We are building this site that we plan to use in exposing all kinds of scams including Scam ICOs. Incidentally one of the scams we have reviewed is threatening to sue because of this post -scam/ Now I wonder how they plan to so that. Do you think we should get a lawyer in readiness for that?
It comes with the "scam buster" territory.
I've been threatened a few times with "legal action" and worse,
most notably by one of the biggest scammers of 2016 (he certainly had enough [of other people's] money) to do so, if there was any reasonable chance of it succeeding. But he didn't.
OP, your trust is a bit of a dent to your credibility.
I don't particularly want to inspire a big self justification reply from you, (I certainly hold the ICO support services industry as culpable as the actual scammers for enabling them) but this was pretty dumb.....
tmpf, as a legendary member, I expected you to know that the trust system does not necessarily represent an individual's values, unless you can prove a person is a scammer or dishonest a negative tag doesn't mean anything much when you realize how people easily tag new members who are not really aware of the rules or that what they were asking for or agreeing to was unethical.
Tagging a new member for responding innocuosly to a misleading ad doesn't mean anything, rather it diminishes the value of the trust system. I proudly wear the tag because I long realized that the trust system is not a representive of individual values and actually no longer regard it the way I did when I first joined the forum and got tagged weeks after responding to an ad i didn't know was a bait.
Having said that, I hope that as a legendary, you realize that I relate with everyone tag or no tag knowing that there are people with tags with more noble characters than those without it as long as the reason isn't for scamming or attempting to scam people. That is why I even give jobs to people without looking at trust system which I think is largely abused especially towards new members.
