Should I tag every DT member that doesn't agree with my views? That's ridiculous. Should I tag every DT member that doesn't tag the same people as me? That's ridiculous.

You're simply trying to rope in more people - trying to get others in trouble - because your hubris won't allow you to be the only one. This is why you keep going back to the same tried arguments. You think they have substance. You think they aren't just conflated bits of rhetoric.

---

Considering how three DT members have tagged you, don't you think that you might be part of the reason why?

No, certainly not.

Cognitive dissonance.

---

TheFoxBot Twitter Campaign will continue for another 4 weeks (at least) but will be aiming for high follower-count participants.

Now the payments are as follows:

10K - 25K: 0.001 BTC / week
25K - 100K: 0.0015 BTC / week
100K+: 0.0020 BTC / week

---

All participants below 10000 will be removed from the spreadsheet for Week 5 onwards. As such, the campaign is now open for applications.

Because I don't think they are untrustworthy.

You were already tagged by marlboroza. I didn't feel a need to tag you for the same thing twice back then. However, they changed it.

You're trying to make it personal. You're trying to come up with some explanation as to why I tagged you. About anything but the reference. Causation is not correlation: we've already gone over this.

---

I have already answered the same questions from you over and over, yet you continue with these contemptuous strawman and ad-hominem attacks.

Users already do that. I don't know what you're trying to do but your incessant attempts at bone-rattling are very ill-conceived. You need to slow down with the egregious conceit and take a break.

I don't see any point of limiting pages these to logged-in users. It would help immensely with archiving data: there have been many a time where I've wanted to archive merit history for busting users that are trading/selling/abusing. Same thing with trust pages.

The user's "power" doesn't matter. It's their intentions. Hypothetically, if you were to say, "I will escrow scam when given the opportunity" then I would also tag you. It doesn't matter if you're offering escrow or not. It doesn't matter if you're trusted or not. It's the intention that matters.

Trust Feedback != Government Law

What the fuck? There's a time limit on trust feedback? That makes no sense.

You have yet to show me some proper arguments instead of nonsensical rhetoric.

Go read what you wrote and figure out why what you posted was asinine.

WTF? You're blatantly lying now.

Great. So you're going to enforce this mandatory donation. The victim gets fucked over either way.

Selling/trafficking illicit drugs is possible. Anyone could do it. Doesn't mean it's socially accepted and doesn't mean that I will trust you if you deal with that kind of trade. Same thing with account sales.

My negative trust has nothing to do with spam. I just brought up your poor post quality.

You're not a victim. Someone who chooses to buy stolen products knowingly is also in trouble. Someone who chooses to deal in a shady area willingly should also be punished.

I tagged people as soon as I found the thread. I'm not a program: I can't look at every thread as they come out.

If you start posting with the same quality after buying a Hero/Legendary then you will certainly be barred from campaigns.

Butthurt users will create butthurt threads about me.

Is that part relevant to my feedback?

It's not the destination that matters but the principle that you're letting scammers get away scot-free with just a fee. I have already mentioned this before and in no way am I saying that the negative feedback is in response to you asking for money, for yourself.

Check this quote:


We've already gone through this before. You're grasping at nothing here.

---

Forcing scammers to pay the forum is basically rerouting the money from victims into a mandatory donation.

The token doesn't need investors. The investors need the token.

The price is directly proportional to the site's profit and thus everything is focused on that. If investors want to try and help with traffic, then they could buy up the tokens for a low price and try to get more players to the site.

I have said nothing of trolling. The posts that I have quoted were consecutive posts and are in violation of the forum rules. I don't think I've tagged anyone for trolling and I don't think I will.

Did you look at the reference?

---

I would advise you to stop breaking the rules.

---

You obviously know about the edit button since you use it all the time to change thread titles. Why not use it?

Clearly with all the threads, the feedback hath struck many a nerve.

Please lock/archive the thread. The buttons to move/lock are in the bottom-left.

Quote the posts that have been deleted. I'm assuming that this is in P&S. AFAIK, Flying Hellfish is actually an atheist.

Perhaps you stumbled into a thread that was redundant/pointless? Trying to add to a lack of a discussion is as bad as not adding to a discussion at all. It would be like trying to have a conversation with a brick wall.

523585, 523586

Payment coming shortly
3558c28437baa65b0a60682d4e2bbe808c58e9345f406fe08e108b2c1654d9d8

Cool idea.

Yeah. The truth hurts which is why you keep trying to formulate all these pea-brained conspiracy theories about how the forum works. I have zero alt accounts. I am not colluding with DefaultTrust members - in fact, I don't even message them on a regular basis.

---

You've already resorted to lashing out incessantly with toxic bullshit. That's why you're being responded to. Not harrassed.

The only reason you think that you're being singled out is that your ego is so monstrously overinflated like a hernia-afflicted scrotum, the cognitive dissonance within you is just begging for an explanation, no matter how incorrigibly inane it is. But it's clear that you're past sensibilities and will now sway it away with another asinine word salad.

I think you need to lay off the hard drugs. You're getting a bit ambitious now with your conspiracy theories. Next you'll start spouting out bullshit about how suchmoon is theymos.

Who said DT members have to agree with one another? If that were the case then it would truly be a horrible centralized cartel, like you've been spouting. Pick one or the other and stick with it.

If you paid any attention to the past, you would realize that this "DT cartel" has had its own brand of problems on multiple occasions. There's been tons of drama with exclusions and inclusions.

Regardless of who is getting paid, you're basically offering a free pass to scammers. What, they can get off easily with just a fine? That's not the way to go with it. I don't see how that would be beneficial at all. You can scam for way more than $50 here. Easily.

If my feedback has been unjust then I would have been removed months ago.

How long does it take to quote a post and reply here with the contents?

Rather than doing so, you continue to repeat the same old crap.

Redundancy in feedback is not a bad thing. And just because I sent it to one individual doesn't mean I have to send it to all tagged members. Keep in mind (again) that you're not special. I've sent out negative feedback to many users other than you. I've responded to threads about me many times before.

From what?

So then I can offer unfair terms that don't guarantee a service and get away scot-free with it? That's not how it works in the real world and that's not how it works here.

You're being a bit repetitive now.

When have I ever said this? This is just false.

Because there isn't one specific thing they can refer to. Apart from Hhampuz's.

I have been objective. In fact, many a time I have disagreed with TP, marlboroza, OgNasty and Lauda. All of which are on DefaultTrust.

More like: I've been left positive trust by the people that I trust. I sent TP positive feedback before he sent it to me, by the way. All other feedback from me was sent prior to their positive feedback.

How does tagging you benefit me in any way? I'm not taking advantage of you.

Do you seriously think that I believe every single thing Timelord writes? No. However, I based my feedback off of his. Of course, I would investigate independently first. You also still haven't shown me your defense.

You still think you're so special. This is what happens when kids get in trouble, eh? I've already told you that you're not being specifically targeted. You're just very vocal and annoying, which means I will respond to you more often than someone that doesn't post about me at all.

Yes, I am. Thus you should defend your case yourself, just as you've offered that service to others

Blazed is not that active on BCT, AFAIK.

---

Thanks for deleting my post, by the way. I'll just repost it here:

The difference between a qualified lawyer and you is that they:
a) have knowledge of how the system works (you don't really)
b) will usually have past experience, either in the field or some mocks in law school (you don't really)
c) have a pre-existing reputation (you don't really)[/quote]

There will always be members that will sieve their way through the filters but if they aren't caught, then there's no problem. Eventually, they will either get caught or run out of merit. And when that happens, we're better off tagging them then rather than risk tagging someone who is innocent.

I'm going to say that this is a false positive. Although it is very suspicious that the user sent 10 merits over a minute (if it were within 10 seconds it might be a reload mistake) some people will send merits randomly to campaign managers.

If there's another instance of this then I would say that a tag is warranted but right now there's insufficient evidence.

---

If anybody else wishes to neg the user(s) then they can but I prefer to play it safer with merit.