A couple yes, attention whores or people who like to play the martyr. Terry Tibbs was all right though. Paid his dents eventually.

Being realistic, if there's a situation that requires legal advice to make a decision, I'd rather stay out of it. 99% of the people here (definitely including myself here) are unqualified for that, and the other 1% probably have better things to do with their time or are unqualified in other ways.  

"Those with knowledge that does not even scratch the surface of the issue and talk and promote their opinions as if they know it all are the most destructive type. They reject or adopt policies and ideas based on incomplete or trivial knowledge of the issue at hand. But since they think they "know" all there is to know about the issue, they are very confident in their nonsense which they cover with lovely sound-bites that attracts the ears and eyes of those who do not know and are seeking knowledge."
TLDR: A little knowledge is far worse than none.

I don't want to be that guy. A little knowledge of that particular law doesn't make me qualified to make a judgement or ruin someone's reputation over it. I only give/recommend scammer tag in cases where I can be absolutely certain there is guilt. To paraphrase another quote, I'd rather let 10 scammers walk away than one innocent person receive a scammer tag. I don't take it lightly, your reputation and your name is all anyone has here.

Not speculating, I got that from what Nefario said himself in the emails posted above (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=114442.msg1238231#msg1238231). It does appear to be valid concerns, but there aren't many more excuses he can use.

Everyone is biased in some way or another, and to think otherwise is naive and foolish. You can't get rid of bias anymore than you can get rid of emotion or opinion. Best way to deal with bias is recognize your bias so you can adjust your actions to compensate for it. Would you rather him lie and say he isn't? None of us have ever claimed to be unbiased, we do try our best to not let it interfere with our duties.

As for the OP, Nefario isn't responsible for the actions of others. If Usagi/Diablo is a scammer, you don't blame the middleman unless you can prove he knowingly aided and abetted it. Innocent until proven guilty and all that.

As for Goats issue, I can see why Nefario wouldn't send him the bitcoins if the address was altered in any way, even if it was "just" a space. And putting his email entirely within quotes was odd and uncharacteristic of usual communications, and would send up red flags for me too.

Wow. Wonder who decided on the choice of hosting.

Read, comprehend, post.  You seem to get the order reversed quite often.

Neither.

Can't help it if you have odd definitions of trolling. Report the post and move on, Hazek isn't the only one who sees reports. 

Which bias is it? Cause there's more threads against the foundation than for it at the moment. That might be my bias, I'll admit it  .

But really, how many different threads do we need about it in Bitcoin Discussion? I just think it's something that interests people and inspires discussion, evident by the many many threads and posts within. Hopefully with lots of ideas and discussion we can come up with answers to difficult questions at the moment. I'm okay with having multiple threads to support different viewpoints. I'm not okay with half the threads on the first page being about it. Does where a thread should be really have to be so black and white? Really a lot of threads in Bitcoin Discussion could be classified into subforums as well. Same with Marketplace.   

You paid interest from new deposits, that's a ponzi. Just cause you didn't know what a ponzi is when you did it doesn't mean it isn't a ponzi. Even if you don't intend for it to be a ponzi, you've still crossed the line into being a ponzi. Before you were just an idiot taking on debt and paying stupid interest rates in the naive belief you'll totally be a rock star within a year. Learning to play guitar well takes far longer than a year, and will demand a minimum of 3-5 hours of practice a day, every day. 

You're taking deposits, using the money for personal reasons, and paying interest from new deposits. Your interest rates are unsustainable and you're starting to get in over your head. Why would you saddle yourself with so much debt? Eventually you'll go broke trying to pay off the interest, or default and disappear. ID or not. You're renting, have admitted you have no friends, your family doesn't understand you, don't trust you enough to lend you money. What is it about you that makes you low risk again? The only thing you've ever done that I can see is play guitar badly, make a few photoshop logos, and accidentally figure out how a ponzi works. Get a clue Dank.

Oh thanks for that, that's a nice laugh after all the tension lately.

What does have to do with sending pms?

I said once I think Scam Accusations should be renamed to Trade Disputes, I think it would fit better. I've managed to resolve several situations amicably and I don't think for a second either one of the parties was a scammer, they just needed someone to help guide them in the right direction. If I had a problem and needed help, I probably wouldn't post in Scammer Accusations just because I wouldn't want to imply someone is a scammer just because we have an issue.

I'm not gonna read that whole thread, but gmaxwell has always been a good mod, so if he felt it was necessary to lock the thread then I believe him.

Not as far as I know, I just meant that since he isn't posting these days he can't or won't.

You're right, I actually edited my post right after posting it to remove Matthew specific remarks and changed it to just focus in general. I don't want to trash talk him too bad when he can't defend himself cause I know there's more than one side to every story. 

You're a regular Sherlock Holmes aren't you?

If someone has no/bad reputation, no ties to the community, and nobody to vouch, then yes they absolutely are someone you should be careful of dealing with, and possibly a potential scammer. I wouldn't trust some faceless guy walking down the street, why should I trust someone I only know on the internet? I may not distrust them, but I don't trust them either. Certainly not gonna give them cash and send them on their way.

I usually use escrow, even when selling. Customers have no reason to trust me either if they don't know me, and I understand and accept that.

I agree. I don't think it's the forum's place to enforce such a contract, or punish based on them. Regardless of whatever agreement someone may have, I still feel that people have the fundamental right to express themselves, and I'm not going to take that away on the whims of Usagi or whoever the next person is that tries this. Personally, I will choose not to moderate such requests.

There is a warning when posting in old threads. Well kind of, if the last reply was more three months there's a warning, once it's been bumped there's no warning.