1. There is no such thing as a "pending" ban or Steam admin. Anyone threatening your account is a scammer trying to scare you. Read more.

Archived Appeal Review for 76561198018785061 (Jacktaz)

Discussion in 'Archived Appeals' started by Bonk Scouterson, Apr 26, 2020.

  1. Bonk Scouterson

    Bonk Scouterson Banned on SteamRep

    Messages:
    18
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:1:29259666
    Appeal Review Request
    Reminder: Appeal reviews are not appeals!

    Reason for Appeal Review: Other extenuating circumstance at admins' discretion. NOT USUALLY GRANTED!!!
    Past Appeal: https://forums.steamrep.com/threads/appeal-76561198018785061-jacktaz-banned-by-sr.189044/

    Steam profile: 76561198018785061 (Jacktaz)

    Make your case:
    Hello SteamRep,
    To keep this brief and concise, I want to call an element of policy into review, that I believe has restricted my appeal from being reviewed under one of SteamRep's major principles and policies.
    The major policy I'm referring to, is:
    "2) Fraud involving trades occurring entirely outside of Steam trading
    SteamRep's scope is limited to trades that involve the Steam economy and Steam trading ONLY. We do not handle scams for other game economies nor do we handle scams regarding outside businesses or agencies. These should be handled with the appropriate authorities."


    In context, my appeal was auto-denied on the principle that my trade was fraud to do with real world money, as I offered to pay with PayPal (I didn't even own a PayPal account at the time I was 13). My argument is that no money was transferred, moved, stolen or provided to the person I took the hat off at the time.
    Time is also another considerable factor here, seeing as my ban is over 3100+ days old now.

    TF2, back in September of 2011, was in its true infancy of trading. Concepts such as real world trading of the game were rarer and un-moderated. Websites that made RWC trading mainstream and easy to access, such as Marketplace.tf and MannCo.Trade, didn't even exist at the time. Beyond that, the trade did occur in game, there were no third-party elements other than my deception at the time.

    I also have some questions, like:
    Did SteamRep's policy on Real World Trade exist at the time the offence occurred?
    Is there a possibility to consider the circumstances and time-frame of my ban, to provide me an exceptionally rare second-chance?

    To summarise, I believe that the time-frame of my ban is a justifiable reason to bring my appeal to review. Furthermore, auto-denying my appeal on the principle of trading related to RWC doesn't reflect the true nature of the trade that occurred. No cash was lost, obtained or moved whatsoever, only the item was traded for, and returned in a very short time frame. Were I to charge-back/reversal scam, then I would understand the auto-deny, and even the legal problems that would accompany that choice. But I believe my actions better reflect receiving the item and not paying, to which I had a change of heart.

    I ask you, SteamRep admins, is there any possibility for me to return to the community that is beloved to me. I am truly on my last legs, after attempting to get my ban downgraded for the past 10 years. I still try to participate within the community, and elements of the game I love such as trading, almost daily. I continue to be banned from numerous community servers, and receive extreme distrust, and have people block me on the assumption that I am up to something malicious.
    These values truly do not reflect me, I am begging you to please consider the circumstances, I am an honest man and will do whatever I can to provide evidence that I am not what this tag makes me out to be. This restriction from the community is crippling me at this point, I've been actively playing the game for 2 years now and on a weekly basis a problem arises due to this tag, it haunts me. The torment and anguish it has caused me over the years is trivial when put into context of what the ban is, but that is just how much resolving this matters to me.

    I will leave the emotional rhetoric here, if you need any further references, I believe my appeal will cover them. And just like last time, if there is any need for dialogue, or to contact me, please do so, I would be happy to hear from you.

    The image below is You Are the One's response to my initial rejected appeal, as you can see he details that my appeal is auto-denied on policy. I think the judgement doesn't reflect the true nature of what I was banned for, and is merely the alibi I produced to obtain an item without returning it, all those years ago.

    Have a wonderful day, evening, or night, whoever reads this appeal. Thank you.
    -Jack.​

    Attached Files:

  2. Bonk Scouterson

    Bonk Scouterson Banned on SteamRep

    Messages:
    18
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:1:29259666
    This is not a bump but some aspects I feel I must add. When calling to review Policy, it's not from any realm of entitlement whatsoever. I apologise if I convey the message in that manner. Beyond that, I do understand the significance of that element of the policy. RWC fraud can be, in this day and age, investigated on a federal level, and carries some extreme complications. I respect SteamRep's desire to not be involved when situations escalate, and only represent a warning from a community standpoint when it comes to involvement.

    I would like to add, the evidence of what occurred is lost to time, were I able to retrieve chat logs and dissect them to prove my honesty, I would. The two highlighted (itallic and bold) statements from above are extracted from SteamRep's description of what activities can result in an individual receiving a mark. I know both of them are not mutually exclusive when it comes to marking somebody, and both can be used to describe an individual scam. But I did this to draw attention to what I believe, better describes the mistake I made.

    Finally, I would like to just clarify one previous part of my review request, that I feel wasn't described correctly. The part of the previous post I'm referring to is "as you can see he details that my appeal is auto-denied on policy. I think the judgement doesn't reflect the true nature of what I was banned for, and is merely the alibi I produced to obtain an item without returning it, all those years ago.". I incorrectly used the words judgement and nature. I am aware that an auto-deny is not a judgement as such, but more enactment of policy. As well as this, when I said true nature, I wasn't conveying that I am not guilty of what I did. I was trying to describe that the result of the auto-deny is more to do with the alibi I produced to initially obtain the item, and not to actually do with the prospect of stealing RWC.

    When I initially did this, I never had a concept of the significance of theft and the real world consequences. This alibi was a spur of the moment decision, a whim on which I aspired to commit a crime. Only the item was stolen, however, there was no intent to ever commit fraud regarding currency, as it was beyond me at the time. I did steal an item, in-game, through the in-game trading system at the time, and all actions were within the confines of Team Fortress 2. There was not a third-party element involved, from my memory I never provided any info of an account at all, it was just an alibi.

    Does SteamRep's scope of classification for cases on RWC cover the context of scams? Or is it only applicable when RWC fraud has occurred?

    To finalise my thoughts and what I have just explained. I understand the significance of this element of the policy, and upholding its integrity. Due to the real life complications, and the collective goal of SteamRep. When I speak in this manner, there is no disdain or personal grudge behind my words. The manner is which I speak is only in respect of how these review appeals are handled, which is to provide a genuine and valid argument as to why you believe your appeal should be reconsidered. I am genuinely regretful of what I did all those years ago, and not because I reap the consequences, but because I understand the true meaning of protecting the community at large, and the true consequences of pursuing crimes like this. I am older, and have principles and standards. I will say once more, I wish to be part of this community, and further enforce these standards, and positively represent myself.

    Thank you, that is all.
    -Jack.
  3. Lava

    Lava Public Relations SteamRep Admin

    Messages:
    5,858
    SteamRep Admin:
    STEAM_0:1:46187366
    First of all, let me make this clear in case you missed the message. Appeal reviews are not an appeals. No decision will be made about whether to remove your tag here, it's beyond the scope of appeal reviews. The only thing we will do is decide if your allegedly extenuating circumstances set you apart from everyone else demanding another chance at appealing, enough to make an exception and grant you special permission to make another appeal. The burden is on you to demonstrate that, and since we have to be fair to everyone, the fact you don't like it, you disagree with the permanency, or you promise cross-your-heart-hope-to-die that you changed for realzies this time with a pinkie-promise, won't carry any weight.
    The reason cross-economy trading falls outside our investigative policy isn't because we condone it, or don't consider it fraud, but because it's beyond our ability to properly investigate and prove beyond reasonable doubt. Because the offense itself is not in question, there is no plausibility, and hence the procedures for a change of heart appeal took effect. To clarify, we do not honor change of heart appeals for scams we consider too serious, such as those involving real-world money. If you were disputing the offense itself, and claiming innocence, it would be handled differently and that policy might be more relevant.
    The length of time you've had the tag is not a factor for appeal reviews. Sometimes it can be a small factor in deciding a change of heart appeal outcome, when other conditions are met and the admin is on the fence, but it doesn't matter here. Tags in our database are, and always have been, permanent. There's nothing extenuating about that.
    So your point is you thought you would get away with scamming when you did it, and now because you don't like the consequences of fraud you think you qualify for extenuating circumstances?
    When SteamRep first came to be, some of our policies were looser. Over time, we generally became stricter about issuing new tags, but those who were already tagged must still appeal, and burden of proof is still their responsibility.
    "Sure I did X, but at least I didn't do Y as well" is not a valid claim to extenuating circumstances.
    Once your appeal is denied, you're out of options. There is no remaining avenue for you to remove the tag, ever. Not unless we implement some additional "scammer forgiveness" procedure at some point, which seems unlikely to me.
    You offered to buy an item with PayPal, with a premeditated intention to scam. You were well aware you did not have the means to pay for it, and yet still followed through with misrepresenting that in order to get what you wanted.
    That policy only applies to appeals, but it covers anything with failure to pay, or failure to provide items when money is received.
  4. Bonk Scouterson

    Bonk Scouterson Banned on SteamRep

    Messages:
    18
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:1:29259666
    I can understand why you've highlighted that this is not an appeal here, and fair enough I did write that at the end of initial post, that was just error on my end. I am not under the impression that this will be handled like an appeal, I am trying to make a case to have my appeal re-looked at. Regardless of that, I wouldn't classify my circumstances as extenuating but I couldn't find a reason that would better demonstrate my "circumstances". The latter part of your message trivialises the intent and true meaning behind me writing this post. I have been respectful, and I wish to make that a theme of conversation here, I do not wish to argue or sound condescending, and that applies to you too.

    In response to your use of the term fairness, I wouldn't describe it as just when considering the restrictions and problems, and even the personal treatment it has caused me over the years. You use words like "fairness" and "circumstances" all of which have ethical context to them, and then go forward to say that genuineness, or change due to the consequences of baring a tag, doesn't carry any weight. And I know you're talking in regards to how SteamRep handles it's appeals, and even these appeal reviews, but does the burden of circumstances have to be objective? Things that couldn't have been helped?

    Then let me ask you, what is the intent of change of heart appeals? This is my true frustration with the appeal process that has restricted me for years now. The idea and use of words such as "fairness" and "consider" are all circumstantial, and the concept of a change of heart appeal itself is restricted uniquely to circumstances, or burden of proof that you have changed, which will be reflected upon by admins. All these things I have mentioned in my argument, such as time-frame, lack of evidence against me (By your standards), and time since the mark without incident (You Are Not the One's words) are all circumstantial. What I am ultimately disputing is the context of my ban, I do not believe it reflects RWC, I have made an argument as to why. I still stand by my point.

    As I explained earlier, I do not believe my circumstances are "extenuating" but I had no option to better represent my argument. I suppose new evidence would have better fit the context?

    No, it isn't, and once again you are trivialising my appeal in a condescending manner. The matter of fact nature is strictly for the point of communicating information without sugar coating it, and you would know that in my last appeal. I believe that I've miscommunicated, or you've gathered the wrong intent from that message. When I referred to that era of TF2, it was only to convey some context. The manner in which you've quoted me, makes me look malicious and misrepresents me. I will reiterate that I was 13 years old, a child. I, by no means, had the capacity to follow that trail of thought at the age of 13.

    Again though, when I said I did X but didn't do Y, I wasn't trying to say "H-hey I'm not that bad guys! I only did one bad thing but not the other" as you seem to be implying. I was using it as justification to convey what I believe better reflects the crime I committed all that time ago.

    Well, Lava, despite my frustration at everything, I can understand your points. It's the way in which SteamRep handles these appeals, and reviews. And as you have stated, numerous times throughout your response, there is a permanency to these tags. Words such as ethics and circumstances have also been used, both of which SteamRep allegedly considers. So I don't think it would be too naive somewhere down the road for some sort of scammer forgiveness procedure, given that they are genuine people with a good case to make. I wouldn't be here 10 years down the road trying to resolve this, on the same account, if I lacked honesty and conviction.

    I did, and within a very short time frame I had a change of heart and returned the item. Which I proved in my initial appeal. I was 13 years old, and I was a child. Even courts of law give the sickest, most twisted children a second chance. Ones who commit felonies that could land you with life in prison, such as murder, and other atrocities that are taken very seriously.

    Do you know what the problem is beyond that though? The tag I have paints me as a scammer, forever. A single instance, a single mistake, which I attempted to resolve back when I was naive enough to make it, by returning the item. I was by no means a bad child, and I hope I've been able to demonstrate I've grown into a respectful and cohesive person. I will use the word circumstance again, which I consider the previous points to be extremely relevant to. This one, single mistake, has genuinely caused me so much stress and frustration. It is not a passive means as representing me as someone to be cautious of, it is a distinction that carries consequences. I am banned from a massive pool of community servers, I am treated like scum, people expect me to have bad intent. I'm banned from numerous websites. I had my backpack wiped for that instance as well, so Valve had taken action against me, and I can prove that also if you do not believe me. This is truly my last attempt at resolving this, it's eating away at me. I have roughly $1,700 worth of items in my backpack I have obtained legitimately, and in the face of global uncertainty, I fear I may not be able to sell them in the event of an emergency. I don't even have a chance at representing myself as a person, it goes beyond restrictive, it is invasive and FAILS to represent who I am as an individual. Imagine stealing an apple one day, returning it, and being labelled a thief for the rest of your life by everybody you know, or you have to interact with.

    I genuinely don't know what you expect of me if this isn't a valid enough reason to request that my appeal is reviewed. The circumstances most certainly apply. I am sorry if I sound entitled but I did not appreciate your approach to responding to me, I am most certainly not a criminal, but someone who made a mistake a long time ago.
    -Jack.
  5. Lava

    Lava Public Relations SteamRep Admin

    Messages:
    5,858
    SteamRep Admin:
    STEAM_0:1:46187366
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's unfair. You may call it harsh, unreasonable, or punitive, but it's equally harsh to everyone, because we follow a set of guidelines and don't deviate from them unless we end up changing them for everyone down the road (e.g. trades with scammers). It would be unfair for us to selectively pick favorites who we give special exceptions to while upholding our policy for everyone else.
    In a change of heart appeal, we weigh the nature of offense, behavior, circumstances and context of repayment, and other individual factors to perform an overall character assessment, weighing the continued risk they may or may not pose to the community. In order to keep it fair and impartial, there are certain auto-deny guidelines all appeals admins are required to follow, whether they want to or not, and whether they agree with it or not. Among those are reports of multiple other scams, serious or premeditated offense (real-world money, impersonation, hijacking, etc), failure to repay prior to appeal, and lying. You can make arguments for why you think such a policy should be revised, but an appeal review - something very strictly bound by said policy - is not a place to try and change it from.
    I'm sorry, that's what you selected, and that's what you need to demonstrate now for permission to re-appeal. You can't just keep changing your selection to see what sticks. If you had a valid claim for an appeal review, it would've been a much more clear-cut decision. Appeal reviews are for clear-cut extenuating circumstances, not for people to plea once again for another chance because they didn't like the first outcome. That's why they're so rarely granted. If none of the options fit, it's probably because you don't have grounds for an appeal review in the first place. Your chance to argue your case has come and gone already, and appeal reviews cannot remedy that.
    Again, that's not what appeal reviews are for. Were such a forgiveness program to exist, outside of appeals, you might be eligible for it. But appeal reviews have a very narrow and specific purpose. Begging for another chance to appeal because you didn't like the outcome for your first one isn't a valid reason for an appeal review.
    It's not within the scope of appeal reviews for me to make a judgement on your case itself, only whether your unique circumstances are extenuating enough to overturn and retract the admin's final decision and allowing an additional appeal that said admin is generally prohibited from touching.
    It does not matter how I feel about how the tag has affected your life. It doesn't matter whether I agree with the admin's decision, or whether I myself believe you deserve another chance. I am only allowed to grant a second appeal if you demonstrate clearly extenuating circumstances that I can use to justify that call.
  6. Bonk Scouterson

    Bonk Scouterson Banned on SteamRep

    Messages:
    18
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:1:29259666
    I understand your use of the term "fairness" now. It's not used on a basis to determine equal punishment for the crime you committed, it's to determine equal punishment across a variety of crimes. This also includes the permanency aspect, the scammer mark, and the community bans. To expect special treatment without a valid argument to validate these extenuating circumstances is entitled and disrespectful for what the true intent of an appeal review is. I know this is my only chance, so I will use it as a means to apologise for misusing this form, even though I did believe I was making a valid argument as a point for review.

    So, it would seem I initially passed the character assessment and demonstrated genuine change, at least in the eyes of the admins. I suppose that's some sort of reassurance, in the grand scheme of things, as I'm not being reflected on as a criminal or malicious individual.

    Other than that, the latter part of your statement caught my attention. First and foremost, I would like to apologise again for using the Appeal Review section as a means to challenge policy. I have misused this option, not intentionally, but out of lack of knowledge on where to make this argument. Lava, I do have some questions regarding policy, and some aspects I would like to contribute. I do not know if I have the authority to discuss this topic, or whether it's restricted to the likes of Admins and Moderators. Would you be able to add me on Steam so I could ask some questions and receive some direction? I give you my word there will be no talk of my prior appeal, or even this post in appeal reviews. I only want to discuss policy.

    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 30, 2020
  7. Bonk Scouterson

    Bonk Scouterson Banned on SteamRep

    Messages:
    18
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:1:29259666
    Re-post due to Formatting problems, please ignore the last one.
    I understand your use of the term "fairness" now. It's not used on a basis to determine equal punishment for the crime you committed, it's to determine equal punishment across a variety of crimes. This also includes the permanency aspect, the scammer mark, and the community bans. To expect special treatment without a valid argument to validate these extenuating circumstances is entitled and disrespectful for what the true intent of an appeal review is. I know this is my only chance, so I will use it as a means to apologise for misusing this form, even though I did believe I was making a valid argument as a point for review.

    So, it would seem I initially passed the character assessment and demonstrated genuine change, at least in the eyes of the admins. I suppose that's some sort of reassurance, in the grand scheme of things, as I'm not being reflected on as a criminal or malicious individual.

    Other than that, the latter part of your statement caught my attention. First and foremost, I would like to apologise again for using the Appeal Review section as a means to challenge policy. I have misused this option, not intentionally, but out of lack of knowledge on where to make this argument. Lava, I do have some questions regarding policy, and some aspects I would like to contribute. I do not know if I have the authority to discuss this topic, or whether it's restricted to the likes of Admins and Moderators. Would you be able to add me on Steam so I could ask some questions and receive some direction? I give you my word there will be no talk of my prior appeal, or even this post in appeal reviews. I only want to discuss policy.

    As you have detailed, this isn't a valid argument for appeal reviews, and I have not faced any circumstances that would justify my initial appeal being re-looked at. I will admit I did not like the initial outcome of my review, as would anyone in a similar position. Likely because the battle was so close to being won, and I only saw one final hurdle in the face of my appeal, one big hurdle. However, I will reiterate that initially I was not under the impression I was abusing this form, I just believed I had a valid argument to make. I will use this to once again apologise for misusing this form, I see your perspective now and I will refrain from posting in this thread once I have finished writing this post.

    As I said above, I see your point, I will argue this no further. On the topic of a forgiveness program though, that would truly change what it means to bare a tag like this. I'll try and summarise my thoughts quickly, as I don't want more emotional perspective to litter this page. It would be ignorant of me to expect you to truly put yourself in my shoes, as what I have endured over the years since receiving my tag has been personal to me and sentimental. We would obviously feel differently on the matter.

    I know that the tag represents something objective, and conveys that a user has committed fraud, at some point in the past, and is not to be trusted. In the eyes of the community, this is infallible, and not to be disputed. Some people take their disdain and frustration out on bearers of these tags, and are abusive and harsh. I've been the victim of such abuse for years, and it has happened on so many occasions that I have a paragraph prepared with my initial appeal in so they know I have no bad intentions. Let me clarify something, I am not saying I am innocent by any means, or that I don't understand why this is happening. This is another element of the consequences, for a single mistake that I made years ago. The point I'm trying to make here is, the tag that represents me, and the tag that represents the worst of the worst, the most prolific, and those with the biggest disregard for the consequences, is mutual. There is nothing to distinguish us, just a blanket that associates us to be so similar. This is what truly tears me apart, as I cannot represent myself before the tag, and in the eyes of the community I'm no better than the worst of the worst.

    I know the ethical grounds of my argument are not justification from an objective standpoint, but SteamRep, you are the arbiters of how people are represented in the community, and not just from a trading standpoint, but the community as a whole. The idea of a blanket tag is flawed, and leads to the problems I have faced for years. These tags are often accompanied by a description of the type of fraud that occurs, but mine doesn't even have that, it merely states an alt account that I was using for flipping keys to make some money on the side, with no malicious activity whatsoever. This is by association, but I haven't participated in any crimes on either account since the initial taking, and returning of the item years ago. I know that how the community treats me, and other personal problems I have faced are beyond SteamRep's control, and are most certainly not intentional. I hold no grudge against SteamRep, in fact, I'd even like to be part of the community and enforce these standards at some point as a member of SteamRep. If I didn't believe I had a case to make here, and even challenge policy and beliefs, I would have given up years ago. And I will reiterate, that regardless of this tag, I will continue to try and trade, I will do everything I can to keep fighting it, I will never, ever give up trying to rid myself of this tag. And in my opinion, the consequences I have faced over the years, in comparison to the crime I committed are radically different and unjust. As I mentioned earlier, you are the arbiters of how people are represented, if there's a case against them, within the community. Is it too much to ask for some sort of distinction? I truly believed a caution would best reflect that, initially, but the severity of what I did (In your eyes) is beyond forgiveness, regardless of everything.

    And that is all, and I will leave this appeal review here, but I will not give up. I would most certainly love to have a dialogue with all of you some time, it would be informative. I will explain one last time that it comes from no realm of entitlement when I speak like this, I truly want to understand SteamRep and hopefully sculpt or build the foundation for an extra level of scope when it comes to reviewing appeals in the future. This year in particular I imagine to be monumental, as it's 10 years since the Polycount update was released to TF2, in September. This is also the decade advent of trading, and soon enough people will reach scammer tags of upwards of 10 years. 10 Years is a very long time, it wouldn't be far fetched to believe there would be some sort of additional scope to resolving either extremely old tags, or ones that bare very unique circumstances where exceptions can be made on the basis of consideration.

    Were I to appeal this 8 years ago, circumstances would be different, I may not even have the tag right now. The whole point of circumstance is there are so many aspects to take into consideration, if and buts, time-frame and even the philosophy of what the tag means now, and how it would have been dealt with, with the older policies. All these elements contribute to why I believe it is unjust to continue the tag being handled in this way.

    Also you said that my appeal was denied on the principle of severity due to association with RWC. To imply it was determined on severity would imply some arbitrary value was given to the type of crime in question. Severity is circumstantial, and once again, it is all of you who determine whether or not a crime is severe. You present this info, as if it was objective, and cannot be argued with. You may have a justification for why you feel the way you do, as have I with what I have endured. However, the point I will end this on, is you're the ones to set the standards. To imply you've considered my argument entirely, it would mean you've considered my points and and contrasted them to what the policy covers, as well as the circumstances, such as the time it had taken me to repay. I know the objective stance on these topics exists to enforce fairness, but even a court of law provides a fair balance between ethical and objective evidence. I may be guilty, but it doesn't mean I have to receive full force punishment until the day I am dead.

    Thank you for a very cohesive and explanatory response, Lava. If you were to add me on Steam, not to argue, or even debate, but just to educate me, I would be very appreciative. Have a wonderful day.
    -Jack.​
  8. Tio José das Vacas

    Tio José das Vacas SteamRep Admin Partner Community Donator - Tier V

    Messages:
    6,204
    SteamRep Admin:
    STEAM_0:1:32194479
    Went thru the appeal and I have found no mistakes, no policy changes, no new evidence found, not an unfair or mishandled appeal.
    I also did not see any other extenuating circumstances.

    After reading the appeal review is clear that you do not like the decision, but unfortunately that's the decision you will have to stick with.
    Unless SteamRep implements a form of "scammer clemency" program as a forgiveness/downgrade option, you have no further options to address your ban. I can make no promises about such a program being implemented, and clearing our appeal backlog is a higher priority. If such a program were implemented, you may or may not qualify, because you already made a change of heart appeal in the past, and were denied.

    Appeal review denied, thread archived. Best of luck!