Perhaps I'd consider withdrawing my support after more evidence of his legitimacy has come to light.
Isn't this the exact opposite of the intended purpose of flags? I thought the evidence was supposed to be presented before supporting it, not create a conclusion and then build a narrative around it. You know, innocent until proven guilty, not your rep is toast until you can prove yourself/appease the mob.
No. The purpose of the flag system is to warn other users about potentially getting scammed. Nobody is saying anybody is "guilty" because this isn't a court of law. What we are saying is that this guy is demonstrating untrustworthy behavior and users should take caution before entrusting this person with their funds. So far he has put forward little to zero evidence that he can actually do what he is claiming to do. What he has put forward is a bunch of disjointed nonsense backed only by an outrageous ego and air of superiority.
Feel free to oppose the flag if you'd like.