Quickseller, this has nothing to do with TECSHARE so get it straight (and stop commenting on things you are very misguided about).

This is more about this precedent:


which was not applied to an instance that has already been conclusively settled as also violating this criteria, however the user was not removed from DefaultTrust.

This is the obvious catalyst, as also hinted by:


---

So, please think before you hit 'Post'.

No, you were wrong on all three counts. You have failed to ever substantiate how takagari or TECSHARE has "lied" about you.

This thread is evidence.

You were asked many times to identify a repercussion you have faced.

You still have not answered that question, and have only replied to the questions with (i) off-topic ad hominems attacks, (ii) demands of 100 BTC for the answer and (iii) posts insulting the intelligence of another user asking the same question.

Given your intentional refusal to identify any repercussions and avoidance of such question, it is safe to assume that you have not received any tangible repercussions. You may have received PMs from people who placed you in their trust list, however that is not a reprecussion.

A repercussion is being removed from DefaultTrust. Scrutiny (which you have received at least publicly but attempted to avoid) is not a repercussion.

Again, Remington_Steele is asking for a repercussion.

I think you mean avoiding scrutiny. You've posted other people's personal messages publicly many many times when it's convenient for you, and you can't complain about other people doing it.

Enjoy your mod coins

Oh my, Vod is thinking that he's the 'ultimate scam buster' and anyone who does not praise him is guilty of contempt.

I think this little exercise has quite concretely proven:

i) Vod is incapable of responding to questions about his use of the trust system, and the feedback that he has left.

ii) Vod attempts to avoids scrutiny by making inappropriate ad hominems and other off-topic remarks.

iii) Vod is unable to identify and prove any instance where TECSHARE supposedly "lied". It is safe to assume that TECSHARE has never lied about Vod, and hence Vod used the trust system inappropriately.

iv) In multiple instances (takagari, TECSHARE, iCEBREAKER) vod has used the trust system as a punitive tool for stifling speech.

v) Based on a precedent theymos has set, Vod should be removed from the trust system.

Bzzt. Irrelevant ad hominem, plus refusal to answer questions in an attempt to avoid scrutiny.

Try again.

Bzzt. Irrelevant ad hominem.

Try again.

Perhaps you should justify the comments you have left others.

Bzzt. Refusal to answer question.

Try again.

Bzzt.

(1) You have never directly answered any of my questions.

(2) Unreasonable demand and refusal to answer questions, in an attempt to avoid scrutiny.

Try again.

Bzzt. Irrelevant ad hominem.

Try again.

That's all he can do

Irrelevant ad hominem.

Try again.

Scrutiny, defined as 'critical observation or examination', is not a repercussion.

Try again.

Please put your hand up if you can "understand" what identifiable repercussions Vod has faced over his trust system abuse.

Anyone?

Haha, another ad hominen. You do realize that this does not help your case at all, right?

I've just PM'd theymos asking him to confirm that PM in this thread

You should read the PM, because I've been removed from DefaultTrust two times.

The first time I got removed was for leaving gweedo negative feedback, when he made a number of topics with material fabrications. Basically, I left him negative feedback for lying.

theymos agreed that what gweedo posted was inaccurate, however removed me from defaulttrust regardless because of 'the forum's mission of free speech'.

You have done the same, yet you were not removed from DefaultTrust. Hence, TECSHARE's statement is accurate.

You mean this?


That's not a lie, ROFL. The truth is not a lie.

When a similar situation happened to me, I was quickly removed from DefaultTrust and received the following PM:


You did far worse than what I did, however you faced no repercussion. This is a fact.

Telling the truth cannot possibly be lying.