Bitcoin Forum

So Now Trust Spammer and abuser " The Pharmist" Back on business and he will again start his mission to give Red trust to each and every one on this forum. He was previously been removed as default trust because of his abusive behavior.

Since Once this shity person, give negative Trust, he never removes it even if that person is doing no more shit posts or account selling and no second chance is given.

Why does he given a second chance to prove himself a responsible Default trust member ?

Don't worry. Although "The Pharmacist" is a DT member or not, your account still tagged by Lauda. LOL. If you're a shitposter, maybe you'll have a second chance to come back but selling and buying Bitcointalk account I think you'll never have second chance :). Beside why don't "The Pharmacist" tag me or other normal member but you? Of course you'll never being tagged if you do nothing wrong :). Stop complaining :)

Given how quickly he was sabotaged, this is actually his first chance at proving himself.

Grow Up Man !!  I am already tag by Lauda and i never complain.

Thats what i am saying, why Pharmisist still did not tag you  ;D ;D He is tagging everyone ..  :P :P :P
I only complain why  "The Pharmacist" tag me ?   ;D ;D ;D

You are a Sr member on this forum. You are complaining you deserve a 2nd chance. My question to you is do you read the forum ever? If you had you would have seen many users complain about their red trust. You would also have read why some accounts were tagged. And guess what, you would have seen some of those users tagged for buying/selling accounts. That was you chance right there. You should have known if ppl find out you were a bought account that you'd be tagged.

Why cry about it? If you were an honest and trustworthy person. you'd have started as a newbie and ranked up your account yourself. Instead you bought an already established identity and became that person. Making you untrustworthy IMO

To the former remark, The Pharmacist should be replacing spam tags with neutral feedback. Regarding the latter, account selling is a shady act and deserves negative feedback. Just because you've stopped doesn't mean that you still weren't shady.

If I have committed crimes in the past and decided to stop after I was caught, does that absolve me of all of them? No, of course not. Why would you think that the same thing happens here?

---

Deterrents exist for a reason—there's no point of adding the negative trust in the first place if you can just get away scot-free after saying "sorry sir".

Trust is like everything else.

If you see it too often, you begin to ignore it.

Yes, I'm going to get my ass moving on that.  I did change a lot of them already, but I've been taking more time doing it than I meant to.  I'd apologize, except I'd gladly keep all those negs in place if Theymos didn't explicitly say that he doesn't want that.

I recently got a real computer and internet at home, so I'll start converting the negs I left for shitposting to neutrals tonight after work or tomorrow morning.  Don't know how many I have left to do, but it shouldn't take all that long.

Having said that, I won't be removing my feedback on 2girls, as I left it for account dealing. 

If anyone was in any doubt about whether The Pharmacist should be part of DT, the number of butthurt scammers and account sellers who have made threads to complain about him in the last 24 hours should be all the proof you need.

Grow up is really hard to me atm cause I'm having to become a friend of my son. Lol. Stop complaining and don't break the forum rules your account will never gonna be tagged :)

Stop being melodramatic, if you care so much you should just buy a fresh account. One thing I will say is I wish TP was consistent in his approach to account dealing. If you're going to tag people for it, I don't think it is really fair to be selective about it.

The forum is not the place of a box of spam. Phermacist is a great guy and good to see he is back on. Now spammer will be catch out. I am always with him to support and want to make forum is a great source of knowledge and spread it to the world.  Just remind forum is not the place of spam. Just go with the rules.

I'm afraid this is becoming the case. Trust in general is just being thrown around these days. I'm not saying the OP doesn't deserve the negative rating but, it seems on other notes people have been way to quick to pass judgment and give a negative. I can't think of any specific examples currently but, it's definitely happening.

He's removed a lot of his feedback in the past, or at least changed it from negative to neutral. For example, the whole giving spammers red trust thing. That was a forum issue which he took into his own hands and probably thinking about it now wasn't worthy of a red, but reporting those members for the staff to deal with them would of been a better approach.

Negative trust for account sale isn't normally removed though.

An example of this can be found where? Is this another case of "You're doing something wrong. Even though I haven't pointed out exactly what it is, I'll still complain about it."?

I don't think it's just that TP is being selective; I think it's because they can't get to all of the account dealers/buyers due to a lack of visibility. I know it sounds rare, but not everyone spends all day and night on the forums :o

MadZ, if you ever come across a dealer or buyer that hasn't been tagged, try sending the link of the thread to The Pharmacist.

Unless you're referencing an incident that happened that I'm not aware about... Then yes, please show an example.

You don't know that thing most of them got more chances,but I suggest to you look another business. This is not the forums where we learn or make money. I thought you already left the forums, but sad to see you again.

Do I really seem like the type of person to make accusations like this without any proof? Here is an excellent example of it: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1492296.0

TP gave negative trust to everyone who bid in that thread (as per their rating's reference link)... except for the staff member and the guy who had positive trust at the time. They all did exactly the same thing, shouldn't they all be equally untrustworthy?
 

See the thread I linked above, I'm talking about cases where multiple people bid on the same account, yet negative trust was given selectively. One of the users who was tagged from that thread actually asked why this happened to him and not the other two (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2801609.msg28658918#msg28658918) (which is why I first noticed this), but he was given no response.

I completely agree that account dealing is untrustworthy, however, I don't tag for it because I don't want to be arbitrary about it. I don't think it's fair to turn a blind eye to some people while having zero tolerance towards others. I'd have no problem if he had tagged everyone in that thread, I'd actually admire him for taking a stand against someone with a bit of reputation, but I think it's wrong that we tell members like the cabsav and the OP to go fuck themselves for something they did almost 2 years ago, while giving other members of the community a pass for doing exactly the same thing.

I didn't imply that; re-read my statement again. I was wondering whether you've pointed this out to him before you've complained here and what his response was.

Yes and no. Depends on the exact details of the case. If it were him giving negative ratings now for that thread, then I'd argue that letting them *slide* was understandable. However, these ratings were left a few days after the thread was created. I don't know why he would avoid tagging those two randoms (OmegaStarScream was not a staff member at the time so that is irrelevant).
I could argue two things: a) They were non DT ratings, thus consistency and reliability isn't as necessary as with DT ratings. b) These were one of his earlier ratings (within the first 100 sent I believe). I'd expect him to know better now.

---

Anyhow, the best time to fix it is now.

My bad, you're right. I did bring it up (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2801609.msg29768196#msg29768196) after I saw cabsav was ignored. I assumed TP would read it, since that whole thread was about him, but perhaps he didn't. TP was removed from DT shortly after, so I forgot about it until now.


A lack of consistency in old ratings is completely understandable, but I think we both agree that these inconsistencies should be fixed. The thing is, when most people bring this up, they are dismissed as salty shitposting account farmers. While this is generally the correct reaction, I think there are a number of instances similar to the one I referenced where the issue is not so black and white. Cabsav both PMed TP about it and made that post, yet was ignored on both fronts. If I was in cabsav's shoes and saw that there were (future) staff members doing the same thing in the same thread who got away with it, I'd be pretty upset too. All I'm saying is TP needs to address the selectivity of some of his ratings, when someone has a legitimate complaint he shouldn't completely ignore them.

Well, I took part in that thread and I don't remember reading your post either. Usually I find it better to directly (via PM) inform them before doing so publicly.

It was most likely a whiny PM, which I don't answer anymore either. People bother me with useless nonsense quite often. I've learned that the simplest form of replying is to put them on the ignore list.

Well, solving this is easier said than done. The thing is, some notable members that used to deal or attempt to deal in accounts in the past have not been tagged and won't be tagged (neither Cabsav nor OP are examples of notable members). The potential solutions are:
1) Tag the remaining users.
2) Remove the tags from the other users.

Both cause more questions (if you consider people with positive trust and/or people who are staff members notable members) and difficult edge-cases. Before you ask me what those might be, spend a minute or two thinking about the implications of going via either route. I'm sure you will figure out a few.

?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3197685.0

Oh Nice. You will not remove my neg. feedback for just asking for account buying ? but you WILL NOT leave a Negative feedback on yahoo for actually buying selling account here.  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1050272.0

Where does your forum cleaning and all the justice bull shit goes now?

Don't bother. Monkey see no evil.
http://archive.is/07Mh3#selection-3215.0-3215.216

Ive seen this somewhere long back, but I am posting here someone can shoot the alt name of this person
https://prnt.sc/hgikxp

Edit Got this link
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2410318.0

That's right, because Yahoo62278 isn't a shitposter, and he's proven to be trustworthy a thousand times over.   We can talk when you become a trusted campaign manager--or otherwise prove yourself worthy of my trust.  The same argument goes for me not leaving a neg for Blazed, Omegastarscream, or the other ones I can't even remember.  I take other factors into account before leaving someone a neg for account selling, and I have removed negs when people have turned into fine, upstanding members of bitcointalk.  Deal with it.

Ok i accepted your words here. Let me clarify you two things here.

First, You did not give Red trust to Yahoo, Blazed, Omegastarscream etc because they are all trusted already. So you can trust them too and of course i also trust them. But the point is who am i ?  Me along with many others  don't have any positive trusts and so you will give us negative rating for accounts sales posting of 2 years before ? When we were also new and did not have any idea of where this could go to....

Secondly, you are saying that first i became a trusted campaign manager and then you will rethink of my trust ? If you would have given RED paint to Yahoo, Blazed, Omegastarscream before they become trusted managers, they would have never become because of RED paint.

Thirdly, you think everyone should become trusted campaign manager and you will recheck ? Not everyone here comes here to become a Campiagn Manager and i have no intention of doing so even if you give me 100 Positive trust  ;)

Finally you said that " Yahoo62278 isn't a shitposter,"...So do u think i am writing these shit posts ? Just my 80% of the posts are againist you only, does this make me a shitposter ?

Dude, 2girls... Quit being so aggressive.

I was once red-tagged for some stupid post where I offered to provide a review service in exchange for being paid for my review. I immediately deleted the post, but I was tagged. I sent a message to the DT user who tagged me, and explained my situation in a calm manner, and that I was apologetic and didn't realize I was actually displaying fraudulent behavior until it was too late. After reading my explanation, the DT user changed the negative feedback rating to a neutral one. He had no reason or obligation to do that, but I think because I approached him fairly and calmly, he gave me the benefit of the doubt.

Over the course of several months, I started becoming more active here, making some friends, and calling this my internet home... I've dedicated countless hours to consciously becoming more contributive until finally, I decided to message that DT user and asked him to review my post history so I can prove to him that I was a contributing member here. I then asked him to remove the neutral trust. He did.

I'm only telling you this example because being nice and respectful can go a long way, and that it's at least possible to get a red tag reduced to a neutral one... You haven't displayed any instances of respect in this thread.

Regarding the reason why The Pharmacist didn't leave a negative trust on those trusted members' accounts? Because they've already proven themselves to be trustworthy. There was no need for them to have to defend themselves, as they've built up their trust. You, on the other hand, have not. That's why you're getting ridiculed here; your aggressive behavior is not going to get you anywhere, and you've got to be delusional if you're seriously comparing your situation to yahoo's, blazed's, or omega's...

Just my personal opinion as I keep seeing this thread progress with your responses.

You are right. I am also not so aggressive but we have to deal with on person to person basis. If you ask them politley they will still make fun of you by claiming to be third world shits..lolzz... I have addressed this is my below posts. There you can see how DT member :The Parmicsts: making fun of people cryings and watch my reply on it too... ;)

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3197685.msg33464359#msg33464359

He stated what he did because it’s true. 3rd world shitposters are different than 3rd world contributors. Hell, I currently live in a 3rd world country, yet my contributions to the forums are often extremely valid. The major difference between a shitposter and a contributor? A shitposter’s sole purpose here is to earn an income. That is fine, but when it comes in the form of single sentence spam posts that don’t contribute to anything, it’s merely there to count as a “point” on a scorecard. That is not healthy for the forums in the least bit. A contributor will take their time to construct a post, and think carefully about what kind of message they want to relay. They will often think twice about posting, especially if their answer coincides with someone who has already answered the question. They don’t post in megathreads. They don’t care about the sound of their own voice. They do care about the quality of their post and the health of the forums.

I fully stand by The Pharmacist and what he is doing. He is not singling out individual users that he has a personal vendetta against; he is protecting this forum from substanceless accounts that are only here for the sole purpose of filling the forums with unsubstantial posts.

My advice to you would be to prove that you are a contributive member here for the next several months, and then ask the negative taggers to revisit your trust feedback, and at the very least to change it to a neutral rating. It happens here rarely, but you must be able to show that you’re a substantial member of this community. Are you up for the challenge?

Ok I am up for the challenge. As you mentioned avoid one liner posts, My posts are not one liners and I not shit posting on the spam bumpy topics.
I read the whole thread and then posting my arguments. Since i am RED painted, i will not get any income for doing all the posts also.

So now Please tell me what else i need to do to proof myself ?

Stop posting for the sole purpose of earning an income. That's your problem.

Advice from a member, who earned already 2 x 0.00075 BTC (the last post was too short) in the thread of 2girls with paid chipmixer signature, lol.

The key part of his post is "sole purpose", which you either missed or couldn't understand.

I don't even care if someone is here just to get paid, as long as they can write interesting material--and write it coherently.  Those two qualities are sorely lacking in the vast majority of noob's posts.  They are not qualified to take up writing as a career, even if it's just writing on a discussion forum like this one.  What they write is just spam.  It's garbage that no one spends time reading, and if they didn't get paid to do it, they most certainly would not be here.

Now Maum goes back on ignore.

What you may not know is that I don't give a shit about a signature campaign. I've only ever been a part of 3 of them since I've joined this forum, and before re-joining ChipMixer's, I took a long pause in not joining any, simply because I don't want to be misconceived as a shitposting spammer. The only reason I re-applied to ChipMixer's sig campaign is because the majority (and by majority, I mean like 90%) of the posts I've seen by participants in this campaign were extremely substantial. I use ChipMixer to anonymize my coins, and I stand by their service. I am using my signature space personally to vouch for a service that I personally use, and I get to earn a few bucks on top of that.

I could care less if I get paid for my posts or not. I don't post for the purpose of getting paid; I would post the exact same way regardless of what I have in my sig space. Why not give my post history a gander and see for yourself, rather than just trying to passive-aggressively insult me? Or was that your attempt at humor?

#epicfail

I see your answer BTCforJoe and I can't stop myself to share a different story with you.

Mistakes happen on this forum and not all DT trust members are so polite and willing to discuss their choices.

I was tagged by Hillariousandco more as 100 days ago for "Trading merit with those who leave him points as advertised via his avatar. Also copied content without proper attribution".  My case is not resolved until today and Hillariousandco doesn't answer to my innocents' proofs from one month in my negative trust thread. Of course, I haven't traded or given in exchange even one merit and I have added an announcement to my post about missing quotation before Hillariousandco tagged me not after as he says.

As you see BTCforJoe you were lucky to be tagged by another member because I have written like you 4 PM's in 2 weeks to Hillariousandco. I was always very polite using words thank you, please, sorry and never got any reply. After that, I opened my reputation thread to prove that I am innocent.

You can read here my last answer to Hillariousandco in my negative reputation thread which contains proofs and sums everything up https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2864431.msg34482040#msg34482040

2girls says about another member or even members who were not tagged despite they abused forum rules same as 2girls. My situation is similar. I was tagged for an avatar I have copied from legendary member Jeremycoin and he was not tagged red despite I have written about this to Hillariousandco next day after it happened and I have posted about this in my reputation thread. This member used this avatar for a few days more and like I said before nobody tagged him. When I asked about this everybody seems to not see this question or just ignore it.

I have even added a merit policy (Merits only for quality content, no merits in exchange, spam is not good) to my signature and avatar and worn it for about 2 months. Nothing helps I am still tagged. If this was such a crime why to punish only me?

I am on this forum 5 years frequently. Never rushed to achieve higher rank, never spammed (my first posts are not so good but I learned how to post quality content), never did anything wrong, never insult anybody or used offensive language (I know this is not in forum rules and is allowed but I am proud of this), never got warning, etc.

I don't think I am guilty. I don't fill guilty and I can do nothing. This is killing me every day because in my reputation thread high-rank users advised me: "you have to move on", "don't worry red trust is not the end of the world", "nobody looks on red trust". This all is not true. I was rejected several times from various projects and promotions on the forum because of red trust. I was involved in a discussion and member told me: " do something with your red trust first and then come back to talk here". It was humiliating for me and I have to admit that I'm ashamed when I post. I try to even avoid these subforums where you can see trust because I noticed that people do not treat you seriously with a red trust and you can forget about merits completely.

I have to add that I have seen The Pharmacist around the forum and I think that he is an asset with no doubt. Didn't know about his problems and that he is not in DT anymore. I think his posts are very valuable and high quality. I like to read his point of few because sometimes his words influenced the change of viewpoint by me. From what I saw lately, his judgments were accurate, I agree with them.

I didn't know that either.  Wouldn't surprise me, though.  The politics on bitcointalk are crazy, but I'd be interested to know who excluded me.

Ah, OK.  So nothing has changed.  Thank you.

You are still here with 2 exclusions and 2 inclusions. Obviously you are greatly inferior to my 3 exclusions! :-[

"The Pharmacist" actually gave a negative rating to a Bounty Manager that didn't do his job properly and didn't care much of what I had to say.
After the red rating from "The Pharmacist", the Bounty Manager started to care & listen to what I got to say.
Ultimately, the Bounty Manager paid me tokens from his pocket due to his mistakes, all these, thanks to "The Pharmacist".

This is the Reference Topic: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3319150.0

ps: Lauda didn't give him Red Trust as the Bounty Manager already had Red Trust and considered that it was my fault I trusted the Bounty Manager even though he had red trust for account farming.