this is my only alt account,i still think this is crazy...even for my first warning as i remember it should be at least 7 days

also i still think my post are okey,i really want this lowered down as this is my first warning!

Removing signatures wouldn't necessarily stop paid advertising campaigns anyway.  The irony is, much like Bitcoin itself, there's nothing you can actually do to ban it outright.  If you disable signatures, which have set limits on the BB code that can be used, people would just start pasting the relevant advertising code directly into their posts, where there's no restriction on the BB code that can be used.  You'd have brand new accounts posting in giant 72px fonts in a various array of colours.  How about some flashing animated gifs for good measure?  Any semblance of legibility in threads would be decimated.  Be careful what you wish for, regulation and banning doesn't work anymore, this is Bitcoin we're talking about.  

Secondary point, have you looked at comments on a youtube video lately?  People don't have to be paid to post stupid shit on the internet.  They spew it freely and in large quantities.

It is split very evenly. Even the users who voted for each seem so. Interesting that BadBear didn't vote (unless he did on an alt account). I think the current system is the best solution but should be tweaked or kept a closer eye on the people who are on there and maybe limiting the number of users that each person can put on.

I cast my vote on the "keep DefaultTrust list" side since, even with the known problems, it offers more protection to new users. However, I would like to see some of the new features Theymos brought to us like:

• the check box to inject extra users in personal trust lists (hopefully a similar way to also prune it of no more trusted members) to tailor-custom our own list.
• I would also like a box to upload a trust list from an ASCII text file to expedite the maintenance of my list (I keep an ASCI *.TXT file with my list od trusted members and untrusted member i wish to exclude them from my trust network - e.g. as to avoid cases like the well known MagicalTux who remain in the DefaultTrust due to an unpruned trust list of a member).
• Also having the possibility of using jointly both the DefaultTrust and our own list would expand our options for security while ranking up (and learning our responsabilities of more established forum members).

It was only a matter of time before something like this ended up happening, especially with the fact on this forum we conduct real deals, I hope that the moderators will have the sense not to give in to this bullshit and drastically change the rules or ban anyone for that matter just because a few morons are screaming the loudest. The people bitching about Vod even if they are correct are counting on you to overreact and start banning people left and right, then slowly, they'll get support to try and take over the forum or try and get a good portion of the community to leave.

I've seen this kind of crap before and it's always something completely pointless that starts it.

I think what it basically boils down to is what TF said.


Is lying or slander a good reason to leave someone negative feedback (free speech is irrelevant)? Personally I don't think it's so black and white, more of a grey area. An example, and for the purposes of this we'll say that I do in fact care what people on the internet say about me  . If someone were to start posting that I'm really pirate@40 in disguise, fabricating evidence, etc, and I leave this person negative feedback, is that really a wrong thing to do? The answer to this is going to vary from person to person, and at the heart of that answer is going to be, whether or not you trust me. If you do trust me, then it is valid feedback, because he's a known liar who can not be trusted. If you don't trust me, then maybe I really am Pirate, and I'm leaving this feedback in order to silence my critics and slander those who dare speak the truth. There are degrees in between of course. It all comes down to your own opinion and your perception of those involved. Opinions, outhouses, etc. Some people are okay with others having different opinions, some are not.

Vod isn't my buddy, I don't know him personally, and he is only in my trust list as long as the community thinks he should be. If the community doesn't trust him, then I would remove him (though note that lots of complaints means nothing if the complaints aren't valid). With the addition of exclusions, it's no longer necessary for Vod to removed from anyone's trust list, just for enough people in the right places to distrust him enough (or his feedback) to exclude him.

I think you and I both know this is a valid trust abuse claim regardless if you are going to come out and say it explicitly or not.

That was actually on my thread, and I would prefer he not comment toward me.
I'll be sure to flag every post he makes that's off topic from now on.

I can't see your posts vod, please stop replying. I simply see your name. Lol

Vod is just being a dick, not making an honest accusation that he could reasonably believe to be true.

Must suck to be a fearful posting whore for these signature campaigns.

"Spreads FUD - calls me a liar, and a fool." is a highly inappropriate comment to leave as a negative trust rating. Calling someone a liar in no way justifies a negative trust, like Vod has given, and is contradictory to the forum's policy of free speech.