The ring does not demand anilingus ( whoops, is that a gay joke)
Are you referring to my rave review from Cluster2k? Warning, some reference links to other reviews are NSFW. |
|
|
|
Tman and lauda posted a negative review at the same time which leads us to believe they are the same person or are connected and having read laudas previous extortion attempt explains what cunning games they play.
Can you explain all of the other negative reviews and how they should be dismissed? There appears to be quite a few. I doubt they are all sockpuppets of Lauda.  I see even Ognasty has chimed in with a recent negative trust rating for different reasons. (Although it appears in untrusted feedback at the moment.) |
|
|
|
|
I'm disappointed that there are no available Windows GUI wallet for Grin. Maybe if I get bored this weekend, I'll tinker with it in my VM or Linux shell. I haven't done that for over a year.
|
|
|
|
Officially changed my signature from the ChipMixer Sr. member signature to Hero member signature. Sorry for the slightly off topic reply, but I just want to vent. I'm finally a hero member! After being just slightly frustrated when the merit system was newly implemented because I was like a week or two into having enough Activity points for hero member(LOL). 250 merits is quite a bit. But hey, I got the required 250 a lot sooner than I anticipated. Small achievement but whatever.  Darkstar_ has good taste in picking people to participate in this campaign. As a merit source, I find myself meriting people that sport chipmixer sigs quite often. Congrats on your deserved promotion. |
|
|
|
In a while, when everyone sets his own DT0 and excludes DefaultTrust entry from it, that DT1 constructed by algo will be obsolete, I believe.
That would be ideal. However, how is a new member who has only been around for a month or so supposed to know who to place on their trust list? Or is the reality that we have faced some sort of stagnation and all lower ranked members are actually alts of more established members. Isn't the point of default trust to give a heads up to people who haven't gotten or witnessed enough hard knocks yet to know any better? |
|
|
|
Be honest for once suchmoony. Given the ever growing size of the Cult of Lauda, you are not really safe unless you have 10-15 inclusions. I was under the impression that suchmoon was one of the main disciples of the Cult of Lauda. I guess that I have much more to learn. |
|
|
|
Nope, I was not lying of manipulation. The sad proof of this belief is that Lauda (in cooperation with her sock puppets) has kicked off one of the DT1 member after his was chosen by algo developed by theymos.
Well, aren't there plenty of other DT1 members that are neutral who could put them back in? All that needs to be done is to persuade enough of them to take affirmative action. |
|
|
|
I'm a little curious about something. I have not engaged in any transactions using this forum. Therefore, I don't have any positive trust feedback that is trusted and wouldn't expect to have any. However, this zero trust appears to put my effectiveness at a disadvantage. If I find a member, who happens to be on DT1 or DT2, definitely doing something questionable and give them negative feedback, chances are pretty good that I will get retaliatory feedback. My trust score will then be red, and my reputation will be marred. I gather that I should just stand up and do what is right in that case and hope others agree and banish the person from the DT list next month. Correct?
Since you're admittedly not trading then your score isn't going to matter much anyway. Abusive feedback would likely get countered and yes, banishment for the abuser is also a possibility. Don't hold back because of someone's DT status. There is a bit of a quandary though if that person is your "sponsor" but in this particular case I'm not planning to do anything shady to put you in that position  Fortunately, I have two sponsors. However, the last time that I had a major disagreement with you was back in 2015, and you ended up helping me change my mind. (ie Bitstone.) |
|
|
|
I'm a little curious about something. I have not engaged in any transactions using this forum. Therefore, I don't have any positive trust feedback that is trusted and wouldn't expect to have any. However, this zero trust appears to put my effectiveness at a disadvantage.
It does not put you at a disadvantage when giving out negative ratings, no. If I find a member, who happens to be on DT1 or DT2, definitely doing something questionable and give them negative feedback, chances are pretty good that I will get retaliatory feedback. My trust score will then be red, and my reputation will be marred. I gather that I should just stand up and do what is right in that case and hope others agree and banish the person from the DT list next month. Correct?
Correct. However, the chances that you will act alone against a DT member that does deserve negative feedback are very slim now. Usually you'd open a thread (if none exists) first to get inform others and get input first. Thank you for the guidance. Without mentioning names at this point, there is one particular member that I have in mind. I guess that I better revisit my trust list and do the needed adjustment, since it's clear that if this member is coming to my mind, they have no business being on my list. |
|
|
|
|
I'm a little curious about something. I have not engaged in any transactions using this forum. Therefore, I don't have any positive trust feedback that is trusted and wouldn't expect to have any. However, this zero trust appears to put my effectiveness at a disadvantage. If I find a member, who happens to be on DT1 or DT2, definitely doing something questionable and give them negative feedback, chances are pretty good that I will get retaliatory feedback. My trust score will then be red, and my reputation will be marred. I gather that I should just stand up and do what is right in that case and hope others agree and banish the person from the DT list next month. Correct?
|
|
|
|
I'm also looking at Dash.
Haven't finished reading this thread yet, but watch out lest you become the next target of cryptohunter for that. Just voice a modicum of support for Dash and you'll end up on the sharp end of his trolling stick. Grin? Never heard of it. Not interested in it, even if Theymos is throwing his support at it--which makes me scratch my head a little. But I'm obviously not nearly as knowledgeable as 95% of bitcointalkers as far as what constitutes a good altcoin anyway. Meh, Jet Cash already had to face the grilling from that person. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5098607.33 Cryptohunter decided to back off due to Jet Cash's age and not wanting to be a bully. |
|
|
|
If you are non-DT you can set your list to full of scammers if you wish, nobody should care. if you are DT, you affect everyone and thus are responsible for keeping a proper list. If you don't, then you should be willing to accept the consequences. Your post didn't need breaking down as it is just not worth it.
I gather when you state DT, you mean only DT1. As a DT2 member, the only effect my list has is with the selection of valid DT1 candidates (Like everyone with more that 10 merits has on the forum) and if anyone cares to set their trust depth to 3 or 4.(Which is not recommended.) |
|
|
|
No, those are earned merits.
I understand that, but I wondered if it assumed that all legendaries started with 1,000, or if it knew they had been promoted to legendary, so they should have a lower start count. Here is the direct link to the most earned merits report on BPIP. It only takes into consideration the earned merits and not the airdropped merits. https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=mostmerited |
|
|
|
But scammer should remain red tag. So not bad tag them by multiple DT.
Yeah,most times when there are changes to the DT lists and some DT members removed it gives scammers a leeway and their tags get off which probably isn't safe for members who didn't know they were previously tagged. So if scammers and inappropriate users gets tagged multiple times by different DT members it'll almost make it impossible for their red tags to go off even if there is a change in the system. We should start encouraging conscientious members to start tagging whether they are part of DT or not. If only I could turn back time and would have tagged all of the scammy shit that I've seen going down since 2015. With this new dynamic DT system, what's only "untrusted" feedback now, could be DT feedback next month. |
|
|
|
My favorite one was the one raving about my rimming abilities.  This is worthless without pics.  The review for me didn't come with a link to display my good work. However, he left others glowing reviews too. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=18201WARNING: NSFW |
|
|
|
I like it too. It's now quite obvious how much more active the current group of DT1 members are than the previous list. That alone adds practicality to the system. Scammers are getting tagged quickly and frequently. Members who are engaging in honest trade are also getting tagged appropriately.
I would still caution new users to do their own research into potential trade partners, but it does give us a good starting point. As long as the DT members remain active, and this isn't just a "Honeymoon" stage, we're off to a good start with the new system.
Yes, I've been trying to restrain myself so that the gloss doesn't wear off the pumpkin. However, it's so hard because it's only been two days and I already got 3 fan letters. Also, I've gotten a few fabulous reviews. My favorite one was the one raving about my rimming abilities. |
|
|
|
Uh, yeah. Don't click on those reference links at work. Just a warning.
I put a neutral trust comment as a warning that the reference links are NSFW. |
|
|
|
@OP. I went into your profile on BPIP.org and noticed that it is only showing that you password was changed on 12/09/2018. https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=bjoern1978Have you tried using the "forgot password" feature? Don't use the secret question feature, it will lock you out of the account. In order to change your password you only need to know the e-mail that is attached to the account. If BPIP is correct, the hacker hasn't changed the e-mail associated with the account. |
|
|
|
|
Hello OP. Please move this post to the Meta Board. The Meta Board is for discussion about the Bitcointalk forum, itself. The people who hang out there should be able to help you better.
|
|
|
|
Its doesn't It isn't going to happen. As I mentioned on my first reply he is spending merit on shitpost then how you expect that he could find good post. Don't forget that thread is like a court so when he report 2-3 posts and they're all shitpost as you said he'll either be reported by other merit sources to be removed as a merit source or given suggestions by other reputed merit source on what quality post are. Right now I'll say it could be, he's meriting post just because he agrees to it or maybe he wanted to finish his remaining merits before starting this topic to replicate The Pharmacist's success. I can't really tell though. We need to remember that QuestionAuthority was removed from merit source for giving merit to the shit post(s),so if this is the case OP also can get the same result.I hope OP's merit transaction will be watch out by Hawk eye (theymos) after reading this thread. Well, the QA case was a little different. QA basically solicited the giveaway of merits and gave each participant in the WO thread 50 merits each. In this current case, only 2 merits were given for each post and the people made posts to participate in the contest, not to get merits. We will see. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
