Both "easysport" and Go Navy " offer up ideas which would go further than the present system to protect users. How much workload this would add to RCU staff and whether or not it would starve the baby is unknown but I don't think creating more accounting is the answer. Though there is some deterrence effect and possibly some recovery, credit card payments can be disputed, creating an even thicker plot. My point in all of his is a simple one: try to err on the side of the good guys, since nothing will ever be clear right at the onset of a problem. As was suggested, if that means temporarily suspending a member until a proven outcome is available, so be it. This protects others from falling into the same trap, as was the case with this recent flap. A temporary suspension is not a conviction, only suspicion; until the proof in in there is no finding of guilt or innocence. Members can sign an agreement to such a rule when they sell. This "option" is less tyrannical and unfair than RCU shutting down members posts that are trying to expose crooks.

At this point it is clear to me that RCU is not seriously considering taking any steps to improve protection to buyers, only defending its position as a business machine.
The site does have entertainment value however, so all is not lost.