Quote from: jackjack on January 09, 2014, 04:41:56 PM

Quote from: mprep on January 09, 2014, 02:45:17 PM

Quote from: jackjack on January 09, 2014, 12:49:51 PM

Quote from: mprep on January 09, 2014, 10:35:46 AM

Quote from: Eternity on January 09, 2014, 10:31:53 AM

Why is this thread still not locked ?

Bloody scammer

Scammer or not, it's for the community to decide and police it. The forum's policy is to monitor the basics such as spam, off-topic threads, not scams.

The guy admitted to be a scammer

He might be saying sarcastically (not saying he was, it can be interpreted in a way). What I noticed that the moderation policy is to controll objective problems such as spam, flame wars and leave any subjective problems for the users to fix. This is a libertarian oriented forum after all, freedom of action, speech and such.

He said that AND didn't pay anyone
Do you need more proof?

Read the quoted post bellow:

Quote from: mprep on January 09, 2014, 03:02:09 PM

Quote from: hilariousandco on January 09, 2014, 02:54:02 PM

Quote from: mprep on January 09, 2014, 02:45:17 PM

Quote from: jackjack on January 09, 2014, 12:49:51 PM

Quote from: mprep on January 09, 2014, 10:35:46 AM

Quote from: Eternity on January 09, 2014, 10:31:53 AM

Why is this thread still not locked ?

Bloody scammer

Scammer or not, it's for the community to decide and police it. The forum's policy is to monitor the basics such as spam, off-topic threads, not scams.

The guy admitted to be a scammer

He might be saying sarcastically (not saying he was, it can be interpreted in a way). What I noticed that the moderation policy is to controll objective problems such as spam, flame wars and leave any subjective problems for the users to fix. This is a libertarian oriented forum after all, freedom of action, speech and such.

He wasn't saying it sarcastically; he was being mocking and just rubbing it in.

Quote from: mistress_magpie on January 09, 2014, 02:50:02 PM

So is this actually a scammer-tolerant forum, i.e. scammers ain't banned, and their threads ain't locked? What other libertarianisms does it allow?

My goodness, I truly am a Lawful Good little mouse Tongue

The rules are somewhat paradoxical at times. Scammers usually arent banned but spammers sometimes are, and each mod has a different definition or what a actually spammer is.

The thing is that everything people say can be interpreted subjectively and such interpretation can be handled in a bad way. For example, let's say I post in a forum called TyrannyTalk that "I don't like that Steve guy" while Steve is a friend of the admin. The admin takes an alt army and slanders me with posts about me scamming users, presents faked proof. After that he orders the mods to ban me and poof, banned. See what I mean?

Meanwhile in BitcoinTalk people see a scammer and each user with different amounts of rep rates him appropriately. Another user dealing with him sees the ratings and makes a descision to trade with him or to cancel the deal.

The whole discussion started because he wasn't banned and the thread wasn't locked. I was talking about the policy, not separate cases. In this case, yeah, I know, he's a lowlife scammer, but the policy is that the community decides if he's guilty not the mods.