Re: Flagging user broke an agreement and leaking confidential information
It is also Bob's assumption that OP and trustedaccseller are the same person.
Lets stick to topic, as far as I see it, OP wants to create red flag, as written in subject "flagging user broke an agreement" and as I can see OP has no basis to create red flag because:
1) OP claimed they referred bob to another person (trustedaccseller) for accounts 3 & 4
2) OP didn't provide proof that they own first 2 accounts
So bob technically don't have confirmation that accounts 1 & 2 (chat with OP) are for sale and OP can't sell accounts 3 & 4 because they belong to another seller.
So bob didn't broke any agreement in this case.
Also, it is not stated that information from chat is confidential and OP has no basis for red flag.
Lets stick to topic, as far as I see it, OP wants to create red flag, as written in subject "flagging user broke an agreement" and as I can see OP has no basis to create red flag because:
1) OP claimed they referred bob to another person (trustedaccseller) for accounts 3 & 4
2) OP didn't provide proof that they own first 2 accounts
So bob technically don't have confirmation that accounts 1 & 2 (chat with OP) are for sale and OP can't sell accounts 3 & 4 because they belong to another seller.
So bob didn't broke any agreement in this case.
Also, it is not stated that information from chat is confidential and OP has no basis for red flag.
None of that matters, SeW suffered loss due to deliberate actions by Bob, the main point is that Bob never had any intention of purchasing anything, and their information seeking was solely to do damage. The flag wouldn't be for not following through with the sale, it'd be for causing damaged by going in with false pretenses to make the OP give up information that they wouldn't have previously, and then publishing that information.
This isn't a matter of accidentally leaking details which could be attributed to unexpected results, this is a case of a deliberate action doing its intended purpose, and the result to be expected. Can you deny that SeW is out money due to Bob's deception?
I personally think #1,2, and 3 apply, but #2 is probably the safer bet
OP didn't provide proof of ownership for accounts which he was trying to sell.
In this thread, we are talking about ownership of accounts 1 and 2
All other accounts are from different sellers and they are irrelevant for OP's flag.
So what loss Bob caused to OP who failed to provide proof that he owns accounts 1 and 2??
If seller number 2 wants to flag bob - they claimed they are owner of account which turned out not to be for sale and supposedly hacked they broke their own contract then (I didn't check for other accounts)
If seller number 3 wants to flag bob - as it is shown in pictures there was no deal.
Also, nothing here is confidential information. For information to become confidential, you have to make it confidential https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/confidential-information
You can't put all eggs in the same basked, those are 3 separated cased and each one should be treated separately.
Here:
He made an agreement for both of us that he will buy the account if we prove ownership and use SebastianJu as an escrow if proved that the accounts is within our hands and we are not scammers by sending a message to him which trustedseller has done but he broke the agreement/contract and compromised a confidential information about our transaction.
Again, SeW900 didn't prove ownership of accounts 1 and 2 which we can only assume he owns.Each flag type 2 or 3 requires thread and you can't create flag on someone else's behalf.