Once enough evidence has been gathered a Locked/Scammer tag will be given.
Either you are Locked or not. There is nothing in between.
This would also promote false accusations.

This post was edited by FantaExotic on Oct 8 2012 08:37am

Either use a mediator or accept that taking a risk sometimes ends in misfortune. Members are either found guilty or not, we do not need warnings for potential scammers that is a grey area that needs not be touched. The responsibility is on the members to take all the appropriate SS's and gather the proper evidence in order to ensure a speedy lock of the scammers gold.



They only gather the evidence that you provide in an organized fashion. S/A helpers are not there to determine the outcome of a case. As soon as a mod determines guilty they are locked, there is no lag time between guilty and locked. They do their best to stop scammers asap the only real lag is insufficient evidence from the accuser.

This post was edited by Beowulf on Oct 8 2012 08:55am

I get what you guys are saying... and you're probably right.

My worry is: there's a huge lag between the providing of evidence (however overwhelming), and the locking of the users gold, and I'm disappointed that there appears to be no acceptable way to address this.


... and again, I'm not proposing a warning for 'potential scammers' I'm proposing a warning for scammers. Scammers who have been validated and verified as scammers by S&A helpers (the ones who seem to be around all the time but don't have authority to lock gold), but not yet locked by a mod.

This post was edited by Alterlife on Oct 8 2012 08:50am

This is my opinion too.

Use mediators to avoid being scammed. Sometimes it might take longer, but i rather wait longer than get scammed.

If you dont use mediator, take as much evidence that you can even if you dont get scammed. From very start to the end of the trade, then you can be sure that he/she gets locked, when you have solid proofs.

But i still suggest to use meds
my vote is: NO

Would be abused.

Voted no.

this

also, innocent until proven guilty

Sufficient evidence needs to be provided in order for a locked tag to be applied. Then the SA is put for an additional review from an Administrator to appoint the Scammer tag.
No in-between should exist for this because it would promote false accusations. Also, no action should be taken unless required evidence is provided, so I do not agree with this.

Voted no.

This post was edited by Beacon on Oct 8 2012 02:11pm

Scammer Accusations is a court system, not a police force.

That's the perfect analogy. JSP has a court system, and it doesn't have a police force. IMO, that is the problem.

In the case that I linked to, the evidence was provided in full in post #20 - Oct 7 2012 01:47am my time
Scammer tag was requested in post 29 - Oct 7 2012 05:15pm my time - more than 12 hours after the S&A helper collected the evidence.

The trade forum was in the meantime was abuzz with posts warning people to be aware of this scammer - the only way that we have to warn people outside of the system... and still one more person got scammed in the interim.


I think that some of you who voted 'no' really haven't read my original post in full... However it's clear that only two other people agree with me (I voted null on the poll), and it looks like this idea has already been considered... so please consider this topic closed.

This post was edited by Alterlife on Oct 8 2012 10:42pm