Supreme Scam report against @Resolut1on

[1.621]

To the Moderators,

I’d like to correct and clarify the facts regarding his claims.

At the time of purchase, I clearly stated and delivered a personal account, not a shared one. The method used to access that account was temporary in nature and clearly communicated as such. I did not offer a key or a traditional license, but rather access to a functional account, a year has passed and now he opens a report, a couple days after y explained his warranty expired.

He is now claiming that the account was unstable and that I never delivered what was promised. This is not accurate. He received a personal account and used it for a full year, with support provided every time an issue arose. When the method used to access the account was eventually patched and stopped working, that was due to external factors beyond my control, and it was clearly outlined in our communication and in the Terms of Service that once the method expires, there are no refunds or replacements.

He also accuses me of deleting the chat multiple times. This is false. I have a screenshot of the conversation when I delivered the details again at that time because he was trying to frame me, he falsely claims I deleted messages — in reality at that moment I was sending him updated credentials in real time.

Once again, I want to make it clear: no deletion of the chat occurred on my part.
The buyer is the one who deleted the entire conversation himself. This is not only dishonest — it’s an attempt to frame me for something I didn’t do.

He had access to the product for a full year, and during that time, I provided support whenever needed. Now, after the method expired — as clearly stated in the Terms of Service — he’s trying to twist the story, delete conversations, and lie to the moderators’ face.

I ask the moderators to take this into serious consideration.
This user has a clear pattern of manipulation, dishonesty, and false accusations.

I’ve been transparent and fair throughout this process. That scammer simply wants something for free after already receiving a full year of service, and he’s trying to manipulate the situation to get it.

Please don’t be misled by his false claims.

Thanks

[218]

I will not even read the lies you wrote I will provide the chats to admins when they contact me. The accounts you provide me last for not more than week. I have some proofs because I still have access to some of the emails and have the screenshots from them.

Founder of LeagueSociety



(OLD DISCORD SERVER WITH 800+ MEMBERS GOT BANNED CLICK THE SIGNATURE TO JOIN THE NEW ONE)

 

[1.621]

To the Moderators,

Let me clarify what this report is really about — because he is deliberately missing the point.

The core issue here is not whether an account stopped working.  
The core issue is that a full year has passed since his purchase, and with it, the warranty has clearly expired.

He is now bringing up old issues — like accounts getting patched or access being lost — as if they happened yesterday. But these are normal occurrences in this type of service, and every single time during the active period, I provided support and replacements when requested.

What he’s not telling you is that:
- He hasn’t contacted me in months.
- The last time we interacted was during a previous report — which he also opened unnecessarily.
- Now, out of nowhere, he comes back demanding another fix — and when I told him I can’t provide one because the warranty and method have both expired, he opened another report.

That’s the real reason this thread exists: he didn’t get something for free after the service ended.

He’s trying to distract from this by talking about account stability, deleted chats, and “proofs” — but none of that changes the fundamental fact: the service period is over. A full year has passed. There is no more obligation to refund, replace, or repair.

Even if the method were still working today, the warranty would still be expired. That’s how Terms of Service work.

So please, don’t let him shift the focus. This isn’t about fairness or broken promises — it’s about someone trying to bypass the rules after already receiving a full year of service.

I’ve been transparent, responsive, and fair.  
He’s doing the opposite. I just cannot keep reading all his lies.

Thank you for your time and careful judgment.

[2.710]

Provide any and all evidence to me through onsite PM.

 

[Selling Signature Ad Space - DM Me]

 

[Ping's PGP Key]

Before conducting any form of business confirm my identity through onsite PM.

[218]

Provide any and all evidence to me through onsite PM.

I’m currently on vacation. I’ll provide them when I get access to my computer. I'm sorry for the inconvenience and delay.

Founder of LeagueSociety



(OLD DISCORD SERVER WITH 800+ MEMBERS GOT BANNED CLICK THE SIGNATURE TO JOIN THE NEW ONE)

 

[2.710]

⚠️ Scam Report Verdict ⚠️

 

The facts are undeniable following a complete and unbiased review of all available evidence, including scam history, private messages, sales thread revisions, and behavior.

 

This is not a misunderstanding. This is a case of calculated misrepresentation, repeated deception, and a refusal to uphold basic marketplace standards.

 

---

Breakdown of Findings:
 

• 1. Misrepresentation of Product
  • Advertised repeatedly as a "Lifetime Key" or personal activation. Nowhere in any version did it ever mention "team method" or shared accounts.
    
  • Post-sale claims that it was not a standalone key are demonstrably false.
    
  • This constitutes a textbook Marketplace Rule #12 violation — allowing administration to override ToS when deceptive practices are detected.
    
  
  
• 2. History of Product Instability
  • The buyer's product required replacement several times in just a few weeks.
    
  • Anything that breaks every 7–14 days cannot, in good faith, be sold as "lifetime."
    
  • No upfront disclosure of this instability was made at the time of sale.
    
  
  
• 3. Invalid Use of Post-Sale ToS as Defense
  • Seller cited: "Warranty ends if method dies." However:
    
  • There's no proof this clause was ever shown pre-sale.
    
  • If the method is dead, why is the thread still active and accepting payments for the same product with no disclaimer?
    
  • Either the method is dead (continued advertising is fraud),
    
  • Or it's still live (buyer is owed a working product).
    
  • This logical contradiction voids the defense entirely.
    
  
  
• 4. Attempted Moderation Manipulation
  • Seller falsely claimed a prior 2024 scam report was ruled in his favor.
    
  • In truth, the report was never ruled on — it was closed by the buyer on the promise of a fix.
    
  • Misrepresenting moderation history is a deliberate attempt to manipulate staff.
    
  
  
• 5. Ongoing Thread Misrepresentation
  • Sales thread still live and active: Sales Link
    
  • Over 10 manual edits were made by the seller, yet every revision implies a personal upgrade/key.
    
  • This is not legacy text — it is intentional, ongoing misrepresentation.
    

 

---

 

Verdict: Refund Required

 

Seller is hereby required to issue a full refund to the buyer in the amount of $39.99.

 

[Selling Signature Ad Space - DM Me]

 

[Ping's PGP Key]

Before conducting any form of business confirm my identity through onsite PM.

[218]

Thanks @Ping
LTC address: LPsF4Uj3M1JWNcnA43B6VA92Fqdk8Nb3oS

Founder of LeagueSociety



(OLD DISCORD SERVER WITH 800+ MEMBERS GOT BANNED CLICK THE SIGNATURE TO JOIN THE NEW ONE)

 

[1.621]

First, I’d like to clarify a key point about the previous report the buyer opened months ago:
He contacted me late at night, I responded the next morning (after ~6 hours, as I was sleeping), and he immediately opened a report. However, he later apologized, admitted he shouldn’t have rushed, and closed the report  after I fixed the account promptly.
That case was resolved in my favor — not by my claim, but by the facts: I delivered, he acknowledged it, and no action was taken against me.
Please do not reinterpret or misrepresent that outcome. It was closed with no fault on my side, and that should carry weight in this current case.
 
Now, regarding this new report: the only difference is that a full year has passed, the method has expired, and I refused a refund or replacement — as clearly stated in my Terms of Service, which he accepted at the time of purchase.
To be clear:

• He used the service for a year.
  
• He never contacted me during that time after many months ago.
  
• He only returned after the a year when warranty expired to demand a free replacement or refund.
  

How can a seller be expected to refund a full amount for a service that was fully delivered and used for a year?
You mentioned the sales thread is still active. Yes, it is — because the product now uses a new, working method, different from the one that expired. That’s why the thread remains open. There is no deception — just an updated service. Every Adobe seller can say the same.
I provided all available proof but not a single message from the moderator. Yet the decision appears to favor him, despite his history of false reports, deleted messages, and now, post-service exploitation?
The fact that he stayed silent for months, and only acted after the warranty ended, is itself strong evidence that this is not about fairness — it’s about getting a full year of service for free.
I feel deeply disappointed that a moderator could rule this way. I followed the rules, delivered the product, upheld my ToS, and cooperated fully. I did not expect to be penalized while the buyer — who has a clear pattern of abuse — is rewarded.
I kindly request that another moderator review this case, or that you reconsider based on the facts:

• Full year of service delivered.
  
• ToS accepted.
  
• No valid complaint during active period.
  
• Current claim made only after all obligations ended.
  

I believe in this community and its fairness. I hope that principle still stands.
Thank you for your time and understanding.
Hope I can get a reply soon because this decision is not fair, how can he get a refund after a year? That's incredible unfair