After paying their dues, should hobbyists who committed fraud be allowed back ?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by skelly423

Is there a way to admit them to the forum without BST privileges? If there is, I'm ok with it, but otherwise I'd rather not have them.

For practical purposes lets say there is not a way to do this...
.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Leon

For practical purposes lets say there is not a way to do this...
.

If it includes BST, please no. Free speech grounds I get, but the BST is a nice and safe place right now that doesn’t need a bunch of fraudsters thrown in to destroy it and rip a bunch of good people off.

[90feetaway]

I mean anyone not registered can still see posts on the site and be "involved" in that sense just not respond to posts or part B/S/T? I'm comfortable with that.

[Smarti5051]

I feel like Net54 is supposed to be for true fans of the hobby. I don’t see how one that committed fraud in the hobby can be a true fan. How can you intentionally damage the hobby if you have any respect for it?

Also, i am not sure our justice system really meters out penalties that match the harm caused. As a society, obviously there are tradeoffs to what is prosecuted and to what extent in an effort to keep society safe. Unfortunately, these tradeoffs often mean that major breaches of trust in the hobby are given a slap on the wrist, at best. If you commit tax fraud, you may live a life of indentured servitude to make things right. If you counterfeit or trim $2 million in collectables, you might spend 30 days in jail and have to pay back a small fraction of what you stole. Let’s face it, for every $1000 in counterfeit cards that is discovered and provable by a prosecutor, there were likely 5-20x that amount actually sold by the fraudster.

It is bad enough that there are 100s of unidentified criminals to navigate in this hobby. Why let the known wolves back into the chicken coup? Like the old adage goes: Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

[hockeyhockey]

agree on BST privileges, think that should be earned versus just handed out.

but if you can't restrict that, is there a way to add a tag to these people, so we know who they are? not scarlet letter levels, but certainly good to know who you're buying from or selling to.

[x2drich2000]

Lots of gray areas with this one. If you are going to say no, where do you draw the line? Are we talking just convicted in a court of law (Mastro) or convicted by public opinion (PWCC)? What about those caught committing a crime at a young age and are generally now considered to be among the most trustworthy (Lifson)? How about those that have used the courts to avoid paying debts through bankruptcy (Goldin)?