Why not a default tag?

[darkmule]

It seems the site is understandably reluctant to name someone as a scammer without evidence of intentional fraud.  That's reasonable, since it could be defamatory to call someone a scammer without proof.

However, people investing in something are probably more interested in whether or not a certain individual or business pays, not necessarily whether they're a scammer.

Why not have a value-neutral term just for people who have defaulted for whatever reason?  There seem to be plenty of people who just stupidly got involved in blatant scams like pirate, and I'd avoid doing business with people that naive and incompetent even if they have the purest of motives.

DEFAULT would be a nice tag, and all it represents is that they owe money and are not paying it back in a satisfactory manner.  Also, the DEFAULT tag could go away if the debts are satisfied, unlike a SCAMMER tag, which is forever.

EDIT:  apologies in advance if this is already a recurring subject or if I'm discussing it on the wrong subforum.

[1714994819]

1714994819

[1714994819]

1714994819

[1714994819]

1714994819

[1714994819]

1714994819

[Bitcoin Oz]

Scammer tags can be removed if the money gets paid back.

[MPOE-PR]

The scammer tag is not forever. In one notable example, Wright was tagged, then untagged, then he scammed everyone again.

The more important problem is that someone not paying back in a "satisfactory manner" is entirely subjective. Someone promising and not delivering (aka scammer) is very easily established as a point of fact.

[ElectricMucus]

I like the idea and agree with the subject, if that were a democratic decision you'd have my vote.

Oh you can move the thread into the meta subforum youself if you like, it's in the lower left corner when you click *edit* (I think)

[theymos]

The forum isn't in the business of arbitrating disputes or determining how reputable people are. Someone else should do that. I would prefer that there not even be a scammer tag: it takes up too much time and it's always controversial. But I'm not going to ban anyone for scamming, and leaving proven scammers alone would cause too many naïve people to get scammed.

Use your brain and third-party reputation services to determine who to trust. Do not rely on the forum itself. The forum staff doesn't spend much time on scam accusations, so the forum does a very poor job of keeping up with scammers. A for-profit company should deal with this stuff. Or at least a non-profit organization of people who are actually interested in spending a lot of time to fight scams (unlike me).

[Justin00]

i think its retarded now how people seem to just be happy when someone gets a scammer tag.
like - oh i lost 100btc... but the other guy got a scammer tag... damn i showed them not to screw me over !!!!

when trying to get your BTC back does anyone do anything other than send a PM and a phone call ?
whatever your all doing is clearly not working......... and has never worked......




Anyone who has been ripped off by someone in Australia... lets chat :-)

[rjbtc]

i think its retarded now how people seem to just be happy when someone gets a scammer tag.
like - oh i lost 100btc... but the other guy got a scammer tag... damn i showed them not to screw me over !!!!

It's like in Happy Gilmore when Chubbs is happy to have the Alligator's eye after it bit his hand off.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OI2ZXXw70as&feature=related

[darkmule]

i think its retarded now how people seem to just be happy when someone gets a scammer tag.
like - oh i lost 100btc... but the other guy got a scammer tag... damn i showed them not to screw me over !!!!

I don't really care.  I've never personally needed to try to get anyone a scammer tag.  If someone shows up offering ludicrous interest rates, I assume that just like in the real world, it's a Ponzi scam or some other sort of scam.

I'd just like to know there's some mechanism of getting these creeps marked.

My suggestion in this thread is there should also be a tag for just whoever doesn't pay.  Who cares why?  I'd just like to know whether someone carries a ball and chain of debt behind them and never pays it.  Why?  I'd just like not even to have to think about whether to buy anything or invest anything with that person.

I already do my own due diligence and I think anyone who ever invested with pirate is a fucking retard.  Who the fuck would have invested in that shit?  Were you people out of your minds?

But I think there should be a tag other than SCAMMER for people who are in default for any reason.  The problem with SCAMMER is it has a moral connotation.  I don't care about that.  I think it just makes sense to have a list of people who are not reliable, for whatever reason.  Save the moral condemnation for church.