Perhaps, but we can only go on the evidence as it currently stands. The guides that ron paul sells are presumably not mailed as a textbook, but delivered in a digital format. It would then stand to reason that threatening to kill everyone that leaves him a bad rating would be a bit ridiculous as all he would have is their Silk Road username or an email address. 
The OP clearly stated that Ron Paul offered a bounty to other vendors for his address.
Yes, and the OP cannot provide evidence of this; the majority of the things that were allegedly said seem to have been sent via Privnote. If that is the case and there is no evidence to go on, then there is nothing that can be done. If ron paul sent messages to other vendors looking for motek's address, those messages will be found if/when an investigation takes place.
As for going on the blacklist, that is simply an informal list that vendors keep amongst themselves. Not every vendor checks it, nor does every vendor that does check it decide not to sell to the member that was blacklisted. At least ONE feedback would reflect low quality if low quality were the case here.
It's irrelevant whether or not every vendor consults the blacklist. At the end of the day Motek is on it for no damn reason. This is unjust. You cannot justify it because you don't think many vendors use it. That's like the New York Times publishing something incorrect about you, some allegation that is incorrect. And then when you go to the ombudsman to have it removed they say "Ah sure not everyone in the world read the New York Time, so don't worry about it".
Motek is reaching out to admins for help and the only help he's getting is from regular members. I'm sure we give him support but does he feel reassured? Libertas, put yourself in Motek's position. Now please take this seriously.
Vendors are free to discuss things amongst themselves if they wish - that is their right under the freedom of speech that is guaranteed here for all. Have you got access to the Vendor Roundtable? Do you know that motek is indeed on the blacklist?
I wasn't justifying it because many vendors don't use it, I justified it by the fact that vendors are entitled to freedom of speech just like the rest of us. Many buyers keep lists of vendors that they will not buy from, and post threads in the Rumor Mill saying "don't buy from Vendor X for such and such a reason" - should we infringe on their right to say that because it is 'unjust'?
This is a free and open community - the New York Times is a private, closed-ended business. The two cannot be compared as equals.
If motek has an issue he has been told to bring it up with administrators, and presumably he has done so. He messaged me before regarding this and I sent it up the chain but heard nothing back. He knows that there is nothing we can do from the forums as we do not have access to the administrative sections of the main site. Therefore, it is entirely up to the administrators to look into, and for them to communicate their findings to motek. Before you tell me to "take this seriously", please research the history of the situation.
Libertas
Show Posts
fuking ratting on us and you chin me for what asking a question.. nice
