Spectre Posted July 16, 2017 Author Share Posted July 16, 2017 7 minutes ago, Decode said: So you reckon someone refusing to use a middleman, no matter who it is, is TWC worthy? When it's evident he was trying to scam yes, I even showed you the skype conversations, where it was clear he wanted to scam. And everyone who saw the post agreed with me, its deleted now which is sad. All his feedback consisted of trades barely over 10m 07. My first 5 feedbacks consist of trades worth over 1.2b 07. All his feedback was him selling tut accounts for 5m or so. 400m was suspicious as hell. Which is why I pointed it out. I was looking out for the safety of the community and you just deleted the thread, which really made me question your integrity. Sorry to be so blunt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 1 minute ago, Decode said: You see, people have taken middlemen to be the safest option. Not every middleman is 100% legit, as seen with the banned ones. Damn you're right 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spectre Posted July 16, 2017 Author Share Posted July 16, 2017 1 minute ago, Decode said: You see, people have taken middlemen to be the safest option. Not every middleman is 100% legit, as seen with the banned ones. I said we would use an MM such as Roomscape, or Realist. These are dudes that I feel wouldn't scam 10b if they had the chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darren Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 Well, you know... the weeaboo's have to pay for the online anime porn somehow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decode Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 1 minute ago, Tom said: Damn you're right ... Just now, Isildur1 said: I said we would use an MM such as Roomscape, or Realist. These are dudes that I feel wouldn't scam 10b if they had the chance. That is where you're mistaken. I am not saying that evereyone is a scammer, but even some of the people who come across as "trusted" to you/us scam. Adding a third party into a trade when i know it can be done without "me" having to take the risk of the third party scamming me is always something i would go for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spectre Posted July 16, 2017 Author Share Posted July 16, 2017 9 minutes ago, Mio said: How about we ban all members instead. I think its a great idea. It'll be a nice safe space. A PC community. Not saying you were in the wrong, you had nothing to do with this. But taking into consideration all the evidence I provided, it shouldve been handled differently. Not even 2 weeks later he has scammed for half the amount he wanted to buy off me. You weren't the one who deleted the thread, so you're not at fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 2 minutes ago, Darren said: Well, you know... the weeaboo's have to pay for the online anime porn somehow Shit's Expensive man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Decode said: ... That is where you're mistaken. I am not saying that evereyone is a scammer, but even some of the people who come across as "trusted" to you/us scam. Adding a third party into a trade when i know it can be done without "me" having to take the risk of the third party scamming me is always something i would go for. So who is more likely to scam A) A Scripter 1 who has already had a dispute opened against him in the past (not sure what it was related to) B) A reputable middle man that has been on the site for years and has accumulated hundreds of rep Dunno bout you, but I'd go with the safer option I'm also not saying the middle man couldn't scam, but its a whole lot less likely than someone who hasn't been around for even a year and has under 100 rep At the end of the day, you should be aiming to protect buyers over sellers, as most of the time buyers are the ones going first. Edited July 16, 2017 by Tom 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ez11 Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 4 minutes ago, Tom said: Everyone can have their opinions, but if someone is denying something that makes a trade safer for both the seller and the buyer for potentially no added cost, its suspicious as shit and should be flagged for the rest of the communities safety some MM dont make the trade safer lol only use MM who consistenly make money from osbot (scripters/big service owners). I would really avoid MM who only really sell accounts, when they decide to quit they can get all their accs back. so someone having high fb from mostly selling accs and sometimes doing quick services shouldnt be a reason to blindy trust them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decode Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 3 minutes ago, Tom said: So who is more likely to scam A) A Scripter 1 who has already had a dispute opened against him in the past (not sure what it was related to) B) A reputable middle man that has been on the site for years and has accumulated hundreds of rep Dunno bout you, but I'd go with the safer option I'm also not saying the middle man couldn't scam, but its a whole lot less likely than someone who hasn't been around for even a year and has under 100 rep Definitely option A. And im not saying that the middleman is a risky option, 9 times out of 10, they are indeed the safest option. However, if i personally refuse to use a middleman, i don't think that should be held against me or paint me as sketchy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spectre Posted July 16, 2017 Author Share Posted July 16, 2017 7 minutes ago, Decode said: ... That is where you're mistaken. I am not saying that evereyone is a scammer, but even some of the people who come across as "trusted" to you/us scam. Adding a third party into a trade when i know it can be done without "me" having to take the risk of the third party scamming me is always something i would go for. Please do not tell me you didn't think he was gonna scam that 400m. It was so evident he was, which is why I'm pointing it out now, and you just shoved it away like it was nothing at all. This is what really got me confused. Even now, you're still siding with the fact that he was right in refusing an MM. For future reference, do not allow this to happen again is all I'm saying. Just admit you were wrong and leave it be. Just now, Decode said: Definitely option A. And im not saying that the middleman is a risky option, 9 times out of 10, they are indeed the safest option. However, if i personally refuse to use a middleman, i don't think that should be held against me or paint me as sketchy. You are a moderator, I wouldn't even request to use a MM when working with you. And you have 390 feedback. That is a completely different scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decode Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 1 minute ago, Isildur1 said: Please do not tell me you didn't think he was gonna scam that 400m. It was so evident he was, which is why I'm pointing it out now, and you just shoved it away like it was nothing at all. This is what really got me confused. Even now, you're still siding with the fact that he was right in refusing an MM. For future reference, do not allow this to happen again is all I'm saying. Just admit you were wrong and leave it be. So me saying "Yes its suspicious" means i am siding with the fact that he was right? pretty sure i was telling you the opposite. However, that alone wouldn't warrant me placing him in TWC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rekt Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 Just here for post count and cuz this funny k thxbai 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragonite3000 Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 20 minutes ago, Tom said: Everyone can have their opinions, but if someone is denying something that makes a trade safer for both the seller and the buyer for potentially no added cost, its suspicious as shit and should be flagged for the rest of the communities safety I thought I was the only one thinking this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gearing Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 48 minutes ago, Isildur1 said: I guess not, but it would've saved this guy 180$ he was not sane to trade 180m to a random-.- you could have done nothing, DONT TRADE RANDOMS WITHOUT MIDDLEMAN 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
