Another one about the new sig rule

[roydan]

So.. a sig renter is directly responsible for another seller's ability to deliver a service? I think it's a wrong move and that it opens BHW for liability.

By using the same logic.. If BHW require sig renters to take responsibility for their advertisers' wrongdoing or under-deliveries, isn't BHW responsible for letting them in in the first place? If someone was scammed for $100, the sig renter is expected to pay it back or lose their account. If they haven't, by using the same logic, BHW should reimburse the guy who was scammed.

I think this is chaotic, even without the huge logic hole it has in it (which I won't share here out of the hope that no one abused it yet).

I understand why this rule was added in the first place, but besides that, it still opens BHW for more trouble than the ones it solves.

I hope you reconsider.

 

[Brickbat1]

So.. a sig renter is directly responsible for another seller's ability to deliver a service? I think it's a wrong move and that it opens BHW for liability.

By using the same logic.. If BHW require sig renters to take responsibility for their advertisers' wrongdoing or under-deliveries, isn't BHW responsible for letting them in in the first place? If someone was scammed for $100, the sig renter is expected to pay it back or lose their account. If they haven't, by using the same logic, BHW should reimburse the guy who was scammed.

I think this is chaotic, even without the huge logic hole it has in it (which I won't share here out of the hope that no one abused it yet).

I understand why this rule was added in the first place, but besides that, it still opens BHW for more trouble than the ones it solves.

I hope you reconsider.

Oh ,I didn't know they had added this rule. It simply means signature renting business will diminish greatly. Why would I want to risk my account on the possibility of another person's sins? To avoid that, I would rather not rent out my signature. Its that simple. So if the rule is in force, then this will be the end result IMHO.

 

[roydan]

Oh ,I didn't know they had added this rule. It simply means signature renting business will diminish greatly. Why would I want to risk my account on the possibility of another person's sins? To avoid that, I would rather not rent out my signature. Its that simple. So if the rule is in force, then this will be the end result IMHO.

It's already being enforced, take a look at the dispute resolution section.

 

[PetraAnn]

As I stated in the previous thread:

- ask your potential renter what they're selling
- do it via DM here on BHW and not off on a 3rd party communication platform
- use common sense

This isn't hard.

---

If you have further questions please visit our newbie guide summary here: https://www.blackhatworld.com/seo/s...ter-list-of-all-newbie-guide-threads.1389081/

If that doesn’t answer your question, please reach out to our Support for further guidance.

Answer Supplied - Thread Closed​