Discussion in 'SteamRep General Discussion' started by BigMac187, Apr 21, 2015.
Ah faster then me by 2 secs.
I can read, It's not clear at all and comes across as PR to me.
"Ultimately, if it's very clear you were purposely trying to profit from scammed or stolen items, you deserve a BANNED tag at admin discretion"
Saying deserve a ban and will receive a Ban are two different things, in the wording above the notes section it comes of as clear that you will receive a caution if you can get a ban for a first time offense, this is whatI am referring to.
I already explained. Please make a thread on FoG about any tags you have doubts. If it's not FoG related post them on the partercommunity where they were baned.
My question here are for SteamRep not FoG and the wording of their FAQ's, I think the wording should be updated in the case of this FAQ to make it clearer.
Its not always a hard-cut case. Hence there is leeway in how the admin handles it. There are also a LOT of factors to be weighted in for each case, the total value, the number of items, the type of trade, how known the trader is, how obvious was the alt, was the item history any clue, can the main account be traced to be involved, have previous owners reported the item stolen, etc etc etc. Throwing all those into rules easy to understand is impossible for we would have to write a very long convoluted if/then/else/nullified by/etc/etc/etc rule, and that would make the work of admins much harder and time consuming to do, for they would have to use forms to do such cases. Which is what we cannot do here.
That is the reason the rules are short, and giving the admin leeway to handle the report. Cases are never 100% simular. See these rules just as general guidelines.
If Trader A is trading for a Burning Team Captain while he's been around with a steam account for say like since 2008, and trades with a Trader B who'se account is created yesterday, then that is a very obvious alt of a scammer. Its a whole different case where trader A, who is just starting, is trading for a flies effect for 10 keys, a low value unusual with a Trader C who is banned. Its up to the admin to assess the report and weight it.
Yes, different admins will then rule differently on cases. Cannot be helped, there is also difference in how deep admins will research things or is able to.
Not at all! Did you know if you report someone on SteamRep for running from a spycrab or posting fakerep, it'll get rejected, but if you report it to the partner community where it happened, they can get marked? Some things we leave up to partner communities. They're the ones who ban you, hence they're the ones who keep the evidence, even if the tag is on our website. We do oversee their tags for proper evidence and to make sure they aren't abusing their access, but if you have questions about a specific tag issued by a partner community (something that isn't BANNED BY SR) you should reach out to that community.
The words "at admin discretion" make the meaning of this sentence crystal clear. Point is we're not definitively saying you will receive a ban every time, but at admin's discretion. Like @SilentReaper(SR) said, there are often other factors to weigh in. The intention is to not tag new/unaware traders for trading with an alt, but if we see a clear case of working to help scammers profit then they can get a mark on the first offense.
"at admin discretion" really doesn't correct the deserve part, where does it say in that sentence that you can receive a banned tag for a first trade?, it says you deserve a banned tag at admins discretion, to me it reads as an admin may think you deserve a tag. If you simply replace the word "deserve" with "could receive" then that clears that up.
Also I don't think it should be in the important notes section and it should be moved into the First Offense section for two reasons... 1. People could overlook the Important notes part and 2. Both sections sort of contradict each other as the bold first offense section doesn't indicate you can receive a Full Tag and the special notes section makes mention that an admin may feel you could deserve a ban but that doesn't exactly mean you will receive a ban.
How I see it, what could be obvious to you may not be obvious to others.. I don't see why you will be against a suggestion to make things clearer.
As a suggestion I will think this will work better, simply moving it up and replacing deserve with you could means it won't be looked passed and it's clearer.
Item/Game trades: You will receive a one-time warning for any high-value item or game trade with a BANNED account or an obvious scammer alternate account. (This warning will be a temporary CAUTION tag that will be removed when you contact SteamRep admins.)
Cash trades: You will receive a CAUTION reputation tag for cash exchanges for high-value items with a banned scammer or obvious alternate scammer acount. Helping scammers profit is not something we can encourage.
Ultimately, if it's very clear you were purposely trying to profit from scammed or stolen items, you could receive a BANNED tag at admin discretion.
You were already warned: You will receive a CAUTION reputation tag.
You already have a CAUTION tag: You will be BANNED for working with scammers.
Third offense: You will be BANNED for participating in fraud.
Anyone has the right to one appeal. You should appeal if you feel the evidence is incorrect or you feel the penalty is too harsh.
Even if you disagree with someone else's BANNED reputation tag, trading with them is still considered "Trading with a Scammer". Just because you trust them not to scam you, it doesn't mean they aren't selling stolen merchandise they took from someone else.
I'm pretty big on the if/then/else rules, I worked as a process specialist for 7 years for a leading ISP and I had to create a very deep IF / ELSE / THEN flow. It started off with a welcome to ISP my name is ______ how can I help you? In generally the customer could say 1 of roughly 50 things, depending on what the customer said the consultant will then start with that flow which had high level IF / ELSE / THEN instructions, it started to get complex when different flows would have to cross paths.. as an example the customer could say they had an email issue but in reality they have a connection issue, so the email flow will need to cover this and then push them into the connection flow. Connection issues were pretty tricky as the instructions change depending on the modem and what the lights are doing... some customers had modems we didn't supply so we had to cover them. All in all the Flow I had to create was 2000+ pages and it was created in a way where if a process changes "system to reset password being changed" then a snippet could be changed where all the reset password related instructions could be changed in 1 update rather than manually update all the pages with those instructions.
I've previously said "somewhere" A IF / ELSE / THEN is the way to go, it removed transparency but the big one for me is that with a defined IF / ELSE / THEN statements you can get look into getting the community to help out with the reports as the process is then more robotic / data entry over a non transparent approach where judgement needs to be used and judgement could differ from person to person meaning a non consistent approach.
Thats nice, but as I said, every case differs, and as most questions will need to be answered with a grey-scale there is not much point in that. That you like it like that, doesn't mean its a working model for everything. Also, even if we would have such, we would not publish it, for it would provide an exact guide on how to avoid to get burned with this, by just avoiding the conditions, and use accounts that fall just outside those.
By using the current definition, the scammer doesn't know what to use, and the trader gets a easier way to avoid the situation by just researching the profile.
Stop whining about other community policies bigmac, jesus.
In 2012 as a trader who had been in the community for like maybe 2 months? I did a 7 bud trade with a marked scammer. First offense, never traded with a scammer prior and received a warning from Pretender, courtesy of TF2OP. In spite of that, I still received a caution. To this day, I have on NUMEROUS occasions been refused a reasonable explanation as to why this caution placed on me is valid and why it can't be removed. If anything it seems to be placed out of spite, hoenstly. Do you see me creating numerous rage threads? You've literally created three rage threads in a row on the SR general discussions.
You commit a 250 bud trade with a marked scammer as an experienced trader and don't get tagged. I'd call it a miscarriage of justice, if anything. Stop complaining and stop wasting the time of both admins and community partners who have to read this and answer to your invalid complaints.
What are you on about?, I am putting through suggestions for improvements... contrary to what some people may believe this place isn't a well oiled run machine, just look at the back log and the inconsistencies.
Your point proves my point, there are issues...you should know why you have a caution against yourself and no I don't see you creating numerous rage thread but I see you doing worse, your create reports where you flat out assume bullshit and lie with the purpose of trying to get people banned for similar mistakes that you did (If anyone needs an example have a look at the FOG report he created about me).
250 bud trade yet I overpaid through the teeth, but you don't mention that.... I've been around for 5 years, very active in dealing with high tiered items and haven't had previous issues but you don't mention that, I had offered admins access to view my full steam trade history but you don't report that, I was open and honest about everything but you don't mention that but instead flat out assume and lie in your report to F-O-G. I didn't try and hide from what happened, my trade history and reputation proves without a reason of a doubt that I am very legit and have been for a long time but then there's you, a person who is trying to make a name by getting rid of the high tier traders by exploiting the flaws in the community for the sake of what? Jealousy? Hate? Where I am sticking my neck out in hopes to make this system a smoother and fairer system for the community.
No, not true. The rules are set as they are, so admins don't have to spend a lot of time to apply them on each and every report. If we made a very detailed ruleset for that, for every situation, they would have to use a very LARGE form of some kind to fill in every time per report to handle the report, more than doubling the work. This would slow down handling of reports and also appeals. It would require to make that part of the process, but it would only be useful if implemented in such a way that it would be less work. Which isn't possible on these forums.
Also, if we would do that, there would also be no room for any of the arguments that could be made by the offender in their defense. And we do like to give room for that.
Also, while most cases are simular, its not possible to capture all situations.
I don't think it has to be very detailed, it could cut down the time spent per report and with a formula in place (being public or not) it could mean you could hire then teach junior admins part of a flow and then they can help with certain steps and then if it comes to a point where it needs judgement so to speak they can then assign it to an admin - it can sort of be case managed.
As an example for a PayPal chargeback complaint the 1st 2 steps could be:
STEP 1: Does the accuser have the sufficient evidence required to file this report?
(sufficient evidence = blah blah blah)
If Yes pass this onto <Insert Group or Admin> for tagging
If No ask the accuser to gather more evidence and change status to <insert status>
Those two steps means admins don't have to waste their time to look at cases where there's no evidence, and no digging up of the evidence is required when looking at the case as the lvl 1 has already looked at it.
What you have described is similar to that of the Moderator role.
Oh my god hahahaha
I seriously question Bigmac's knowledge of SteamRep (or anything in general)
Not everyone is aware of all the nuances of SR, and while I definitely suggest people learn the best they can, if people are trying to help, I will always appreciate it.
My knowledge of SteamRep is that they are way behind the ball and this has been admitted by the head of SteamRep, feel free to argue against that. Similar practices to what I suggest might be in play but that suggestion was to highlight how having a flow could minimize work and increase productivity.
If what I suggested was part of the process, why aren't there more SteamRep Moderators or a lower tier role where there doesn't need to be the highest level of trust but more people that can help with the tedious / data entry tasks.
SteamRep / Partners can sit their on their high horse and bag me out all they want, I couldn't care less.. in the end they have a crazy backlog they have said they can't handle, so to say our process is at the best it can be and we don't need suggestions is overly flawed and cocky.
Your easily amused :/ tickle tickle, pick a boo.
Because any role is inherently requiring an immense amount of trust. Here are some of the my issues with 'lowering' the standard of who we take on at SR Staff:
That individual uses the private methods and accesses they have to commit fraud or otherwise assist those who do
That individual fast tracks and denies reports for their friends, not on merit but on favors and corruption
That individual otherwise corrupts or tarnishes the reputation of SR
Now, I'm not a nay-sayer, I've been quite vocal that SR needs to improve and that I'm open to suggestion, but those are 3 of many possible serious problems. Not you specifically, but others have said, well those are three bad issues, but then you fire them, and you move on, it's better than doing nothing. But I don't agree completely with that. The worst possible thing we can do, is lower our standards, because it isn't a matter of then firing those individuals, because if one of those three scenarios happens then we have to review every tag, mark, case, appeal or basically anything they ever touched, their judgement is completely invalid and it adds to a huge pile of work already overdue. Not only that, but it jeopardizes the credibility of SR, and say what you want about how SR makes mistakes or doesn't care, but we do. Each one of us cares an immense amount about this community. And not just with our time, but with more than that, the sincerity of the concern we give isn't just some face we put on.
But when SR truly loses its credibility, you will see communities stop believing in it, then people stop using it, then banned individuals who have scammed thousands, come back to continue to do so. I remember the times before SteamRep, which have often been cited by people, "well we were fine before them", and when I hear that, I often challenge that those individuals were even around prior to SR and the major community efforts against scamming. I remember PayPal scamming being so frequent that you'd turn down almost every deal, that you'd have to use a MM for even the most simple transactions, that bans had to be given out thousands of times, and the community did its best to share and culminate that information. Which is what SteamRep is. Things aren't 100% efficient, things aren't perfect, no one involved says they are. What we need is a dialogue of actual thought out changes about that. "_______ needs to be fixed" doesn't help, and honestly, neither does "Nothing is wrong". I think what people forget is that SteamRep isn't some group that was bestowed upon you, or came down from the mountain tops with tablet and chisel, it's a group of people that were around when scamming was as common as phishing bots are now, and said, "There has to be a better way". SteamRep isn't something untouchable or immaculate, it's the culmination of the efforts of every person who has every cared to make the community a better place. Every accepted report, every person who has suggested something real, every poster who comments and the Staff of SR itself make this organization what it is.
I've been accused of trying to put a spin on things, or sweeping things under a rug, and I understand that my words may come off crafted or fake, and there's nothing I can say to change your mind on that. But I will say, if I didn't care, at least a little, I doubt I'd be sitting here commenting on this thread, especially when I have exams.
My final thought is this, things can always get better, ideas can always help. There's going to be people who say, "Kill SR" and there's gonna be people who say "SR is perfect", they're not who I want to encourage. I want any ideas you think could improve SR, because we do care. Not everything is a quick change, not everything can be done, but your suggestions will always be welcome.
P.S. To everyone in this thread, ideas can be discussed and built upon. Not everything will be a winner, but you can contribute to ideas, you can add to them. Tell them why it may not work, tell them that there's problems with A or B. Frankly, just insulting people really doesn't do anything for anyone.
P.P.S. I wrote a lot more than I originally intended...
Separate names with a comma.