Quote from: IconFirm on August 14, 2019, 05:12:24 PM

An interesting point of view. How about this though, the below statement:

Quote from: DaveF on August 14, 2019, 03:14:22 PM

From the scam accusation they have burned some people. I would go with yeah, they did.

..means you have just broken their TOS & given them the right to seize your funds, like they have done previously:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5159692.msg51714699#msg51714699

Saying bad things about Livecoin is not allowed cos their TOS says so. Would you still have the same point of view if they seized your funds for saying that I wonder?

I doubt it.

Actually I have less problem with that then say Polo saying "we will give you plenty of time to complete your KYC" and then forcing it w/o telling anyone.
Or all the exchanges who have socialized losses.

If their rules say "you don't talk shit about us" then those are the rules.
Now, I did not READ the rules like most people. But that's on me, not them.

However, what you brought up does not cover what I was saying about DTs giving red trust for using having their signature.

That's what I was posting about. There should be some sort of constancy. There have been dozens of scam accusations against FortuneJack do you think everyone wearing their signature should get red trust too?

-Dave