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.

Rejected 76561198046727705 -RB- TACO BE11 (SR Scammer)

Discussion in 'Archived Appeals' started by -RB- TACO BE11, Mar 27, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. -RB- TACO BE11

    -RB- TACO BE11 New User

    Messages:
    6
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:1:43230988
    steamID32: STEAM_0:1:43230988
    steamID64: http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198046727705
    customURL:
    steamrepURL: http://steamrep.com/profiles/76561198046727705
    On Sunday, March 25, I was in a server and was asked to do a spycrab. I offered a dirty Boston boom bringer, and Thiec offered a dirty merc scarf. As we proceed with the spycrab, he would skip some of his turns. Obviously he won and i refused to pay him as he had cheated. When i repeatedly refused he had threatened to report me, tried to bribe/blackmail me into paying him, and was going to have his friends report me as well. As of today, March 27, I have been banned from trade outpost, multiple servers, and most importantly, been marked as a scammer. All this has greatly slowed my trading and separated me from many good friends of mine that go into the servers that i have been banned from. Anyone that know me and hang out with me know that i don't do these kinds of things. I have been a true and fair trader ever since my first scam, which i have changed the way I act ever since. I have multiple pictures (from my Ipod so sorry if a bit blurry) that can back up my accusations and prove my innocence. I hope to have this whole situation cleared up as soon as possible, and be able to trade in my normal servers. If anyone has anything further to say on my behalf, please comment. Thank you
    http://imgur.com/a/6OINa#0 <---link to the pictures of my conversation
  2. HelenAngel

    HelenAngel Retired Staff

    Messages:
    4,577
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:1:8627755
    Thank you for these screenshots. Unfortunately, I do not handle appeals but I will be investigating him now for his part in this.
  3. -RB- TACO BE11

    -RB- TACO BE11 New User

    Messages:
    6
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:1:43230988
    thank you for getting back to me on this matter, I never realized how hard it is to trade with a [SCAMMER] right next to my name.
  4. -RB- TACO BE11

    -RB- TACO BE11 New User

    Messages:
    6
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:1:43230988
    Not to sound impatient or anything, but on average, how long do appeals such as mine take to be noticed, taken, and solved by admins. Thanks
  5. Hairy Stryder

    Hairy Stryder New User

    Messages:
    9
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:1:47849127
    They're currently backlogged, so more than a week.
  6. -RB- TACO BE11

    -RB- TACO BE11 New User

    Messages:
    6
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:1:43230988
    :( Looks like my trading is going to come to a standstill. Thanks for the reply though
  7. atom-

    atom- Retired Staff

    Messages:
    717
    SteamRep Admin:
    STEAM_0:1:19172005
    Taco I apologise for your wait.

    I have added you, respond when you can.
  8. atom-

    atom- Retired Staff

    Messages:
    717
    SteamRep Admin:
    STEAM_0:1:19172005
    I have made a decision.

    Quite simply, the case here revolves around an individual walking away from losing a spycrab gamble. This is undoubtly what comprises this particular scam. Walking away and not honouring the agreement. Taco in this case believes that the person who he "scammed" had acted unjustly during the spycrab and he was warranted in leaving it. He has produced a series of screenshots which suggest that the individual who was scammed, had resulted to extortion in order to get paid back his items.

    But what of the legitimacy of these screenshots? I needed to gain an understanding of the relationships which governed the parties. These screenshots (put forward by the appellant) suggest D'ander and Thiec and (Ubermarshmallow) had conspired to get taco marked and as a result, Thiec would be able to extort, to the extent of an unusual from him. Aligning what I have gathered from all parties, Taco believed Thiec had cheated multiples times during the spycrab, he refused to pay, and in order to induce payment, Thiec has attempted to extort an unusual from Taco. So where the original report has singled Taco as spycrab scamming, this appeal in a way presents a counter report of extortion via "report threat". As remarkable as this sounds, I do not believe it. The relationships between the three do not seem as tight knit or collusive, but merely to my mind, a bunch of server dwellers who had participated in a spycrab, witnessed someone refuse to pay and had rallied to that cause. It is a common action done by people who frequent servers and spycrab among themselves.

    I am terming this evidence put forward by Taco as inadmissable and it will have no bearing on this appeal. I highly question its legitimacy and without better correlation between the profile and the conversation (omission of a profile shot or timestamps) put forward by the appellant (there is a higher burden of proof when putting this type of evidence forward in an appeal), this evidence will be overlooked. I am not terming it as "falsified" as such, simply inadmissable to your case as it lacks strength of integrity or a commonality to the motivations of the individuals who reported you. It feels out of place and at odds with the original agreements which took place. I would term it as "questionable integrity" but not so far as to say it is "falsified".

    What evidence I do have is by Taco in the original report which explicitly states that he had run. It doesn't matter if you didn't feel he wasn't going to pay, you should have thought about it BEFORE even engaging in the spycrab. You have said, "He didn't lose anything, I didn't gain anything, just go on with life like nothing ever happened". Spycrab gambles are set up in such a way that there is an agreement which binds the participants to fulfil the end trade- your mentality here breaks the agreement formed when entering and completing a spycrab. Simply put, it is a spycrab scam.

    I have also taken into account that the original report was done by a third party- however in a holistic sense, this does not prove a detriment to the equity of this decision. There is still a fairness of the evidence put forward in the original report. The admission is clear to me here, the tag is justified.

    Appeal denied, best of luck to you.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.