You clearly haven't worked hard one day in your life.

Before becoming an engineer I've worked one month as a production line worker following 3 times 8 planning.

Doing ANYTHING constructive and trying to use your brain when you work in such conditions is not possible. I mean it's physically not possible.

People like you simply deny the reality of alienation of hard work.

Please anyone thinking that people are just "not willing to better themselves" just try to think about the condition you're in when you just finished a 50 hours of physical and repetitive hard job week. You CAN'T think. Not matter your education, your intelligence, your curiosity, when the week end you're just dead. The 2 days of "freedom" you get at the end are here just so you are able to go back to work week after.

In just four weeks I and my SO litteraly saw me go dumber every day, more tired and less proactive. After 2 weeks I stopped reading on the evening because I was too tired. After 3 I stopped doing anything productive after coming back from work. After 4 I couldn't do anything of the weekend.

Now imagine people doing this for YEARS?? How could you expect them to go and "better themselves"?? That's impossible. They're barely humans at this point, they're just slaves.

Anyone saying with this voice full of contempt that people are just making "excuses", go work for real. Then try to "better yourselves". We'll see how you "don't need help from the government" then.

You should have that stick up your ass checked out, it seems to be causing brain damage.

A joke at your expense is not "political", despite your feeble attempts to run a political-style campaign with your "standards". Your inability to handle any criticism or disagreement is genuinely hilarious.

Ironically people have been saying similar for a long time, still waiting for the sky to fall...  Good and bad people come and go for lots of different reasons, you of course seem to know the answer to everything so why not just go make the perfect forum and stop whining like a fucking bitch for a while.

This is a mischaracterization.  Population is not an issue and depopulation is not achieved through genocide.  The problem with the environment is how the top 50% consume almost all of the natural resources.  Its a small amount of people causing all of the environmental harm and the population of this group is not actually increasing.

The other thing is that women without education and access to reproductive healthcare have a lot more children so providing those things to everyone is a right would be the easiest solution.

Its only people who want to avoid the inconvenience of cutting back consumption or spending money on education who even bring up "overpopulation"

jes but the priority who gets the short becoming labor isnt changing, its still focused on the central banks, and the billionaires. thats the issue.be

the central bank is the master of the usa.

@TECSHARE

I don't think that your argument is false in anyway, and I'll say again; I agree with your agenda and philosophy.  We all live in societies of laws, and it's always best when those laws are unambiguous.  I just don't think that, strictly speaking that has to be the way a forum is operated.  It is just an internet forum.

To risk playing devils advocate; you said it yourself:


That argument alone demonstrates that he's less likely to implement a rigid set of guidelines for trust.  And after all, it's his forum to operate as he sees fit.  There are several illegal activities that play out here on the forum, and Theymos does little to prevent them.  Some of those illegal activities are conducted legitimately, and people participate in them willingly.  Some are down right scams.  That's what I would expect from a self described anarcho-capitalist.  The trust system applied the way it is allows the community to determine what is what is not trustworthy behavior despite the lack of rigid guidelines.  It can lead to inaccurate ratings, but it can also be worked out when errors occur.

I certainly don't claim it to be perfect, but what set of rigid guidelines is perfect?  Cryptocurrencey was born, and adopted out of the desire and need to decentralize wealth.  A relatively libertarian and anti-authoritarian philosophy, and it's likely to attract those who would like to put that philosophy into practice. 

Wait... Hold on a minute... I just got TECSHARE Bingo on this thread! BINGO!

I disagree with you here. Many scammers rely on pulling in as many customers as possible over a short period of time, before they are exposed. If we require every suspicion to be first posted, and then wait for the community to review before tagging, you are now giving them an extra 24-48 hours to continue scamming until they get tagged. It also simply isn't feasible to start a new thread and have a discussion about every suspected scammer - the board would be overrun with new threads and being a DT member would become a full time job to read and review every accusation.

I think your method is correct and workable in marginal or uncertain cases, but these are the minority. Trying to apply this to every case would rapidly overload the system.


Fair point, which I accept. However, you seem to be arguing against yourself here. Many DT users pre-emptively tag account sellers, Ponzi promoters, loan requests with no/fake collateral, fake ICOs, etc, before they are successful in their scamming. By your metric, none of these people would be tagged until after they had scammed and there was evidence of theft. Now, if the community decided this was "not acceptable", as you put it, then the users who leave these ratings should be "losing their reputation and/or being excluded". This isn't happening, so the only conclusion is that a majority of the community supports this position. You, of course, can completely disagree with this stance, but as theymos has more-or-less made DT a democracy, the majority view wins.


I agree with you that we shouldn't be tagging people for disagreements or differing points of view, but I disagree that we should be waiting for evidence of a scam being successful before we tag the scammers. I also don't think theymos just giving a top down declaration, but leaving the system as is - inclusions and exclusions based on community votes - would actually result in the change you are looking for.

It's a big fat nothing burger as usual, do you really think McConnell invented show votes.  McConnell can't force anyone to vote on anything all he can do is bring it to the floor, since it won't pass the dems don't need to do ANYTHING.  The dems that don't want to be on the record either way will vote present (as GOP and dem senators have done many time in past show votes) or not show up to vote at all.  The ones that are looking to appeal to the progressive base will happily vote for it.

Ironically as usual Yurtle the Turtle has rallied against show votes when the dems have done them but of course when he thinks it will benefit him he is all about it!

Show votes are completely irrelevant and accomplish nothing but a waste of everyone's time and money.

wages go up? central banks arent the only ones that can print money now.

So in my example, in which I have presented evidence I deem is sufficient, but you disagree and state my evidence is insufficient, then you agree it would left up to the community to decide who is correct, and by extension, who to place on their trust lists and who to exclude, which is what we have now. Right. We have some common ground from which to start.

So now you want theymos to enact a set of standards which he wishes people to follow, but he won't actually enforce them. I'm afraid I fail to see how that will work. If you want a set of standards to be enforced, then someone has to enforce them. If you want the community to decide for themselves, then that's exactly what's happening at the moment. You can't have both. This is what I don't understand in your argument.

If you want people who don't follow the standards to be kicked off, then theymos has to officiate over every disagreement. If you don't want the people who don't follow the standards to be kicked off, then what's the point in having the standards in the first place?


I was perfectly civil in my reply to you, and I would expect the same in return. I'm genuinely trying to understand your system, because I (and most others) currently don't see how it would work. Being aggressive with someone who is simply asking for clarification isn't going to win anyone to your cause.

no you lack the intelligence and the wide perspective of thoughts that i have processed befor writing that

so ok i explain you:

once usa is sealed of off mexica, americans will find themselves being ruled by a printing press off a banking cartel, they then try to decentralise that financial system with then realising they dont have the labour force for their "cryptos" so they run around looking for labourers again, making the wall a big question.

With a comment like that some one might think you're racist?  Is snow Mexicans meant as an insult to Canadians LOL, you're a special piece of shit aren't you.  Good to know you're not just a cunt but you're a racist cunt!

Now back on topic, since the majority of "illegals" in the US are there because of overstayed visa's it's actually a fact that more illegals enter from Canada than from Mexico...  No one is suggesting or even thinking about a wall on the Northern border!

With a comment like that some one might think you're racist?  Is snow Mexicans meant as an insult to Canadians LOL, you're a special piece of shit aren't you.  Good to know you're not just a cunt but you're a racist cunt!

Now back on topic, since the majority of "illegals" in the US are there because of overstayed visa's it's actually a fact that more illegals enter from Canada than from Mexico...  No one is suggesting or even thinking about a wall on the Northern border!