Should confirmed scammers lose the ability to send PM?

[The Cryptovator]

A single report for unsolicited PM is enough for a temporary ban. Your idea isn't bad, but I don't think this way, we can prevent scammers. Forum registration almost free, so they would dare to create multiple accounts. And who knows if they have multiple accounts from the beginning? On the other support flags would be manipulated as well, so determine a real scam would be complicated for moderators which would raise questions about moderators transparency. Since feedback is visible on the message, so would help to prevent scams. Those are greedy, you can't save them anyway...

[1714653625]

1714653625

[1714653625]

1714653625

[1714653625]

1714653625

[1714653625]

1714653625

[1714653625]

1714653625

[LoyceV]

Yeah it might be a good idea if a user has a trust flag and at least 10 more supporters than opposers on it...

That would mean someone's ability to PM depends on who's on DefaultTrust, which varies quite a lot.

If a forum rule is created for confirmed scammers and is enforceable by the mods based on a certain criteria, wouldn't that make trust moderated?

Yes. And that's why I don't think this will ever be implemented. I'd like to see this implemented, but it won't help much anyway. A scammer can just PM using a Jr. Member account without any negative feedback anyway.

The administration should find a way to disable those with malicious intent from doing their dirty work through private messages

I don't think it's going to help:

Honestly, I think that someone that naïve can't be protected.

There's another thing: this forum aims to be as free as possible, which is one of the reasons why scams don't get moderated. Another reason is that Mods don't want to decide who's a scammer. I think the Trust Flag suggestion is the best so far (apart from the variation in DT).

Quickseller for instance has an active flag with many supporters, but I wouldn't want him to lose PM-privilages.

[KaneVWE]

Yeah it might be a good idea if a user has a trust flag and at least 10 more supporters than opposers on it...

That would mean someone's ability to PM depends on who's on DefaultTrust, which varies quite a lot.

If a forum rule is created for confirmed scammers and is enforceable by the mods based on a certain criteria, wouldn't that make trust moderated?

Yes. And that's why I don't think this will ever be implemented. I'd like to see this implemented, but it won't help much anyway. A scammer can just PM using a Jr. Member account without any negative feedback anyway.

The administration should find a way to disable those with malicious intent from doing their dirty work through private messages

I don't think it's going to help:

Honestly, I think that someone that naïve can't be protected.

There's another thing: this forum aims to be as free as possible, which is one of the reasons why scams don't get moderated. Another reason is that Mods don't want to decide who's a scammer. I think the Trust Flag suggestion is the best so far (apart from the variation in DT).

Quickseller for instance has an active flag with many supporters, but I wouldn't want him to lose PM-privilages.

Hasn't he got a type1 flag which can be for any reason?

Type2 and 3 flags are the only sensible or credible threshold for "scammer" that we have right now.
If someone is a confirmed scammer why would you worry if they lost their PM privilege.
Makes zero sense

Besides if QS wants to reach out he can use primenumber7  or one of his others.
I see no reason not to delete confirmed scammers accounts.
The counter arguments are kind of weak considering the state of the trust system.
Credible accounts even alts take a bit of time and that's if they are merit source DT atls.

[shield132]

This won't be a deal anyway. Imagine that one day I decide to scam someone via PM by offering him to boost his transaction's confirmation time or double his bitcoin, etc. More likely, this user will fall into scam because I have some trust and have a better profile than others (Of course I write it just to show you an example).
So this isn't a deal, it's a bad way of solving the dilemma. Instead, we have to create some threads and pin it where we will talk about how to get rid of getting a victim of scams. When I offer this kind of benefits to user to scam that I mentioned above, user don't have to trust my trust rating, he/she has to be critical and ask question like: "How are you able to accelerate my transaction?" And he/she has to do some research at the same time. Also, when I ask for a deposit on my address and offer him double bitcoins, he has to ask: This user has good trust rating but it doesn't matter, how is he going to double my bitcoins? There are no ways of it, nor cloud mining, nor trading, they carry risks and in overall ROI of mining is low, by trading you can't profit that much in a short timeframe, so, this user lies to me, I have to ignore him and tell the community about him and his methods.

So... We don't have to act like a bandaid, we have to fix the problem from the root.

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

So... We don't have to act like a bandaid, we have to fix the problem from the root.

Right and the roots has to be from the users. We just have to be vigilant ourselves as we make the security of our funds our number one priority. Disabling PM from the so called confirmed scammers won't do the trick. By the way who're the confirmed scammers when the forum doesn't moderate scam and the dt system isn't yet perfect to be used as judgement on who scammers are or aren't.

Putting into consideration, we have conflict of increase in the system. Also there has been previous situation when users with high green trust scammed users of their funds meaning not everyone with a red trust is a scammer and not every one with a positive trust should be trusted. OP I understand you're just showing concerned and trying to help but this won't be the perfect solution also there no point helping individuals that aren't ready to be helped by educating themselves and been vigilant.

[GeorgeJohn]

The problem is that how can we identify the user who are scammers because even though them refused to send us a personal messages them will also trapped people based on their platform, losing ability to community or interact with them, that does not grant a chance for isolation via people because investment is the option to scam people which many people has be complaining about, therefore you can pm me but due to the content of the message I might lose interest knowing that it's a strategy to scam me.so if any one noticed a scammers, the scammer should be totally Ban, I think is the best option for them.

[Lucius]

Thanks to everyone who participated in the discussion. From all the posts, it can be concluded that the majority still has a negative opinion about this type of ban. While the question of who is a scammer and who is not can always be asked, freedom of expression still seems to take precedence over any bans - this is definitely good news for scammers.

Imagine that in real life, instead of prison, criminals remain on the loose with the inscription "warning - I am a murderer" and that the system says : "beware of them, we cannot protect you."