Market transaction funds hold mechanic is broken

[Alfi]

Couple months back Steam introduced this mechanic with the purpose of protecting people from being scammed. While this is nice on paper, it's more of a hinderance in it's current iteration. Try selling a CS2 skin worth of 0,03 cents for 0,04 cents and it will put that 2 cent you gain into pending. Try selling an item 1 cent lower than the cheapest avaible buy order it will put the amount of funds into pending.

My suggestion is that the price difference between what the user pays and the "usual price" determined by Steam should be greater than the value of 1 eur/usd for the funds hold mechanic to trigger. Because as of right now even if you sell something just 1 cent cheaper or more expensive than what Steam deems as the usual price, it will move that money into pending status.

If anything this is just purely annoying and there's nothing practical about the way it's currently implemented.

[HikariLight]

Anything to hinder the scammers is a good thing.
If people would use some basic Internet safety, then Valve would not have to implement all these anti scammer security measures.
I doubt it will be changed.

[Pscht]

But since a ton of people manage to get scammed anyway, they could do away with it entirely. That would stop annoying the people who don't need it, and the ones who DO need it... well, it's (mostly) their own fault.

[Alfi]

Ursprungligen skrivet av HikariLight:

Anything to hinder the scammers is a good thing.
If people would use some basic Internet safety, then Valve would not have to implement all these anti scammer security measures.
I doubt it will be changed.

There are ways to do this better and I think Valve can do better.

[Gwarsbane]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Alfi:

Couple months back Steam introduced this mechanic with the purpose of protecting people from being scammed. While this is nice on paper, it's more of a hinderance in it's current iteration. Try selling a CS2 skin worth of 0,03 cents for 0,04 cents and it will put that 2 cent you gain into pending. Try selling an item 1 cent lower than the cheapest avaible buy order it will put the amount of funds into pending.

My suggestion is that the price difference between what the user pays and the "usual price" determined by Steam should be greater than the value of 1 eur/usd for the funds hold mechanic to trigger. Because as of right now even if you sell something just 1 cent cheaper or more expensive than what Steam deems as the usual price, it will move that money into pending status.

If anything this is just purely annoying and there's nothing practical about the way it's currently implemented.

Its there because people fall for scams and tricks. Figure out a way to stop people from giving away their info and falling for scams and maybe this kind of thing can go away. Till then, its here to stay.

Ursprungligen skrivet av Pscht:

But since a ton of people manage to get scammed anyway, they could do away with it entirely. That would stop annoying the people who don't need it, and the ones who DO need it... well, it's (mostly) their own fault.

And far more people would be effected which is why its not going to go anywhere. A lot of the annoying protections are for people who get scammed easily, sadly there are many people. But it doesn't just effect them, it also effects people they sell stuff to and the market itself. Which is again why its not going anywhere.

Ursprungligen skrivet av Alfi:

There are ways to do this better and I think Valve can do better.

Instead of just saying "there are better ways to do it, and you think Valve can do better" make actual suggestions on what Valve could actually do better....

And remember till you can actually stop people from giving away their info and falling for scams which Valve can't see happening in real time cause there is no possible way they could monitor every single message/post on Steam, and that every time something is picked up, the scammers change things which means its a never ending game of whack-a-mole, it will not end.

So again instead of just saying "Valve can do better" make an actual suggestion. But remember, Valve more then likely has people dedicated to fighting scamming and figuring out ways to protect people that is transparent to the user base.

This is much easier said then done, which is why we are currently in the place we are now.

[Alfi]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Gwarsbane:

Ursprungligen skrivet av Alfi:

Couple months back Steam introduced this mechanic with the purpose of protecting people from being scammed. While this is nice on paper, it's more of a hinderance in it's current iteration. Try selling a CS2 skin worth of 0,03 cents for 0,04 cents and it will put that 2 cent you gain into pending. Try selling an item 1 cent lower than the cheapest avaible buy order it will put the amount of funds into pending.

My suggestion is that the price difference between what the user pays and the "usual price" determined by Steam should be greater than the value of 1 eur/usd for the funds hold mechanic to trigger. Because as of right now even if you sell something just 1 cent cheaper or more expensive than what Steam deems as the usual price, it will move that money into pending status.

If anything this is just purely annoying and there's nothing practical about the way it's currently implemented.

Its there because people fall for scams and tricks. Figure out a way to stop people from giving away their info and falling for scams and maybe this kind of thing can go away. Till then, its here to stay.

Ursprungligen skrivet av Pscht:

But since a ton of people manage to get scammed anyway, they could do away with it entirely. That would stop annoying the people who don't need it, and the ones who DO need it... well, it's (mostly) their own fault.

And far more people would be effected which is why its not going to go anywhere. A lot of the annoying protections are for people who get scammed easily, sadly there are many people. But it doesn't just effect them, it also effects people they sell stuff to and the market itself. Which is again why its not going anywhere.

Ursprungligen skrivet av Alfi:

There are ways to do this better and I think Valve can do better.

Instead of just saying "there are better ways to do it, and you think Valve can do better" make actual suggestions on what Valve could actually do better....

And remember till you can actually stop people from giving away their info and falling for scams which Valve can't see happening in real time cause there is no possible way they could monitor every single message/post on Steam, and that every time something is picked up, the scammers change things which means its a never ending game of whack-a-mole, it will not end.

So again instead of just saying "Valve can do better" make an actual suggestion. But remember, Valve more then likely has people dedicated to fighting scamming and figuring out ways to protect people that is transparent to the user base.

This is much easier said then done, which is why we are currently in the place we are now.

If you did read my thread you'd know what my suggestion is.

[cSg|mc-Hotsauce]

I told everyone months ago that the system Valve has in place is only going to become more strict and flag more sale to put money on hold.

And Valve will never release the exact specifics that trigger the hold so that people/scammers can't get around it by going under their values to continue to do their thing.

[Gwarsbane]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Alfi:

If you did read my thread you'd know what my suggestion is.

And that suggestion is no good.... because it brings us right back to where we were with lots of people quickly losing stuff. I used to sell stuff on the market to get rid of it, I don't bother anymore because of how annoying it is, so I would gladly like a more transparent way to me to sell stuff, but your suggestion, while it would not effect me would end up hurting more people who fall for scams.

So again if you have a better idea, suggest it.

As mentioned by Hotsauce, if anything, things will become more strict.

[nullable]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Alfi:

If you did read my thread you'd know what my suggestion is.

You want a more flexible system that you don't think will impact you. Ok, so let's do your thing. Since you've made a public definition of what the tolerances are, if I'm a scammer I am easily able to price things $0.99 +/- as needed and I am too able to avoid pending funds system. Now the system really does do nothing, thanks for helping scammers dismantle it.

Your annoyance and opinions may not make you an expert about the system, its impact, or alternatives. And I do understand its annoying if you're just a regular user. Security is going to be annoying sometimes because it's really hard to impede criminals without any inconvenience to everyone else.

Trying to make systems toothless, whether you realize it or not, might be more convenient for users, but it's also very convenient for criminals. What's the goal again?

[Alfi]

Ursprungligen skrivet av nullable:

Ursprungligen skrivet av Alfi:

If you did read my thread you'd know what my suggestion is.

You want a more flexible system that you don't think will impact you. Ok, so let's do your thing. Since you've made a public definition of what the tolerances are, if I'm a scammer I am easily able to price things $0.99 +/- as needed and I am too able to avoid pending funds system. Now the system really does do nothing, thanks for helping scammers dismantle it.

Your annoyance and opinions may not make you an expert about the system, its impact, or alternatives. And I do understand its annoying if you're just a regular user. Security is going to be annoying sometimes because it's really hard to impede criminals without any inconvenience to everyone else.

Trying to make systems toothless, whether you realize it or not, might be more convenient for users, but it's also very convenient for criminals. What's the goal again?

Remind me, what’s the point of Steam Guard then?

[nullable]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Alfi:

Remind me, what’s the point of Steam Guard then?

If you can't address the obvious criticism to your half-baked suggestion, change the subject.

But to answer your question, Steam Guard is security, like a password. The problem is users who are willing to give away their username and passwords are also willing to give away Steam Guard codes. And users being careless and reckless with their accounts is a big enough problem and is visible enough that Valve is compelled to put up road blocks to address problem points. IE if scammers are always doing X to exploit careless and reckless users, why not address X? Not much choice since Valve can't fix the human condition.

Steam Guard is security, not a magic talisman that protects careless and reckless users from themselves and all evil. It still requires users to treat account security properly. Lots of users are seemingly incapable of that though.

[Gwarsbane]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Alfi:

Ursprungligen skrivet av nullable:

You want a more flexible system that you don't think will impact you. Ok, so let's do your thing. Since you've made a public definition of what the tolerances are, if I'm a scammer I am easily able to price things $0.99 +/- as needed and I am too able to avoid pending funds system. Now the system really does do nothing, thanks for helping scammers dismantle it.

Your annoyance and opinions may not make you an expert about the system, its impact, or alternatives. And I do understand its annoying if you're just a regular user. Security is going to be annoying sometimes because it's really hard to impede criminals without any inconvenience to everyone else.

Trying to make systems toothless, whether you realize it or not, might be more convenient for users, but it's also very convenient for criminals. What's the goal again?

Remind me, what’s the point of Steam Guard then?

Its to protect people... sadly people hand over codes for it when asked.... again if you can figure out a way to easily stop stuff like that from happening, then suggest it... till then the biggest security hole is users so Valve has to come up with ways to protect users.

And yes they do have to come up with new stuff, because if they don't they could end up being sued by governments for refusing to try to protect users which can cause a LOT of legal problems for Valve.


They could always do the simple thing and shut down the market, stop people from being able to transfer items from one account to another and then just be done with the whole thing... but something tells me you wouldn't like that happening. Me, I wouldn't care as it wouldn't effect me if it was all shut down. I don't bother selling stuff anymore.

[Ionut Catalin Frasineanu]

It is also the fault of users who are deceived by scammers because they do not take into account Valve's recommendations regarding the safety of their accounts.

[Alfi]

Ursprungligen skrivet av nullable:

Ursprungligen skrivet av Alfi:

If you did read my thread you'd know what my suggestion is.

You want a more flexible system that you don't think will impact you. Ok, so let's do your thing. Since you've made a public definition of what the tolerances are, if I'm a scammer I am easily able to price things $0.99 +/- as needed and I am too able to avoid pending funds system. Now the system really does do nothing, thanks for helping scammers dismantle it.

Trying to make systems toothless, whether you realize it or not, might be more convenient for users, but it's also very convenient for criminals. What's the goal again?

For anyone to be able to actually do that they'd need to know what Steam deems as the "usual price". It's not that you need to price things at $0.99 it's that the price difference between what the user pays and the "usual price" is greater than 1eur/usd. I didn't help no one to dismantle anything.

The goal is to not put users in a situation where they have to wait days to get their money. If something is on sale and I can get the funds via selling some items through the market I'd like to use that option, however in it's current state that's not a feasible option anymore.

I read your reply more thoroughly and came to this conclusion and deleted the one I posted previously.

[nullable]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Alfi:

For anyone to be able to actually do that they'd need to know what Steam deems as the "usual price". It's not that you need to price things at $0.99 it's that the price difference between what the user pays and the "usual price" is greater than 1eur/usd. I didn't help no one to dismantle anything.

Yes I know. Or do you think I was suggesting pricing things at -$0.99 was an option? +/- would suggest adding or subtracting an amount from the price.

My argument is making the window for exploitation bigger will do a lot to undermine the system.

Ursprungligen skrivet av Alfi:

The goal is to not put users in a situation where they have to wait days to get their money. If something is on sale and I can get the funds via selling some items through the market I'd like to use that option, however in it's current state that's not a feasible option anymore.

I read your reply more thoroughly and came to this conclusion and deleted the one I posted previously.

The normal price is not a secret. And flagging most deviations limits the amount of exploitation that can be done. Ultimately whatever you set the threshold for someone is going to think the window should be larger. You say $1, someone else thinks $2, $5, $10. Everyone has an opinion based on what would be convenient for them. Valve is not likely to change the system to make it convenient for you and hamstring the functionality for scenarios you don't care about.

Ultimately I don't think Valve is overly concerned about people who are using the community market as the primary/sole means to fund their accounts. They'll get their money, and if they need money for a sale, they'll have to plan ahead a bit and manage their items and wallet accordingly. Clinging to the status quo that used to exist and refusing to adapt is a self-inflicted problem.

[Alfi]

Ursprungligen skrivet av nullable:

Ursprungligen skrivet av Alfi:

For anyone to be able to actually do that they'd need to know what Steam deems as the "usual price". It's not that you need to price things at $0.99 it's that the price difference between what the user pays and the "usual price" is greater than 1eur/usd. I didn't help no one to dismantle anything.

Yes I know. Or do you think I was suggesting pricing things at -$0.99 was an option? +/- would suggest adding or subtracting an amount from the price.

Ursprungligen skrivet av Alfi:

The goal is to not put users in a situation where they have to wait days to get their money. If something is on sale and I can get the funds via selling some items through the market I'd like to use that option, however in it's current state that's not a feasible option anymore.

I read your reply more thoroughly and came to this conclusion and deleted the one I posted previously.

The normal price is not a secret. And flagging most deviations limits the amount of exploitation that can be done. Ultimately whatever you set the threshold for someone is going to think the window should be larger. You say $1, someone else thinks $2, $5, $10. Everyone has an opinion based on what would be convenient for them. Valve is not likely to change the system to make it convenient for you and hamstring the functionality for scenarios you don't care about.

I still don't know what the "normal price" is. Is it the lowest buy order? I think I had funds being put on hold where I used that so I don't really know. What would be convenient for me is not to have to deal with this at all but I understand the purpose of this mechanic hence the reason why I'm not even suggesting to have it outright removed. As for the $1 I just thought that would be something the majority would find reasonable.

Ursprungligen skrivet av nullable:

Ultimately I don't think Valve is overly concerned about people who are using the community market as the primary/sole means to fund their accounts. They'll get their money, and if they need money for a sale, they'll have to plan ahead a bit and manage their items and wallet accordingly. Clinging to the status quo that used to exist and refusing to adapt is a self-inflicted problem.

Again, you're jumping at shadows that aren't there, no one is clinging to anything, I simply made a thread about an issue, with the purpose of suggesting a solution to it.