Create a New Rule: No Selling Rank Management (Based) Systems

Forum Help
#1

The title is pretty self explanatory.

There are a few reasons for this, I have listed them in order of importance (from least to greatest.) I will include a TL;DR at the end of the three reasons to summerize for those who dont’t want to read it.

#3. First off, after #collaboration:asset-marketplace was removed, ROBLOX made it clear that we (developers) were not allowed to sell assets on the DevForum. While you could claim that developers are recieving ‘orders’ for these, they are selling a specific UI and code to every client. Even with modifications for every order, this is still ‘selling’ as the developer has a specific product.

#2. While you could argue that this applies to every line of code, these systems specifically have an increased chance for the developer (service provider) to steal the client (buyers) cookie, and account, allowing them to freely access group feature.

#1. Out of however many services there are in #collaboration:portfolios, I can safely say that >95% of these are just developers scamming other developers out of a free, open-source, API. I literally created a tutorial on how to do this, so that those looking for a way to do this dont have to get scammed, and yet, I still see new ‘rank management’ posts.

Reasons Summarized: (TL;DR)
#3: Selling assets is against the DevForum rules, those selling rank managment services dont custom make the API for any order. (Or even make the API at all - See Reason #1)
#2: Developers selling these services are not trustworthy by any means, and selling these type of services basically allows them to freely access many group features for clients using them.
#1: Almost every single rank management service being sold on the DevForum is a scam as it just uses an open-source/free API. (Literally look up ‘rank’ in portfolios and see for yourself.)

Note: Some rank management services are real and are custom made, but the fake services outweigh 99/1 the real services.

Making a rule against this would make ROBLOX a safer place (which by the way, I thought was ROBLOX’s goal :thinking: ) as it eliminates scamming here on the DevForum.

Example of this rule: Providing a product/service, such as application/donation centers, chat commands, and any other form of this, that are used to change properties of group members (roles and join requests) are not allowed on the DevForum.

5 Likes
#3

This post is not intended as a joke. I have seen people spend upwards of 10k Robux (plus monthly hosting) for a service that uses the same method as my tutorial.

(Yes, bad decision on their part but that’s not the point.)

EDIT BELOW
For anyone new to this conversation, the post that the message above was a reply to was now edited (after being flagged).

The whole point of the topic is not just about accessing other users accounts. I made it very clear that the reasons are in order from least to greatest importance. (2/3 are extra on top of 1, and 1 should be enough alone.)

Also, mind elaborating on how this is hard to follow? I gave three reasons then concluded.

3 Likes
#4

Actually, I don’t get what you mean by this at all. Can you explain it to me?

2 Likes
#5

People should not be allowed to sell services that are mainly for rank management. (Editing aspects of a group or group members from in-game/external communication services. Not including ban bots.)

3 Likes
#6

Alright and that’s their decision to do so. It all comes down to the client in situations like purchasing a Rank Management Center. The client is at fault’ if they do not do their own research beforehand on the topic. As well, the sellers aren’t selling the API, or the code most times, they’re selling the accessibility to a Rank Management Center. Most times, group owners are either lazy and do not want to follow the tutorial, or don’t know it exists. What they’re being sold is ease of access to a Rank Management Center.

5 Likes
#7

Let’s say that everything you said was true, this would fall under the 3rd reason. (In reality it is different.)

#8

Yes, this would fall under the rule that asset sales are not permitted, so why make a new rule for it? A better alternative would be suggesting a more strict & efficient removal of these posts (Rank Management Centers). I don’t see the need for an entire new rule.

1 Like
#9

As you can obviously see, no posts have been removed because of this.

It is way easier to say ‘no rank management services are allowed’ then to flag every single post. (If anyone did, they would get their account frozen for spam-flagging.)

I would be just as pleased as long as the result is the same.

Is there a substantial difference between making a rule like this and a guideline for strict removal? I don’t think so, but please let me know your side.

#10

I’m not going to lie, with your #1 reason it makes you look like you’re going for anti-competitiveness. While I don’t believe some of the pricing for these services is sane, nor do I think all of these services are legitimate does not mean you should ban everyone from making them.

You can’t ban people from making something because they’re a “scam” without even buying the product, you can be scammed with building assets, scripts, and models. Why put this towards rank management systems and not do it for other products like the before mentioned?

#11

It is impossible to ban anyone from making anything. My goal is to limit these on the DevForum.

This is one (of the many) reasons why the asset marketplace was removed. To eliminate high-risk transactions on an official ROBLOX sub-domain.

#12

Okay, buying anything on here is ‘high-risk’. You can’t just keep people from making them on the devform because you consider them a scam. Once again, it still looks anti-competitive. I don’t see the problem if they’re doing it by the rules. I have a post up for this kind of stuff, as I provide this service for free… myCenter Application Services | Ranking API for Roblox Games, and Node.JS | Free

#13

I have nothing against providing a service for free. But once again, there are other reasons than scamming/high-risk buying.

1 Like
#14

I dont like the practice either but its not something u should take away. Just because some people might not like it.

1 Like
#15

3:) You know this how, and how exactly is this wrong [if they provide the means of hosting, and such]?
2:) You know this how? No one trusts anyone. Yes, giving people cookies is no bueno.
1:) Anti-competitiveness. Just because you don’t like it, doesn’t mean they don’t have the right to post. If PostApproval, or a Moderator doesn’t like it… they’ll remove it.

Thank you.

1 Like
#16

#3) I won’t send specific links, but due to my tutorial I get notifications when people say something like “stop selling this, anyone can make it, look at this tutorial”, also, most of these services say for X robux you’ll get our service and the UI shown above.
#2) Like you said, no one is trustworthy.
#1) How do you figure? Removing the market entirely is not anti-competitiveness. Also, what you said about PA and mods is not true.

Edit 1/2: Correcting grammar and fixing mis-numbered reasons.

#17

A lot of this post seems to be a rant about “I have made a rank management system tutorial but nobody is using it” which seems selfish since it looks like you only want your product to be used rather than a custom one. Sometimes posts ask for a custom one so that it is tailored for their specific project. One’s product isn’t always a “one size fits all” solution.

2 Likes
#18

This is way too specific to become a forum rule.

If you see someone selling assets, just flag it as off-topic. We don’t have any valid category for those kind of posts (no matter what they are selling). There’s only recruitment and portfolios.

3 Likes
#19

Is having packages (standard, premium, etc) that a user receives for X robux considered selling? (Where the seller only slightly modified a UI if at all.)

If so, I am going to need to spend a few hours this weekend flagging posts.

#20

I can’t say for sure without seeing the topics (please don’t link me – just flag if unsure to save us both time, staff won’t put it against you if you’re incorrect) but that would seem off-topic for Portfolios.

1 Like