I believe the whole story and comments can be summed up as:
1. People want paypal to act as a big dumb money pipe from point A to point B
2. Paypal refuses to act as a big dumb money pipe from point A to point B when the risk is high that point A may want their money back, and paypal cannot shift the loss allocation to someone else.
3. Their risk mitigation strategy in the case of #2, while not atypical of the industry, upsets a lot of people who are not familiar with this type of thing occurring, and seems "unfair".
1. People want paypal to act as a big dumb money pipe from point A to point B
2. Paypal refuses to act as a big dumb money pipe from point A to point B when the risk is high that point A may want their money back, and paypal cannot shift the loss allocation to someone else.
3. Their risk mitigation strategy in the case of #2, while not atypical of the industry, upsets a lot of people who are not familiar with this type of thing occurring, and seems "unfair".