Active Warning List Proposal

So as you're probably aware, the markets have been removed from the Active Warning List. This decision wasn't taken lightly, but the list has caused some issues.

The Issues

The first issue is the hatred towards the moderators. I understand that having some skepticism is a healthy mentality to have, but some users took that too far. When the list was up some users would say that the moderators were in cahoots with the other markets to drive traffic away from the ones listed. This was not the case. When the market list was removed, the same thing happened in reverse. Some users would say the moderators were then working with the markets on that list. Again, this wasn't the case, and is a bit ridiculous in my opinion.

The second issue is clarification and proof. Some users took the list as an avoid at all costs type deal, rather than a warning to guide them into making a decision. We do not want to make decisions for you, but we want to help guide your decision in a way that will only benefit you. In order to do that proof is needed, and proof was not easily found. Anyone that has been on reddit for a decent amount of time knows that the search function is less than stellar, and not having links to the proof was detrimental.

The third issue is action. The list was meant to be a list of markets that had active warnings, issues that were current and not fixed. It was meant to inform the community, and help them make decisions on which markets to use or not use at the time. This became a problem when markets would stay on the list for weeks, if not months, at a time. Even after the issue was fixed the market would stay on the list.

Most of these issues were at our fault, and I would like to apologize on behalf of the rest of the moderators for this, and I want to assure you that we will do our best to make sure this doesn't happen again in the future. So with that out of the way we would like to make this proposal.

The Active Warning List

This list will be used for active warnings only, and not just for markets. Any service related to the DNMs that puts its users at risk are also added. Depending on the circumstance and severity, a thread will be created by a moderator where a discussion can take place. This will be a serious thread, and any off-topic posts will be deleted without warning to not detract from the topic. After verifiable proof is brought forward, the market/vendor/tumbler will be added to the Active Warning List with a link to the discussion thread.

After the issue has been solved, be that a security issue patched or a vendor being banned, the warning will then be removed from the Active Warning List and added to it's relevant section in the subreddit wiki.

Examples

  1. Multiple users come forward about an issue with a tumbler. A thread is then created by a moderator, and linked to these users for discussion. After proving that funds aren't being sent to the end wallet, the tumbler is then added to the Active Warning List. A few hours later the tumbler owner pops in and says it was a back-end issue and was resolved. This is confirmed, and the warning removed from the list and archived in the wiki.

  2. A user comes forward about a vendor, says they're pulling an exit scam. A thread is then created by a moderator, and linked to that user for discussion. After determining that the vendor was not pulling an exit scam, the thread is closed for no further discussion.

  3. A market has disabled withdrawls for users and vendors alike, but BTC are still flowing from the market. The market is added to the sidebar and linked to a discussion thread created by a moderator. It is determined that the market is indeed pulling an exit scam, and the market stays in the warning list for as long as the market servers are live. When the market shuts down, the warning is removed and archived in the wiki.

Obviously this isn't perfect and we can't think of every possible situation that may arise, so that's why we're presenting it to the community for constructive criticism. We would love to get possible ideas about how this could work, certain pitfalls, and how it should be implemented. We're nothing without you law abiding citizens, and want you to be involved wherever possible.


Comments


[15 Points] krokodiltear:

So you removed all the previous market warnings so you could reintroduce a new system that would include these same market warnings, along with ones for tumblers and vendors. Doesn't this just open yourself up to the same problems the last system faced, only now with the extra responsibility of monitoring vendor and tumbler scams as well?

Not saying this is a bad idea (quite the contrary), but if you guys are already too overwhelmed to monitor a few market warnings, sifting through all the F.U.D. in the vendor complaints threads will likely prove to be impossible.


[7 Points] define_irony:

We're nothing without you law abiding citizens

And we're nothing without you honest businessmen.


[2 Points] InfinitelyOutThere:

We need a system that serves the people but doesn't require the mods to make choices that can be scrutinized (was that market really dangerous?) because if we put up faulty warnings it helps no one.


[2 Points] theevoinsider:

Who is to decide what is worthy of adding a service to the warning list, obviously this is a loaded question as the mods is the answer, but then you think who added nucleus to the old list, as anyone with an IQ above 36 could see that the "possible admin doxx" was nothing of the sort. It didn't even claim to be ffs. Mods should be accountable for their actions, if you do decide to have a new warning list then hovering over the market name should identify the reddit account which added it


[2 Points] DareToHope:

Paging /u/J0NJ0NES I remember you making a thread a week or so ago, I feel like you had some very valid points/interesting topics to discuss regarding this matter.


[2 Points] theevoinsider:

You say some of the markets should never of been there, maybe each mod can take two minutes of their lives to explain, why none of you removed ME after they updated their software, each and every one of you were online when it was up, explain who added nucleus and why they did without even reading the 'doxx' thread. And why no-one then removed it.

Serious question I'd even half the mods explain their actions/inaction then massive respect.

/u/-lobali /u/MLP_is_my_OPSEC /u/InfinitelyOutThere /u/CanUTasteTheWaste /u/Theecononist1 /u/sharpshooter789 /u/DareToHope


[1 Points] Canna-Juice:

Appreciate the thought that had went into this.

Transparency and facts are just as important to us as marijuana and coffee, dudes. This ensures there will be more of each moving forward.


[1 Points] heliroll:

Where would this list be posted?


[1 Points] J0NJ0NES:

I like it. I'm also assuming that the current vendor "Blacklist" will be removed, and any new issues with vendors will be incorporated into this new "Active Warning List", yes?

BTW, thanks MLP_is_my_OPSEC for putting in this work.


[1 Points] throwtheeaway1234567:

What if each vendor had a button that can be marked for flagged. If marked the user would have to provide support (time of purchase, messages sent that were unresponded, time still waiting, etc. Anything to show a pattern without a doubt the vendor is a shill. I'm thininking PandaExpress here who went from hero to zero quickly and has run off with a lot of product and money with zero to no communictio to those he fucked.

What he we had a bar or system to flag them. Enough warnings (that are legitimate and backed up by someone in charge of investigating) gets that person put on a do not use lise until they either do right by everyone or just fade away with the money they took from everyone like the fuck boi they are.

Thoughts? Should we institute a stronger, more comprehensive warning/protection sysem for buyers to avoid scammers other than just having to read back on posts for days and days and hopefully not miss the one that says "scam warming" in red that could have saved us?


[1 Points] givemeoil420:

Chipzahoy /... agora ....

https://www.reddit.com/r/AgMarketplace/comments/361cbl/potential_scamming_chipzahoy/


[1 Points] xJuSTaTossAwayX:

I think what you explained is a great idea, i'm not sure why everybody is complaining. /u/MLP_is_my_OPSEC , your doing a great job and thank you !


[-3 Points] glavnogo-inzhenera:

/u/hacksforcrack should have some input.