well, since i have recently been scammed 2.3k fg by a user
i think it would only be fair that the users fg should be sent back to me
their gold is locked and unaccesable, so it goes to no use anyways
some scams are not preventable, and i think that this issue should be adressed

I've never really understood why this doesnt occur. Perhaps a moderator could explain why it doesnt.

Obviously yes, been scammed for about 5k fg myself.
And even then, it's just stupid to only lock and not send back.

No,

If you are scammed and the person wants to get unlocked he MUST repay his scams.

Not gonna change otherwise.

This post was edited by Yip12343 on Jan 12 2010 06:51pm

its not about repaying his scams, think of the person that got scammed
the person who is locked loses his fg when he is unlocked anyways...

and what should happen when the scammer only has 200 fg on his account, but scammed multiple times with a total of 1000 fg?
voted no, this would just lead to confusion and it would be very hard to make this fair for all.

What if the person doesn’t care about being unlocked and the forum gold is setting there forever collecting dust? Why not give that gold back to the individual who provided enough evidence to get that scammer locked?



Granted it does require more work but you as a Mediator chose this job. Any form of compensation is better then just the satisfaction of having a scammer locked. I would suggest dividing up the remaining fg among the people that posted legitimate proof of being scammed against the convicted user.

what you are actually saying is they have chosen to make it equally UNFAIR for all who have been scammed.

This post was edited by VileDoom on Jan 12 2010 07:05pm

Sometimes the scammed fg doesn't always stay on the account of the user who scammed it. Sometimes he trades for more items, and it gets circulated around to users who traded legitimately. These users should not be punished for your carelessness and/or bad luck. You should always trade with a mediator for safe trading.

use a med for everything.

Voted no, for some reasons that was alredy stated and also because can be abused