Re: [SMAS] Signature Managers against Spam (light version)

lemmi just paste what the definition of a threat is real quick

Code:

a statement of an intention to inflict pain, injury, damage, or other hostile action on someone in retribution for something done or not done.

I wanted to a) warn the users in that campaign of what I considered doing and b) gain opinions from other DT users about how to proceed.
Leaving negative feedback for scams or advertising scams isn't a "hostile action". It's a concequence of what the user in question did themselves.

Lutpin, in your defense, what you wrote *could* be considered a 'threat' if you use YPII's definition which he so priggishly hauled out. My question is: Yeah, so what??

If Betcoin.ag is a scam and folks are promoting it via a sig campaign, well, that's what DT members do. Bust out the paint, and Lutpin isn't the only one doing it. That's not something that IMO needs a warning or anything even coming close to a threat. Offenders get marked and then the whining begins in meta, scam accusations, and reputation. So be it. You folks are looking after the best interests of the forum and are doing a fairly good job of it. End of pseudo-asskissing session, continue on ladies. Wink

Your response to Lutpin going around threatening to give users negative is "so what??"

wow

edit: then you guys throw a tantrum when og says he should probably kill himself

the double standards here are ridiculous. Some people making themselves look stupid just to be on Lutpin's good side

What double standard? I leave copious amounts of negative feedback for account sellers and buyers, and with no warning or threat whatsoever. Lutpin et al probably give that warning because their feedback carries that extra weight. And no, I could care less if he or any other DT member tags someone promoting a scam site in their signature. With warning, threat, or none of the above.

Please, I'm not trying to smuggle anyone's bone here. Lighten the fuck up.