Quote from: A-Bolt on October 20, 2019, 09:31:22 AM

Quote from: madnessteat on October 20, 2019, 06:32:44 AM

Если членами DT определяется, что проект является скамом, то его представитель на форуме получает негативный отзыв/флаг (это и является своего рода предупреждением для новичков и других пользователей, рекламирующих данный проект). Пользователи, продолжающие участвовать в подписной такого проекта, также помечаются отзывами. Это примерно тоже самое если бы "суд постановил, что Сергей Мавроди является мошенником", а каналы продолжали бы крутить ролики "МММ"- полагаю, у них также бы возникли проблемы.

Допустим, есть проект, представитель которого покрашен за мошенничество. Поскольку мошенничество не подлежит модерации (и это правильно) представитель будет продолжать писать сообщения о своём скамерском проекте, тем самым рекламируя его. То есть, форум будет использоваться как рекламная площадка для скама. Будет ли покрашен за это Теймос кем-нибудь из DT1?

Так почему за то же самое (предоставление рекламного места в подписи) красить рядового пользователя считается нормой среди членов DT1?

Форум не берет на себя модерацию мошенничества (соответственно и не отвечает за размещения кем-либо мошенничества). Расследования ведутся членами сообщества, негативные отзывы также оставляются членами сообщества и могут быть изменены/удалены по просьбе пользователя, получившего негативный отзыв. Теймос дал форуму инструмент (систему доверия) для предупреждения о мошеничестве, но силами форума защитить пользователей, которые не проверяют негативные отзывы, не является возможным.

Приведу несколько цитат:

Quote from: hilariousetc on August 06, 2018, 08:30:47 AM

Quote from: Coolcryptovator on August 06, 2018, 03:01:44 AM

Scam are not moderated by forum. But I don't know exactly why. There are many case that well proven scammer with solid evidence. Why they should not be ban from forum ? Is red tag from DT enough ? Scammer will take chance to scam other. Although it's very hard to prove scammer. But those case are clear & there is good evidence, I think they should be ban. So that he can't scam again by same account. I know scammer might be create an new account but it will not trustworthy.

It still takes time to investigate and verify and would just be too much work. If someone gets scammed by someone who has negative feedback then that's probably their own fault. We really can't be expected to babysit every user here and each individual is responsible for their own money and what they do with it.

Quote from: xtraelv on August 06, 2018, 05:03:09 AM

What is a scam and who decides it is a scam ?

Some scams are obvious but others are not. Once you start moderating scams it can quickly become extremely complex.

Some people call bitcoin a scam. Some people call bcash a scam - some people call it bitcoin cash.

Some people call Ripple a scam. Where do you draw the line ?

Cloud-mining contracts ? Short term mining contracts ? HYIP ? Pump and dump groups ? Crypto exchanges ? Tax collectors ?

The trust system - while not perfect - works fine in identifying and warning people of potential issues and scams.

The reality is that people need to educate themselves on how to spot scams, keep their crypto safe, use escrow and do their own research.

Quote from: xtraelv on August 06, 2018, 10:33:43 AM

Quote from: The Pharmacist on August 06, 2018, 08:38:18 AM

If Theymos wanted to, he could come up with a list of things that are and aren't acceptable. It might not be easy, and it might not please everyone, but he could do it instead of doing nothing. I mean, that's what laws are--they're written rules describing behavior that isn't acceptable. Lawmakers don't throw up their hands at the complexity of the legal system and decide to not prohibit certain things as a result.

Once you start censorship it opens up a whole new can of worms.

If you censor some scams but not others it can provide a false sense of security.

Banning copy-pasting is not censoring because they have nothing unique to say.

It is also a matter of "proof" and "liability". Copy-pasting when caught is fairly clear cut.

Once you start censoring scams you are accepting some sort of responsibility for the safety of the users.

The whole bitcoin thing came from the Cypherpunk movement - which tends to have a free speech and libertarian viewpoint on life.

Once you start censoring it very quickly turns into over-reach.

The reality is that most users that get banned probably re-incarnate as another account anyway.

A known & tagged scammer is better than an unknown & untagged scammer.

Lawmakers often over-reach. The powers they give their "henchmen" often affect ordinary citizens. (I'm not only talking of developed democratic countries)

To make something illegal - lawmakers only have to declare it to be illegal. Lawmakers only pursue "crime" if it is in their self interest.