Irrelevant. The point is there is no other plausible explanation for Vod's behavior other than malicious intent.
Has nothing to do with Vod. I don't think you understand what the issue at hand is. What crusade to get you tagged?
The one you're still on, apparently. You were already tagged and I argued that others were just in doing so by standards you yourself advocate for.
You mean the iCEBREAKER tag? He was removed from DT, as were you. The community has voted against both of your judgments. That's not what I was talking about, however. You hold others to those standards but you expect to be exempt yourself. How convenient. You embarrassed ME in Politics and Society? BWAHAHAHA, K. I guess that's why you needed to put me on ignore, because I was so embarrassed by your intellectual prowess! You had virtually no activity in P&S until you decided to follow me there to extend your circle jerk vendettas & try your luck, got spanked, and ran away crying, yes, talk about petty. Right, a brilliant revision of history, unsurprisingly in your favor. Compelling. Doesn't explain why you felt the need to continue to sling shit in my Reputation thread though. Frankly I don't care. Feel free to write another one of your famous neverending rebuttals to this comment so you can have the last word. I'm out. Hahah I missed this. Your usual debate strategy of choice. Say a bunch of unsubstantiated shit, never support it, then proclaim you are above this kind of petty bickering just before declaring yourself the victor and running away. Your pattern is getting a bit predictable Nutilduhh... might want to change it up a bit. "Has nothing to do with Vod. I don't think you understand what the issue at hand is." This has everything to do with Vod and nothing to do with Bill Gator or OG. Any one with 2 braincells to rub together can see this is just a really pathetic attempt at diversion from the inexcusable actions of Vod's initial behavior. If you are at an outdoor cafe and some one runs their car into the seating area and the guy next to you jumps up out of the way and spills your drink on you, is he at fault or the one driving the car? You seem to be focused on the spilled drink. I wonder why. |
|
|
|
I was at 4 DT1 inclusions until just recently and am now down to just 1... Hmmmmmm...
Yep, and Hhampuz had me included as of this morning, now suddenly I am excluded in spite of the fact I never said a word about Hhampuz during this whole blowout, which leads me to believe he is doing so because he has pressure being put on him from the "club of special people" he is so desperately trying to be a part of. I would have loved to hear his objections, but when I went to PM him about it, I found he had blocked me too like a coward in spite of our previous open line of amicable communication. I guess I will just have to take my discussion of it to the public then since he is to afraid to have a private conversation with people he found trustworthy as of a day ago. |
|
|
|
This wont be an abuse because Vod is part of the mafia here,if it was just a normies then that would be an abuse.If you aint belong to them you're out.
Another example of negative thinking man. Community don't allow the word "mafia" and there is nothing here on bitcointalk which seems like this. Its really interesting to hear something like that because i believe all scammers way of thinking is likely similar and on the other side all default trusted members have got the same point of view against scammers. That"s why it could look like a group or mafia for you dude. It looks like a "mafia" to me. Am I a scammer? Here, have some ball washing polish you seem to be running out. |
|
|
|
Vod has gotten a pass a large number of times and by the looks of it he is going to end up getting another pass and once again will not be held accountable.
Just to clarify, because I haven't read all the posts and threads in this drama: what would Vod be getting a pass on? Did he dox OgNasty? Did he report him to the IRS? I may have missed where these things actually happened, or the posts might have been deleted before I read them. I read a bunch of threats on Vod's part, but I'm not sure what he actually did. And are the huge merit grants part of this issue or what? I'm not trying to shut down discussion on this. On the contrary, I think it should be discussed until there's a resolution. I'm not playing ignorant, either. I have a tendency to skim threads, but in the ones involving Vod and OgNasty I did read them but don't know what Vod's offense was. I know he thinks OgNasty is cheating the IRS and was going to report him, but while that's controversial within this community it's not exactly wrong (if it's true). First of all this is not the first time Vod has entered into this pattern of harassment, and he has gotten the "he learned from his mistakes, let live and learn" treatment more times than I can remember. A lot of this was before you were even around. What he actually did was malicious behavior. First of all even if OG did owe taxes, it is none of his fucking business, or the forums for that matter. Second of all this community is big on privacy, and regardless if the information was previously available it was not widely known, now it is. So you boohoo about the technicalities to make excuses all day if you want, but what this all boils down to is there is ZERO excusable reason for Vod to have made the post to begin with. The obvious intent of malicious harassment sets precedent that pretty much this entire community can agree on, that DOXing people except with evidence of criminal activity is not acceptable. Vod is not an IRS agent, even if his claims were true he included no evidence to support the claim. In summary this is cut and dry YET ANOTHER case of harassment of the user base here in a long line of this kind of behavior from Vod. Anyone else notice the new way these DT1 members are shutting down conversation that doesn't benefit their gang? Simply call the other person a liar or a hypocrite.
The average user just reads this and automatically believes it to be true because the people they look up to are the ones saying it.
But they want forgiveness for their friends.
There is a term for this. Gaslighting https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/GaslightingAs far as I know I was also on Hampuz's trust list until today, really not even sure what the issue is because he blocked me from messaging him like a coward regardless of the fact that we have had open pleasant communication up until about 2 days ago. Now I am excluded by him and my only conclusion is he had his chain yanked and he is falling in like like a good little subservient toad. Shame, I had hopes for him. Too bad he feels the need to board a burning ship. |
|
|
|
Since the original poster has decided to lock the thread, in my opinion prematurely, in a useless attempt to try to make this drama go away rather than let it unfold and be discussed so that it can be addressed I have decided to open the discussion up again here. It is funny how we all need to move on and forgive and "be the better man" when it is one of the "special" people who caused issues, but when it is anyone else it is perpetually open season. Now, the question is clearer. If I did not start the topic, we would have not seen the following post of theymos, that help us have better overview on admin's stance on Trust system, roles of DT members, and the way Trust / feedbacks works. It's only better for the forum, I believe. At the start, I believe that something inappropriately used with such feedbacks, that's all.
I actually believed that things solved on that day, but I was wrong when things become worst (it should be better), and we have not had a happy time. I am deeply sorry by starting the thread. So, I locked the topic. By now, the purpose of the topic likely reached. Two cases of Vod and Hhampuz solved, and theymos once again stepped in and stated his opinion.
What do you think if I lock the topic? (Personally, I believe it is time to lock it). I will listen to your opinion till the end of today, and might lock the topic tomorrow, even next hours if most of you support to lock it.
|
|
|
|
This reminds me a lot of all of your negative ratings sent for account trading, yet when your buddy Nutilduhh was shown to have solicited their account for sale suddenly everyone needs to hold on a minute.
What you should have learned was that "unearthing" publicly-available information written three years ago is not necessarily grounds for a red trust. If you feel so strongly that it is, why haven't you left one for me yet? You're trying to claim uneven application of a "standard" that never existed. Your whole crusade against me and movement to get me tagged began because you felt I embarrassed you in Politics & Society... I told you I was putting you on ignore and you immediately visited my trust history to look for dirt to dig on me. Fifteen minutes later you were smearing it around in my Reputation thread... Talk about petty  I have excluded you for red-trusting other users for sending merits
For the record, this was also my line of thinking, and I am open to changing my mind about it. Irrelevant. The point is there is no other plausible explanation for Vod's behavior other than malicious intent. There is literally no plausible excuse for why what he did was ok regardless of it being posted already elsewhere. I haven't negative rated you because unlike you I don't feel the need to run around with my plastic badge and police the forum. What crusade to get you tagged? You were already tagged and I argued that others were just in doing so by standards you yourself advocate for. You hold others to those standards but you expect to be exempt yourself. How convenient. You embarrassed ME in Politics and Society? BWAHAHAHA, K. I guess that's why you needed to put me on ignore, because I was so embarrassed by your intellectual prowess! You had virtually no activity in P&S until you decided to follow me there to extend your circle jerk vendettas & try your luck, got spanked, and ran away crying, yes, talk about petty. |
|
|
|
The word hypocrite has been thrown around by two members that have excluded me over this.. they need to take a look in the mirror.
I have excluded you for red-trusting other users for sending merits, and I have 15 thousand reasons for that. That's all there is to it. This is permanent unless you show that this was just a momentary lapse of judgement but seeing you're still trying to spin this - not looking likely. It's a shame since I used to think you're a level-headed dude but it appears you're letting your personal likes/dislikes dictate your use of the trust system. I called you a hypocrite because you declared (unprompted) that you'll take the same anti-doxing stance against anyone, which I assume would mean red-trusting the doxer and anyone sending merits to the doxer... then you weaseled out of it when presented with a couple of opportunities to do so. Same goes for bill gator. Personally I don't believe in the "all or nothing approach" with trust ratings, i.e. if you red-trust someone for eating lemons I don't think you're obligated to red-trust every lemon-eating idiot. However when you voluntarily declare such a position and then don't follow through - yes, you're a hypocrite. That's neither here or there, I'm not gonna red-trust you for that... just an opinion. I've taken a look at the hhampuz dox thread and need to figure out the best way to approach that whack job.
What's wrong with the way you approached OgNasty's dox? Standards are for thee and not for me! HOW DARE YOU HAVE A STANCE THAT IS NOT UNIVERSALLY APPLIED! Only I and the loser DT mob are allowed to do that and then call out others as if we serve as a beacon of impartial justice! It never ceases to amaze me how many times you will use this argument of a users standards against them, when you yourself don't even meet these standards as if you are allowed to pick and choose who you rate but when some one else does it, they are a hypocrite. Lol. This reminds me a lot of all of your negative ratings sent for account trading, yet when your buddy Nutilduhh was shown to have solicited their account for sale suddenly everyone needs to hold on a minute. |
|
|
|
Actually most states have qualified immunity for police, so as long as they were not completely negligent it is usually irrelevant, but this is another topic. There would be no mandate to get this training, so your logic about unpaid work training is flawed. The school is not mandating anyone do this necessarily but permitting it, so there is a huge difference. Again you avoided my question. Which do you think is better, a well meaning armed teacher there instantly, or police there in 5 to 20 minutes? Which is more dangerous, an unchecked mass murderer, or an armed amateur?
Well, it is speculation on my end, I cannot fathom not requiring the training I mentioned before, but your guess is as good as mine at this point. Armed amateurs are more dangerous than mass murders. The number of accidents prone to happen from millions of armed amateurs is surely higher. As much as its played up as an imminent threat to the existence of humanity, the chances of being involved in a school shooting are still statistically insignificant. The numbers of them occurring is certainly increasing, but as I mentioned before, I think there are far better methods available to reduce them than removing guns. I support people's rights to own guns, but there is a time and place for everything. I don't think that turning the country back into a Clint Eastwood western movie is the solution. Going to the grocery store should not become an arms race. As I said before when I was defending gun ownership, guns are just a tool of convenience. If school shootings became difficult due to sentry turrets or whatever else, people would just move onto the next most convenient method. You don't stop shooters by shooting them first, you stop them from deciding to become shooters in the first place. I'm not the sort to point fingers and blame violent movies or video games or anything else, but just something to think about. Most countries in the world normalize sex rather than violence. A movie will receive a higher rating due to violent content rather than sexual content, whereas in the US, its the reverse. I'm not claiming thats the cause of anything, just a portion of my basis for being against normalizing violence. You shouldn't need a gun to feel safe in public, you should feel safe knowing that unreasonable violence is a statistical outlier, and the majority of people will be able to receive treatment for whatever would drive them to commit violence in the first place. I never said anything about not getting training, the point was the state wouldn't make carrying the gun (or the training required to do so) mandatory, therefore it would not fall under unpaid work. I know you live in an area with pretty strict gun controls, but visit Arizona or Texas some time. Tons of people walk around all day with guns on their hips and they don't jump up and shoot people on their own. If the threats of a school shooting are statistically insignificant then this entire debate is moot. High levels of carrying is a deterrent and in itself a form of making school shootings harder, which would most certainly be more likely to prevent it in the first place if they know they will not be able to rack up a body count before they join the pile. All kinds of studies have already shown video games and movies don't result directly in more violence. You know what studies have shown results in violence though? All the meds that the vast majority of shooters have been pumped full of. It is very good of you to decide for others they should feel safe because "statistics". Next time some one tries to jump me when I am in Chicago I will show them the stats maybe they will go away. |
|
|
|
...
Is this what you do? Now I'm starting to understand why so many people let a couple of users get away with murder. Ominous threats, insults, "everyone is against you!" and twisting words for your narrative. You act like law enforcement when they really need to convict somebody, but don't have much to go on besides emotional manipulation. Quoted for reference. Nobody threatened you idiot, don't play the victim card. Nobody sane likes you, end of. It amazes me how these pathetic little turds who come off as grade school bullies get so much control around here. Every time one of "the chosen" breaks the rules and is called out it is always the same story. Lock down and vector in on anyone that dares to speak up. The problem is every time you do this it just becomes more and more obvious just how pathetic and abusive you and your toadies are. You morons are about to cross the event horizon and get sucked into a black hole of your own compulsions and stupidity. |
|
|
|
stop beating a dead horse [Drags dead horse into the room and starts beating it] Hey stop beating that dead horse! Beat this dead horse! |
|
|
|
Build islands out of the homeless.  |
|
|
|
I am sure some number of teachers already have the requisite training to be able to safely carry a gun in a school, and there are probably more teachers who are generally interested in this training but have not gotten around to obtaining said skills.
Also, every teacher doesn't need to have a gun, teachers only need to have the option to carry a gun in the school. The goal is not necessarily for the teacher to win a gunfight with an attempted mass shooter, the goal is to deter the mass shooter from going to the school in the first place.
I'm not sure about that. Assuming that the option was viable, formal military and police training would still probably require a few more pieces to be legal. In many jurisdictions, police officers are required to have liability insurance policies to cover them from being sued into oblivion when they make a mistake that their department wont cover. I think it would probably be a hard sell to get a policy without extensive ongoing training. I can't imagine teachers wouldn't be required to have one if they were allowed to carry guns. Again, you are automatically assuming the state will have to pay for it. Teachers are not hobos, the ones who want to do this training certainly would have it be within their means. This is not a requirement, so trying to pretend like the state should be on the hook for everything automatically makes no sense. How about we start with allowing those that choose to, to do so? Just like any other gun owner, you are liable for every action you take with a firearm, regardless of how much or little training you have had.
You can't legally have an employee undergo unpaid work related training, so the school board would need to cover that or be at risk of lawsuits. I don't know for certain that the state would have to pay for everything, but based on employment laws, I can say with relative certainty that teachers wouldn't be allowed to provide for themselves. You can't just put a responsible gun owner in charge of protecting lives, they need to be thoroughly trained so they don't put those lives they are responsible for at greater risk. Google says police academy training costs around $5k and takes 840 hours, followed by field training with a senior officer, and certification exams before officers are allowed to uphold public safety. Again, realistically assuming that the idea is plausible, teachers would need to go through similar if not greater levels of training as police officers as dealing with minors is not a simple situation. I'm sure there are specialization certifications on how to deal with violence around minors. Lets also not forget the routine psychological analysis, not sure what that costs, but I'm sure its cheap. There is a reason that someone you are trusting your life to is required to jump through so many hoops, otherwise they pose a risk to your safety. Even if you think the regulations are stupid, thats not the point of what we are discussing. I could be pro teachers with guns, but that wouldn't change anything I've said so far so its just my interpretation of the legal impossibilities that stand in the way. I'm not accusing anyone of bringing it up, but I just wanted to mention it in case the conversation would have otherwise gone in this direction. Vigilantism is the worst possible solution. I would bet my life that under absolutely no circumstances would teachers simply be allowed to bring guns to school at their own discretion. It is such a huge legal liability that we are better off talking about nearly anything else. Actually most states have qualified immunity for police, so as long as they were not completely negligent it is usually irrelevant, but this is another topic. There would be no mandate to get this training, so your logic about unpaid work training is flawed. The school is not mandating anyone do this necessarily but permitting it, so there is a huge difference. Again you avoided my question. Which do you think is better, a well meaning armed teacher there instantly, or police there in 5 to 20 minutes? Which is more dangerous, an unchecked mass murderer, or an armed amateur? |
|
|
|
You can still discuss Vod's behavior but for some reason you're choosing to bitch about me not doing what you want. I happen to think that massive hypocrisy, which you're not a stranger to, is a big part of this whole shitshow. None of you keyboard warriors are concerned about doxing at all, it's just a convenient topic to latch on.
I never said you were stopping me, I was just pointing out the fact that certain people here are trying to make this thread about everything but his inexcusable behavior. Convenient to latch on toward what end? What coveted prize do I get for pointing out Vod's pattern of years of serial abuse of this user base along with the community's excusing of it EVERY TIME? It is always the same thing, he pretends to repent, makes some minor concession after the damage is already done, everyone says the same brown nosing lines about how we should forgive and forget and "he contributes a lot", then he lays low for a few months and repeats the same pattern of malicious behavior again and again and again. |
|
|
|
Switch the roles, if OG released Vod's DOX, OG would have a negative feedback from me.
LOL yeah... what other users have you actually negged for doxing? Anyone noticing the repeating pattern of how certain people are trying to turn this in to a a discussion of anything and everything except for Vod's inexcusable serial abusive behavior? |
|
|
|
What about the fact that there are already a lot of police and military already trained working in schools as teachers? It might take a lot of training, so what? Is the benefit of protecting children not worth it? Who says the state pays for it? You know damned well you cant even get a concealed carry permit with a 30 minute course in most states let alone a permit to be armed on school grounds, this is total hyperbole. You know teachers already have access to firearms outside of school right? If they wanted to snap and shoot the place up nothing is stopping them currently. The most important question of all though you need to ask yourself is, which do you think is safer, an armed teacher doing their best with training on the scene the instant violence breaks out, or police five to twenty minutes away? A lot of lives can be taken in five to twenty minutes (average police response time).
It doesn't matter if the benefit is worth it, there just wont be funding for it. If we can't get kids dry erase markers, you think a comptroller is going to allocated part of the budget to pay for guns? The federal government cares even less about public schools than the state, even if it wasn't a political hurdle, it would still be a financial one. Teachers don't get paid all that much, you would have to offer them significant compensation for their additional overtime work as well. Lets not forget the mandatory psychological screenings, and stricter standards for background checks. Police officers also own firearms outside of work, but they aren't allowed to bring their own from home. All of their maintenance, ammo, shots fired etc are accounted for. I don't imagine the laws would give teachers fewer restrictions on firearm use than police officers. There are a lot of real considerations before just getting straight to the ideological, good guy with a gun beats bad guy with a gun. How many teachers are going to open themselves up to the liability? Good teacher with a gun misses and shoots a student for example, are they guilty of manslaughter because they haven't undergone years of psychological training to prevent them from misfiring when in the heat of the moment? Just being good at a firing range isn't the same as having someone shooting back at you. As far as I know, most middle/high schools already have an on duty police officer to deal with sexual misconduct, drugs, fights, etc. It would be easier to keep them trained to the same standard as beat cops, so you don't have the same thing that happened in Lakeland. Even assuming arming teachers was a good idea, the policy would be too controversial to enact. You aren't going to get that kind of reform without it being an overwhelming majority vote. I don't imagine having 50% of students removed from school by their parents, and non stop teachers strikes would be that great for school systems. Again, you are automatically assuming the state will have to pay for it. Teachers are not hobos, the ones who want to do this training certainly would have it be within their means. This is not a requirement, so trying to pretend like the state should be on the hook for everything automatically makes no sense. How about we start with allowing those that choose to, to do so? Just like any other gun owner, you are liable for every action you take with a firearm, regardless of how much or little training you have had. |
|
|
|
More like I have been calling out this bullshit for years while you sell your projections of jealousy in a pathetic attempt to distract from your own serial abusive behavior. You claim you aren't jealous, but your actions.... What actions? Because I dare to point out you are a dangerous mentally ill Canukistani cunt with a pattern of this kind of malicious behavior, I am jealous of your spot on the default trust. LoL. K. [plays clown music] |
|
|
|
Shout-out to TMAN!
If only. You do need to work on that delivery lately though, that "speed well digging" joke could've been funny.
It was not a joke, you're done. I didn't realize anything until I asked for opinions of you as I don't play around in these channels. I did not mean that, stop malliciously misquoting me.
Oh come on, you know I love a good guessing game - that's why you and Vod refuse to explain any of your assertions/claims. Lying and reputation atacks are your game. You know you and the forum would be far better off if you played out your game of thrones fantasies in a MMORPG or something. |
|
|
|
Holy shit, if you follow that post OG made eight years ago, you can still see a paypal link. He doxed himself eight years ago. OG has been putting the forum funds in danger for that long, and only now it is being noticed? What a dangerous ONGOING flaw in judgement. He can't say he made a mistake on that one... :/ Anything to create a 3 ring circus to distract from your behavior. Lots of excuses and brown nosing. sucking OG's reproductive organs and licking OG's thingy behind Now go and read my post again. What do those trust ratings have to do with the fact that Vod thinks it is ok to do shit like this? There is no justifiable reason for him to have done what he did I don't give a fuck how much you want to argue how much actual risk there was or if the information already was out there, it clearly had malicious intent. I have no allegiance to OGNasty, frankly I don't particularly even like him very much on a personal level, but I have experienced the targeting he has gone thru from many members here, including Vod himself, and I don't see any evidence of his wrongdoing forth coming. I don't think the precedent he is setting is at all acceptable. If you criticize certain people "in the club" around here they ensure you suffer a penalty one way or another shortly after. Vod just tends to have exceptionally pathetic excuses for it. |
|
|
|
Is that 4 DT members now that have been removed for putting red trust on Vod over this?
bill gator, Rmcdermott927, OgNasty, and teeGUMES
Hmm.. I wonder who is doing this excluding..
Its almost like... there is a..."Secret Sad BitcoinTalk Trust Farming Circle Jerk Mob" protecting certain members who act in lockstep... It's almost like you are jealous you are no longer part of it? More like I have been calling out this bullshit for years while you sell your projections of jealousy in a pathetic attempt to distract from your own serial abusive behavior. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
