⭐ Merited by DireWolfM14 (1)
@Lauda, @eddie13, I encourage you to explain why yahoo62278 deserves a red-tag, while those who supported LiveCoin don't.
Here are some:- False equivalency. LiveCoin pressure was due to a singular instance of scamming and/or maybe some other previous situations. Yobit had many many more instances before the campaign was even taken over by Yahoo. Therefore:
He accepted a much worse scamming entity[1]. - False equivalency #2. Both exchanges are shady, but Yobit is the one that was actively promoting their Ponzi scam. Even without advertising it here, he's knowingly diverting people to an entity one of whose products is the ponzi. You can't argue that a lot of people didn't get burned this way, not even with utopian wishful thinking.
- Why didn't he act between January 14th (although this issue being widely known started much earlier) and the point at which Yobit announced campaign termination? He actively avoided doing so, and avoided posting in this thread too.
- [1] See his own post in the LiveCoin situation (he wasn't managing that one, maybe that's why), i.e. it proves hypocrisy as well.
See the following two points:
IMO "reputable" users should be held to higher standards than your average shitposter, but that seems to often be the opposite of the case..
A familiar tactic of avoidance often seen in situations involving financial motivation..
For the above, please don't waste my time with nonsense such as "active avoidance doesn't mean he's guilty". Of course it does not, but there has to be a strong reason to do so. Update, see the following too (thanks Quicksie
):LiveCoin did not start out as a scam. After it turned out that LiveCoin was acting in an untrustworthy/scam manner, and once LiveCoin had the opportunity to defend itself, pressure was given to those who were advertising for LiveCoin and after a discussion, Hhampuz ended the campaign.
In the case of yahoo/Yobit, yahoo acknowledged that Yobit was a scam and decided to continue advertising for them. The difference is that those who were advertising for LiveCoin had not taken the position that it was a scam when they were advertising.
In the case of yahoo/Yobit, yahoo acknowledged that Yobit was a scam and decided to continue advertising for them. The difference is that those who were advertising for LiveCoin had not taken the position that it was a scam when they were advertising.
You can't seriously argue that this not only doesn't warrant negative ratings, but doesn't warrant exclusions either.
Also side note (not related directly to topic so I apologize): Please note the extreme lack of merits on very substantive posts from everyone against Yahoo (eddie, et. al. and me). There's no bias here, and all DT1 members are properly assessing the situation, right?
