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.

A year or so removed from all the dramas

Discussion in 'SteamRep General Discussion' started by BigMac187, Mar 21, 2017.

  1. Ninja Otter With A Taco

    Ninja Otter With A Taco Retired Staff

    Messages:
    641
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:0:35378805
    Hard to answer with just Yes or No.

    1. Going off memory, it was more of a case of knowing about the rule etc. especially when it came down to trades of high-values. If you didn't know about the rule and you made trades over a certain price, FoG at the very least would inform you of the rule, how to check for scammers etc. If you did know about the rule then that was generally all that was needed for values that were exceptionally large.

    2. Was there any evidence provided that SR was down? That logic works both ways, and as far as I remember with your case, there was more proof showing that SR was functioning.

    3. If all evidence was made off of assumptions then No, but that wasn't the case.


    Again though, I'm answering these as a moderator at FoG and the person that handled your appeal.

    Also, SteamRep has always said that you can bring up a community ban with them (a ban that has the person banned on SR as well) if the ban doesnt go alongside SR policy.
    https://forums.steamrep.com/threads/questions-regarding-fogs-mass-330-user-marking.85084/ This is an example of that, from my memory most of the bans from that were removed.
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2017
  2. Eoj Nawoh

    Eoj Nawoh Retired Staff Partner Community

    Messages:
    1,445
    SteamRep Admin:
    STEAM_0:0:40091868
    There are multiple reasons to have a policy against it. One of them was what I posted, that's what I have personally stated numerous times.

    Your many questions have been answered in multiple conversations, posts, and threads by a vast majority of staff members. We've responded to your questions via PM, Chat, Reddit, forums, etc. I'm happy to answers questions regarding my decisions on SteamRep, and how I've administrated over the last few years. But it confuses me when you state that we avoid your questions, when I look at the pile of posts, chats, threads, and messages that have all been answered. I don't believe it is fair to say that we avoid your questions, we don't. I do have issue with when you insist on removing as much of the conversation and context as possible, it feels as you're more trying to one-up people than have a productive conversation. If you want answers to your questions, that's fine. However, I personally feel that you are better off asking those, without restricting our answers.
    n0:name, Roudydogg1 and Sjru like this.
  3. Lava

    Lava Public Relations SteamRep Admin

    Messages:
    5,735
    SteamRep Admin:
    STEAM_0:1:46187366
    Tell me again why you overpaid so much?

    PS - I merged your 2 threads together. Looks like nobody else unlocked your original yet, and I wasn't available to handle it until now. As I said before, please stay in your own thread.
    Hidden Content:
    **Hidden Content: Content of this hidden block can only be seen by members of (usergroups: Administrative).**
    Tio José das Vacas likes this.
  4. BigMac187

    BigMac187 New User

    Messages:
    313
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:0:32620293
    I think this thread is evidence enough of SteamReps malpractices. For those reading please see how I asked a simple questions in my OP and how they have avoided answering it, because answering this 3 simple questions proves that my case handled with Bias and this is something they are too stubborn to admit. I have been factual and evident in my posts and they have posted misleading statements and assumptions and used these assumptions as justification.

    A user who isn't an official SteamRep admin posted in reply to those question, I do not want a partner community trying to answer this question, this is a question directed at SteamRep.

    Lava, please reply in regards to your assumption filled post. By Lavas comments in the reddit thread it should be very clear that my marking was banned on assumptions.

    There is evidence in this thread of both Lava and Eoj posting incorrect statements and I have been factual with what I have posted.

    Lava's last post here right above was Tell me again why overpaid so much? Seriously Lava answer the important questions in the OP, it's a very simple question.

    This is what they do, they ignore the simple questions but then ask irrelevant questions which makes things cloudy. Since I have nothing to hide and am transparent unlike SteamRep avoiding questions I'll answer those questions and we'll go round and round just making the thread more cloudy with i feel is them hoping that the core questions will be ignored.

    I asked you not to post assumptions so you are limited to asking these trivial questions, I overpaid because I had items x in my backpack and the other person had items y in his backpack and made me an offer, and at that point I was enjoying having good items and was financially stable in real life that I was ok overpaying for an item I knew i would enjoy.

    Lava can you please answer the questions in the OP with a yes or no and refrain from asking the trivial questions that could have an assumption attached that can't be proven or disproven.
  5. You Are The One

    You Are The One Appeals SteamRep Admin

    Messages:
    11,363
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:1:41038663
  6. BigMac187

    BigMac187 New User

    Messages:
    313
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:0:32620293
    Lava please remove YATO's comment or remind him of your above comment. As you said lets keep it civil.

    Anything I've said has been factual / evident. I am trying to keep it factual and it's you guys that are clouding this thread.

    Once again, please answer the simple questions in the OP.
  7. You Are The One

    You Are The One Appeals SteamRep Admin

    Messages:
    11,363
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:1:41038663
    My post was civil and reflected on your previous post. No need to silence opinions.
  8. BigMac187

    BigMac187 New User

    Messages:
    313
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:0:32620293
    It adds nothing, I am being factual and you are trying to misrepresent that as straw man, If you think I have said something incorrect feel free to clear it up. Or feel free to answer the 3 simple questions in the OP.
  9. You Are The One

    You Are The One Appeals SteamRep Admin

    Messages:
    11,363
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:1:41038663
    Your opinion is it adds nothing, I understand that. Readers may think otherwise.
  10. BigMac187

    BigMac187 New User

    Messages:
    313
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:0:32620293
    My opinion is backed by evidence, SteamReps is riddled with assumptions as is evident in this thread. I have you guys in a corner with a legit question and if answered honestly will prove my case was mismanaged.

    Once again please answer the 3 simple questions in the OP. Lets focus on getting this answered please for now.

    My bad it wasn't in the OP since the thread was merged. (See how i can admit to error)
    1. Was it not in the ruleset that it had to be evident that a user knowingly traded with a marked user on a first issue case like mine to be marked as a scammer?
    2. Was there any evidence provided that I knew in my case? If so please show it as in the report it was clearly an assumption based ruling.
    3. If there was no evidence provided and it was an assumption that I knew should I have been marked on assumption?
    Yes or No only please. I will really like this cleared up.
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 25, 2017
  11. You Are The One

    You Are The One Appeals SteamRep Admin

    Messages:
    11,363
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:1:41038663
    Thank you for clarifying just an opinion, just as my posting was an opinion as well.
    Roudydogg1 likes this.
  12. BigMac187

    BigMac187 New User

    Messages:
    313
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:0:32620293
    Whatever YATO, if you don't have anything else to say move on.

    At this point I just want my questions in the OP answered.
  13. Lava

    Lava Public Relations SteamRep Admin

    Messages:
    5,735
    SteamRep Admin:
    STEAM_0:1:46187366
    1. (Screenshot of revision also attached)
      The first warning case listed here, where your reputation is never touched, does not apply because you were not by any reasonable stretch a "new trader". By procedure, it would make sense to immediately give you a caution. By policy, partner communities have a certain level of discretion with tags they issue on behalf of their own community (and friends/partners have discretion to exclude their tags if they feel it's unreasonable). They had reasoning behind their decision to skip straight to a scammer tag, they have evidence that you did, in fact, trade with a scammer, and they had a justification for believing it was intentional. Since I'm not a FoG admin, I have/had no business getting involved with the case, and it really doesn't matter what I thought. I don't have to agree with their decision. If I did, then it really would have been FoG tagging you by proxy, but because they did so on their own initiative, it's not my call.
    2. Up to FoG, they handled your report and they tagged you. We don't always keep partner communities' evidence locally here. Therefore, I'm yielding to what the FoG admin said and you dismissed. We've told you again, and again, and again, that partner tags are the responsibility of the community who issued them. I'm not going to review your case because you're not tagged anymore, and there's no procedural reason for me to.
    3. If there was no evidence, you'd be correct here. Dismissing the credibility of your reporter, tagging community, or whatever evidence they have/had on file, does not mean it doesn't exist. Just like admins giving more detailed answers than "yes or no only" when you asked for "yes or no only" doesn't mean we're "refusing" to answer your loaded questions.
    As far as I'm concerned, they're answered. I don't care if you like my answers, but you can't keep insisting that we're "refusing to answer" until you get the convenient answers you're looking for. Arguing your tag is a waste of time, it was removed over a year ago.

    Attached Files:

    Sjru and Enstage like this.
  14. BigMac187

    BigMac187 New User

    Messages:
    313
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:0:32620293
    This is the sticking point, lets not get beyond this please.

    They did not have justification for believing this, if by this you mean the outage log, then it is not evident and it can't be justified when looking at the definition of evidence as there were many other factors involved and your outage log is by no means near definite, it only reports on your server up time and has no information regarding the many other variables the could cause SteamRep not to load on my side. FoG and you as you have commented on this outage log as evidence that steamrep didn't load on my side, evidence needs to be definitive and not a reason to justify an assumption. I hope you can understand especially from your position and how can you defend that as enough reasoning to be placing someone with so much evidence towards being legit and transparent over a long period of time and then place flimsy evidence at best to label me as a scammer and then mark anyone those goes in contact with my internet as a scammer as well.

    By your logic if I was to say I don't ever check SteamRep then I would have not been banned as there would not have been a reason to attempt to justify a ban out of process and rather than assume i checked and SteamRep was up and I was lying but i wanted to continue to trade.

    There were two options here, do the right thing and understand that there wasn't enough evidence to justify and ban but plenty evidence to see I was legit, transparent and understanding that there were cracks in the process, or attach yourselves to a statement that SteamRep was down and then convince yourselves that i was if fact able to check to justify labeling me as someone that is a thief and should not be trusted.

    I'll also like to add that during the appeal process FoG did say that they got confirmation from SteamRep to mark me so you are involved as you the ok FoG and listing the information publicly, you can't offload this to FoG and say we had nothing to do with us.

    If these thoughts don't make sense to you and you still want to argue that it was justified then that is up to you and in mind my this is evidence that you don't understand why the process we are discussing was even removed and in mind can be harmful to the community.

    Can you please answer the questions in the OP, they should not be that hard to answer.

    I mucked up the above message, don't use it against me.

    For the sake of clarity can you confirm that you got approval from SteamRep before placing my ban, I can't recall if it was you or another FoG admin that mentioned this previously and I can't be bothered chasing it up.
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 26, 2017
  15. Lava

    Lava Public Relations SteamRep Admin

    Messages:
    5,735
    SteamRep Admin:
    STEAM_0:1:46187366
    Having a justification, reason, or explanation, doesn't mean they're right; it just means they had a justification. What about that is so hard to understand?

    Let me try to put it in terms you can understand and relate to. If came to me, as a trader, and told me a 1-of-1 unusual I had and you wanted was "worth less" because it's not priced on backpack.tf... that "not priced on backpack.tf" part would be your justification. I wouldn't have to agree with it (would probably tell you to find the other 1-of-1 copy), and it wouldn't have to be right, for it to be a justification. It wouldn't even matter that there are traders who operate on that mentality, nor would it matter that I personally tend to favor unpriced unusuals, just that you had that explanation. If, instead, you said "your unusual is worth less" without any explanation, you would not have a justification.

    Back on topic, FoG had a justification for your tag (whether or not you or I agree with it). That is to say, they did not simply drop a tag without any reason. You could argue their reasoning was wrong, but not that they had no reason. Because they had a reason, it was up to them to handle your appeal.
    If something on your end prevented you from loading steamrep.com, that's your problem. Let's try an experiment: Go to a university somewhere, sign up for a class with online homework, and then as an experiment configure your router or firewall to block the homework site. Bonus points if it's a computer science or IT class. Wait until the last hour or so before your homework is due, then try to submit your homework without rolling back your changes, so it won't work. Don't do anything to try and troubleshoot or work around the problem, just stare at the error message for no longer than 60 seconds. Wait until you get your grade, then kindly explain to the professor it's not your responsibility to make sure her homework site loads. Rebute her point of "none of my other students had any problem" with the same "many other variables that could cause {site} not to load on my side" you're using here and see if improves your grade in the course. Make sure you accuse the professor of penalizing you with flimsy evidence for what you had no control over, because their site wouldn't load. If at first you don't succeed, follow him/her home and interrupt her dinner with the same arguments. Then go to the college dean and say she's treating you unfairly. Make sure you rally a bunch of fellow students at your side, and drag the faculty council through the mud any opportunity you get, because as a "partner" it's their responsibility. After failing the class, go back to the professor periodically during the following semester to remind all their students about how "corrupt" said professor is.

    First step of any experiment following the scientific method is a hypothesis... do you think the professor will excuse you from homework? Do you think this is a reasonable stance to take? It's exactly what you're arguing here. Our site was working fine, so your network issues were not our problem.
    I don't know how many times I have to keep answering this before you quit bringing it up with your selective reading. There was no official correspondence from FoG on this, and no official instruction of "ban him" or "don't ban him". It's common practice for partner communities to ask us for impartial advice; I can only imagine the "confirmation" they got was a simple off-record instant message to a random SR ADMIN who happened to be online at that moment, asking a quick "general policy" question. Questions and clarifications like that happen all the time, and there's really no reason for our admins to log every single random question from a partner admin to use against them a year later like that. FoG tagged you, so it's their responsibility. Don't like it? Complain to them. I don't have access to FoG's private notes on your case, so I have no idea who they talked to. I am not going to spend hours digging into your case and badgering them for records I don't have access to just because you aren't content with the last 6 times we had this argument (and probably won't ever be happy).
    Sjru, Roudydogg1 and Sniper Pro like this.
  16. BigMac187

    BigMac187 New User

    Messages:
    313
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:0:32620293
    The reason why I ask you to answer Yes Or No is because when there's more than more than a few words involved it gets clouded the questions are worded to be very specific and they are not loaded, they are simple.

    A lot of what you said has been pushing this towards FoG, but the fact that SteamRep did get involved in my case and gave them the ok to go ahead, as such you can't deflect this to FoG as you had in your statement with the long answers i specifically made it clear i did not want as history has shown me you guys like to cloud / make assumptions and use them to churn a statement in favor of SteamRep.

    Like seriously how does this answer my question.

    "If there was no evidence, you'd be correct here. Dismissing the credibility of your reporter, tagging community, or whatever evidence they have/had on file, does not mean it doesn't exist. Just like admins giving more detailed answers than "yes or no only" when you asked for "yes or no only" doesn't mean we're "refusing" to answer your loaded questions."

    The credibility of my reporter? Is this a joke... FortSP and his friend he asked to report me, .. Even if it Gabe himself reporting me, that should not factor in he can't give you the evidence needed to justify this assumption. Look at facts over this so called credibility of the reporter.

    You then say does not mean it doesn't exist, that's a correct statement but it doesn't not mean the evidence required does exist or does it in your mind?

    Like i said earlier you used a point that can't be proven or dis proven in attempts to justify a ban.. I asked you to answer with yes or no, because of the clouded nature of your replies. I am being very logical and you are reaching.

    Please just answer with Yes Or No and don't cloud it.
  17. Lava

    Lava Public Relations SteamRep Admin

    Messages:
    5,735
    SteamRep Admin:
    STEAM_0:1:46187366
    I have given my answer. Take it or leave it.
  18. BigMac187

    BigMac187 New User

    Messages:
    313
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:0:32620293
    This, this is something of another level... the amount of cloud you are adding to avoid answering 3 simple questions is worrying, most with how much power you have in this community.

    Since this website isn't very user friendly and doesn't let me edit.. i'll post this here.

    So Facts....... simple... ok...no clouds, nice sunny day below. It should be obvious I'm trying hard to remove the cloud and ask these questions as simple as possible.

    - Rules said it needs to be evident i knew
    - You have no proof that there is evidence i knew, proof that SteamRep was not down is not evidence i knew
    - SteamRep gave the OK to FoG
    - I was banned out of process

    Discuss where there was "evidence I knew" and not "evidence SteamRep was up"

    Once again 3 simple questions, Yes or No please.

    You didn't answer mate, you clouded the daylight out of my simple questions. I made simple knowing you would look to cloud your way out of my concerns, like steam rep has in the past.

    You won't answer this, even thought it's a very simple question and evident.

    So Facts....... simple... ok...no clouds, nice sunny day below.

    - Rules said it needs to be evident i knew
    - You have no proof that there is evidence i knew, proof that SteamRep was not down is not evidence i knew
    - SteamRep gave the OK to FoG
    - I was banned out of process

    Discuss where there was "evidence I knew" and not "evidence SteamRep was up"

    Your move.. answer truthfully and admit to error, ban me or continue to cloud.


    I'm going to reword because it's open to clouding.

    So Facts....... simple... ok...was some but no more clouds, nice sunny day below.

    - Rules said it needs to be evident i knew
    - You have no proof that it is evidence i knew, proof that SteamRep was not down is not evidence i knew
    - SteamRep gave the OK to FoG
    - I was banned out of process

    Discuss where it was "evidence I knew" and not "evidence SteamRep was up"
    Your move.. answer truthfully and admit to error, ban me or continue to cloud


    It doesn't look like I am going to get an answer, so those reading this thread please see how I have been factual throughout and the reps from SteamRep have lied, made assumptions and tried to cloud the thread whilst avoiding simple questions, I worded my questions in a way that they could not be clouded and had to pull them back in.

    We are at a point now where there's a very legit question asked and they aren't answering it as it exposes them. Before you try to push this off as the viewpoints of a single person remember there's many threads on reddit from different users sharing the same concerns which received many upvotes and comments highlighting their concerns and lack of trust with SteamRep, past admins / community partners have also highlighted their concerns with this group.

    I have previously advised SteamRep that the account listed as an alt belonged to my nephew and requested it be removed as he was being abused but they did not remove it. It was their actions / processes that lead to an innocent child being abused, this might sound dramatic but this is fact.

    SteamRep was listing this information and were involved in my ruling, even if they did not have a say in my ruling they are still liable for the information they are publicly listing. I have never agreed to SteamReps practices therefore I did not agree to them invading my space and defaming me.

    Your service should never be forced, if someone is worried about trading with a scammer and if you provide anti scam measures and they choose to visit you that's fine. Forcing Steam users to visit your website or risk a ban from the communities that have signed on as a partner agreement is not fine especially when a steam user can be defamed when they have not even visited steam or one of these partner websites.

    In your terms and rules you state "You agree to not use the Service to submit or link to any Content which is defamatory, abusive, hateful, threatening, spam or spam-like, likely to offend, contains adult or objectionable content, contains personal information of others, risks copyright infringement, encourages unlawful activity, or otherwise violates any laws."
    Yet your admins swear at users (see my signature) and when I questioned it you other admins defended his actions.

    I have asked them many times for a privacy policy as I will like to know what information they have about me, how they got it and who they share it with and since the nature of this group is one that connects other communities is especially concerning. Don't give me notes on what you do and don't share as I don't trust your word, you should have a privacy policy and fact you don't is very suspicious.

    As you have defamed me in the past, and caused my nephew to go through unwarranted hardship I will like to request you remove my Steam Profile from your website, I don't want it to be searchable, I will like to keep my profile public so don't ask me to set my profile to public, especially don't add notes on my profile as fact when they are assumption based, don't add notes about me full stop.

    Before you say I am clouding I am not, i am highlighting many evident concerns (and i could post more, ask me if you'll like to see more), there is no assumptions being made on my part, this is all evident, and I am not avoiding your questions, if you have asked me a specific question I have answered it.

    If you're going to reply, answer where it was "evidence I knew" and not "evidence SteamRep was up" don't avoid it. This was evidently an incorrect ruling so either admit to error or bias.

    If you don't reply then I won't be posting anymore so feel free to lock the thread, or I guess keep it open avoid the questions. But don't post a long statement statement filled with assumptions and excuses and then lock this thread as if you do I will like to respond.
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 26, 2017
  19. SilentReaper(SR)

    SilentReaper(SR) Retired Staff

    Messages:
    11,992
    SteamRep Admin:
    STEAM_0:0:89705646
    No idea why admins, mods, partners etc still answer on your baseless diatribes.

    Hidden Content:
    **Hidden Content: Content of this hidden block can only be seen by members of (usergroups: Administrative, Donator, Donator - Tier 05, Moderating, SteamRep Friend Members, SteamRep Partner Members, SteamRep Partner SCAs, Valve (Automatic)).**
  20. BigMac187

    BigMac187 New User

    Messages:
    313
    Steam:
    STEAM_0:0:32620293
    It makes sense that you mistake logic as baseless dribble especially since you were involved in the trading with scammer rule that got many innocent people kicked out of the community.

    Fact: You did not have evidence to proves that I was knowing trading with a scammer yet made it seem like fact i was... this was a baseless marking. Feel free to show evidence that I knew he was marked and not that SteamRep was up. You can't thus baseless. It's hard to beat logic.

    Fact: Information is passed between different communities many of which will have sensitive information yet you don't have a privacy policy

    Fact: You guys had a shitty process that defamed many innocent people as scammers

    Fact: A lot of people don't trust SteamRep

    These point are all evident.

    Lava can you please remind SilentReaper that if he doesn't have anything constructive to post not to post at all.