Quote from: TwitchySeal on Today at 11:19:05 AM

Deciding not to support the flag is one thing, but you're opposing support for it which only serves to give credibility to the scammer.

I've posted a note on the Flag page (words to the effect the Flag is not valid).

Quote

And besides, I don't see any issue with creating a flag that references a thread that you didn't create - there's no reason to believe Jollygood will lock the thread, and if he does the flag can be removed - we don't need another Betking scam thread and Jollygood creating another identical flag just seems redundant.

I'm pretty sure theymos said when introducing Flags that a locked thread is one of the many reasons that makes a Flag invalid. (but in saying that, I've just scrolled all 20+ pages and can't find where theymos said that...)

Quote from: theymos on June 13, 2019, 04:35:22 AM

The type-1 flags on Quickseller, BSV, etc. aren't misuse of the system by either supporters or opponents.

True, but Flag 2809 is a type one flag while flag 2810 - type three was created just one second later.

Flag 2809 is redundant in more ways than one, hence my continued opposition to it.

I am also relying on this interpretation by theymos of their system:

Quote from: theymos on June 13, 2019, 03:25:14 AM

Quote from: suchmoon on June 12, 2019, 02:45:59 PM

Is a non-victim creating an otherwise factual flag also considered to be abusing the system?

Is someone who supports a factual flag that was created by a non-victim also considered to be abusing the system?

And is someone who opposes a valid flag also considered to be abusing the system?

That's all misuse of the system.

We either work within the guidelines as set out. Or, we do our own thing, then join a gang when we don't like what others are doing in this place and dish out rough justice.