Of course that disclaimer is useless. I wasn't aware of a problem with betcoin.ag. Is there enough proof that it's scammy? Are you talking about this thread? Any other?

If someone promotes a site which is known for being scammy then they clearly deserve negative trust, regardless of their position or any disclaimer. Now the question is whether that site is clearly scammy. If it is (without much doubt) then I'll add some negative trust.

Also, I do believe highly-trusted users and staff should be specially careful with what they promote. As I said long ago in a similar case: if the staff promotes a site newbies will think it's endorsed by the forum (I know it's not the case but it can look like it because of the 'Staff' legend). So they definitely need to check any site before promoting it.

Update: I haven't found final proof against betcoin.ag so I don't think promoting it deserves negative trust. There are some suspicious things so personally I wouldn't promote it but the benefit of the doubt could apply. However I do think it would be more responsible for anyone to research a site before promoting it. This is valid for everyone and even more so for staff and trusted members.

And just a note to Vod and Quickseller: you obvious can't have a proper discussion with each other so please consider just ignoring each other for everyone's sake. At least that's what I try to do whenever I see any of you writing about the other. I have to say I do strongly appreciate your opinions otherwise.