Why should a vendor's image be damaged before a conclusion is taken? In the court for example no one puts a tag on your head saying "warning this person may be a thief", and they only have a complaint from a random guy.. That doesn't sound too well.. Two thumbs down.
Thats exactly why I made my post here. There needs to be more definition to the word 'dispute'. Speaking on behalf of Moderators, I do not know of any of us that rush right out and take actions on anyone for a single random complaint. However, multiple complaints do justify taking action and giving other members a Warning before purchasing a product that is currently being disputed. In all disputes, both parties are given the option to resolve/respond to the complaint at hand.
I had to chuckle here man- You evidently have an excellent judicial system in your country...Here- Innocent Until Proven Guilty are merely words these days... Perhaps a system that shows the complaint is from a "newbie"...that is the "random guy" you speak of correct? How about a number system that reveals how many complaints the "random guy" has filed maybe? It seem at least we've opened the door to explore a solution here. I think the mass majority is going to be in see more favor here....Consumers need protection, or this business simply cant grow to it's potential. Boonex has a superior solution...Vendors will be fine if they stand strong, back their product, and show integrity.