Quote from: mikeywith on September 27, 2019, 11:34:44 PM

Quote from: TECSHARE on September 27, 2019, 08:40:04 PM

The flag requires "concrete red flags", I.E. evidence, not just suspicion. This is not a valid flag.

Does this fact apply to those who ask you to send them 0.25BTC and receive 1BTC in 24 hours ? assuming it's a newbie account with no "evidence" that would support any flag?

if you want to talk about solid evidence then 90% of online scammers are innocent, simply put most evidence are just screenshots of conversations and shit, they can be easily faked, the same thing applies to all gift card scammers and any other sort of internet scam, good luck having a solid proof against any online criminal, based on your theory we might as well just cancel the whole idea of the flag system since we rarely present any solid proof that would satisfy you and ask the victims to take their cases to court.

TS, let me ask you a question, would you lend CryptoSparks 5BTC if you had that ? I bet on NO , simply because you do know that it's very unlikely you going to get your money back, if Theymos or any other trusted member asked for the same loan, you probably wouldn't mind , despite the fact that there is no solid evidence that Theymos is going to pay back neither CryptoSparks would scam you, logic is stronger than evidence in many cases, this case is no exception.

None of your rambling matters, The fact is Theymos implemented these standards in order to stop arbitrary accusations without evidence, and you have none. An environment where anyone is subject to arbitrary accusations and is guilty until proven innocent is far more destructive than an environment where some scammers slip through the cracks (which you will never stop anyway). This is an invalid flag and an abuse of the system as it was designed.