The bolded part of your statement I feel perfectly exemplifies your inability to even form a basic logical premise. You define conditions by which I argue do not even exist (Marxism is inherently totalitarian), and then demand I meet your impossible contradictory standard in addition to meeting my standard. In short you are doing little more than demanding I ARGUE YOUR POINT FOR YOU.

Seriously man. You need to see a professional psychologist. You have problems. I don't mean that in a dismissive way. There is something seriously wrong with the lens thru which you view the world and I would wager it is the cause of many problems in your life, all of which you likely project upon other causes. Either you are here to do a job or you have serious issues. If you are on the job I am impressed with your acting skills because you fit the bill to a T. If not seek help.

You are looking at it. We are. If the standard of evidence was of theft, violation of contractual agreement, or violation of applicable laws, the rating party could be informed of this standard and that their rating is not considered acceptable. If they refuse to modify it or present evidence according to the very basic standard, then they should, and will likely be excluded by anyone with any influence within the trust network. The rating will continue to exist, just hidden from most users and having minimal effect on the recipient.

The important part is all this bullshit argument over it being valid or not just gets to get skipped, and either evidence is presented or it is not. The entire point being to clarify what ratings are acceptable, reduce disputes over nonsense, and reduce signal noise of frivolous ratings making them once again mean something.

I didn't ask for the opinions of others. I asked for you to tell me why you personally think that rating is not valid.

You are right, I do want discussion before rating. Except you will note the distinct lack of a standard of evidence, substituted in its place is mere suspicion. Really even if he was up to what is suspected, how long do you think it would last before the people rating him would figure it out and notify everyone who rated him to remove them? My point is this is kind of a non-issue even if it was true.




No, you didn't explicitly accuse him, you also provided no evidence that he should be subject to suspicion at all either (other than what you imagine may be true). There is a reason most of the legal systems of the industrialized world require a warrant, because fishing expeditions themselves even if no other action is taken are a violation of privacy and can bring other repercussions against entirely innocent people.

I am not implying anything. I repeatedly stated I am open to reconsidering iCEBREAKERs inclusion on my list if you can simply explain to me why you think his rating is not valid. That's it. You haven't done that, you just told me your side of the narrative without actually answering my question.

"Nudilah is a Dash shill who apologies for Evan's massive Instamine (see his buttkissing Trust entry) and spreads FAKE NEWS about competing projects (see Reference link).
Nudilah also viciously attacks the motivations of people questioning multi-year delay of Dash's previously announced i2p and Masternode Blinding features. "

Explain to me what makes this rating invalid please.

Just because this is the case for you does not mean it is the case for everyone. Again you are a more casual trader, some people depend heavily on their reputation. As some one who makes a point to try to trade with new users, they often don't know the difference between an invalid or a valid rating. When it comes to high value trades it doesn't take much to spook people. I have literally had users walk on large deals over a single retaliatory rating from an abandoned red marked account.

I tried to explain, but their mind was made up and they were already spooked. No one is going to send first to new users, and I don't use escrow for what should be pretty obvious reasons by now. That means I am regularly in a position to have completely new users to this forum and Bitcoin, and asking them to trust sending me large amounts of value based ONLY upon my trust ratings here. Yes, they do make a difference, I have personally witnessed it with so few in what is otherwise a stellar trust history.



Yes, the handful of documented trades in your ratings over the past 2 years are impressive. Especially the one for the coke points. You are a trust cop first, and for such a prolific trader as you claim to be your ratings seem to be mostly ass kissing over your trust policing. The point stands, the trust system doesn't effect you at all because you don't depend on it to function here like others who take it more seriously and conduct regular transactions.



But they usually don't check, or if they do they don't even look into any of the ratings. What I want is for this forums user base to snap out of the "its not my problem" mode next time you see people abusing their authority, along with a standard of evidence of theft, violation of contractual agreement, or violation of applicable laws before negative rating. Everyone just eats their popcorn and watches the struggles, until it is their ass, then suddenly they get it.

I don't see this user explicitly asking for trust ratings do you? They are asking for a review. This is not uncommon. Perhaps it could have been worded better and people are reading into it too much. Maybe he is actually fishing for positive ratings. Maybe he is an 8 story tall crustacean from the protozoic era. I doubt we will ever know for sure.

This frankly is the kind of thing that demonstrates to me this forum is full of a bunch of busybodies that have nothing better to do than interfere in the lives of others over the most inconsequential things they SUSPECT MIGHT be happening. This is all lots of fun until it is your turn to have the forum crawl up your ass just because some one is bored. Good thing for them there are no penalties for wrongly rating people who have no influence within this system... so win win.

Conveniently for you though your received negative ratings are meaningless because you conduct little to no trade here. Must be great to take no risks while handing out negs like candy. It is quite magnanimous of you to tell him to accept it and move on, again this having no cost to you personally.

You are the sidelines. The path of least resistance. The people who stand by and shrug when this abuse happens and tell them to move on. Then the problem gets out of control for everyone, but what do you have to worry about? You aren't taking any risks after all.

Yeah, I remember those days, back when we used to have freedom. Then people like you who insist on installing a mommy and a daddy to keep watch of over everyone at all times come along and now everyone is worried they are going to get unpersoned for something they said half a decade ago like this is Stalinist Russia and they will be Photoshoped out of all of the old photos for something politically incorrect they said once years ago. Plagiarism should not be tolerated for numerous reasons, but I find it abhorrent frankly to enforce rules upon people who could not have possibly known it was going to be a forum rule in the future.

Yes it is technically not legal, but it also falls squarely within civil law. No one is ever going to bust down your door because you took an unaccredited snippet from a news article and posted it on the internet. Criminal penalties only come into play with wider scale abuse, so your point about being in violation of the law is moot, especially since these laws are not the same in every nation.

I think people plagiarizing in order to abuse the forum should have a penalty for sure. Old posts still technically in violation should just be purged without further action. IMO this is the only just way to go about this, but I am just a troll and have nothing of value to add.

Of course not. Why would it be relevant that you all run around like one unit together forming the perfect brown nosing human centipede all backing each other up no matter what and including each other, and excluding the members they also choose to target. You have a lot of nerve pointing at me and crying to do as you say not as you do.

You and the people you support run around negative rating people based on suspicion, which is exactly the standard iCEBREAKER is operating upon. You scream about the injustice when it applies to you and yours but I am the hypocrite for not removing him because he doesn't meet the standards I would like exactly? If you keep stretching like this you are going to snap, be careful. Feel free to start a separate thread in reputation about my supposed behavior you find objectionable and I would be happy to discuss it. Of course you won't though because this is all just desperately crafted sophistry to try to cover for one of the members of your brown nosing human centipede of a trust mob.

Just wanted to make a quick note for all interested here, this user has in fact completed a trade with me and everything they sent checks out. Thanks.

Dems know their only chance to win is if they can buy the votes with free handouts to illegal aliens...


https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/mar/8/house-votes-favor-illegal-immigrant-voting/

Why ask for advice then just tell everyone who provides it they are wrong? You have fun being the next wannabe forum cop. You can figure this out for yourself.

I want to know why YOU think this rating is invalid. See how that works? Of course you can't answer that because you know if you do your own actions will then be revealed to be hypocritical BY YOUR OWN WORDS. Run along now sweet summer child.





The constant projection you people partake in would be hilarious if it wasn't so destructive to this community. I brought up democracy because it is the most similar existing governmental system to what we have here, except for the informed populace and accountable representatives part. Good try at a smear though bringing up politicians to tie me with visceral emotional sensations in lieu of a logical argument.

I do, do what I preach. I didn't leave this rating iCEBREAKER did. Funny this whole time both of you are screaming hypocrisy at me while you yourselves are A-OK wit this standard every other time it is not you or your friends. I am holding you to your own standards then you turn around and call me the hypocrite for not removing some one for doing what you do every day dozens of times a day. You have no principles, and your pathetic attempt at moral grandstanding is quite hilarious to me.

It is a documented fact they exist. Some are more shady than others. Some are quite public.

Or we could all just agree on a standard of evidence of theft, violation of contractual agreement, or violation of applicable laws being maintained and publicly posted BEFORE negative rating some one, not after. There is no need for a council. We are already all the council. We examine evidence of scams daily in scam accusations and make a collective determination. We just need better standards by which to organize so that the most abusive and duplicitous individuals don't always run everything.

As evidenced by your continual frothing mouthed attacks any time I try to argue for a standard of evidence of theft, violation of contractual agreement, or violation of applicable laws. Also your willingness to support people who do exactly what was done to you to others on a daily basis by the dozen. If you yourself do not endorse such principles I am not sure why you also get to demand protection by them as you continue to poo poo at the standard.

I don't know, you tell me, that is why I asked. I wanted you to explain to me exactly why his rating was invalid. You refuse, so I guess you don't care. If you don't care why am I obligated to care for you? It is not hypocritical at all to keep him on my list because while I advocate for that standard IT IS NOT YET THE STANDARD.

It would be like North Korea saying hey USA, we will disarm our nukes, but only if you do it first ok? Oh China and Russia, they are going to keep theirs for now don't worry about them. In essence you are demanding those I associate with all keep a standard that is not yet a standard, which is asinine. If I followed this logic there would be NO ONE on my trust list, it would just be exclusions.

Our main disagreement stems from your inability to understand that "a body that enforces" already exists, only they operate on completely arbitrary standards. I don't know where you get the idea some new body of people will need to be assembled. People are VERY prone to subjectivity. That is why we are badly in need of some structure from Theymos, such as issuing the notice he prefers we operate with a standard of evidence of theft, violation of contractual agreement, or violation of applicable laws. I am advocating all the same people now present evidence to support their negative rating before doing so. That's pretty much it. The rest is your pure imagination.

My opinion is you should be neutral rating them with references to this thread, and monitor them closely. People rely on the trust system too much to fix all of their problems and be a tool of punishment. It works better as a tool of communication, and unless you have solid proof I would avoid red tags. I would say you have provided reasonable evidence they are all linked but I am not familiar enough with the policies of the signature campaign standards so I can not comment there.

The Rothschilds are just front men, but yes they are very powerful. Look up the Payseur family.

I know they were, but they have been pushing them again recently. Also the EU is trying to pressure Poland and a few other remaining nations to allow themselves to be overrun with illegal immigrants with no interest in integrating. Eastern Europe has a long history of fighting off these invaders. IMO the Israeli claim is just to try to force Poland to comply with the EU demands using financial war. Israel is in a much better position to use force against anyone than Poland is. Also since Poland was arguably one of the biggest victims of WW2 I find this idea they should pay reparations asinine. It amazes me how a people could suffer their own attempted genocide then run around perpetrating all those same horrible behaviors on other groups within 1 lifetime.