Why are they not punished?

[Rhodesy]

Feel like re-introducing this topic again, as I didn't really get a response.

 

[Daily]

I support this! I recently see a few signatures indicating Daily is a 'Scammer'...

..you do?

Funny, I haven't done a trade since I've been market banned.

 

[Skele]

I still stand my original opinion. I don't think there are any rules for signatures, so some mods chose not to do anything while others infracted.

 

[Rhodesy]

I still stand my original opinion. I don't think there are any rules for signatures, so some mods chose not to do anything while others infracted.

You should bring it up in your private forum and make a final decision if it should be infractable or not, as it can be confusing to new mods for example.

 

[Spyike]

Accusing a member of Scamming, is accusing a member of Scamming.

My personal feeling is I would take action no matter where it is posted unless supported with proof. So unless you intend to place the link of proof (Scam Report) next to the accusation, I'll infract. Lastly, I think we can find much more entertaining ways to occupy our limited sig space.

 

[Benjamingtr]

I agree but why put it in a sig.. some people lie someone don't but if you don't have proof it won't help so if ur getting scammed don't put it in ur sig, vid/screen it and give it to a admin so they can do something's about it.

 

[Worldie]

I agree 100%

 

[†Tysonâ€Â]

I support this.

Referals/advertising in signatures etc doesn't effect anyone else. But false accusation can have severe effects. So i don't see how it should be allowed.

 

More often than not, people only put that stuff in their signatures after they've posted proof anyway.

 

[Rhodesy]

More often than not, people only put that stuff in their signatures after they've posted proof anyway.

Yeah I can understand if the person got banned for scamming, if he;s not banned he should be infracted.

 

[Skillers FTW]

Accusing a member of Scamming, is accusing a member of Scamming.

My personal feeling is I would take action no matter where it is posted unless supported with proof. So unless you intend to place the link of proof (Scam Report) next to the accusation, I'll infract. Lastly, I think we can find much more entertaining ways to occupy our limited sig space.

Do 'so and so was very 'fishy' on msn, trade with caution' count as accusing them of scamming, when they haven't actually done anything and you are just warning people about their 'fishy' activity?

 

[Rhodesy]

Do 'so and so was very 'fishy' on msn, trade with caution' count as accusing them of scamming, when they haven't actually done anything and you are just warning people about their 'fishy' activity?

Not really, since you're not really saying it, you are implying it though.
Who would put that on your signature anyway, seems like a waste
of a space of a signature, I would have better things to put on my
signature to be honest.

 

[kill dank]

i don't think someone should be allowed to accuse someone of being a scammer unless they have proof and have posted in the RAS. signature or not.

 

[Mage Tanker]

Signatures are sometimes dangerous, all i can say is becareful on which sig you click on, you may think its nothing bad but once you lose everything you worked for then yea your in trouble.