So how long should we wait from someone scamming to them not being held liable for that any longer? Just so that I know what guidelines to use. Some old time scammers could be getting a 2nd round of fun here soon if we base it off of a certain amount of years 
.
.If you want to call me putting one flag on one confirmed scammer "calling upon the impending doom" that's on you. I've never made any such claims .
.No, I am saying you are claiming you must put the flag down or else there will be impending doom, as demonstrated in bold above.
So why is it then you aren't opening a flag against Vod? He has been responsible for all the same acts as listed above. I have proven he was lying about me using his own contradicting words to justify his abusive negative ratings. If lying is the metric then about half of this forum can go into a dumpster. Also who gets to decide what is a lie and not just a difference of opinion, or simply a mistaken conclusion? Lying necessitates intent, and you have no way to prove in this case what exists only in the mind of another.
First of all, we're not talking about Vod, we're talking about Quickseller, but since you brought it up, I would trust Vod 100 times before I trusted QS once.
Second of all, we're talking about inherent trustworthiness, which also has subjective metrics whose importance varies from individual to individual. I know you want to live in a world of black and white but the issue is more complex than that. QS is clearly motivated by personal grudges (as are you) so he fabricates malicious stories in order to get a kind of revenge on them.
You also didn't prove anything about QS - you rarely prove anything about anything - you just convince yourself that you do so that you can chalk another win in your imaginary "V" tally. Clearly not many other people around here see you as the infinite hot-streak victor that you see yourself as.
The purpose of this system is to protect people from fraud, not to put ointment on your inflamed butt holes.
You're a child and there's clearly no point in trying to reason with you. I'm putting you back on ignore.
We aren't talking about Vod, we are talking about standards. I don't care who you decide to trust. I do care how you use the system designed to warn people of fraud as a tool of retribution, especially as demonstrated by your selectively applied standards. I brought up Vod to prove the point you are willing to apply this standard to your opponents but not your pals. Inherent trustworthiness is subjective. The trust system is not supposed to be a trustworthiness ranking system, it is meant to be a system of indicating users likely to defraud others. Useful systems don't use subjective metrics. You can make subjective conclusions, but they shouldn't be used systematically because they are by their very nature unfit to be part of any objective system. I don't have to prove anything about Quickseller, the burden of proof is on the accuser. What grudges am I motivated by? Am I abusing the trust system to fight my grudges? What exactly do I win here? More stalking from halfwits like you? Am I supposed to be disappointed you put me on ignore? All you are doing is saving me time rebutting your half baked arguments.