So you were not paid at all? Regardless of if you were paid after the fact, or if you did not receive payment, neither is the basis of a negative rating.

Furthermore, it is my understanding that the OP was not paid until after he delivered his services, allowing the owner of the company he was advertising for to withhold payment if the quality of service was less then expected, which dilutes this kind of claim.

Is OP up to date including every recent addition?
(If so, I can update SMAS with it)

Stop blaming others for your mistakes. And if you want to blame somebody, go ahead and blame me.

---

Then please leave it there.

Is OP up to date including every recent addition?
(If so, I can update SMAS with it)

Stop blaming others for your mistakes. And if you want to blame somebody, go ahead and blame me.

---

Then please leave it there.

Because that negative feedback had no justifiable reason behind it and therefore was abusing the system. Retaliatory feedback is usually a big no-no.


Irrelevant, and you were the one who had ignored everything Bitcoinsummoner had said to only reply with "RIP english". Certainly, someone has no clue, and it's not them. And that goes along with the fact that you use poor grammar and spelling so you're in no position to begin insulting other people's English skills.

Red trust doesn't always make someone a scammer, it shows that the person leaving the feedback doesn't trust the person recieving it. Lutpin has made his reasoning clear for the red mark in his feedback, as did Lauda.
Would you trust someone that spams and ban evades, along with little trustworthy things to their name?

In addition, would you not consider somebody delivering a sub-par product for what you pay to be scamming? In that case, signature spamming and getting paid is scamming the owner.

And all I can say for you is RIP english .

I think you forgot to explain how this guy is a scammer. You posted connections to several accounts that are alleged to be spammer. If he is evading a permanent ban then he will probably get banned, although sometimes some people who are permanently banned are allowed to come back, either under a new name or under their old name(s).

The only thing that i can say to you it is better to stop arguing what you want to say it is better to do action. prove that you are not deserve to not ban or receive a negative trust remember quickseller i saw his account before that receive negative trust and prove that he can be deal as trustworthy until he gain back his account to 0 negative trust..
If you are just push what you want to say here there is no help it can be more complicated and trigger them to be angry..
Better respect what their decision if you can be change and maybe in the future they can remove your negative trust..

So better to relax and try to gain positive feed back to someone else like vod said.

Bribe:

Wait, what? Multiple bans are not enough to give you a hint something is not working out right?


You had several accounts banned, what exactly would be an appropriate warning sign in your opinion?


Again, this is not difficult to figure out. Look at your own profile. Carefully, you will likely find the trust page and the untrusted feedback section.


Can you? Can you undo all the spam your other accounts did? Show me.


Multiple accounts are not a problem, even if they are active at the same time, as long as they follow the rules.


Why? Why should there be an exception for you? What have you done for this board to justify the exception? Right now I have a nagging feeling Im talking to a child or a troll. You either are unable to find very basic information or unwilling. Your moral compas is way off if you dont understand why "gifts" or "donations" towards people in power are forbidden in most countries.

You've learnt nothing and proceeded to make even further violations of the rules. Definitely a "very special case".

I got no intention to do so. You could try contacting Blazed who is the reason for Lauda and me being in DT2 and convince them it's worth removing us over this.
I would not hold my breath for that and given your way, you probably will just end up on their PM ignore list like you did with Lauda and me.
Another way would be getting two other DT1 users to exclude us, resulting in a similar situation.

You already are banned. As for this account, I am no moderator and can't decide this. I asked Lauda to push my findings and they have submitted sufficient proof (the one I posted, together with your acknowledging of said proof/situation) to users who can decide over it. We will have to wait for those users to take a look at the report and handle it.

If a person is jailed, they don't walk out and start another life acting like nothing happened. That's kinda what you did.
You got banned from the forum, so you just started another account and acted like you were new/like nothing ever happened.
In real life, this is not possible, so please don't start any comparisons to being "jailed".

The official unofficial rules of bitcointalk.org

I rest my case.

Reading the comments in your trust list it will not happen by this post.
I think your best chance to get Lauda and Lutpin remove there neg. trust rating is to post quality posts for the coming weeks and ask it by pm. Still not a warranty do.