Well, I see your dilemma about not being able to prove that you didn't receive something. However, as a disinterested third party, I can't just go out and paint the account red without some definitive proof. Also, I gather that the conversation setting up the deal happened on telegram and the messages self destructed. Correct? Too bad for you. That's the cost of doing shady deals in the first place. When you get burned, it's difficult to get some kind of justice through legitimate channel.

 I just discovered that I am a new DT2 member. As one can tell from viewing my trust page, I'm not very experienced in giving out trust comments. Any pointers from experienced DT members would be helpful. With the recent changes to how default trust members are selected, many more may find themselves in my position, and could use the tips.

   For my first question, is it cool to give positive trust for transactions that I am not personally involved in? I don't want to come off as being a strictly negative Nancy. Quite frankly, I haven't engaged in any P2P on this forum since I am not a very trusting person.





Edit: In case anyone needs clarification on my self moderation of this thread. Here are the general rules.
1) If you wish to discuss the merits of the new way DT1 members are selected, please use one of the several threads already opened in meta.
2) If you wish to appeal any feedback that I may have given to your own account, it's probably best to open a new thread. We may discuss it here since getting constructive criticism is part of the learning process; however, if I take your critique and basically tell you to go fly a kite, it may be best for you to "take it outside."
3) If you wish to discuss my worthiness of being on dt2 or anyone's worthiness of being a default trust member, please open your own thread.
4) If you want to ask your own questions on how to give good trust feedback, please go right ahead. This doesn't have to be all about me. Unsolicited advise is also welcome. I certainly can't be expected to come up with all the good questions and answers.

I gave it a neutral tag. Don't want to start coming out of the gate bucking off a bunch of jockeys. 

OK, I softened the language. TBH, I'm not very proficient in giving trust comments. Definitely amature hour here.

Well, that's a surprise. My condolences to the OP.

LOL. The OP post is shady no matter how you look at it. Red-tagged OP (although I'm not DT, so doesn't amount to much.)

IN XRP WE TRUST!

Well it's a wrap. martinholly167 is now autobanned!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIZoVO8ZyyQ

I guess as a member of the LBGT(lots of letters after that) community, I know the T(lots of letters after that) are getting a bit touchy. However, it's nice to know that you really couldn't care less.

      Actually, the moderators do have some latitude on exactly what action to take on a post that breaks the rules. This can be anything from deleting a post to an autoban. (or no action at all.) I have seen cases where a member is not autobanned for a copy paste. They usually take into consideration how old the post happens to be, if it can be contributed to an error, and whether it appears to be financially motivated. Also, the rules are titled "unofficial." From what I gather, Theymos is not interested in micromanaging the moderation of this board. He has delegated this responsibility to several moderators and mostly leaves it up to them to make fair decisions. He will step in if someone has a complaint about the moderation that seems to have some merit and that he disagrees with.

I think the clarification of what is meant by "plagiarism" stated later in the rules is pretty clear no matter what culture they are from.


Also, since I am a typical dumb American, I am monolingual. Therefore, I am not certain if a translated copy of the rules are available on the local boards. However, I believe many of the local boards do have a stickied post that gives users some idea what the rules are. If this is lacking, perhaps a push to make sure rules are available in as many languages as possible is in order. The challenge is finding capable users willing to do it.

Yes, Microsoft have many employees. I'm sure they have many security measures in place so most employees won't have the access. However, many companies tend to give more access to those with more responsibility. All you need is one of these employees with the required access to go rogue.

Furthermore, there is an additional stipulation in the 2 250+ merit rule.


For example, I currently have 260 merits. I could add suchmoon to my trust list. However, suchmoon is one of my merit fans. So if I deduct suchmoon's merits, I only have 211 merits with respect to my vote for suchmoon, so my inclusion of suchmoon would not count in respect to that user for the 2 members with 250 merit. You'd need a wider network of users in order to get your puppets into DT1.
(As an aside, I'm having difficulty determining what pronoun to use when referring to Lauda and suchmoon. Him, her, they?  )

Meh, the red trust is a comment made over a year ago about the person being an "annoying troll." No reference with the comment. The person making the comment must have just became a new default trust 2 user with the new rules.  I wouldn't get my hopes up that this will create a new spot. If this results in the individual getting removed from the campaign there may be even more spots opening; since come Monday, I suspect there is going to be even more new DT1 and DT2 users with the new DT trust rules...

Meh, I'm not sure that I want to go wade through the sewer. I'm almost certain that I will find zero posts worthy of consumption there. As a merit source, my primary mission is to distribute merits. Earning a reporting badge is only an extra bonus. Similar to the concept of merge mining, I guess.

I have a long way to go to earn that new reporting badge when it rolls out. Only have 107 good reports so far.   Luckily, these ban appeal threads are like fish hopping into the boat.

I recommend that you and your friend sort this out with a licensed mental health professional.  

     Sharing account credentials is bad practice. Please inform your "friend" that since you two were sharing this account, your friend is banned too. If a pool of "friends" are sharing the banned account, they are all banned as well.


Wow, manually posting an excerpt from a Quora article sounds really tedious. Just because you or a "friend" did all the key strokes doesn't make it OK. Although we don't believe you.

Shall we now play link the alt accounts together?

I'll go first.


archived


archived

@OP. Is this an appeal to your ban? Or is this an attempt to get us to reveal any flaws in your posting bot? If the latter, please do your own research.