Counter-scamming is when you are trading someone who is a scammer, and you steal something from them on that basis. For example, I know Sigex is a scammer, I steal 500M from him. I tell him too bad, he's a scammer, that's what happens to scammers. This is an example of counter-scamming. It's against the rules.
What is happening in this situation, is Buyer *B* owes Seller *A* money ($100). This debt is documented with evidence and the evidence must be sufficient. Buyer *B* goes to Seller *C* and orders something for $120. Before delivery, Seller *A* contacts Seller *C* and shows proof of the scam. Seller *C* should now freeze the transaction and ask Seller *A* to post proof on Sythe, or if they are satisfied with it, can go ahead and forward $100 to Seller *A*. Not the full $120, since the debt is for $100.
Now, this situation should be rare. Considering that Seller *A* must know that Buyer *B* is buying from Seller *C*, and must contact Seller *C* before this delivery, it should not be something which impacts Sythe users regularly. The situation I had with Kevin happens maybe once every 2-3 months for me, and I trade literally 1,000's of times each month. Sythe rules do not need to be modified, it actually states that recovering your own property is fully within the rules, as it should be.
