SWAPD is a trusted middleman service dedicated to offering our users the safest way to buy, sell, or trade items and services of virtual nature. SWAPD opens doors for you to earn and rise to fame in the digital universe by connecting you with vast network of buyers, sellers, and opportunities.
It’s extremely simple. The seller claims you can use any profile pic, however, that is not true. You have to alter pic (A) which then becomes pic (B). I cannot simply upload the logo or use the existing logo that’s already uploaded.
How is that so hard to understand?
And thank you @Igplug - this site is by far the best in the industry and will continue to thrive. But with something so simple like this, I am confused how they reached their decision and it’s concerning. This ticket was for $250, but what if it had been for $50,000? If I can’t use the existing photo that’s already uploaded or have to altar one that I want to upload, then how can they said I can use ANY image? That makes zero sense.
P.s. I was semi warned that my days on Swapd may be over because some admins think I leaked this seller’s method. However, I did not leak his method or any private data. I was already privy to it and spoke about it publicly months ago. Plus Brant asked me to post all info. So if I go bye bye, that would be unfortunate and is the reason.
I do understand, but I also still think this one is partly your own fault for not setting better terms as a buyer that most likely knew this was going to happen. I understand admins’ decision.
Regardless if I knew it may happen or not doesn’t mean I can use any profile pic. I’m not required to add additional terms. In fact, Alpha said I’m not allowed to add terms.
True but I do think it’s also your responsibility to discuss the method with the seller and ask the right questions before you start the ticket. This all could have been easily prevented with 1 or 2 questions beforehand. I don’t think this seller is a scammer and that’s also a big claim to make IMO.
Sellers have a responsibility to accurately describe their service. If he makes a bold claim that any pic can be used, his claim better be valid. If he publicly claims any name can be used, but then in the method it says you have to add “xyz” to the end of the name, that’s misleading.
You are correct that I could have taken extra steps to ensure I wasn’t going to get scammed (because I was already privy to this method), but what’s concerning is … what if I wasn’t already aware of it and solely relied on his claims, and the ticket had been for $50k. Buyers should not face this type of liability.
btw, I appreciate your candid discussion. It’s what’s needed here.
I’d love for @hooper@PLUG or @onlyusernames to chime in with your opinion if any of you feel like reading this. It’s worrying, as others have noted, because it makes me reluctant to proceed with larger purchases. One admin says we can add terms, while another says we can’t, and the inconsistency / lack of logic is frustrating.
The discussion here is whether photoshopping four pictures into the corner still counts as using ‘any’ picture. In some sense, the answer is yes, because it only shows in very rare instances (e.g., when you download the pfp via a 3rd party app). So in the eyes of 99.9% of Instagram users, you could use any picture, since they will never notice it.
However, you still can’t use just ‘any’ picture since it needs to be photoshopped.
In this case, the admins decided on the 1st option, which I can somehow understand.
I understand that perspective, but no reputable brand would do this. Moreover, it’s still not technically any photo. I also showed the seller that I was aware of this back in April, yet he acted in bad faith by not closing the ticket.
I know we may be going in circles a bit, but I’m really curious what would have happened had it been a $50k ticket. That’s what’s concerning.
Personally, I would make sure to have an additional contract for any big deals like that to counter all potential disputes. I don’t think this is really comparable to a 50k deal since this is a very simple deal.
However it is possible to get disputes in 50k deals and 50k mentorship deals and that’s where it get’s tricky. That’s why clear terms and good communication is so important.
You could say the seller acted in bad faith here but I don’t agree with the term ‘scammer’. I got scammed before by a ‘method’ and it’s way different from what happened here.
Agree. However, Alpha claims you can’t add terms which contradicts Swapd. So that was concerning to read as that applies to any service item, not just mentorships. Are you under the impression that buyers and sellers can agree to additional terms?
I guess he means you have to include it in the terms when creating the ticket. I’d say be cautious about what kind of tickets you accept and get yourself into. I think it’s hard for admins to keep track if terms keep changing within tickets.
Let’s say I sell you a method and we agree to the following terms:
“The seller agrees to have the funds held in Escrow by Swapd until the buyer confirms success with the method. If the buyer tries the method and does not achieve success within 72 hours, the seller agrees to cancel the ticket and issue a refund to the buyer.”
Alpha claims these terms would not be valid because it contradicts Swap’s terms.
“Account type: AWS Price: $400 Description: Amazon AWS account with $1000 credit and valid for 1.5 years.”
And we agree to add the following terms:
“Seller guarantees buyer will be able to use the $1,000 credit within 1.5 years. If for some reason the buyer is unable to redeem the $1,000 credit within 1.5 years, I agree to give him a full refund”
This, according to Alpha, would not be valid because those terms would supersede Swapd’s terms for the “other” category where he says:
Stop, it’s tiring. I said this was reviewed by the Admin team and was a joint decision, not solely mine. I’m not sure what you don’t understand about that.
You never tested it. You went straight to disputing it as soon as you realized it’s a method you already know, which as clearly outlined in our method warning, disputes aren’t permitted for simple dissatisfaction.
And this isn’t something we can enforce. We can’t force the seller to refund the buyer a year and a half down the line. In fact, tickets are not eligible to reopened if 3 months has passed since the ticket has been closed, unless there is clear intended malice. At the end of the day, near everything is reviewed on a case-by-case basis to ensure to fairest outcomes possible, as there is no one overall “rule” that can enforce everything to a tee.
I actually did not dispute the ticket based on that.l I just looked back on it and it was solely based on the false claim from the seller. However, this thread wasn’t to rehash the ticket. It was to create an open discussion to warn buyers.
I was using a specific post, which unfortunately had a 1.5 year time frame. But if it were 10 days and the said terms were agreed upon by the buyer and seller, are you saying those terms would not be enforceable?
I agree with this. Def hard to cover everything. But, clarity on whether or not buyers and sellers can add/agree to additional terms would be helpful as there seems to be contradictory statements around this.
No way bro. You are a vital member to this community because you speak up. We need more of that. Im sure 70% of everyone on swapd know of this method this kid was using. Plus he wasn’t successful so can this really be considered a working “method “ ?
