No, you are just not allowed to use the high-power scam flags -- intended mainly for punishing people, not really for preemptively warning about scams -- without first being scammed. You can still use the newbie-warning flags and negative ratings, which have plenty of warning power.
I suppose we
did want differing degrees of severity in regards to negative feedback. I'll have to give this some more thought and form a more substantiated opinion as discussion develops.
Is there any message indicator for when a user PMs a flagged user? I know that some users have tried to sneak their way into scamming others in sections that hide trust ratings (and now flag markers).
I agree with this; having a scaled impact value vs. a simple yes/no; needs to be considered IMHO. I have seen people with negative trust; just because they were duped into advertising for a scam unknowingly.....
In the same regard; my Yobit banner could potentially have harmed me if yobit truly went south for the winter and started ripping everyone off blatantly (which i personally am surprised they haven't yet); because for me; the sig was just a way to put a little coin in my pocket for doing the same thing I have always done; help in the areas I can help in; when I am physically/mentally able to do so..... Never once did I advocate anyone use them or go out of my way to shill for them; I would only suggest people go in and hit up the free coins when there was something worth nabbing (like the free .01 ETC every 24 hours), or when I was gung-ho on a [still in progress] "coin" that I believe the project has merit (as a DEX)....
Shit; I already have a negative distrust from some asshat on the old system for my yobit banner; with literally no real reasoning for it other than I would rebut or continue the discussion with logical processes and analysis in my process of trying to help them through the issue they were having. I think it might even be the guy whom sent an ETH smartcontract token set to his ETH wallet on yobit; which they have never supported..... he was quite butthurt at my honest curt replies.
Innocent until proven guilty, sure. But with this one it is unflagged until victim proves scammer guilty. If no victim acts on the flag, then nothing is done. You are not allowed to flag without first being scammed.
No, you are just not allowed to use the
high-power scam flags -- intended mainly for punishing people, not really for preemptively warning about scams -- without first being scammed. You can still use the newbie-warning flags and negative ratings, which have plenty of warning power.
Yeah; but here's the rub; If you dont have evidence of a scam; it's a blind accusation from you in the eyes of everyone else with an objective mind..... so that's a double edged sword of a concept to try and modify that way. Even if the people who trust you see it; they have nothing on it past your say so; that doesn't fly in the online world unless you are truly respected by even the people who havent conversed with you. Very few people reach that status in any regard. (at the same time, I am baffled why people put so much stock into actors' opinions these days)