$1,000,000 isn't even a lot of money. Maybe you can buy a small house in Los Angeles.
Or Nigeria... On Topic: I think you should not accept accounts as collateral anymore, there is clearly an issue with account selling. I know.. Having multiple accounts and account sales are allowed I was assuming if I sell it to someone with credibility, it would be okay.. I could find out its value from other bids, the thread still says I will not sell to people with a red tag. I made a mistake. Shit happens. I repent. I still think it's not fair that I get a 'not to be trusted' when this poll legitimately shows, users of bitcointalk.org indeed DO trust me! Should I not get another chance? |
|
|
|
One day I provided a loan ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=772348.0) and took the account as collateral, the person defaulted I held the acc for a couple of years, just decided to get rid of it if I find a legitimate buyer, I wouldn't sell it to just anyone. ... That's a sad tale, OP... however, you surely knew that anyone involved in account selling is all but certain to get red trust, so I'm not sure what your beef is here? His problem is not getting his way. OP PM'd both The Pharmacist and me asking us to remove their rating. Upon not answering said PM, OP proceeded to leave false negative ratings on both of us which is absurd. However, this doesn't come as a surprise as people who get caught doing shady things do not tend to respond rationally. I continued to leave feedback for that? You left the feedback 3 months ago. What did you expect? I didn't catch the time to read through your profile then, I was in a hard break-up. I recollected recently and got back to the forum. Why would one move someone elses money to an exchange? Money he is escrowing? That's shady, you certainly weren't doing something the investors knew and wanted to do with their assets! I was never engaged in that sort of behaviour. If you want to, I can make another poll to see who would bitcointalk users rather trust with their BTC, Lauda or iluvbitcoins  $1,000,000 isn't even a lot of money. Maybe you can buy a small house in Los Angeles.
$1,000,000 isn't even a lot of money. Maybe you can buy a small house in Los Angeles.
I'd be willing to bet that more than 50% of the users of this forum would probably kill someone for a million $. Not sure where OP lives exactly, but a million is/would probably be considered a fortune in most non-western countries. @iluvbitcoins just buy some email adresses from TBZ and you'll be back in positive trust in no-time. Ask Lauda, his former business-partner Atriz knows all about it. ./s  Croatia Eastern Croatia at that Dad has average salary (900€), mom has minimum wage (400€), so I'd say a million $ is only something I could dream about. Well, to be fair, I've made some BTC myself, so if BTC hits 20k$, I'll have some million kuna (~150k$), not USD, but I'd be fucking happy  |
|
|
|
You can't even a draw distinction between fact and fiction, which alone makes you unpredictable. You are not trustworthy to me, nor anyone who is thinking clearly. Therefore, the system is working as intended.
Dunno, seems like you have moved your users funds to an exchange and can't provide accountability for the transfers while I have managed a million $ worth of XMR for over a year without a single complaint. Dunno which one of us deserves more trust. |
|
|
|
Using the somewhat centralized default trust system to 'threaten' people with dissenting beliefs is not consistent with the libertarian beliefs bitcointalk was founded on and the values of free speech.
Libertarian bullshit again, ain't it? And it is an abuse of power and a threat to free speech.
This has nothing to do with free speech. You can post the same way that you would regardless of the state of your trust rating. Any change in such would be a decent indicator of hidden motives. He can continue writing, but users who share unpopular beliefs are now more afraid to express them, knowing there's is a possibility they will get red-tagged!
Unpopular =/= objectively false (a.k.a., a lie). You as an individual with a red tag can keep posting. But an individual without a red tag is disincentivized to post because of fear of getting a red-tag on his account. Unpopular = false? So, you too, believe in flat-earth? Since, believing the earth is round was quite unpopular Also, instead of arguing about flat-earth you could tell me how come you forgot to speak Croatian after resetting your e-mail? |
|
|
|
Yes.
That's why it's an opinion and not a fact.
If you opinion means jack shit it doesn't change the fact that it's an opinion.
Well, I disagree.  I believe you cannot have an opinion that the sun emits purple light. Opinions should have something to base the opinion on... Facts don't care about opinions. The same way joe believes the earth is flat doesn't change the Earth from being round. The same way, if you disagree with the definition of 'opinion', the definition still remains the same. |
|
|
|
And it is an abuse of power and a threat to free speech.
I disagree. No one is trying to ban him, and his threads in the wrong boards haven't even been deleted. He's being allowed to spew his nonsense anywhere he goes. Negative trust does not stop him posting in any way shape or form. Similarly, there are no free speech restrictions on trust, which is why most DT members have a plethora of ratings calling them pedophiles, racists, motherfuckers, faggots, whores, etc. Usual 'untrusted' ratings barely have any effect, while DT members have the power to render accounts almost useless for plenty of activities on the forum. He can continue writing, but users who share unpopular beliefs are now more afraid to express them, knowing there's is a possibility they will get red-tagged! That's why it's a threat to discussion. That isn't a battle of ideas, an argument, it's use of power in order to intimidate and silence. It doesn't matter it's about flat-earth, it starts a bad precedent. |
|
|
|
Using the somewhat centralized default trust system to 'threaten' people with dissenting beliefs is not consistent with the libertarian beliefs bitcointalk was founded on and the values of free speech. It is up to the users of the forum to decide whether or not joe is a retard or not, and if he is a retard then we ourselves, will decide for ourselves. He does not need to be red-tagged simply for the reason of beliving into something we find ridiculous. And it is an abuse of power and a threat to free speech. |
|
|
|
One day I provided a loan ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=772348.0) and took the account as collateral, the person defaulted I held the acc for a couple of years, just decided to get rid of it if I find a legitimate buyer, I wouldn't sell it to just anyone. Did this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4441505.msg39675193So, seems like my account is ruined. If you count up all the risked trades in my positive feedback there's ~50 BTC left on my profile Aside from that, I've been running Gringotts depository with 1300-1500 XMR since 15th August 2017 XMR ATH was 494$, which means I escrowed 800k$ just there, I was escrowing some 20 000 DNR etc. (at the time I think around 10k or so) and some other things I'm still escrowing 1350 XMR, at these prices ~150k So, I'm asking you, what's more important to judge my trustworthiness? Am I 'not to be trusted' because I tried to sell an account once or that I held a million USD in escrow and didn't scam anyone? EDIT: I know this is more off-topic, but since it's about the trust system itself and negative feedback, I assume it should be here to represent what the trust system has turned into, it's not about 'trust' anymore, it's about personal whims and thinking whether or not you yourself approve or disapprove something Is trust really here to let us know if we should 'trust' someone with our BTC? Or what is it for? What is its purpose if trust isn't? Example https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1053331 |
|
|
|
Yes.
That's why it's an opinion and not a fact.
If you opinion means jack shit it doesn't change the fact that it's an opinion.
Well, I disagree. I believe you cannot have an opinion that the sun emits purple light. Opinions should have something to base the opinion on... I'm sure joe has some basis to back up his claim. As much as I respect Vod--and I respect him a great deal--I think he probably shouldn't have left that feedback for the reason he gave.
Thank you. How can I trust someone who ignores all scientific laws? Then you shouldn't be able to trust 90% of the worlds populace since all of them believe in an imaginary man on the sky. No the appropriate course of action is to ridicule the retard You could argue that Christians, Muslims, and Jews live their lives based on a book of fairy tales, but would I give them a neg on the forum? No, not at all.
I’m with @The Pharmacist on this. From a scientifically point of view, religions are fairly tales. Does that mean that you can’t trust people with religious beliefs? Not at all. I believe religions are fairly tells that were made up to ease the human fear to death, by the way. To be consistent, Vod should tag any person who expresses religious beliefs on the forum. Religious people are gullible, but that doesn't mean they can't be trusted to do what is expected. Believing the earth is flat means you have mental issues. I would not trust such a person to do what is expected, such as repay a loan. So are flat-earthers. I met a flat-earther once, wouldn't say he can't be trusted. |
|
|
|
The english dictionary disagrees.
It is most certainly an opinion.
Can you have an opinion against something factual? Is my opinion really an opinion if I claim tiny trolls are holding us down so we don't fly off the earth? Yes. That's why it's an opinion and not a fact. If you opinion means jack shit it doesn't change the fact that it's an opinion. |
|
|
|
What is relevant is that joe got a red flag because of an opinion.
It is not an opinion that the earth is flat any more than it is the opinion that the moon is made of cheese. :/ opinion (ə-pĭnˈyən)►
n.
A belief or conclusion held with confidence but not substantiated by positive knowledge or proof: "The world is not run by thought, nor by imagination, but by opinion” ( Elizabeth Drew).
n.
A judgment based on special knowledge and given by an expert: a medical opinion.
n.
A judgment or estimation of the merit of a person or thing: has a low opinion of braggarts.
The english dictionary disagrees. It is most certainly an opinion. |
|
|
|
If the OP believes the earth is flat, he is incapable of reasonable thought and should not be trusted.
I don't agree with that statement. The ability to think critically or rationally isn't inherently tied to one's trustworthiness, in my not so humble opinion. Of course the earth is round, more than 7000 years old, and orbits the sun. I know all these things, but a lot of people choose to argue these facts due to their spiritual beliefs, lack of knowledge, or learning disabilities. I don't think that automatically makes them untrustworthy. Whether or not the earth is flat is irrelevant. What is relevant is that joe got a red flag because of an opinion. |
|
|
|
If you see the ship "go behind the curve" in the ocean and it has totally disappeared it has only gone out of your perspective. You cannot see forever!!!
A photon will continue forever until it is deflected. You will either see the ship, or something in the way. You can see forever. When the ship disappears, you understand it's because of the curve of the earth. There is something called atmosphere. You cannot see forever on earth. Your vision is limited. I have posted video above debunking your ship disappearing evidence. This shouldn't be a debate about Earth being flat, but a debate on the abuse of the trust system. |
|
|
|
Vod's opinion is that your opinion indicates a mental deficiency (something I disagree with - I think you're just a troll - but I appreciate Vod's warning nonetheless) and that you can't be trusted. That's really not a complicated concept. If you disregard all proof for Earth being round then (again - in Vod's opinion) you're likely to disregard e.g. proof of a Bitcoin payment. This is such bullshit and a false analogy. Just because he has a different line of reasoning on things we disagree with doesn't make him a scammer. The trust system shouldn't be used this way, if you want to you could leave a neutral stating that the user believes the earth is flat. Leaving a red tag on someone just because you disagree with him is very wrong. @joerogers8 don't engage in a discussion whether or not the earth is flat, you will waste energy on tilting windmills the discussion should be, whether or not it's right to leave negative feedback to someone for expressing a dissenting viewpoint Although I respect Vod and everything he's doing on bitcointalk, I believe this act is very wrong. |
|
|
|
|
Niiicee
Still a long ROI, but that ths/w means it's going to be profitable even if the price is under 4k$, should be able to run at least 2 years
Has to be able to break even by then o.o
|
|
|
|
It is up and running!
my meter reads 2283 watts
it does flux up to 2346 watts
Video video We want a video |
|
|
|
Addy sent! Though, will need your location for a shipping quote |
|
|
|
|
How much would you charge per kwh if I used up ~45 kwh?
I'm thinking of ordering 20 of the new Whatsminer M10s
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
