7 days ban after trade cancelling

[Marv666]

So I wanted to trade with a friend, we started a trade and accepted everything. All well, until we got the message saying the trade is on hold for 72 hours because he didn't use a mobile athenticator. So after he installed the mobile app, I cancelled the trade to make the trade again and I got a message saying I've been banned from trading for 7 days because I cancelled the trade.

Is there a way to lift the ban?

I've got some questions, that maybe make the whole pain in the ass Steam safety thing a bit more user friendly instead off the current "hey, you didn't read two words, lets make sure you can't do anything for a whole week"-approach

Why is Steam so overprotective? And why is this forced so heavily upon every Steam member? I think it is mostly your own responsibility to keep your account safe. Sure Steam has to offer the possibility too keep your account safe, but it still is mostly your own responsibility.

Why isn't there a fair warning literaly saying you can't trade for 7 days when you click cancel on an "on hold" trade? I now know it says so in the text. But come on, who reads every bit of text that closely? Just give a fair warning with a confirmation button you do want to cancel the trade after clicking and will accept that you can't trade for 7 days.

It is a bit weird you do have to confirm a trade three times (ones at the trade itself after selecting your items, once in the trade itself to confirm the trade, and a last time in the app/e-mail), but there is no confirmation for cancelling a trade.

And my last question: Why would an accepted trade be on hold for 72 hours whitout the possibility of cancelling it (without concequenses)? you are either stuck with a trade that takes 72 hours or you are stuck with the ban.

We wanted to trade right now, not in 72 hours, not in 7 days!

[BlaBla]

you get a chance to decline before accepting the trade.
after you agreed canceling is 7 days no trade the warnings were clear.

[Marv666]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από BlaBla:

you get a chance to decline before accepting the trade.
after you agreed canceling is 7 days no trade the warnings were clear.

I do believe I didn't see a fair warning, maybe there was. If so, let me rephrase the question: why isn't it shown very clearly you get a trade ban for 7 days? maybe with some clear exclamation marks and a proper "warning-sign". It is kind of a big deal.

I do get the point that I probably can't trade now, but I want to make myself heard about the idiocracy of this thing. Steam is currently way too overprotective with these trades.

[BlaBla]

https://imgur.com/gaMsLue
and when you click that button it is made more clear.

[Hanomaly]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Marv666:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από BlaBla:

you get a chance to decline before accepting the trade.
after you agreed canceling is 7 days no trade the warnings were clear.

I do believe I didn't see a fair warning, maybe there was. If so, let me rephrase the question: why isn't it shown very clearly you get a trade ban for 7 days? maybe with some clear exclamation marks and a proper "warning-sign". It is kind of a big deal.

I do get the point that I probably can't trade now, but I want to make myself heard about the idiocracy of this thing. Steam is currently way too overprotective with these trades.

as BlaBla showed the warning is *very* clear, and it is no one's fault other than your own that you chose not to read the message you are shown to confirm you really actually want to cancel a trade.

[Marv666]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Hanomaly:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Marv666:

I do believe I didn't see a fair warning, maybe there was. If so, let me rephrase the question: why isn't it shown very clearly you get a trade ban for 7 days? maybe with some clear exclamation marks and a proper "warning-sign". It is kind of a big deal.

I do get the point that I probably can't trade now, but I want to make myself heard about the idiocracy of this thing. Steam is currently way too overprotective with these trades.

as BlaBla showed the warning is *very* clear, and it is no one's fault other than your own that you chose not to read the message you are shown to confirm you really actually want to cancel a trade.

It is funny that you guys keep coming back on the "reading" part. If you guys would read yourself, you would see that that is just one of my small concerns. I know already it showed somewhere in that text that you'll get banned from trading. Point of that small concern is that almost nobody reads such a text, especcially if you are annoyed already by the fact that an accepted trade is suddenly placed on hold for 72 ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ hours for no valid reason at all (accepting a trade via e-mail is rather safe already imo). Like I said, a warnig sign with maybe a few exclamation marks and a confirmation would make me read the text before I click anything. Who in their right mind would think they'll get banned from trading for cancelling a trade? That is just ludicrous.

I know now what happens if you cancel a trade, but as I've read some other posts on here about the same thing, I know for sure that I'm not the only one who happened this to. And I am also sure I'm not the last person.

So maybe it is not just "no one's fault other than your own", but also a system that is not working like it should. Like I said: We wanted to trade right now, not in 72 hours, not in 7 days! My only reason for cancelling that particular trade was because I don't want to wait 72 ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ hours to trade a few trading cards.

[sentetik.klavye]

no problem

[BlaBla]

back to the top.
you had the option to decline before accepting a 72 hour trade.

[Marv666]

You guys are completely missing my point. maybe this makes it clear: I KNOW I am banned from trading for 7 days. You don't have to repeat that (@ Nightenheiser), that doesn't add anything to this conversation.

I just want to make clear the way it currently works isn't by far the most practical, nor logical way. Maybe somebody should look into it to prevent people from making the same mistake in the future.

[BlaBla]

http://store.steampowered.com/news/19618/

[Marv666]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από BlaBla:

http://store.steampowered.com/news/19618/

This certainly provides some answers for me. Thanks BlaBla, this actually is the first post to this discussion that is of use. This is also a hint to people like Nightenheiser: If you don't add value to such a discussion, maybe it is better if you refrain from reacting at all.

That news item at least shows some of the reasons behind the current pain in the ass security measures. Although I still think some measures (especially the 7days trade ban) are a bit too much, I am at least a bit more familiar with the security measures and why they are taken.

[Marv666]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Nightenhelser:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Marv666:

This certainly provides some answers for me. Thanks BlaBla, this actually is the first post to this discussion that is of use. This is also a hint to people like Nightenheiser: If you don't add value to such a discussion, maybe it is better if you refrain from reacting at all.

That news item at least shows some of the reasons behind the current pain in the ass security measures. Although I still think some measures (especially the 7days trade ban) are a bit too much, I am at least a bit more familiar with the security measures and why they are taken.

You might've missed my post where I said the exact same thing the article stated.

No I didn't miss it, but it wasn't particularly heplfull either. One short sentence isn't "the exact same thing" as a complete news item, by far. And that wasn't even your most useless reaction. But we are going off topic here, as this is rather useless too.

[BlaBla]

it was useful input for me.

again you had the option to decline the 72 hour hold trade.
the email was clear it had a 72 hour hold and you should have declined than.
this is the answer to your rant.

answers are not bad because it is not what you want to hear.
we are not missing any point we know you know that you have a 7 day restriction.

[Marv666]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από BlaBla:

it was useful input for me.

again you had the option to decline the 72 hour hold trade.
the email was clear it had a 72 hour hold and you should have declined than.
this is the answer to your rant.

answers are not bad because it is not what you want to hear.
we are not missing any point we know you know that you have a 7 day restriction.

Ok, my bad. One out of his four answers wasn't completely useless.

And I agree an answer isn't bad because it isn't what I want to hear, but an answer is bad if it doesnt add any value to the discussion. Which was the case with most of his comments in this discussion.

[BlaBla]

who is to judge what has value in the thread you?

just because you say it is not the point does not make it true.

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Marv666:

Why isn't there a fair warning literally saying you can't trade for 7 days when you click cancel on an "on hold" trade?

you can not raise a point and than say it is not the point.
this is just one example.

[Marv666]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από BlaBla:

who is to judge what has value in the thread you?

just because you say it is not the point does not make it true.

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Marv666:

Why isn't there a fair warning literally saying you can't trade for 7 days when you click cancel on an "on hold" trade?

you can not raise a point and than say it is not the point.
this is just one example.

When did I raise a point and then say it is not the point?

If we go back to that thing let me repeat what I said:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Marv666:

I do believe I didn't see a fair warning, maybe there was. If so, let me rephrase the question: why isn't it shown VERY CLEARLY you get a trade ban for 7 days? maybe with some clear exclamation marks and a proper "warning-sign". It is kind of a big deal.

Like I already aknowlegded, I apparently wasn't completely correct. But hey, I can't check what exaclty is shown as I have a trade ban right now. Just like I can't check if it shows somewhere that a trade takes 72 hours before you have to accept it, I don't recall seeing that either. The absence of a PROPER warning for a ban (not just a text which almost nobody reads) is still one of my points, but as I don't think I can get anywhere discussing that with you guys, I moved to other points.

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Nightenhelser:

Steam already decided this was best decision.

For example isn't an answer that is of value. There are always things getting decided, but if user experience shows something doesn't work out great, maybe those things should be changed a bit. But it looks like you guys always do everything you are said, without thinking if it is the best thing.

Oh and yes, as I did start this discussion, I think I am the person who can say my questions are answered properly or not. Therefore I think I can say which answer has value for this duscussion/my questions and which answer doesnt.