Don't mean to get all TS on you.
I think the text of the flag banner is the same for type 2, 3, and "legacy" negative rating.
I meant not merely a [suspected, alleged, etc] scam (that'd be type 1 flag or negative rating). For type 3 there needs to be a violation of a written contract that resulted in damages. There, now we're ready to join the guild.
So the whole problem here was only the type of the flag?
Are you OK with it if the flag type was right?
Ok with what? I wouldn't support the flag regardless of its type because I think the accuser is full of shit. But that's just my opinion. It's likely that the flag would get more support if it was type 2 and if the accuser got their basic facts right (like the amount of the dispute).
No disrespect but I think we need someone to create some Udemy type course about flag things :-P
/s
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5191802.0
(two HRs so that folks above don't take it personally)
I'm mildly appalled that merely pointing out the basic faults in this is causing so much controversy but that's par for the course with this kindergarten DT driven by toddler emotions.
Another thing I need to point out is all those bitching about Sportsbet's T&Cs can go ahead an red trust them or create a type 1 flag. You don't need a specific complaint for that. If you think that dealing with Sportsbet is high-risk it would be a responsible thing to do.