a scammer.
"When trading with a scammer, please don't trade for stolen items. If you do, you may be tagged as a broker"

It's a whole lot clearer then just don't trade with them too many times in general!

Once again, I really thin you guys need scammer levels.
If someone did a tiny scam 5 years ago, and has not scammed since.
Then anyone who trades with them, should not be treated as a broker if they do it multiple times with the same person.
(Or however many times you consider too many)

First off, it's "certain" not "cretin"

In all seriousness, I do agree that a scam is a scam. At this point since the trades with scammers are being downgraded it doesn't even make sense to make a separate tag for those who trade with scammers (something that many people had recommended but I was never for to begin with).

So basically, less work with reports and making bans and easier life for scammers.

So I just do surface check of steamrep, whether someone is banned or not, and if not, then I can freely trade. With him. With alts. Because I wasn't trying to help them right? I just didn't check thoroughly.
Of course officer, I wouldn't trade them again after you showed me he is indeed a scammer, my apology, goodbye.
You'll never prove it's a partnership when I stop afterward, and I was really certain that things weren't scammed! *wink wink*

Most scammers sell items from some form of alts anyway so now you basically allow people to trade stolen goods freely, unless you prove their will to partner with him. Which 99% quickbuyers don't do - they just do one time great deals at juicy discounts.

From my own experience, newbie traders had no idea of possible mark for scammers, but after being shown/warned, they learned it. Along with ways how to protect themselves from scamms.
But senior traders should be aware and possibly punished for trading with marked scammers/alts unless extra effort was taken to find the source of those items.

I used to do thorough checks (and sometimes reports of fishy people) to stop them from making profit. I believe most big traders did too. With this policy applied, very few quikcbuyers would dare to quickbuy items worth thousands of dollars from scammer.
But now, many will. There is no direct punishment from steamrep, previously the main page with fair bans and careful rulings.

So why shouldn't I do lighter backchecks, when I know other people won't? Why should I declined scammed items now, when I know, that other quickbuyer will just buy it, knowing that nothing fatal can happen?
Why shouldn't I take it from him isntead and take the sweet sweet profit myself?!

I like the idea of focusing more on the "stay secure" side but from my experience, most poeple will search how to secure themselves and how scamms work only after they get scammed. I had many friends who recently unboxed an unusual - and I warned them, told them to read guides, and explained some basic scamms.
They usually get scammed the other day.

I see no positive side of this change. New traders have to understand that they might get in trouble for trading with scammers and that they should make thorough checks for expensive items.

Is it ok in real world to buy a bike from a person, who had stolen many bikes before? But you can't prove this one was stolen ....
Should you trade with him for his expensive car he bought via selling stolen bikes? And he got convicted for thefts of those?

In real life you get legal ways how to get your stuff back, and for the criminal to lose his property. On steam, you couldn't just take it, but allowing him to sell it to anyone freely is just wrong.

Then what is it? Am I imaginary? f✿✿✿, man. I don't wanna disappear once I stop typing. Must. Type.

Yep, but it's trying to work the same, trying to stop scammers and their profit and to protect the scammed ones as much as possible via informing.
The only difference is that there is no working legal punishing force (because Valve rarely issues bans ... in time at least) so the only way to potentially hurt scammers is via community self-conrol and rules.

Still, altrough steam.rp will stop giving ban for this, sites like outpost and backpack.tf will probably might not join in this policy (I hope).
Steamrep will just lose some of it's reputation being the best/most important sites due to it's fair and sophisticated process of warnings and bans.

I think its also and more than anything a pure fail, we only need to check one seconde to see an incredibly amount of scammers on the "legit" keys reseller friends list, quicksell sellers etc... Most of the big traders have already traded with scammers and they know what they do

Hamtaro, where's the rule about your not allowed to have scammers on your friends list?
------------------------------------------

I have a fair solution to the Trading with scammer/brokering problem.
How about You can not be reported on steamrep for brokering unless if a partner community marked you first, and unless if there's huge proof that you did it on purpose, that marking should only count as a warning.

This way, if there's any issue, they can complain to the partner community first.
If they continue trading with scammers afterwards, you'd have reliable proof!
------------------------------------------

Also, at the same time BigMac187 will post on every community forum asking about the 10 trades with 10 scammer question over and over.
SR will never give you the answer you want, no matter how many times you ask.

You are naive, a lot.

@BigMac187, as you continue to hijack this thread for your own agenda of nitpicking and misconstruing, per instructions from Mattie I'm banning you for another 3 months so others can actually field their questions, and a normal discussion can happen. We have extensively answered you on this thread and others, and it has been enough.

I will separate your responses from this thread and leave a link from this thread to the "discussion" to the separated replies, to make this thread more accessible for others. The link will be edited in below in this reply.

As that may contain replies of others that replied in kind to you but also touched a question they wanted to ask to SR about this:
I'm sorry to be forced to have moved your reply, please ask the question or place the remark for discussion again, this time hopefully not snowed under by a agenda driven individual.

/edit: the link to BigMac187's loaded/agenda driven thread is: http://forums.steamrep.com/threads/bigmac-trades-with-scammer-policy-end-of-life.120088/

I've left some clarifying extensive replies here from some admins that where wide angle and not specific replies to BigMac.

Again, sorry for the inconvenience for ripping the discussion, but this seemed the only way to get back on track without a huge diversion making the thread hard to read.