Quote from: nutildah on December 30, 2019, 02:45:12 AM

Quote from: TECSHARE on December 29, 2019, 07:54:38 AM

Objecting to the methodology used to tag him does not equal defending him. If we gave the police unlimited power to search people's homes without a warrant, no doubt they would find plenty of drug dealers and other criminals. The problem with that is it also strips the innocent of all of their rights. That has always been my complaint with this issue, it was based on speculation and guesses, not facts.

You are defending him ipso facto pretending its simply a matter of him being a bad trader. You are wrong here. Your analogies carry no weight, because yet again I have to remind you this isn't a court room. Its not a justice system, and nobody is being tried or even accused of committing any crimes. Nobody has "rights" on this forum. All usage of it is a privilege that could be revoked at any second, for any reason. Not that we have the power to ban users anyway.

Level 1 flags are based on speculation. The text in a Level 1 flag reads:

Quote

Warning: One or more bitcointalk.org users have reported that they strongly believe that the creator of this topic is a scammer.

Key word: believe.

The text guideline for leaving a negative trust rating reads:

Quote

You think that trading with this person is high-risk

Key word: think.

Usage of either component does not have to be based on "facts." They are both guided by personal opinion. The flag system is being used correctly here, as is the trust rating system.

Quote from: guigui371 on December 29, 2019, 10:20:48 AM

here it is:

Thanks for sharing the specifics of your experience.

You know I love our little chats where you just imagine whatever is useful to you at any given time to be true and just carry on as if it is fact. Funny how its not a court room when people disagree with you, but when you get to role play Stasi officer throwing accusations of guilt around then it sure sounds a lot like one. We have been over all of this already, not that this will stop you from eating your vomit and puking it back up again perpetually.

This isn't a court room, but you are indeed making accusations that have destructive effects on the community in general if not backed by demonstrable observable evidence, instead of just the best attempts of bored control freak losers pretending to be Mrs. Cleo bearing no responsibility for the damages false accusations cause. I know you like to imagine yourself in charge like all control freaks do, but you aren't and you don't get to unilaterally revoke these privileges no matter how much it gives your midget dick a chub thinking about it.

You really love cutting that flag description short to make it fit your Stasi LAARPing don't you?

"Due largely to the factors mentioned in this topic, I believe that anyone dealing with CryptoSparks is at a high risk of losing money, and guests would be well-advised to avoid doing so. This determination is based on concrete red flags which any knowledgeable & reasonable forum user should agree with, and it is not based on the user's opinions."

I don't care how many people you catch in your indiscriminate shotgunning of users. The ends does not justify the means and you bear no responsibility when you wrongly damage the reputations of others, which is why these standards of evidence were created to begin with to put a leash on people like you who simply enjoy lording over others regardless of the cost to the community.