May 13, 2020 09:20 AM
(This post was last modified: May 13, 2020 09:21 AM by Ash Ketchum.)
(May 13, 2020 09:18 AM)IPIKIN Wrote: So if it's not mandatory and someone scams, what then?
Then we're back to the same issue that got us here, his crew mislead people by making him look like an official/trusted member of the community and it lead to a member being scammed.
Even if he was to ensure people with his money (which he will no doubt comment) there's no doubt he wouldn't refund any substantial amount, and this all can be avoided by simply not misleading members of the forum.
(May 13, 2020 09:19 AM)Lavish Living Wrote: No where does it say it’s necessary.
They will be removed from the crew! 😤
It's implied, we've already established you don't like to be direct because you try and play on vague words/implications but we're not 12 this childish manipulation wont work on anyone with a brain.
DO NOT DEAL WITH THIS MEMBER
(May 13, 2020 09:20 AM)Ash Ketchum Wrote: Then we're back to the same issue that got us here, his crew mislead people by making him look like an official/trusted member of the community and it lead to a member being scammed.
Even if he was to ensure people with his money (which he will no doubt comment) there's no doubt he wouldn't refund any substantial amount, and this all can be avoided by simply not misleading members of the forum.
It's implied, we've already established you don't like to be direct because you try and play on vague words/implications but we're not 12 this childish manipulation wont work on anyone with a brain.
It should be a forum usergroup like vendors, where they have to pay an application and holding fee to the forum not to a user
(May 13, 2020 09:06 AM)Lavish Living Wrote: You mean rn? I still am. But I am also willing to let any respectable active mm join in the monopoly.
Too bad he fugged up and got banned from HF marketplace Ok, then add me into monopoly.
reality
(May 13, 2020 09:26 AM)IPIKIN Wrote: It should be a forum usergroup like vendors, where they have to pay an application and holding fee to the forum not to a user Omni would never.
(May 13, 2020 09:26 AM)Orchid Wrote: Ok, then add me into monopoly.
Who u
(May 13, 2020 09:26 AM)IPIKIN Wrote: It should be a forum usergroup like vendors, where they have to pay an application and holding fee to the forum not to a user
I think it shouldn't exist and if it did it should be a very few selected OG members who have proven their worth because as soon as a forum especially one as big as HF puts their trust in someone they instantly become more valuable and if this was to cost even 1-2k the trust they gain they could easily scam quit for a lot more.
the only people worthy of said role would be minimalist/cooligan/killjoy/eagle imo but eagle is way too busy, killjoy is self banned and cooligan/mini aren't very active in the market anymore.
(May 13, 2020 09:27 AM)Lavish Living Wrote: Omni would never.
Who u
No, the real question is who are you? 😂
reality
DO NOT DEAL WITH THIS MEMBER
(May 13, 2020 09:29 AM)Ash Ketchum Wrote: I think it shouldn't exist and if it did it should be a very few selected OG members who have proven their worth because as soon as a forum especially one as big as HF puts their trust in someone they instantly become more valuable and if this was to cost even 1-2k the trust they gain they could easily scam quit for a lot more.
the only people worthy of said role would be minimalist/cooligan/killjoy/eagle imo but eagle is way too busy, killjoy is self banned and cooligan/mini aren't very active in the market anymore. Isn't the point of contracts to reduce the need for a MM?
(May 13, 2020 09:34 AM)IPIKIN Wrote: Isn't the point of contracts to reduce the need for a MM?
Yeah, pretty much but there are loopholes by putting UIDS in contracts.
But unless a 3 way contract is made anything official is obsolete
(May 13, 2020 09:34 AM)IPIKIN Wrote: Isn't the point of contracts to reduce the need for a MM?
not at all lol. they are just an easier way to see if someone has a bad track record in the marketplace. You can clearly see negative ratings and open disputes.
(May 13, 2020 09:35 AM)Ash Ketchum Wrote: Yeah, pretty much but there are loopholes by putting UIDS in contracts.
But unless a 3 way contract is made anything official is obsolete
what? There is an official spot of all contracts where you can distinguish who is the MM/escrow
(May 13, 2020 09:44 AM)Lavish Living Wrote: not at all lol. they are just an easier way to see if someone has a bad track record in the marketplace. You can clearly see negative ratings and open disputes.
what? There is an official spot of all contracts where you can distinguish who is the MM/escrow
Don't recall ever saying there wasn't?
(May 13, 2020 09:45 AM)Ash Ketchum Wrote: Don't recall ever saying there wasn't?
"Yeah, pretty much but there are loopholes by putting UIDS in contracts.
But unless a 3 way contract is made anything official is obsolete"
there is no loophole, its an official feature of contracts
there is no reason for 3 way contracts
(May 13, 2020 09:52 AM)Lavish Living Wrote: "Yeah, pretty much but there are loopholes by putting UIDS in contracts.
But unless a 3 way contract is made anything official is obsolete"
there is no loophole, its an official feature of contracts
there is no reason for 3 way contracts
Isn't 3-way contracts literally what you supported being implemented not even a day ago, the same thread that made you more of a mockery than you already were?
I'll dumb down the 3-way contract since you don't understand multiple meanings for words, any way you're incorporated to the contract between 2 other traders and in the end a b-rating is also applied to your account.
And don't take the term loophole in this so literal, it's a simple term that implies a workaround of some sort, educate yourself 'teacher'
DO NOT DEAL WITH THIS MEMBER
If i buy in right now, would you guys trust me?
Personally, i wouldn't lol
(May 13, 2020 09:56 AM)Hero Wrote: If i buy in right now, would you guys trust me?
Personally, i wouldn't lol
At this point, I would not even jokingly trust you more now than if you were to buy-in.
Because anyone who would willingly do it after all of this, their end goal is 100% exit scamming.
(May 13, 2020 09:55 AM)Ash Ketchum Wrote: Isn't 3-way contracts literally what you supported being implemented not even a day ago, the same thread that made you more of a mockery than you already were?
I'll dumb down the 3-way contract since you don't understand multiple meanings for words, any way you're incorporated to the contract between 2 other traders and in the end a b-rating is also applied to your account.
And don't take the term loophole in this so literal, it's a simple term that implies a workaround of some sort, educate yourself 'teacher'
No I never said I wanted b ratings for mming.
I just want to see the total completed contracts where a user was the middleman / escrow. That should be a very easy statistic to calculate.
The way contracts have middlemen setup is perfectly fine imo.
|