Trade protection is not always necessary
If you don't want to allow the user to choose "to protect" or "not to protect" during the trade, then there is still no point in this protection if the person makes the trade with another of his accounts. If the accounts have the same email, phone, device - then they belong to the same person and this protection for 7 days only hinders such people.
< >
目前顯示第 1-15 則留言,共 18
Wolf Knight 8 月 19 日 上午 9:33 
same phone number does not mean same person owns the account
same email - again does not mean same person
same device - again does not mean same person

some people share things for what ever reason they have. Not my place to question them, nor do I care why they do it.

what happens if all of your accounts get compromised? you would be screaming for that 7 day cooldown.

you being inconvenienced by security is not steams problem. the problem is the people that cant keep their accounts secured. we all have to suffer because of them.

and do you really want all accounts to be treated as one? accounts gets a game ban, so all of your account should get a game ban for the game because it is one person, how about cooldowns on all accounts, trade bans, action taken against 1 account applies to all of them, etc.
最後修改者:Wolf Knight; 8 月 19 日 上午 9:34
Crocodile 8 月 19 日 上午 11:13 
Many projects have security settings and each person decides how much they want to protect their account, but here we have no choice. I'm sure that for many people this function is inconvenient and they would like to be able to somehow turn it off.

For example, I play cs2 on several accounts and send items to one main one and have to wait 7 days. For me, this is very inconvenient.
Wolf Knight 8 月 19 日 上午 11:25 
steam has learned that optional security does not work. those that need the security wont use it because they have your mind set of "its very inconvenient" and then they come to the forums whining and complaining when bad things happen that would have been avoided if they had used that "very inconvenient" optional security.
Ettanin 8 月 19 日 上午 11:30 
A protection that can be disabled at the whim of the account user is no protection at all.

In accordance with section 1 C of the Steam Subscriber Agreement, you are fully responsible for all actions on your account, no matter who used the account. This includes actions that occurred as the consequence of fraudulent account access by phishing or malware, be it input relay, session token theft or any other method that granted a third party access to your account.

Be glad that Valve even offered such preventative measures in the first place.
Nx Machina 8 月 19 日 上午 11:59 
When someone has access to your account/s you will understand why additional security, trade protection is needed.

Secondly the reason why there is additional security, trade protection is because end users love giving away all their account details to 3rd party skin scam sites.
最後修改者:Nx Machina; 8 月 19 日 下午 12:02
Tito Shivan 8 月 19 日 下午 1:03 
Steam already knows what happens when people get to decide what's necessary in regards security.

And it's not good.
Rokossovsky K. 8 月 19 日 下午 8:39 
don't listen to these 0 lvl bots, trade protection is garbage and people must have the ability to turn it off
最後修改者:Rokossovsky K.; 8 月 19 日 下午 8:40
FFL2and3rocks 8 月 19 日 下午 10:14 
引用自 Rokossovsky K.
don't listen to these 0 lvl bots, trade protection is garbage and people must have the ability to turn it off

Their profiles are private, you don't know what their levels actually are.
Anyway, you used to be able to opt out. All you needed to do was check a box that said you agree to be responsible with your items, and that if your account does get hijacked, you understand that you won't get your items back.

You can probably guess what happened next. Everyone opted out, promptly lost access to their accounts because they couldn't resist logging into every shady website that says they will give you free stuff, and then got angry and demanded to be given their stuff back anyway because they deserve a special exception that nobody else does.
最後修改者:FFL2and3rocks; 8 月 19 日 下午 10:14
Rokossovsky K. 8 月 20 日 下午 6:07 
引用自 FFL2and3rocks
引用自 Rokossovsky K.
don't listen to these 0 lvl bots, trade protection is garbage and people must have the ability to turn it off

Their profiles are private, you don't know what their levels actually are.
Anyway, you used to be able to opt out. All you needed to do was check a box that said you agree to be responsible with your items, and that if your account does get hijacked, you understand that you won't get your items back.

You can probably guess what happened next. Everyone opted out, promptly lost access to their accounts because they couldn't resist logging into every shady website that says they will give you free stuff, and then got angry and demanded to be given their stuff back anyway because they deserve a special exception that nobody else does.

that's their problem, they have an opportunity to secure their items or get the ability to trade them without hold for 14 days.
if people chose 2nd option - it's because they need it. forcing everyone to suffer from 14 days hold is a bad idea. valve is becoming another EA/Ubisoft garbage
最後修改者:Rokossovsky K.; 8 月 20 日 下午 6:09
JPMcMillen 8 月 20 日 下午 7:22 
引用自 Rokossovsky K.
that's their problem, they have an opportunity to secure their items or get the ability to trade them without hold for 14 days.
if people chose 2nd option - it's because they need it. forcing everyone to suffer from 14 days hold is a bad idea. valve is becoming another EA/Ubisoft garbage
As was previously stated, Valve tried making the item protection optional and users were expected take responsibility if their stuff got taken.

But people didn't keep their accounts secure and refused to take responsibility. This led to Steam support getting buried in support tickets from people all wanting the same thing, and that's to get their stuff back. Since too many users proved that they can't be trusted with their own account security, now we all have to go through it.

So if you want to blame anyone for this, blame all the people that couldn't keep their accounts secure in the past.
引用自 Tito Shivan
Steam already knows what happens when people get to decide what's necessary in regards security.

And it's not good.
Yeah, it's like people choose to forget or something.
Tito Shivan 8 月 20 日 下午 11:31 
引用自 Rokossovsky K.
that's their problem
But it becomes an everyone else's problem too.
I didn't expect that when buying a case for points that the arsenal pass gives, you also have to wait 7 days. This is terrible. When we get a weekly reward in cs2, we can immediately sell or transfer, but here we can't - I don't understand the logic.

Impose your restrictions after exchanges or after buying on the marketplace, but to do this with the arsenal pass, it's terribly inconvenient. I thought I could sell cases and buy passes again, but no, I have to wait 7 days, great..

This is too harsh, you need to reconsider.
最後修改者:Crocodile; 8 小時以前
Methinks your usecase isn't the priority, good luck.
引用自 Crocodile
I didn't expect that when buying a case for points that the arsenal pass gives, you also have to wait 7 days. This is terrible. When we get a weekly reward in cs2, we can immediately sell or transfer, but here we can't - I don't understand the logic.

Impose your restrictions after exchanges or after buying on the marketplace, but to do this with the arsenal pass, it's terribly inconvenient. I thought I could sell cases and buy passes again, but no, I have to wait 7 days, great..

This is too harsh, you need to reconsider.

All items acquired from the in-game store (including the Armory), Trade Offers, and Steam Community Market are now subject to a 7 day re-trade and re-market restriction

https://steamhost.cn/steamcommunity_com/games/CSGO/announcements/detail/4674264042199559951?snr=2___

:nkCool:
< >
目前顯示第 1-15 則留言,共 18
每頁顯示: 1530 50