Bitcoin Forum

I try to to fix this problem by asking to some members here, I found one way to fix it, that is asking for help to The Pharmacist, because I got red trust from him.
And I try to send him PM but I'm not get the reply. Because I'm not get the answer untill now, I give this post here to fix this problem and I hope I get consideration for this.
The problem isn't when I got red trust from him, but because of me account acha1217 got red trust because my big mistake.
but I want to make clear this problem, and I want to tell the real problem.
• Acha1217 profile URL : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=987070

Here is detail :
• 28 January 2018, 06:05:40 PM : Acha1217 Send me 1 merit
• 19 February 2018, 02:35:29 AM : Acha1217 Send me 1 merit
• 04 March 2018, 07:01:53 PM: Acha1217 Send me 1 merit

Here is detail :
• 04 March 2018, 11:03:09 PM: I Send 1 merit to Acha1217

At the first time I don't know if give merit back to sender isn't allowed. And I send back to his account as my reward to Acha1217, But that is endanger Acha1217. After I got this red trust I so regret it, because of me his account got red trust and I try to fix this problem.
Acha1217 Never asking me to give his merit back, this is from my self, this is 100% my big mistake, I feel so shy because of myself Acha1217 got red trust. and I don't mean to start merit trade, because if I trade merit I will send all my merit to Acha1217 to make it fair.
I hope The Pharmacist consider this problem, please remove red trust at account Acha1217, you can give me more red trust because my mistake, that's fair for me!
And I need help from all staff and DT1 to consider this problem, because Acha1217 not have mistake, but this is my mistake and I'm wrong!


regards

Sudhik

Your excuse:

You didn't know if it was allowed to trade merit, but you did it anyway.

" Ignorantia juris non excusat "

Just because you and your friend were so ignorant to not look into the rules/ look into the stance of most DT members ( which i'm pretty sure is that they think it is pretty unethical to do ( trading merit)), you did it anyway.

I don't see why Acha1217 should be excluded/why the trust rating is invalid? Were you holding a gun to his head when you asked him to give you merit?

I never ask to acha1217 to send me merit, I don't know who is acha1217 .

I will give you example :
One day you give me 1 merit to my post, after that I send back merit to you, and you and me get red trust because DT members thinking we are doing trade merit.
So This mean I'm wrong here, 100% my big mistake, Because of that I want to make this clear.
Because my mistake, sender merit got red trust. And I need consideration for this.

if you feel bad about acha1217 get a red trust from user The Pharmacist chances are none to slim that it will be taken into consideration; I can only suggest leave a message to acha1217 stating that you feel sorry about what happened and learn from your lesson.

The possibility of The Pharmacist would leave a neutral trust on acha1217 isn't gonna happen unless proven otherwise that you are not genuinely involve in merit trading.

P.S And now I make it clear, shit happens and now you got your consideration.

I already leave message to acha1217 and say sorry to his about my mistake.

And about the proof which mean I'm not do merit trading with acha1217, can I add the screenshot of my outbox in this thread? Because I never leave message to acha1217, except at this time, I send to his to say ''I do apologize".
Or if staff have authority to check my message history with acha1217, please check it.
Because I never send his personal message before with acha1217, I never asking about gmail, telegram ID to his.  I feel so difficult to find the proof to make this clear.

As Adolfin has already put it, being ignorant of the rules does not excuse you from the rules. If this were the case, it would be very easy to claim ignorance and never be held accountable for your actions. I have voiced my concerns about tagging members for meriting one another, or in other ways that might not be malicious, yet just uninformed and not harmful. However, DT members are good at what they do and if you truly have not done wrong here I am sure after some time they will be willing to review their feedback. If it was truly not malicious, then the pattern will surely not continue and once more time has passed, I'm sure they will be willing to reconsider.

I wouldn't worry about it too much, unless you plan to continue doing these sorts of things. Learn the rules, learn what is expected from you and learn what DT members tag people for, if you plan to spend any significant amount of time around here.

It is really hard to make it clear on your side buddy if you are using Google translation.
his is a possessive pronoun and saying I send to his/ I never send his/ ID to his is all wrong in grammar. Him is the proper way of addressing object pronoun.

Dude stop being a nuts and do something worthy of your life.

It was a tough call on this one, because two (and only two) of the posts made by Sudhik were actually pretty decent, and these might have deserved merit.  This is why I was so on the fence when the merit system got implemented, about whether people should get tagged for merit trading.  There's so much subjectivity involved, and if you look at my own received merits, you'd probably think I'm buying them from TMAN or Foxpup. 

My strong opinion, though, is that anyone north of Antarctica who knows about bitcointalk knows how important merit is, and these shitposters know how valuable it is and don't hand it out willy-nilly.  And it's a bit hard to believe that users like Sudhik and acha1217 would just exchange it like they did.  I'm not saying it would be impossible, just improbable, and that's why I left my feedback.

I'd like to hear honest opinions from DT members here.  If they think I've left my feedback in error I'll reconsider it.

I know you are looking for primarily DT member opinions from the sounds of it, but if you're interested in my 2-cents then here it is. I think we should be conservative with tagging users that are in similar situations to this. If you cannot be extensively positive that merit trading was taking place, then you probably shouldn't leave a negative rating. A neutral rating for your suspicions might be appropriate, and if the trend continues then a negative may be in order. It would seem that as lower ranking members are attempting to understand the merit system better they are inevitably going to give one another merit in a similar fashion to this. Being on the fence, I would lean towards the side of "caution" and not tag this user. It is such a small amount, as you said the posts were somewhat decent and it doesn't seem as egregious or obvious as I would like it to be in order for them to receive a negative rating.

I'm really need your consideration sir, like I say before, if I trade merit with acha1217 I will send all my merits to his to make it balance, but I only send 1 merit and i want to give 1 more merit to another member.
I accept if I got red trust for this, but I feel have no self-esteem because I make one member of this forum got red trust, and I try to make this really clear.
Thanks sir.

Probably you did it because you wanted to gradually grow your possible alt ring with acha1217 so that others would not be suspicious?

The thing that bugs me most is that why are you even remotely sulking about acha1217 for being given negative trust? The fact you gave them one merit does not mean you will become all so concerned about them - if you did not even have any hidden agenda under the curtain.

Wonder if sudhik's "friend" will even comment on this thread. ::)

Again you literally claimed that you do bounties here as a "job" - which makes you a shitposting pajeet.
archived - http://archive.is/vQDIW#selection-4203.0-4218.1

Simply remove those people who gave you red mark from your trust list and then come back to the forum - this should restore your so called "self-esteem"

This should not be the reason that you will stop contributing to the forum. If you have self-esteem then continue posting on the forum and discussing about crypto - because thats what you are here on this forum for....I guess.

---

Slow Heavy Metal Music playing......

I will say if you have a slight doubt in proving the guilt then give benefit of doubt. (https://www.huffingtonpost.com/margaret-paul-phd/life-lessons_b_4065054.html)

I am not the lawyer  but I  think  law/lawmakers believe in Blackstone's formulation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone%27s_formulation) which simply state that It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer. (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/its-better-that-10-guilty-men-go-free-than-one-innocent-man-be-wrongly-convicted-944059.html)

Circumstantial evidence (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence) can never be ignored and in fact the U.S. Supreme Court has stated that "circumstantial evidence is intrinsically no different from testimonial [direct] evidence (https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/circumstantial+evidence) so if you want to proceed the judgement on these evidences you are free to do so.

I think if we tag people just because they gave each other merits, then probably everyone will be carrying red faces here. I will tell you why it is completely fine if A gives B a merit and B gives A a merit back. The reason being that sometimes when we receive a merit, then we check the profile of merit provider. And if the provider has good posts, then there is a good chance that merit receiver may want to give provider a merit. That is basic human psychology. You tend to balance, when some one does good or bad to you. And you can't force people to leave that psychology. A good example is that when someone follows us on twitter, then there are much higher chances of us following them back, than if they had not followed us.

What we should be looking here is that the post deserves merit or not. If the post is good, then we should not be seeing who gave merit to whom. These things are too complex and tagging someone on suspicion is really the worst thing to happen to any genuine Bitcointalk member. You may say that red trust only prohibits user from taking part in signature campaign, but that's certainly not the case. With red tag, a member can't easily trade, his/her posts don't have any weight, unless they are a DT or a popular member on Bitcointalk. Plus, spreads so much negativity and disappointment.
I totally agree with the above post, "I will say if you have a slight doubt in proving the guilt then give benefit of doubt."

you get merits from me as you talk the truth. I am not DT, but I totally agree with your tagging, people on the lower scale of the ranking system trading merits is easier to identify than someone who has 200 merits and given 50 out unless they are silly and doing it in a single 50 gift.