Since marlboroza is unable to have an open discussion and allow me to reply after trying then failing miserably to drag me through the mud, and has to resort to locking his topic to try to make a point because he knows I will demolish it, I decided to open this topic up to continue any discussion that needs to be had, including my reply. Not everyone's fault, just a small car full of clowns. Maybe I was wrong about you understanding this ongoing dynamic. It's ok, you will learn. No, I don't think I can ever understand how you can keep someone in your trust list not because you trust their judgement but just to spite some "clowns". I can't wait to see who else is going to show up in your trust list by the time you get back into DT1. One of Quicksy's alts would be my recommendation. That would make for a memorable showdown with the clown car. If you don't like my answers, just make up your own and attribute them to me. The dynamic is the more you lash out at me, the more you give me credibility and lose your own, so I guess I should thank you and all the other clowns for giving me this opportunity to prove my merits and character so publicly and having the grace to disassemble your own reputations so I don't have to do it. I didn't add him out of "spite", I added him because he was targeted, and he is staying there because it is being used to target me, there is a difference. It's too bad, you seem just a mite smarter than these other clowns, but your need to belong to the clown car seems to override your better judgement. Did you "knew that it was TECHSHARE who included BitcoinSupremo to trust list or you know that I knew that it was TECHARE who included BitcoinSupremo" before you started this poll OP or not? No? Former is publicly available information, I have no clue about later. How can I possible know what you know? @TECSHARE, whatever you say, you have been pointed several times already who you have in your trust list, including BitcoinSupremo: To be perfectly frank, if some one had simply politely notified me of this issue, I probably would have just removed him. This is just not true. You have been notified 3 months ago. You are very aware of this and you did literally nothing, look: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5149597.msg51388548#msg51388548
Anyway, truth to be told, I started this poll because I wanted to know forum member's opinion, it somehow become discussion about T. It actually wasn't my intention, I was hopping to have poll without members knowing who posted something, who included who etc. Just can't have these things around here without "investigations", eh? Well, clown car driver instructed me to lock thread so locking this. @TECSHARE if you have anything to add, send PM to our clown car headquarters and they will coordinate me to unlock it. You know because this subject was already discussed, and you have access to everyone's trust lists. The way you rolled out this attack is evidence enough that it had nothing to do with him, but was designed to "get me", necessitating that you already knew. It is not like you haven't been trying and failing to do similar things for months, no one is buying what you are selling. You didn't just politely notify me, you pitched a tent and assembled a 3 ring circus. I am not going to reward and incentivize these actions by complying with your manipulation in the form of coordinated attacks. Thanks for that link BTW, I was looking for that. That is why you locked the thread right hoping I wouldn't notice or post it isn't it? Sure does look like you knew I had BitcoinSupremo on my list months ago, but here you are swearing up and down to the entire community you didn't know. I especially love it when I can bury people with their own posted sources, so thanks for that. How can anyone trust anything you say when you blatantly and provably lie to all of us to sell your attack narratives? |
|
|
|
No one buys your feigned ignorance, especially with you personally pushing 2 or 3 threads
I am sorry, I don't understand what you are trying to say. I am pointing that next users become default trust members/will maybe become DT members: 1)scammers 2)banned accounts 3)hacked accounts 4)inactive accounts Seems you can't understand this and you see this as personal attack. To be perfectly frank, if some one had simply politely notified me of this issues, I probably would have just removed him.
FTFY. How many times will you ignore my post? Vod starting one with a retaliatory negative rating and the rest of the clowns all chiming in at once. This was clearly coordinated.
Of course, my counter to Vod's -ve feedback was also coordinated by clowns. and the rest of the clowns all chiming in at once. This was clearly coordinated.
negative is not appropriate.
This was also coordinated by clowns. And back into the sophistry you slip, answering to what you wish I had said instead of what I actually said. You knew very well I included BitcoinSupremo when you pitched this particular circus tent. Just because you make a few weak ass token attempts at appearing impartial doesn't disguise this. To be perfectly frank, if some one had simply politely notified me of this issue, I probably would have just removed him. Unfortunately his words were always just a mechanism to target people for their ideas, be it about life in general or the forum. As a result, you are all essentially assuring I CAN'T remove him from my inclusions, because to do so would be to provide validation to and incentivize these coordinated kinds of reputational attacks. So, good job on making the forum a better place to be Piddles, Bozo, and Shakes.
There you have it. It's everyone else's fault that TECSHARE has that dipshit in his trust list. he's never ever wrong
Not everyone's fault, just a small car full of clowns. Maybe I was wrong about you understanding this ongoing dynamic. It's ok, you will learn. |
|
|
|
|
To be perfectly frank, if some one had simply politely notified me of this issue, I probably would have just removed him. Unfortunately his words were always just a mechanism to target people for their ideas, be it about life in general or the forum. As a result, you are all essentially assuring I CAN'T remove him from my inclusions, because to do so would be to provide validation to and incentivize these coordinated kinds of reputational attacks. So, good job on making the forum a better place to be Piddles, Bozo, and Shakes.
|
|
|
|
Like any other user, he is free to leave negative ratings at will. He has little to no power in this system.
He was on DT2. That's relatively a fair amount of power. It's not the hugest mistake in the world though as if one is expected to search a users entire post history for out of character drunken rants before including them..
The main problem I see is that TECSHARE included him specifically because Timelord excluded him. That's a dumb reason to add people to your trust list: because they are being excluded by other people... It should be about the contents of their trust ratings, and secondarily the contents of their trust lists... not about whether or not that person is being "harassed" by people you don't like. I don't necessarily dislike gays if they are cool but I dislike flamers of any variety.. I've had gay friends but not so much ones you can tell are gay just by looking at them, or at the first sound of their voice.. No thanks.. Just my opinion..
If you are going to be tolerant I think you should be just as tolerant of the guy that doesn't like flamers as you are of the flamers themselves.. You don't have to like and befriend either one but respect their right to be whatever they are, but any sort of offensive violence coming from any camp is unacceptable and intolerable..
What does any of this have to do the trust system?  As usual, you just take the parts of my words you want to respond to and ignore the rest. It is not just because he was harassed, it was WHY he was being harassed. Plenty of people are constantly harassed around here and I don't add them. He was being targeted for speaking out. FYI, I never had any conflict with Timelord until I spoke out about his abusive flags against some of the Turkish community (after first defending him from the same abuse BTW). I added BitcoinSupremo quite a while ago, not that timelines matter in your shitslinging narrative. Like any other user, he is free to leave negative ratings at will. He has little to no power in this system. If he does start abusing any authority he has let me know and I will handle it one way or another.
So you will just go "lalalalala"? I have already told you that is publicly available information, so when you say "let me know", I did. Until then, your complaints ring hollow and remain a transparent attack on my own reputation rather than a complaint about BitcoinSupremo.
Nonsense.
This has just turned into an opportunity to attack TS rather than he/she who posted the offending post..
Yes, this thread turned into something for sure... TS's counter may not have been the best move given these revelations but neither is this thread the best way to bring it to TS's attention and solve the problem.. Drama..
So you made assumption that I knew that it was TECHSHARE who included BitcoinSupremo to trust list or you know that I knew that it was TECHARE who included BitcoinSupremo to his trust list? I reviewed the information you presented. It consists of little more than accusations and suspicions, as usual when targeting an individual here, much as you are attempting to do with me. Furthermore you didn't just "let me know", you tried to start a circus over it to defame me, clearly telegraphing your true intent of harming my reputation and not addressing your so called concerns about BitcoinSupremo. He made the assumption because it is publicly available information. No one buys your feigned ignorance, especially with you personally pushing 2 or 3 threads, Vod starting one with a retaliatory negative rating, and the rest of the clowns all chiming in at once. This was clearly coordinated. |
|
|
|
|
I would be cautious of this offer, especially considering this sellers other businesses are selling accounts, which itself has a high instance of fraud. There is a distinct possibility these labels are charged to other people's accounts. Depending on what service is used, it can in fact be redirected. That said I have seen legitimate versions of this service selling postage, but I would suggest caution and not risk too much value here until this user has built up a history.
|
|
|
|
I admit, I don't like the words he used, however his words shouldn't be used as cover to take retribution for his deserved criticism of some of the DT members, which he was also very vocal about. Coincidentally everyone suddenly seemed to care about his post history at that time.
I agree, BitcoinSupremo should remove his -ve criticism from trust walls. People shouldn't be penalized here for sharing ideas you don't agree with, they should be judged based on their actions.
I agree, BitcoinSupremo should be excluded from your trust network. Like any other user, he is free to leave negative ratings at will. He has little to no power in this system. If he does start abusing any authority he has let me know and I will handle it one way or another. Until then, your complaints ring hollow and remain a transparent attack on my own reputation rather than a complaint about BitcoinSupremo. |
|
|
|
So basically this will mean that the Chipmixer ANN is going to be pinned on the top of the board for... for ever?
Or really, any ANN from a company where more senior members here have a vested interest in bumping the topic..?
Maybe an unintentional side effect, but that's really a massive advantage that they'd get over other companies/etc.
Or not... I don't know.
Bitcointalk seems to become more and more of an esoteric meritocracy.. Where people with higher ranks, or those who spent more time here, now also have a more powerful voice? Hmm. (Or am i understanding this wrong?)
As much as i disliked these threads with account farmers talking to each other, i don't know if such drastic measures are warranted, or if this is the right direction for Bitcointalk to move towards to. (Although i must admit: i haven't visited the altcoin boards in a long time, if ever.)
While the side effect may be providing long time users with an advantage, ultimately I think the primary goal is to restrict new users, simply based on the fact that it is simpler to set up sock puppets on newer accounts to spam. I am sure if it was possible to prevent abuse otherwise, Theymos would let noobs post without even logging in. Sadly that is not possible. |
|
|
|
Everyone who hate someone should come to USA to spread that hate and to say they would beat the hell out of them for free?
Hell no, there's too much hate already in this country--but people generally don't get beat up for expressing those kinds of sentiments unless they're at a rally or demonstration or something where the left and right wings mix on the streets. You know, Antifa/SJWs, that sort of thing. I certainly don't condone violence against gays, but as far as trusting a person who said those words in the OP....I guess it would depend on everything else the member has said and done. I'm pretty sure those kinds of feelings are fairly prevalent in certain parts of the world, and it could just be internet bluster as well. It would be a strike against them if I were deciding to add him to my trust list, and there's a good chance I wouldn't. It all depends. I admit, I don't like the words he used, however his words shouldn't be used as cover to take retribution for his deserved criticism of some of the DT members, which he was also very vocal about. Coincidentally everyone suddenly seemed to care about his post history at that time. People shouldn't be penalized here for sharing ideas you don't agree with, they should be judged based on their actions. |
|
|
|
I don't believe that Tecshare is a scammer.
Regularly abrasive and rude - yes.
He often voices the opposite of the views held by a vast majority on DT.
But I think his opinions are genuinely held.
I believe his dissent from the norm is the main reason why he gets trust list inclusions.
It is a bit of "the enemy of my enemy - is my friend".
I often disagree with his opinion but it does provide for good discussion.
So far I have not seen Tecshare misuse his DT1 role by giving unwarranted negative feedback. (other than the reciprocal negatives between him and vod).
DT is ultimately about placing accurate feedback rather than manners or opinions.
Thanks for the support. I just want to correct one thing though. I never gave Vod a retaliatory trust rating, ever. He has given me negative ratings several times over the years for criticizing his behavior, but the community forced him to remove it, and I have never once responded in kind. Then earlier this year when he doxed and reported OGNasty to the IRS, I finally negative rated him for that. Of course a short time later here he is retaliating. |
|
|
|
|
Out of curiosity, why is Astargath on that list? Don't worry I am not here to argue with you, I am just genuinely curious what the concern is based on.
|
|
|
|
I am offering for sale a Fluke 99 Series II oscilloscope. It is tested in great working and cosmetic condition. Comes with a new battery in box (new old stock but works fine). Comes with all the probes pictured, along with a nice carrying case, and a printed copy of the manual. This is a great, rugged, professional grade oscilloscope from a well trusted manufacturer. PM please.   Full Gallery |
|
|
|
Breaking news which came out a couple of hours ago.
John Bolton, Trumps National Security Advisor, has been fired by Trump. Bolton is known for being a hawk and supporting regime change in Iran, North Korea, etc. Bolton had feuded with many in the administration on many occassions, including President Trump, Sec of State Mike Pompeo, and so on and so forth.
Would love to hear what people think about this firing, as this really did come out of left field.
I'd reinstall Flynn. But that's just me... Can you imagine the raucous autistic screeching that would occur if Trump pardoned him and appointed him to a cabinet position? The funniest part is it would just draw more attention to him being steamrolled illegally. |
|
|
|
Breaking news which came out a couple of hours ago.
John Bolton, Trumps National Security Advisor, has been fired by Trump. Bolton is known for being a hawk and supporting regime change in Iran, North Korea, etc. Bolton had feuded with many in the administration on many occassions, including President Trump, Sec of State Mike Pompeo, and so on and so forth.
Would love to hear what people think about this firing, as this really did come out of left field.
IMO he was just using him to keep the hawks off balance and satiated like they had an in for a while. A keep your enemies closer kind of thing. I feel like he had a rather tight leash on him during his tenure and was using him as a bogey man/sock puppet to keep people distracted. Now that the military is shifting its focus toward Asia, the old Middle East war hawks are increasingly irrelevant. This is in addition to him now having more control over this whole clusterfuck Russia collusion narrative. He now has a lot of the individuals responsible for this coup attempt by the balls, and as a result he has a lot more room to resist the Neocon/RINO establishment. |
|
|
|
Isn't there this issue with current anti-trust law in the fact that to prove that there is a monopoly, you'd have to show that consumers are being hurt by it in some way.
Take Amazon for example, yes they own tons and tons of companies and they continue to buy more and more.Though they've kept prices down, and they're not raising prices once they've taken over market share.
This is the same situation for Google, Facebook, etc.
Yes, this is one of the primary metrics. In the case of Amazon, that is an entirely different animal because the business models are so vastly different. I am sure plenty of arguments could be made for them too. As far as observable damages to consumers, the action would not have been brought unless they had documentation of this. From my own observations though I would suggest election meddling, reduction of options in competition of a plethora of services, tortious interference, and working against US national security interests in coordination with a foreign state would be at the top of the list. Then again, isn't this something that any company could do and any individual can do? Any company could devote billions of dollars towards a candidate if they wanted to, there's nothing illegal with that. Obviously they'd have to donate towards the candidates aligned super pacs instead of anything else. Working against US security interests isn't going to be allowed though. Though I suppose the US would have to show that they're working against the US on purpose in order to hurt the US. You are not thinking of this in the context of a monopoly. As I already stated, that is just one metric. The other metrics I went over previously in the thread. It is a combination of all of these metrics together that makes it a viable antitrust case. |
|
|
|
I wonder what "inconsistencies" and suspicions I could generate with a whole team of clowns digging through all of your trust lists? Of course these kind of unrealistic standards of constant suspicion couldn't possibly be applied to any one of you now could it? You all don't reciprocally add each other now do you? I wonder what kind of correlations might be made between everyone posting accusations against me here and their own trust lists. Hmmmmmmm.
Start digging and let us know! No thanks, I will leave the peanut hunt up to you guys. I am just making the point that this level of scrutiny could be applied to literally anyone to try to cast aspersions. Briefly skimmed through the thread. Regardless of your opinion of Tech's Hare, you should be changing the title to something that more closely connects with the accusation.
As for the topic itself, one should be conscious of the users on their trust list and make adjustments as they are pointed out. And conversely, we should bear in mind that some users are not as active in the reformation of their trust lists as others (e.g. phillipma had to update their list apropos to a concern with their list)
Right. For that matter, if some one sees a problem with my list, the logical thing would be to notify me of it. That is unless of course the intent was to use it to defame me rather than correct the supposed issue, in that case a circus is in order. |
|
|
|
|
I wonder what "inconsistencies" and suspicions I could generate with a whole team of clowns digging through all of your trust lists? Of course these kind of unrealistic standards of constant suspicion couldn't possibly be applied to any one of you now could it? You all don't reciprocally add each other now do you? I wonder what kind of correlations might be made between everyone posting accusations against me here and their own trust lists. Hmmmmmmm.
|
|
|
|
Pretty sure by now you are just trolling everyone TS I mean, you're not wrong. I have already argued my points. No answer I ever give will be good enough for the clown car. I might as well use them for my own entertainment if they are going to keep following me around playing clown music. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
