Addressing a complaint that you are advertising what someone believes to be a scam should be your number one priority, and should take priority over anything else in your backlog of things to get done.
No, it shouldn't. The service in question would be negatively rated if it was a clear scam and that was not the case at the time (which is what I checked while entering, and after getting the PM). If I kept prioritizing things every time I got a message from a random member, I wouldn't have time to do anything.
You should not rely on other people leaving negative trust when deciding to advertise for a company. It is ultimately your moral responsibility if someone were to get scammed as a result of you advertising for such company. If you are unable, or unwilling to research a concern that you are advertising a scam on an expedited basis, or if you are unwilling to research the legitimacy of a company prior to advertising for them, then your workload should either be
significantly reduced or terminated.
Betcoin also did have numerous negative ratings from multiple users several months prior to last week, all with references. I don't think it would be difficult to look into them and reasonable conclude that betcoin.ag is a very shady site.
There is no reason to make an example out of Lauda (although it appears that is what she wants currently), nor anyone else for that matter.
If you are not going to look into claims of the site you are advertising for ~4 months then it should be safe to say that you are not going to look into it at all!
How about you stop talking nonsense? I've joined Betcoin 6 days ago.
You were aware of accusations against BetCoin months ago, but between then and now you have not had a chance to look into them being legitimate prior to you starting to advertise for them.