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.
I appreciate these efforts that make SWAPD community feel SAFE and SECURE.
But I’d like to suggest that SWAPD must give Users ONE WARNING and then in the second go MUST BAN them but please NOT FOR 1000 Years.
They can be banned for 60 Days. And if they try to come back with a duplicate account, then for 90 days and so on.
Most of the Users who join this Forum are already there on Player Up and EpicNPC and they equate this forum with that of those two and have temptations to go offsite and assume that they won’t be get caught. Same is the issue with their Duplicate accounts try.
But I think with the passage of time they’ll get to know that no other Escrow services is even 20% to that of SWAPD and they’ll think million times before going nasty.
OK, I hereby promise to lessen our ban times. But you need to believe me, we (mostly) try to be objective and only give 1000 year bans to people who knew about our rules, but blatantly decided to break them anyway.
I think I’ve checked ban times before and I believe you ban some extremely new members that just didn’t read rules for only 1 month for soliciting off site? Correct me if I’m wrong.
Lets also not forget that everyone opts in saying they understand the TOS and they are freely advertised on the front page and often through-out the site. Not knowing the rules is not really a good excuse and the onus is really on the user to be familiar with a publicly available set of rules they have agreed to at sign up.
I got banned for 60 days, no warning, first offense for communicating with a user off platform. I understand banning someone, but 60 days is a bit harsh for a 1st offense. Heck, Facebook doesn’t even give bans that harsh. I’m not saying to allow users to do whatever, but if it’s a 1st offense. Try to speak with the user first.
You were on platform from December to Feb, you had been active and contacted and made conversations with about 25 users in that time and been online lost days communicating.
Then on feb 14 you make an agreement to buy a page with a user for 2800 dollars, then immediately you both decide to communicate via FB and you confirm that you can messaged them via FB and will communicate there from now on and of course complete the purchase. So you were just making some random, conversation with the guy, you had literally just reached and agreement.
So let’s not get high and mighty on your 60 day ban like it wasn’t justified, you weren’t aware after 3 months on platform or that you were an innocent actor. I’d give you a 60 day ban again in a heartbeat for that conduct.
I’m not denying what was done. Nor am I getting high and mighty. But, do you think maybe it was possible to maybe message me? Especially considering, that was the only time I had ever attempted anything remotely similar to that. Do you think that maybe it’s possible that mistakes happen? I’m not denying that the conduct should be addressed, but 60 days without warning? I think that’s a bit much.
Also, the person that I “agreed” to make a sale with was trying to manipulate me to make a purchase for a car page. Which I didn’t buy because I wouldn’t purchase it off the platform. But, you’re completely justified for addressing the issue, but maybe you should have taken a more close look at the seller who insisted on communicating off platform.
Let me make this clear with our lengthy bans. We 100% don’t want every user who signs up to stick around, some do not do the right thing and we are happy to see them not on platform.
And I’m sorry but after 3 months on platform going off platform like you did, was either malice(on purpose to skirt the checkout system, fully knowing the rules) or accidentally (not knowing the rules - which isn’t likely or acceptable after 3 months on platform)
We are dealing with digital products and users from all over the world, and verifying who people are for real and what their intentions are is insanely hard, so we expect our users to meet some basic standards, and if not then we will remove them from the site, and I for one make zero apologies for this.
As I say, I back the 60 day suspension, you fell well below the standards at the time and I understand why you would think it harsh, but unlike Facebook we are dealing with thousands of dollars at a time when we help make transfers so we want the penalties to be enourmous. So then users can talk and transfer freely knowing that every user is held to a considerable standard.
I was a buyer though. If anyone was going to be scammed it would have been me. And, if you looked through the messages with that user, he was likely trying to scam me. Ignorance did end up kicking me in the butt, but I also didn’t make the purchase because I didn’t agree to make a purchase off the platform. Nor would I, consider how easy it is to scam a person out if a page.
I get your policy. But, considering I was the person in an uncomfortable position, messaging me would have helped. Fortunately, I had enough sense not to make a purchase from that user.
Buyer/seller that really doesn’t make a difference.
Look everyone, the reason we want it all on platform is of course one to protect our business financially and the relationships we help foster. but secondly for security, for history, we have all the logs and we can see what claims and actions were taken about claims.
Then dispute resolution is 10 times easier and there is no he said/she said instances.
Also once you have served a suspension, then we reset back to zero, and your just another user with the same expectations, we don’t hold grudges, those who really do the wrong thing get banned and then ip banned.
I’m sorry but we aren’t your parents, you were on platform for months before the instance, and you didn’t even mildly resist. That just doesn’t even wash.
I get what you are trying to say, and truthfully if you had been on platform for only a day or two or a week, you would have got a warning, but being an active user for 3 months and then playing the victim is a bit rich.
In three months on platform you either never read the 5-6 page TOS or you ignored it. Either isn’t good enough.
We make them wildly available, and everyone on platform know the rules, after 3 months on platform (and actively on platform) I just don’t buy it.
Now I’m not saying your intentions were bad. I 100% accept that you would have done the transaction via the checkout with you saying that, but that is besides the point.
After 3 months actively on platform we really do expect more from our users, and I make no apologies for that like I say, as we have thousands of dollars at risk sometimes.
I joined Dec 23, and was banned in February. I wasn’t on the platform very long before being banned. It might have been 3-4 weeks. I get that’s more than a day, but at that time I was still learning how this purchasing page thing worked. I’ve read the TOS now, but that was after a really long time out. Lol
I wasn’t a member for anywhere near 3 months when I was banned. I’m not mad about being banned. I am only asking that users be spoken to prior to being banned to see their intentions.
I’m sorry but intentions simply don’t matter, everyone pleads “I wasn’t going to buy off platform” the second they get caught.
Literally last week I had a user who have served 3 suspensions, hustling accounts full of bots, so I said this is enough and banned them, they wrote back and said fine “this place is only trouble for me anyways” mid is week they emailed Dave pleading to get back in andmhow they would never do anything wrong and was never trying to lie about accounts and the like.
I 100% understand what you are saying and that you think it is severe, but that is the intention. We want it to be severe, we have big dollars at risk and this isn’t just a fun forum for shitposting, transactions regularly break 10k now and we expect a lot and we will continue to expect at lot.
