So my guess is buff88 locked the topic hoping this accusation will just disappear, but in reality has just made it worse on himself and the site.
It was created by
eGoldgg, so they must have locked it. That explains why they came online without responding to the accusations.
I'm not sure if the Flag against eGoldgg can be Supported based on the Flag rules:
Creating or supporting a scammer flag is actively affirming a set of pretty clear fact-statements.
If a website that has an ANN-thread on Bitcointalk scammed someone, it deserves a red scammer Flag. But if the ANN-thread was created by a user who is no longer active, and the site is represented by a different user, can the thread creator still be flagged? I can argue the thread creator is innocent, but that means the thread won't get a scam warning.
I'm asking because I found what looks like a loophole:
I'm in doubt: A casino closed a user's account, and took 399 m
BTC without valid reason. The casino's main ANN-thread was created by user
eGoldgg, who last posted 3 years ago. The thread is "maintained" by user
Buff88.
I'd like to show a scam warning above the topic, which means user eGoldgg should have a Flag.
I'm in doubt if this fits the Flag-rules, but if it doesn't fit the rules, it means there's a loophole to avoid a warning on a thread.
The scammed user created 2 Flags, both type 2:
A (yellow) Newbie warning Flag (type 1) has less strict Flag rules. Will you create one GekkeBelg? It's this one:
Due to various concrete red flags, I believe that anyone dealing with this user has a high risk of losing money. (This flag will only be shown to guests/newbies.)