> Why would this be considered unethical, while not paying back would not be considered theft?

So you get that not paying it back is not theft, yet you think the behavior outlined in the article is ethical?

There's so many layers of unethicality it's insane.

The idea that these people's privacy is being invaded to such a degree their entire social graph is stored on these servers, the fact these people understand what they're doing is bad insofar as to say they stopped but continue anyways, the kinds of terms these loans provide with such flimsy "collateral", the use of intimidation to resolve a debt?, the psychological effects of treating people like these companies are?

> The idea that they pay back in social credit seems like a good solution to prevent this from happening again with others.

Did you read the article?

(Ignoring the ridiculous of acting like it's some altruistic endeavor to try and "save others" from getting taking advantage of...)

It doesn't even prevent it from happening to them let alone someone else!

They go through these people's contacts, start harassing them and their acquaintances, and the people still end up not paying, and in fact they end up inviting people who actively plan to game their "collateral" with false info.