Proposal: "Trader Trust & Accountability" System for a Safer Trading Environment

Subject: Proposal: “Trader Trust & Accountability” System for a Safer Trading Environment

Dear Moderators and Community,

I’m writing to propose a new system to address the issue of fraudulent trades on our forum, which is currently causing significant frustration and distrust.

Problem Statement:

Our forum’s trading system is vulnerable to exploitation. Dishonest users are initiating trades that significantly deviate from the originally negotiated terms, leading to frustration and distrust within our community. Recently, user @Mazi offered me a Garchomp card, but then initiated a trade for a vastly inferior card (Charmander), as evidenced by the attached screenshots. This incident highlights a systemic problem that needs addressing.


Here is a link to the offer;

Proposed Solution: The “Trader Trust & Accountability” System

To combat this issue and foster a safer trading environment, I propose implementing a two-tiered system:

1. “Offender Tracker” (Negative Badges):

  • Reporting Mechanism:
    • Users who believe they’ve been subjected to fraudulent trade practices can report the offender by tagging a designated forum bot (e.g., @TradeReportBot) in a dedicated thread.
    • The report must include:
      • A link to the original trade agreement discussion.
      • A screenshot of the initiated trade request, clearly showing the discrepancy.
      • A screenshot of the original offer.
  • Verification and Badges:
    • Forum moderators will review the report and verify the evidence.
    • If the report is substantiated, the offender will receive a negative badge on their forum profile, visible to all users.
  • Offender Defense:
    • The accused user will have the opportunity to contest the report by providing their own screenshots or evidence to demonstrate the legitimacy of the trade.
  • Consequences:
    • Upon accumulating three negative badges, the offender will be permanently banned from the trading section of the forum.

2. “Trusted Trader” (Positive Badges):

  • Earning Badges:
    • Users who complete five successful trades, without any reported or verified offenses, will earn a positive (e.g., green) “Trusted Trader” badge on their profile.
  • Benefits:
    • This badge will signal to other users that the trader has a proven track record of fair and reliable transactions, increasing their credibility.
  • Badge Removal:
    • One negative badge will erase all positive badges.

Benefits of This System:

  • Increased Accountability: Holds dishonest traders accountable for their actions.
  • Enhanced Trust: Builds a safer trading environment, encouraging more users to participate.
  • Community Protection: Protects diligent users from being taken advantage of.
  • Clear Visual Indicators: The badge system provides immediate visual cues about a trader’s reputation.
  • Fair Process: Offers accused users a chance to defend themselves.
  • Deterrence: The threat of a trading ban deters fraudulent behavior.

Implementation Notes:

  • The forum bot and badge system could be integrated into the forum’s existing software.
  • Clear guidelines and moderation policies would need to be established.
  • The community should be involved in the development and refinement of the system.

Call to Action:

I believe this “Trader Trust & Accountability” system will significantly improve the trading experience on our forum. I urge the moderators and community to consider this proposal and work together to implement a safer and more trustworthy trading environment.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Why do you consider the Charmander as an inferior card? It has the same rarity

1 Like

Because I have 2 copies of it, and I don’t want it.

An observation would that I think they misread your for trade list after they had already traded away the Garchomp in their original reply (Ref their subsequent replies). I don’t think there was any malice in the trade, and at the end of the day you could veto the trade and move on.

I think this might be over engineering an issue, because it raises more complexities around the ethics of creating and maintaining and independent system to rate user trades. Ie. If I were a new user and have no trades, I would likely be discriminated for other users that have more ratings when I should be afforded the equal opportunity to participate in the community.

I think flagging the post would be a sufficient mechanism to report issues privately with the moderators, but with that being said, I think the best course of action should be to firstly communicate the issue with the user and see whether it can be resolved…

I believe that he could have said that in a comment, and refused the trade himself because he did not have what he offered in teh first place.

In that case I would have dismissed the action.

If you go offering things that you do not have, and then try to complete teh trade with other cards, I consider that as trying to take advantage of a situation from a vantage point.

It is not necessarily malice, but it is not honest either.

Rewarding honest people for accumulating positive experience is rewarding for everyone, anyway we have a 12 hour cooldown per trade, it is not like newbies will be excluded, positive people will have a slight advantage. Everyone is rewarded for promoting positive experiences for everyone.

For example,

I can trade:

◊◊◊ A1-168 - Nidoqueen
◊◊◊ A1-185 - Dragonite
◊◊◊ A1-22 - Exeggutor
◊◊◊ A1-117 - Alakazam

For your:

◊◊◊ A1-128 - Mewtwo
◊◊◊ A1-132 - Gardevoir
◊◊◊ A1-159 - Kabutops
◊◊◊ A1a-6 - Serperior

I have here also the positive experience with @Darkwater, he proposed several trades and options, as per the previous post. In my following post I requested a specific trade, he did not see my post before initiating the trade, I explained that I was looking for an specific card, and then right now I am waiting for him to accept the trade that he initiated.

This was obviously an innocent mistake.

1 Like