Bitcoin Forum

The two UID's shown below are engaging in DT trust abuse as one or both are DT 1 or 2 thereby their twin personalities' negatives both show up as evidenced in the user profile page.

https://talkimg.com/images/2023/05/16/blob8c8ff80df424e2d0.jpeg

This person has attempted to silence me in the past with their regular attacks as well as their DT distrust abuse as a means of silencing me, now they are using multiple alts to further attack me.

This person is well know for having deleted my posts on a whim whenever it suits themselves, as evidenced in their having recently deleted my posts in the bitcointalk interview thread, or, to change the narrative of a discussion to make it look as though I have not responded in other threads, which is not the case.

---

---

Local rules, this thread is self moderated to prevent third party attacks against myself.  If this thread magically becomes non-self moderated then that will be taken as further proof of their abuse of their admin/mod position and I will start a new self moderated thread and lock this one.

I noticed the negative feedback from 2 DT-accounts yesterday. I don't think I've seen something like this before, and I don't think this is how the Trust system is supposed to be used. One person should not give someone positive or negative feedback from more than one account, as it leads to 2 positive or -2 negative on the user's profile.
A simple solution would be if hilariousandco uses hilariousetc for all feedbacks on your account.

Can you show the post? (Or I can dig deeper by myself later)
Update: this (https://loyce.club/archive/posts/5505/55059600.html) is the post, although I can't tell if it was edited later. Modlog (https://bitcointalk.org/modlog.php) confirms one of your posts in that thread was deleted by a Mod, and my topic details (https://loyce.club/archive/details/topic_5262967_2020-08-28_Fri_11.17h.html#msg55059600) confirm only one of your posts was deleted so it must have been by the Mod. I can't tell who deleted your post, when I read it in that topic I also thought it was mostly off-topic (but didn't report it because it also mentioned you declined the offer to be interviewed, which was on-topic).

In general, complaints about moderation should be made in Meta. I've seen theymos restore deleted posts based on this (that happened in Politics & Society).
Update: after seeing the post, I don't think it'll be restored. But you're free to try @theymos.

Not cool. Not surprising either.

Thank you for both of your replies, this is my weekend away (and I've just arrived at my destination just now) so I will provide information late Sunday my time. The most recent posts of mine were in the Bitcointalk interview thread. (As such are only days old).

If you look at the link in the most recent feedback against me you will see they have responded hours later with further posts and then more than a day later have decided they are going to take offense at what I said by placing negative trust feedback on my trust feedback page but only after. I finally yielded to giving their three UID's identical negative feedback from this my main UID.

It should be noted that a no time previously have I ever given this person negative trust feedback .

My first feedback (neutral) was that they have alts which is already widly known.

This set them off on their DT distrust and then more recently their multiple alt negative feedback .

In all honesty, had they just used one alt for this feedback barrage, then I would have just shrugged my shoulders and said "oh well" as I've had recent negatives but have not made any noise about them.

---

---

If someone wanted to be a go between for this person to work through why my identifying their already known alts is burning them up all these years later, then I'll be happy to discuss that via PM's to resolve the issue.

I see this as an abuse to the Trust System, merely by a subjective cause, as both parties seems to have difficulty understanding each other's arguments. Though it was really unfair to give you negative trust just because of "shitting", what answers and ends this argument is whom really had abused the trust systems first.

In general, why do users need to use alt accounts for such activities? If users really distrust another user, why not use their main account? Shouldn't we use the trust system if and only if we have a valid reason, definitely not a subjective one?

I can't really tell which is which, but if this continues, I see that the administration would rather make a disciplinary action not only on hilariousandco but also to you.


I think Reputation board fits this thread well, as the OP pertains only to the matter of Trust, not the Trust system per se.

My "shit" post was a neutral feedback by my alt which like my main alt has multiple DT distrusts and was a response to the abuser literally posting off topic shit images in a thread of mine that had recently been revived.

The abuser was Trolling and I have requested they remove their off topic posts, but my request has fallen on deaf ears.

This is a clear trust system abuse, but as I said before, there are some so called "untouchable " DT members here that are doing anything what ever they want and nobody is punishing them.  hilariousandco must be a person full of hate (Such people are losers in real life) How is it possible for a normal dude to do something like this. Hey dude... tag me as well from both of your accounts, you piece of shit.

Or think it differently. Imagine I have two accounts which I log in frequently. If I send negative feedback on Account A from Little Mouse account, I will not see that tag from my alt account and vice versa. Again, including alt in trust list is forbidden. In that case, would not tagging from both account be perfect?
PS- Not an attack to Timelord2067.

Edit- Created a thread on the above matter- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5271997.0

Have I really attempted to silence you or are you just being paranoid again like you always are. You left feedback from both your accounts on my hilariousetc account first and then decided to leave negative on this one with some bullshit about me being homophobic. You've abused the feedback system for years leaving poorly judged feedback often based on tenuous claims hence why I excluded you like many others have. I wasn't the first and I certainly won't be the last.


Again, more lies and paranoia. I didn't delete it but it was completely off topic. What do I have to do with you deciding to not do an interview for someone else? Do you think if I went into the wall observer thread and posted, sorry guys I'm not going to speculate on the price of bitcoin any more because timelord left me negative feedback that would be on topic? No. Don't be stupid.


There you go again assuming I have imaginary powers to attack you with. Stop using the feedback system as your own personal graffiti wall to smear shit all over or when you abuse it you're liable to be tagged as such. Do you really think you should be posting poop emojis on there? No. If anyone is abusing the feedback system it's you. If your entire beef is that I shouldn't be leaving feedback from both then I would happily remove one but I would advise you to practice what you preach and not do the same yourself. Had you not have used both accounts to post rubbish I would not have done so.


I didn't delete it but I did report it. I'm that biased whenever I see him posting some off topic nonsense I'll just report it and let another mod decide whether it is off topic or not. Timelord has demonstrated many times over the years that he can't differentiate between an off topic post or not but I don't think I've personally removed one of his posts in years, but when he does have one removed he'll assume it's me along with accusing me of having other imaginary admins powers I've abused that he's dreamed up.


You know what my issue is. Stop posting rubbish on mine and others feedback pages. Do you honestly think the feedback system is for posting shit on? You obviously love posting crap on my wall as often as you can so don't make out like you're an innocent victim here.


Neither of those posts are off topic, you just don't like them. Ironically your posts about leaving feedback and whining at mine are off topic.  Your entire beef with me is because I excluded you years ago and that obviously hurt you and it's you that has gone out of your way to do anything you can to try get your own back over the years. If you didn't abuse the feedback system with grossly inaccurate feedbacks I would have never excluded you, but you did, hence why I don't trust you. That's it. Maybe look at changing your behaviour if you want people to treat you differently but crying about leaving feedback from both accounts when you did the same first is just hypocrisy.

P.S If you remove this post I'll just repost it my own thread.

As I write I can confirm the accused continues to abuse me with two DT 1/2 negative trust feedbacks, so the issue remains unresolved.

As I stated in the OP I am away this weekend and can't give a lengthy response to any questions.

To respond to the accused's questions in brief, no trust feed back by me prior to this week on their trust feedback page has been anything but neutral advising they have alts . Information that was already known. I ask all readers to peruse my posts on thir three feedback pages to confirm at no time prior to this week have my posts on those pages been inaccurate.

I have already canvased the one NEUTRAL post by my mobile alt in a previous Post in this thread

Please do :) Or repost it from the other account. Not because of some "beef", but because (at least in my opinion) it's the right thing to do.

I didn't notice Timelord used more than one account to leave feedback, but that's also kinda my point: I didn't notice it, because Timelord isn't on DT. I like to think DT-members (should) have higher standards:
(This quote is not entirely relevant in this case, but you get my point)

As I have pointed out previously, all prior trust feedbacks have been NEUTRAL with the exception of the last which was after the accused had left negative trust feedback on my trust feedback page.

Please check and confirm.

... and I note your quote of yourself talks only of negative trustfeedback.

Not true. You also pointlessly posted a poop emoji just because you didn't like a post I made. Blatant misuse of the feedback system regardless of whether it was neutral or not. So just to get this straight, it's fine to shitppost and post spurious and false information on someone's feedback page just as long as it's neutral?


I removed them. Can't be arsed with the drama.


It's hard to notice because his usernames are practically the same. Just because you're not on DT doesn't mean you should abuse the feedback system either. One day you might get put on there thus feedbacks becoming 'trusted' but one way to remain not on there is by constantly posting inaccurate feedback. One thing for sure is the feedback system isn't for posting rubbish and lies.

That's quite literally what trust exclusions are for - to exclude someone misusing trust feedback or otherwise showing bad judgement.

Retaliating against non-DT neutral trust with DT neg trust is too harsh IMO.

Just so we're clear: the reason you removed your feedback is not because it was inappropriate, abusive, and transphobic, but rather because it stirred up too much drama (which was in no way foreseeable)?

I would just like to point out to suchmoon that we had discussed their working with me on any perceived "inaccurate" trust feedback I may have given only to have suchmoon reneg on that agreement prior to the 5th of September last year which is this "project" I allude to in this NEUTRAL trust feedback I placed on their wall last year:


You can't have it both ways suchmoon - backing out of working with me then posting here that you DT distrust them for inaccurate trust feedback.  That makes you a hypocrite suchmoon.

---

---

As to the accused's comment above I could split hairs on what they said, but instead I'll refer readers to the timeline of events as posted above.

Any spelling mistakes are due to my mobile phones auto correct. I hope to be home in about 36 hours and will clarify/correct any comments made by me then.

LOL project

Your feedback is false. I didn't send you PMs asking to work on a project. You asked for my opinion about trust feedback you put on other users. I reviewed some of your trust ratings and provided my opinion. I was reviewing your remaining ratings when you decided that it's going too slow - which it was, it's not like that was my 9-5 job - and posted trust feedback for me implying that I almost scammed you or something.

That's exactly the type of bizarrely irrational shit that gets you into trouble quite often. Still I don't think you deserve red trust. But your judgement is obviously flawed and excluding you from trust lists is appropriate and advisable.

You have my permission to post any PMs I sent to you on this subject if you disagree with what I stated above. I don't really have the patience anymore with your shenanigans so put up or shut up.

Although this is becoming off topic I will respond by saying your recollection is grossly incorrect and misleading.

If you had proof of any of your claims you would have started a thread a year ago when you were so greatly wounded by my non DT NEUTRAL trust feedback.

But in the end isn't that what this thread is about? Those on DT who have received NEUTRAL non DT trust feedback from me cowering behind their position on DT to force me to change or remove my NEUTRAL trust feedback.?

Your post just above implies you were keen to work with me and in your faulty recollection I "cut that off" (aside from why would I do that? when I'm the one with everything to gain?) I made literally dozens (a hundred?) of modifications to my trust feedback on the basis of what you said, so much so that although Last of the V8s reacted negatively (by giving me DT distrust) to my questions in their bid to become a merit source (which I am still keeping an open mind about) they (Last of the V8s…) placed a NEUTRAL comment on my trust feedback wall:


Which tells me the work you and I did has been noticed by others.

So ... If you are  still really that burned up that you want to work with me, why don't we recommence working on that "project" (for want of a better term?.) That way you won't need to "pull me up" or, "take me to task" on my trust feedback (my words, not yours) which is now quite old - multiple years old infact given I have taken a mostly hands off approach to the Known Alts thread since I started the Mk III thread.

Come on suchmoon, let's work together.

Prove it. You have my permission to publish my PMs.


I can't force you to remove the trust rating and I'm not trying to. I'm directly responding to your false statements here in this thread. I didn't send you PMs asking to work on a project. I wanted to help you because you asked. It's fine if you don't appreciate the help or that it took months for me to review your hundreds of ratings but it's not fine to lie about it.


Absolutely not. You have irrevocably lost my trust. Good luck with your "project" but you'll need to find another idiot to help you with that.

Feel free to quote me where I said "pull [you] up" or "take [you] to task". I'm getting a feeling that you don't see any boundaries between your fantasy and real world.

post the pm's then rather than blithering on making shit up timelord
i ~'ed you well before my 'bid', because of your crappy feedback
like i told you before

Please keep your comments on topic, thank you.

---

---

The Southampton FC has this to say about Equality:

https://www.southamptonfc.com/-/media/files/supporter-relations/11c-equality-policy-2017.pdf


Further reading on their website: https://www.southamptonfc.com/supporter-services/policies-and-charters

---

---

Given the person, the subject of this thread, and at least one of their alts wears the major corporate sponsors' logo for the Southampton FC, I can't help but wonder why this post of mine would be deleted:


As you can see there is a potential conflict of interest between the Global Moderator hilariousandco and the Southampton FC via their jointly being sponsored by the same betting website.