Dispute on GameCube

[Jamez]

Disputed member: Gamecube

Thread Link: no thread

Explanation: He's trying to frame me saying i scammed his 10msh in items while i was doing service , i basically woke up , went to uni then came back to him saying that his items are ''gone''. (I told him yday when i went to sleep to get on and get ava since he doesnt have one)

https://gyazo.com/d3659eaf2a4ded4ee66c882bc7b5f1ed

 

 

Evidence: http://prnt.sc/d3rv9f

http://prnt.sc/d3rvdm

http://prnt.sc/d3rvhj

http://prnt.sc/d3rvlj

http://prnt.sc/d3rvnl

[Solution]

I'm sorry to say, but there's absolutely no way to tell who took the items from the account. It's word vs word with no possible evidence and that's going to waste everybody's time. This is the reason I'm going to close this dispute without taking action towards either party. It's is equally unlikely for either player to have committed the scam and even if that wasn't the case it still wouldn't have been sufficient proof.

 

 

That being said:

Me and @@Decode have been discussing a possible addition to the rules; (Mind you, it's a rough draft that hasn't been through all staff-members yet, but I would like some feedback from the community as well, send me a PM on here or on skype if you feel like I've missed anything, or if you think this is a good/bad idea.)

I've been recommending this for ages, and I'm not sure why I haven't brought it up as a rule-draft before, but better late than never.

 

Servicers must receive a password change link before they start the service. The owner of the accounts can obviously still recover the password and regain access to the account in case of anything shady.

Once the servicer has set his unique password to the account (which is obviously UNKNOWN to the owner of the account!) both parties mus verify the wealth that is on the account. A simple screenshot should suffice, this will HAVE to be provided as evidence in the case of a dispute. Failure to bring forth this evidence would render the person performing the service 100% liable. 

The pro(s):

1) It 100% clear who has access to the account at what point in time, and will be no way for either party to talk his way out in the case of a dispute. 

In this case for example, if Jamez was the only one that knew the password then he would be held accountable for the missing items no matter what. He could be hacked, he could've stolen them, it could've been his cat, but he is the only one with the password and therefore whatever happened would be his fault.

2) Though this is a smaller item it's not something to be overlooked; it'll help with account unbans if the services are botted. It makes it look like the account was hacked, instead of shared. It's obviously speculation, but worth mentioning.

The con(s):

1) Effort. The effort might scare away new servicers or customers, even though this would provide additional security for both parties. Unlikely, but something to consider.

2) Workers would still have to know the password. Though this isn't much of a downside, since service owners are responsible for their workers anyways, in the case of a scam it wouldn't be much of a different scenario than one without workers involved. 

 

Should this happen, I would have it placed in the Global OSBot TOS. Which means I'd have to spend a year or two updating all service threads etc. but if it helps it'll be well worth the time.

If servicers don't want to follow the new guideline we'd hold them accountable in any dispute that's similar in nature to this one.

 

As a reminder; this is just a rough draft that hasn't gone through staff yet. I cannot make any guarantees towards this happening if the majority agrees with this @Solution but I will try my best to make it happen if that's the case.