Someone gets a scammer tag if the mods decide they deserve one - which is based on the available evidence not on some magic ability they posses to divine with certainty whether someone actually IS a scammer or not.

Plenty of scammers don't have scammer tags - in fact it only takes elementary logic to work out out that ALL scammers didn't have a scammer tag at some point (they don't get given them the instant they sign up for the forum).

The set of forum members without scammer tags contains ALL of the following groups of people:

Ones who aren't scammers,
Ones who are scammers but haven't scammed on this forum,
Ones who have scammed on this forum but noone has realised it yet,
Ones who have scammed on this forum but the evidence hasn't been sufficient to convince mods to give the tag.

Now you certainly belong in one of those four groups - as do I, and as does every member who doesn't have a scammer tag.  But the lack of a tag, of itself, says NOTHING about which of those four groups you (or anyone else) actually belongs to.  I'm not that interested in arguing here which group you're in - just pointing out the trivial fallacy of your repeated claim about you not having a scammer tag actually being proof of innocence.

And let's be clear JUST how stupid "I don't have a scammer tag so I'm not a scammer" is.  IF that were somehow logically sound then NOONE should ever get a scammer tag.  After all, right before the scammer tag was awarded they didn't have a tag.  And that proves they aren't a scammer, right?  So therefore they shouldn't be given one - and the tag should just be deleted.