Quote from: Lauda on January 29, 2020, 06:12:42 PM

Quote from: TECSHARE on January 29, 2020, 06:10:31 PM

Quote from: Lauda on January 29, 2020, 05:27:24 PM

Yobit being a scam is no longer an opinion, it wasn't an opinion for a very long time. It's a been a fact[1] for a long time derived from the definition of the word and their continual actions. Very bad example by Tecshare and now by you. Some other entity could have been used as an example of a "scam" that is a scam by opinion.

[1] Empirical proof: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5168200.0.

This still doesn't change the fact you are advocating for tagging people for guilt via association. This is not a strategy that can be universally applied and will by definition result in arbitrary and selective enforcement. Furthermore it does nothing to stop the actual perpetrator and will create massive amounts of conflict as well as open wide the doors for abusing the trust system for ulterior motives. All they have to do is claim what is in their sig is a scam, and boom, excuse for punishing people arbitrarily. This strategy achieves nothing and creates MANY negative side effects.

Irrelevant, wasn't responding to that. Read:

Quote from: Lauda on January 29, 2020, 04:31:01 PM

Quote from: eddie13 on January 29, 2020, 04:04:49 PM

@Lauda @nullius
The campaign is over.. It's been shut down..
All of this fuss has been a fair warning to not advertise scams or facilitate the advertisement of scams..
I think it should be let go for now, with no tags, but not next time..

I'm fine with that as an ending resolution, but you and I both know that there's no "not next time" but "it depends who manages and is recruited in the next one". The same as it was with this one. I don't see much support for a "not next time".

Quote from: eddie13 on January 29, 2020, 04:04:49 PM

Was the money worth it to dishonor yourself so?

No, relevant. I don't give a shit what you were responding to. I am responding to you.