Theymos, no matter how many times you spread that FUD, no one will ever agree with you.

I asked someone to make a 2BTC image for which they thought they'd be paid immediately (even though we had no contract).

When I was a little late to respond to their inquiry, they went straight to the forum screaming that I had scammed them.

They did the usual freakshow of telling everyone that I they were sure I was a scammer (I don't know how in the world they came to this conclusion to which they later retracted and apologized publicly for being irrational).

They went further to say that everyone could use the image freely that they had originally made for me and distributed the source files openly to the forum.

At this time, without any inquiries or presence of a moderating force on the forums, I made the adult decision to tell the person to go fuck themselves, to which without any communication from you, you gave me a scammer label.

After some in-fighting and almost everyone eventually agreeing that the entire problem was that there was a 'scam', but that we lacked a clear contract, you made it clear that if I just sent 2BTC to the individual that my label would be removed.

Here's the funny part-- scamming is not up to interpretation.

Scamming means when someone has intent to defraud, which I had not. And even if I did, how does me giving him 2BTC change any initial intent? If anything, that individual scammed me by getting away with his horrible actions, giving away my product to the community for free, and still getting paid for it, and scammed by you for having to follow through on the whole thing and not just do what he deserved--- ignore him.

You really owe me an apology still for having judged that situation poorly, not to continue spreading FUD about it.

Back on topic, TerryTibbs made a decision that even I wouldn't have agreed with. If my customers lost everything due to my own business practices, I would cut my losses as well. The fact that he didn't makes things complicated. Scammer? Probably not.

So then why is there a "scammer" tag though if "poor decisions", "bad business", "lack of clear contracts", and "administrator's whim" can all be considered "scams"?

Seems like we need a little more clarity than just "scammer". Maybe "Defaulted" tag for bad loans, maybe a rating system (I'm aware you had one before that broke/didn't work?) to allow people give evidence backing up their claims that someone is a scammer, etc?

I mean, seriously-- I'm not different than anyone else. I don't care much about someone who has a scammer tag, until the admin wrongfully gives it to me. Then it becomes aware to even me that that sort of power shouldn't be left up to theymos alone.



I hope you're being sarcastic. Theymos doesn't dictate whether I am a scammer or not. All he can do is use his personal judgment and slap a label on people. I am not a scammer nor am I an ex-scammer. I am an ex-theymos-abused person who paid the ransom and got the label removed at the price of having to swallow my pride.


Anyone who would sell off Bitcoin based on anything that happens on these forums much less the actions of a fallible admin should not be considered to having had 'faith' to begin with.