So your argument is essentially that so long as Coinabul's terms were knowable to the customer prior to the order being placed and the customer placed the order nonetheless, Coinabul cannot be scamming if they follow their own terms.

Coinabul's TOS says "If Coinabul is held liable to you for a transaction, liability will be limited to either the amount which you paid during the transaction or $100; whichever is greater."

So if I place an order for $1,000 worth of gold, Coinabul opts not to send me the gold for no reason, I sue them, get a $1,000 judgment and they pay me $100, that wouldn't be Coinabul scamming?

It is, unfortunately, fairly routine for companies to have terms of service that say "We can do whatever we want and your only recourse is to ask us nicely to do something else". While companies think this provides them with all kinds of legal protection, what it actually does is cause people to have no choice but to ignore the terms when determining if the company acted responsibly or not. Coinabul's terms are these kinds of terms -- many of them contain "we can do whatever we want and you have to take it " clauses, such as this beauty: "Coinabul is not liable for any errors, negligence, or inability to fulfill any orders."

I'm not saying Coinabul shouldn't have this kind of ToS. While I think it's idiotic, I understand that lots of companies do this, often as a result of specific legal advice. And I'm not a lawyer. But it forces people to basically ignore the Tos when deciding whether to buy from the company or evaluating whether the company acted reasonably.

The reason nobody bothers to read a ToS is because they all say the same thing -- we can do whatever we want.