I'm like 99% sure this is exactly what theymos classified as "crystal-clear abuse" in his OP.
Let me know when you make the thread, please?
I think your rating is flimsy, and unwarranted.


I've always wanted a pet rock, but they keep biting me.

Was being a scammer a requirement to receive negative ratings before? *Checks self for buggies* Flagging should be left to more clear-cut cases of scamming, if that's what you mean by notable then I have no qualms with that.


I was using the word "liberal" non-politically. That was one of my concerns as well, the fact that it requires a victim to create the flag - I understand the reasoning behind it, but I just hope that a high enough percentage of victims actually follows through and understands the system well enough to use it as intended.

Be nice to the liberals or FH is gonna bite ya!

I think semantic games are going to be our biggest hurdle before actually seeing the flags do their job.

It's like you really are a cat; so afraid of a changing environment!

I'd be careful with taking a liberal approach towards the scammer flags. Your statement makes it sounds like you're just going to replace your previous usage of negative trust with scammer flags, at least that's how I heard it; can you please correct me where I'm wrong?


Negative ratings are far from useless, and it's almost like you didn't read the OP. If all you've gotten from this thread is "Negatives are useless, we use flags now", then you're in for a bumpy ride.

Side-Note: Any plans to have a "flag history" per user, those that they've created, supported and opposed?

</3 Am I a degenerate for a reason other than buying my account or are you being redundant?

I don't think they're trying to compare the content of the cases, rather they're making a point about the inconsistent action (or inaction) when it comes to ban appeals.


I thought plagiarism was something that staff is handling. Do we really require you to be the back-up enforcer on this matter?

Both @ 0.0165 BTC

Is that a mistake or am I seeing things? Looks like the top bid on lot 3 is .02, right?

Lot 1 @ 0.007 BTC
Lot 2 @ 0.007 BTC
Lot 4 @ 0.007 BTC

Bump.

Lot 1 & 3 @ 0.001 BTC
Lot 2 0.003 BTC
Lot 4 0.002 BTC

Both @ 0.0105 BTC

0.02 BTC

0.015 BTC

Winner! I will be sending you a PM shortly, and if for whatever reason you are uncomfortable entrusting me with the payment or your shipping information we can arrange for an escrow in whatever way would make you feel most secure.


That's a very nice offer from you, but do not feel bad - I imagine that most of my auctions/raffles will carry a similar reluctance of interest due to the current standing of my trust.


I hope you're joking KY; we've had transactions where I was more than understanding when it took you months to get things in order and never made any comments about your trustworthiness. I regularly buy/sell in the collectibles section. I sincerely hope you are not naive enough to see my new trust-rating and forget all of that.

Top-Bid, so far. Ending in about 10-hours.

You don't think that's disingenuous? I've mostly just been making sad-attempts at creating raffles and auctions, like I have been.


I didn't bring it up.


Explaining and Justifying are different.


Yes, I have. Do you know something I don't?


That's laughable.

If they are his masters, and he is the slave, then why are you being the whip?


Who's favor am I seeking to win?


You're obsessed, relax. This thread has legitimately nothing to do with Lauda.

Would be more impressive if he stuck the landing.
Attacking you, even if we concede everything they are accusing you of, is simply attacking the victim.

Wait.. was I in the gang?
Really let an opportunity of a lifetime slip through my fingers.

I'm not here for Queen-Queef. I'm here to apologize for a mistake that I've made, and people like you wouldn't be riding his cock if I hadn't made that mistake.

Can this be verified in anyway? I have been under the impression this entire time that the merits were given to the post while the address was listed, and in fact not until the address was listed.
This would seem to be an important contingency, especially considering that this thread and the dozens like it are riding on the fact that multiple users were encouraging a "DOX" through merit (especially sources).

I feel like doing a witch-hunt for the people that merited the post, unless you can prove that they did not merit until the address was posted, is a waste of efforts. Even if you can prove that, it would be a waste of efforts. I don't understand why we continually beat dead-horses in this community.

theymos has made note of these users, what can you do through posting about it that theymos is unable to accomplish?

My position on the issue has remained consistent, Vod should have negative DT trust (and probably a few more exclusions) for releasing a DOX (especially, of a forum treasurer). Apparently, DTs aren't going to leave negative feedback for DOXing - they have other priorities

LFC, you're getting a lot of bullshit and it is primarily my fault - I feel like a big asshole, sincerely.
You specifically didn't want to involve yourself in this kind of nonsense, and I dragged you in.

I don't think that anyone coming after you is doing anybody any good. All of the childish names and insults that are being hurled your way are unfortunate and undeserved. suchmoon put it nicely In my opinion, attacking you is counter-productive to anything that would be beneficial for the forum.

People complaining about your post-length/quality are to be ignored. I type an essay with every auction-bid - I get shit for it all the time, I would just ignore it (unless you feel you can take that criticism and turn it into something productive). Essentially, keep your head up, and I'm sorry. I fucked up in regards to you.

You are a welcome addition to the community, even if I'm not currently in a place to say something like that.

Do you want a box of chocolates as a gesture of good-faith? Nutildah, I could care less about what happens to you or your account. I wish you the best, I hope you are prosperous, happy and healthy - sincerely, but you happen to be one of the relevant, recent and significant cases that give context to what's happening around the forum. Crying about how everyone is against you whenever they bring up your past actions isn't helping your case. What is bullshit though, your words Unless, "was" was intended to literally mean in the past. Barking back at everyone that pings your notification bot is not trying to remove yourself from the drama. Especially when virtually nobody is advocating that anything happen to you.

Every-time I read one of your responses it just screams "unaccountable". You're even sitting here trying to minimize the damage, "It was only a hero, not a legendary", "It had a few untrusted negatives, too!", "Attempted murder carries a lesser sentence" - Really? The actual sentences for Murder and Attempted Murder are virtually the same in the context you're describing. "I was really trying to kill them, but after 42-stabs I got tired, so I stopped and that makes the crime less of a crime". You sound pretty detached.


I didn't realize I was meant to repent my sins to Saint nutildah. My biggest mistake(s) were buying an account to avoid posting/PM delays in 2015, and also not checking for plagiarism; I have admitted that. This is the 3rd time you've said something directly to me that is a blatant lie or unwillingness to articulate reality.

You're clearly the one with a vendetta against me, the way you talk - acting high and mighty as though you're on superior moral standing; statements like "unlike you" "at least I", etc.


What the fuck are you even talking about? I think it's almost time I hit the ignore button for you, because you're making less sense than Lauda talking about consistency.
I can say one thing, but you hear 6-other things. Hey, Nutildah, Buddy - I do not want to tag you, and I do not want you tagged.
I'm not attempting to claim the "moral high ground", in fact that seems to have been your one goal with every post in response to me.

Please stop trying to have these round-about conversations with me. "At least I was unsuccessful" is not a defense of your intent.


Careful, talking like that might get you got!


Sounds like you've got it all, to me.

I volunteered the fact that my account was purchased, because I was banned for an offense I did not commit (plagiarism) and would rather deal with the consequences of my actions than deal with the consequences for the actions of another. Everyone has their own personal reasons and justifications, but it seems like some people distrust accounts buyers entirely (yet, not consistently), some are distrusting of my previous omission that this is a bought account, and some have removed me from their list during the Vod situation. Some (less credible users), don't believe my story at all, even after theymos "verified" it, and have exaggerated it further. There's no big secret, evil thread that exposes my non-existent treacherous past or anything like that -  You've been here pretty much every step of the way.

These Meta/Reputation threads often give the surface-impression that they are over your head, or that more is going on, when in reality they are simple situations that are being spun into a web so complicated that nobody can traverse it.


I swung my balls a little too far in front of the camera.  
"The emperor has no clothes!"