MNW offered to take the scammer tag if he doesn't pay. In my eyes this was one option of paying ones debt for both sides from the start of the bet and should not lead to further actions like the open letters to remove him from certain operations etc.
MNW's posts were to be taken with a grain of salt and the SCAMMER flag now makes that very clear to all new people. Now calm down and carry on.
I am calm and I didn't take the bet. This is about risk management. The scammer tag alerts others to the risk involved in dealing with Matt. He has demonstrated his word means absolutely nothing and as such shouldn't be relied upon.
Matt seems to believe that just because people shouldn't trust the word of a Pirate offering 3,400% interest they shouldn't trust the word of anyone. The reality is all commerce requires some level of trust. If you send a merchant funds you need to trust they will deliver. If you deposit funds on an exchange you need to trust they won't walk away with it. Even if you do all your commerce in persons (i.e. OTC) you need to trust the other party won't simply rob you.
As Matt is the editor in chief (and equity stake holder) in the magazine, his actions and lack of ethics reflect badly on the magazine. Either the other owners condone that sort of unethical behavior, or the other owners lack the risk management to see the liability that Matt represents. Either way that influences my decision to do business with them. I am not "angry" or "heated". It is business.
A large component of business is trusting the people/entities you partner with. Sometimes it just comes down to a subjective judgement (gut feeling). Someone looking to buy advertising space in the magazine is taking a risk. Business is all about calculated risks and Matt's reckless, and irresponsible behavior increases the risk for others looking to engage in commerce with any business he is involved in.
If Matt is removed from the magazine he is still reckless and irresponsible but that risk no longer affects the magazine. If he remains with the magazine that risk remains with the magazine.
If the other owners of the magazine decide not to remove Matt well that is their right but there are consequences. It isn't about punishing Matt, it is risk management. The magazine is riskier because he is a part of it.