Someone lowered my trust, I don't know why. What recourse?

[Quickseller]

Sorry to necro bump this thread, however it seems pretty clear to me that tspacepilot scammed TF in this case. I understand that scammer tags were in effect at this time, yet for some reason "OldScammerTag" did not leave tspacepilot a negative trust. Also several members of default trust seem to have agreed that tspacepilot scammed TF, however did not leave any negative trust of their own. Has the practice of multiple members leaving negative trust when someone scams a somewhat new practice?

Assuming the mods are going to allow this insane necro bump, surely you realize that anyone looking at your post history would take into account that you are on some kind of anti-tspacepilot bender.   The real qustion is why?

I honestly dont care why the dirt was dug up, but I wonder how you manager to keep this hidden from your rating. Several highly trusted people have left their opinion on this matter, but no ratings which reflect them. Your account currently seems legit, mainly because ratings by TF no longer carry much weight. Well, rather it would seem like this if it was not for Quicksellers rating.

It seems that people seem to distrust TF so much that they just outright ignore his claims without even looking into them. The coinlenders and inputs "hacks" took place very shortly after this took place, at which point TF was likely preoccupied with dealing with that and could not even bring additional attention to this scam.

Since TF turned scammer, he pointed out a number of scams/scandals that everyone promptly ignored. There was the silvercane ponzi that for some reason scammed him first and the community ignored him and then ended up getting scammed. When dicebitco.in scammed, he advocated that people remove their signature and many people promptly ignored him, some people appeared to do the opposite for the sake of not listening to him. I want to say there are more examples but cannot think of them off the top of my head.

From what I can tell people were not leaving negative trust against people when they were discovered to scam verses the 4-5 negatives that people would generally receive today when they are discovered to scam. Plus you can add the fact that no scam accusation was ever opened and TF was on default trust at the time. Not only that but he was a newbie/junior member at the time this happened so it was likely assumed that the account would get abandoned once this came to light (and likely was abandoned until TF was removed from default trust).

[1714968857]

1714968857

[1714968857]

1714968857

[1714968857]

1714968857

[Blazr]

You ran a bot on coinchat, probably with TF's help. You admitted this before, so you can't really deny it now:

I *did* use coinchat a few months ago and I was banned by "admin".  We exchanged some emails in which I asked him what I had done to be banned and I didn't ever get a detailed response.  He said I owed him 0.2BTC if I wanted to be reinstated on coinchat.  I asked him several times where he came up with that number and what I had done wrong.  Each time, however, he just replied tersely about some sort of fraud and paying him back.

The best guess I have at what he was angry about is that I was experimenting with robots on his site using the api the he published (and I as I understood it) he encouraged us to use.  I enjoyed coinchat and I learned a lot about node.js while I was experimenting there.  

Coinchat paid people to chat, not bots. Bot owners on coinchat we're supposed to tag their bots with "bot" so that the system would mark them as inelligible for payments for the chatting they did.

So what exactly are you saying TF is lying about? are you saying your bots never received any payment for chatting? Or perhaps that TF said to you your bots were elligible to receive payments? This is what I don't understand at all. You claim the allegations are untrue, but don't say what is untrue, just that TF is a scammer, which is somewhat relevant of course but I have not took anything TF said into account here, only things you said and my knowledge of how coinchat worked.

You never said either of these things in the initial complaint or gave any other excuse so I suspect you did defraud coinchat, however this was a long time ago and the Bitcoin price was much lower too, approximately $128.50/BTC. So if you did defraud coinchat the amount you took was only ~$64. Not exactly the scam of the century, and as long as you don't have a history of doing this kind of thing then I don't think this on its own makes you very untrustworthy, nobody is perfect and everyone makes mistakes, there are no heros or villains in this world - only heroic and villainous acts.

Perhaps what you could do is offer to refund the $64 to someone who was scammed by TF. Maybe you could do this to "atone". However, the way you have acted when confronted about this by Quickseller doesn't exactly scream trustworthy at all.

[Quickseller]

Like I said in the thread that he opened on me, I don't think he is ever going to get caught scamming in the future because he has learned his lesson on how to avoid getting caught and displays a tendency to dispute any claim of him scamming even though the evidence again him is clear.

[tspacepilot]

Sorry to necro bump this thread, however it seems pretty clear to me that tspacepilot scammed TF in this case. I understand that scammer tags were in effect at this time, yet for some reason "OldScammerTag" did not leave tspacepilot a negative trust. Also several members of default trust seem to have agreed that tspacepilot scammed TF, however did not leave any negative trust of their own. Has the practice of multiple members leaving negative trust when someone scams a somewhat new practice?

Assuming the mods are going to allow this insane necro bump, surely you realize that anyone looking at your post history would take into account that you are on some kind of anti-tspacepilot bender.   The real qustion is why?

I honestly dont care why the dirt was dug up, but I wonder how you manager to keep this hidden from your rating. Several highly trusted people have left their opinion on this matter, but no ratings which reflect them. Your account currently seems legit, mainly because ratings by TF no longer carry much weight. Well, rather it would seem like this if it was not for Quicksellers rating.

You say you "wonder how I managed to keep this hidden", I think it's pretty clear that the global mods in this thread saw this as an unsubstatiated he-said-she-said and left it at that.  TF was amongst the elite at the time, but history has spoken here.  My accounts "seems" legit because I am legit.  I'm a long-time bitcointalk forum member who doesn't do trades, but who does like to talk about the technical details of the protocol/software and I like to gamble and talk about gambling and I occassionally take small coding jobs.

You ran a bot on coinchat, probably with TF's help. You admitted this before, so you can't really deny it now:

I *did* use coinchat a few months ago and I was banned by "admin".  We exchanged some emails in which I asked him what I had done to be banned and I didn't ever get a detailed response.  He said I owed him 0.2BTC if I wanted to be reinstated on coinchat.  I asked him several times where he came up with that number and what I had done wrong.  Each time, however, he just replied tersely about some sort of fraud and paying him back.

The best guess I have at what he was angry about is that I was experimenting with robots on his site using the api the he published (and I as I understood it) he encouraged us to use.  I enjoyed coinchat and I learned a lot about node.js while I was experimenting there.  

Coinchat paid people to chat, not bots. Bot owners on coinchat we're supposed to tag their bots with "bot" so that the system would mark them as inelligible for payments for the chatting they did.

So what exactly are you saying TF is lying about? are you saying your bots never received any payment for chatting? Or perhaps that TF said to you your bots were elligible to receive payments? This is what I don't understand at all. You claim the allegations are untrue, but don't say what is untrue, just that TF is a scammer, which is somewhat relevant of course but I have not took anything TF said into account here, only things you said and my knowledge of how coinchat worked.

You never said either of these things in the initial complaint or gave any other excuse so I suspect you did defraud coinchat, however this was a long time ago and the Bitcoin price was much lower too, approximately $128.50/BTC. So if you did defraud coinchat the amount you took was only ~$64. Not exactly the scam of the century, and as long as you don't have a history of doing this kind of thing then I don't think this on its own makes you very untrustworthy, nobody is perfect and everyone makes mistakes, there are no heros or villains in this world - only heroic and villainous acts.

Perhaps what you could do is offer to refund the $64 to someone who was scammed by TF. Maybe you could do this to "atone". However, the way you have acted when confronted about this by Quickseller doesn't exactly scream trustworthy at all.

Here's the deal man, first off, I feel very angry that I'm having to try to go through all this again, given the large time distance and the fact that while I have caused 0 problems around here, TF has well... But nevertheless, QS is determined to drag us all back through this mud so here we go.  I don't deny that I was working on a bot but I do deny any fraud or anything else.  I was in good-faith chatting on coinchat (using my fingers to type the messages and my eyes to read the replies and my own brain parse and understand them) and I was learning node.js and seeing what's what.  My best guess as to what happened is that my code didn't have a timer correctly set or I had some loop in there (I was a total noob) and that I sent a bunch of messages in a row or something and that's why "admin"/TF banned my account.  As I said upthread, it was only after getting banned that I got any kind of info about the rules for bots, how they were to be named, where they were to be chatting and whatnot.  This is despite asking TF about those rules on coinchat and him never getting back to me about it (I swear this info is somewhere upthread here and I still haven't read it all again).  Some time later (weeks, I'm not sure, but I recall it being later) I find the negative feedback on my account and I started this thread because I wasn't really sure what to do about it.

When you say that reading through this doesn't make you think that I should be seen as untrustworthy you should ask youself this.  Does it mean that I should be kicked out of a signature ad campaign?  I don't do trades so negative feedback from QS only has one real impact, it got me booted from my signature ad campaign and this was exactly his goal.  He even stated it on the main thread of my campaign.  Then he spent about a day looking for something to use against me and this is what he came up with.  After you've answered that, ask yourself this: is this the kind of behavior you'd expect from someone on default trust?  Bullying small, unimportant people because they've disagreed with you in the past?  Is that what default trust is supposed to be used for?

Here's the problem with you quoting those numbers: they are completely arbitrary.  TF had accused me in this thread of taking some wild amount of BTC that I didn't even own at the time, then he "ballparked" it somewhere else then I think he settled on "all money I had ever withdrawn".  But as I said, I spent many hours on that site chatting and having fun and I had withdrawn my rewards legitimately.  TF was throwing numbers out with no backing and demanding that I pay him those amounts in order to remove his negative rating.  I walked away from that ransom attempt.  History has shown what kind of guy he was and what kind of stock should be placed into his accusations.

Like I said in the thread that he opened on me, I don't think he is ever going to get caught scamming in the future because he has learned his lesson on how to avoid getting caught and displays a tendency to dispute any claim of him scamming even though the evidence again him is clear.

Quickseller is some kind of zealous madman on a rampage against me at this point.  I honestly do not enjoy these drama festival flame-wars and I started a thread in Meta only a few days before this nonsense against me began in an attempt to make things more drama free around here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1031791.0   For that reason, I locked the main thread in which I call out QS for his unmotivated mudslinging smear campaign because the thread had degenerated into a flame war.  I'm not interested in continuing that flame war here.  QS, the best thing you can do at the moment is remove your negative trust on me and hope that I forget about this by the time that BadBear gets back from holiday.

[Quickseller]

You ran a bot on coinchat, probably with TF's help. You admitted this before, so you can't really deny it now:

I *did* use coinchat a few months ago and I was banned by "admin".  We exchanged some emails in which I asked him what I had done to be banned and I didn't ever get a detailed response.  He said I owed him 0.2BTC if I wanted to be reinstated on coinchat.  I asked him several times where he came up with that number and what I had done wrong.  Each time, however, he just replied tersely about some sort of fraud and paying him back.

The best guess I have at what he was angry about is that I was experimenting with robots on his site using the api the he published (and I as I understood it) he encouraged us to use.  I enjoyed coinchat and I learned a lot about node.js while I was experimenting there. 

Coinchat paid people to chat, not bots. Bot owners on coinchat we're supposed to tag their bots with "bot" so that the system would mark them as inelligible for payments for the chatting they did.

So what exactly are you saying TF is lying about? are you saying your bots never received any payment for chatting? Or perhaps that TF said to you your bots were elligible to receive payments? This is what I don't understand at all. You claim the allegations are untrue, but don't say what is untrue, just that TF is a scammer, which is somewhat relevant of course but I have not took anything TF said into account here, only things you said and my knowledge of how coinchat worked.

You never said either of these things in the initial complaint or gave any other excuse so I suspect you did defraud coinchat, however this was a long time ago and the Bitcoin price was much lower too, approximately $128.50/BTC. So if you did defraud coinchat the amount you took was only ~$64. Not exactly the scam of the century, and as long as you don't have a history of doing this kind of thing then I don't think this on its own makes you very untrustworthy, nobody is perfect and everyone makes mistakes, there are no heros or villains in this world - only heroic and villainous acts.

Perhaps what you could do is offer to refund the $64 to someone who was scammed by TF. Maybe you could do this to "atone". However, the way you have acted when confronted about this by Quickseller doesn't exactly scream trustworthy at all.

Here's the deal man, first off, I feel very angry that I'm having to try to go through all this again, given the large time distance and the fact that while I have caused 0 problems around here, TF has well... But nevertheless, QS is determined to drag us all back through this mud so here we go.  I don't deny that I was working on a bot but I do deny any fraud or anything else.  I was in good-faith chatting on coinchat (using my fingers to type the messages and my eyes to read the replies and my own brain parse and understand them) and I was learning node.js and seeing what's what.  My best guess as to what happened is that my code didn't have a timer correctly set or I had some loop in there (I was a total noob) and that I sent a bunch of messages in a row or something and that's why "admin"/TF banned my account.  As I said upthread, it was only after getting banned that I got any kind of info about the rules for bots, how they were to be named, where they were to be chatting and whatnot.  This is despite asking TF about those rules on coinchat and him never getting back to me about it (I swear this info is somewhere upthread here and I still haven't read it all again).  Some time later (weeks, I'm not sure, but I recall it being later) I find the negative feedback on my account and I started this thread because I wasn't really sure what to do about it.

so you admit to receiving some amount of funds that were not actually due to you then. If the bot was still running when it was not "intended" to then you would have earned some amount.

When you say that reading through this doesn't make you think that I should be seen as untrustworthy you should ask youself this.  Does it mean that I should be kicked out of a signature ad campaign?  I don't do trades so negative feedback from QS only has one real impact, it got me booted from my signature ad campaign and this was exactly his goal.  He even stated it on the main thread of my campaign.  Then he spent about a day looking for something to use against me and this is what he came up with.  After you've answered that, ask yourself this: is this the kind of behavior you'd expect from someone on default trust?  Bullying small, unimportant people because they've disagreed with you in the past?  Is that what default trust is supposed to be used for?

Doesnt matter. You are a spammer so not having an incentive to post on here is probably good for the forum overall, however regardless, you scammed, end of story. Just because you claim that someone was motivated to find dirt on you does not give you an excuise to have scammed in the past.

Here's the problem with you quoting those numbers: they are completely arbitrary.  TF had accused me in this thread of taking some wild amount of BTC that I didn't even own at the time, then he "ballparked" it somewhere else then I think he settled on "all money I had ever withdrawn".  But as I said, I spent many hours on that site chatting and having fun and I had withdrawn my rewards legitimately.  TF was throwing numbers out with no backing and demanding that I pay him those amounts in order to remove his negative rating.  I walked away from that ransom attempt.  History has shown what kind of guy he was and what kind of stock should be placed into his accusations.

it doesn't matter if you scammed for .01 or 1.5, the fact of the matter is that you scammed. When you were called out about it you refused to pay and refused to even try to make it right.

Like I said in the thread that he opened on me, I don't think he is ever going to get caught scamming in the future because he has learned his lesson on how to avoid getting caught and displays a tendency to dispute any claim of him scamming even though the evidence again him is clear.

Quickseller is some kind of zealous madman on a rampage against me at this point.  I honestly do not enjoy these drama festival flame-wars and I started a thread in Meta only a few days before this nonsense against me began in an attempt to make things more drama free around here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1031791.0   For that reason, I locked the main thread in which I call out QS for his unmotivated mudslinging smear campaign because the thread had degenerated into a flame war.  I'm not interested in continuing that flame war here.  QS, the best thing you can do at the moment is remove your negative trust on me and hope that I forget about this by the time that BadBear gets back from holiday.

why would I remove my negative? You scammed. When I called you out about the scam you threatened me and started a flame war. When people started to say that you were wrong you locked the thread you opened against me. All of these things make you untrustworthy in my (and probably in most anyone else's who is reasonable) eyes.

[tspacepilot]

Here's the deal man, first off, I feel very angry that I'm having to try to go through all this again, given the large time distance and the fact that while I have caused 0 problems around here, TF has well... But nevertheless, QS is determined to drag us all back through this mud so here we go.  I don't deny that I was working on a bot but I do deny any fraud or anything else.  I was in good-faith chatting on coinchat (using my fingers to type the messages and my eyes to read the replies and my own brain parse and understand them) and I was learning node.js and seeing what's what.  My best guess as to what happened is that my code didn't have a timer correctly set or I had some loop in there (I was a total noob) and that I sent a bunch of messages in a row or something and that's why "admin"/TF banned my account.  As I said upthread, it was only after getting banned that I got any kind of info about the rules for bots, how they were to be named, where they were to be chatting and whatnot.  This is despite asking TF about those rules on coinchat and him never getting back to me about it (I swear this info is somewhere upthread here and I still haven't read it all again).  Some time later (weeks, I'm not sure, but I recall it being later) I find the negative feedback on my account and I started this thread because I wasn't really sure what to do about it.

so you admit to receiving some amount of funds that were not actually due to you then. If the bot was still running when it was not "intended" to then you would have earned some amount.

Nope, that's not right at all.  You're purposefully trying to twist what I say into some sort of confession to a crime that I didn't commit.  Even if you manage to twist my words enough that everyone's confused that still won't change the facts of what happened.  It will just mean that you succeeded in confusing everyone at my expense.

What I admitted to up there was that I wasn't very good with asynchronous code and I had some bugs that probably caused TF to flag my account as spamming.  This is me speculating about what TF's perspective may have been, why it was that he banned me. That doesn't in any way add up to an admission of spamming or scamming or whatever.

When you say that reading through this doesn't make you think that I should be seen as untrustworthy you should ask youself this.  Does it mean that I should be kicked out of a signature ad campaign?  I don't do trades so negative feedback from QS only has one real impact, it got me booted from my signature ad campaign and this was exactly his goal.  He even stated it on the main thread of my campaign.  Then he spent about a day looking for something to use against me and this is what he came up with.  After you've answered that, ask yourself this: is this the kind of behavior you'd expect from someone on default trust?  Bullying small, unimportant people because they've disagreed with you in the past?  Is that what default trust is supposed to be used for?

Doesnt matter. You are a spammer so not having an incentive to post on here is probably good for the forum overall, however regardless, you scammed, end of story. Just because you claim that someone was motivated to find dirt on you does not give you an excuise to have scammed in the past.

Here's the problem with you quoting those numbers: they are completely arbitrary.  TF had accused me in this thread of taking some wild amount of BTC that I didn't even own at the time, then he "ballparked" it somewhere else then I think he settled on "all money I had ever withdrawn".  But as I said, I spent many hours on that site chatting and having fun and I had withdrawn my rewards legitimately.  TF was throwing numbers out with no backing and demanding that I pay him those amounts in order to remove his negative rating.  I walked away from that ransom attempt.  History has shown what kind of guy he was and what kind of stock should be placed into his accusations.

it doesn't matter if you scammed for .01 or 1.5, the fact of the matter is that you scammed. When you were called out about it you refused to pay and refused to even try to make it right.

Well it does of course matter that I did not scam or spam, as TF puts it.  And the fact that TF is making up numbers left and right shows what this was, a blackmail attempt.

Like I said in the thread that he opened on me, I don't think he is ever going to get caught scamming in the future because he has learned his lesson on how to avoid getting caught and displays a tendency to dispute any claim of him scamming even though the evidence again him is clear.

Quickseller is some kind of zealous madman on a rampage against me at this point.  I honestly do not enjoy these drama festival flame-wars and I started a thread in Meta only a few days before this nonsense against me began in an attempt to make things more drama free around here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1031791.0   For that reason, I locked the main thread in which I call out QS for his unmotivated mudslinging smear campaign because the thread had degenerated into a flame war.  I'm not interested in continuing that flame war here.  QS, the best thing you can do at the moment is remove your negative trust on me and hope that I forget about this by the time that BadBear gets back from holiday.

why would I remove my negative? You scammed. When I called you out about the scam you threatened me and started a flame war. When people started to say that you were wrong you locked the thread you opened against me. All of these things make you untrustworthy in my (and probably in most anyone else's who is reasonable) eyes.

Nope, I did not scam and i haven't and won't.  It's not my style.  My style is gambling and writing code and enjoying study.  Your style is the dramas and the flamewars and the mudslinging.  I closed the thread because I don't want to go back and forth with you for another week while we wait for this to be settled.  Everyone can read through that thread (and this one, geez) and see what's going on here, you went on a mission against me and you have (temporarily) succeeded.  The reason you should remove the negative trust is so that badbear doesn't have to remove you from his trust list for this kind of behavior, but maybe he will anyway, I dunno.  I'm locking this thread too because I see no reason for this to continue.  You are intransigent, you are angry, you are full of yourself and your own power.  We'll see how long you last.

[shorena]

Id like add my view on things, tspacepilot was so nice to unlock the thread for this. I cant say if the thread will be locked afterwards or not. That is not for me to decide.

Firstly I value Quicksellers input on things and I think the rating is not a violating or misuse of the DefaultTrust status. It is pretty clear that the Trust System does not follow much rules and it should also be very clear that it is more often than not based on opinions.

I was tempted to add my rating along with Quickseller, but I decided against this. Keep in mind that I might be biased on this as TF tried to blackmail me in the past (see the above post by quickseller regarding the dicebitco.in campaign), I tried to mitigate this by consulting several close friends IRL.

My main reason is that there is no solid proof. I read through all the old posts as well as the new posts and never was any solid evidence presented. As I said above that is not always how the trust system works, but in this case I think it should. Its been way over a year and I think multiple negative ratings are uncalled for. A single negative rating by quickseller can be countered by a few good trades. A single rating can also be discussed with a signature campaign manager. This gets harder to more negative ratings an account has accumulated and I dont see any reason to make it any harder as it already is.

[tspacepilot]

Id like add my view on things, tspacepilot was so nice to unlock the thread for this. I cant say if the thread will be locked afterwards or not. That is not for me to decide.

Firstly I value Quicksellers input on things and I think the rating is not a violating or misuse of the DefaultTrust status. It is pretty clear that the Trust System does not follow much rules and it should also be very clear that it is more often than not based on opinions.

I was tempted to add my rating along with Quickseller, but I decided against this. Keep in mind that I might be biased on this as TF tried to blackmail me in the past (see the above post by quickseller regarding the dicebitco.in campaign), I tried to mitigate this by consulting several close friends IRL.

My main reason is that there is no solid proof. I read through all the old posts as well as the new posts and never was any solid evidence presented. As I said above that is not always how the trust system works, but in this case I think it should. Its been way over a year and I think multiple negative ratings are uncalled for. A single negative rating by quickseller can be countered by a few good trades. A single rating can also be discussed with a signature campaign manager. This gets harder to more negative ratings an account has accumulated and I dont see any reason to make it any harder as it already is.

Indeed I am going to relock it because I think that the discussion is getting to the point of going round-and-round and the real solution here is in badbear's hands, but being away, I have to wait.

As you say, Shorena, there's no solid proof against me and what's more, I don't do trades and I don't cause trouble.  This whole thing is motivated on Quickseller's personal anger against me.  Perhaps from this:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1018585.msg11034617#msg11034617

Perhaps from elsewhere where I have disagreed with him.  You can see that when I disagree with him he quickly switches over to "you are and idiot/don't know what you're talking about" or "you are just a spammer".  He does this against me in multiple threads and now that he's admitted that ACCTseller is his alt the timeline of his vengence campaign against me is really clear. (perhaps relevant, in this thread he seem to be arguing just the opposite point https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=875272.msg10015541#msg10015541, proof that the guy is interested in being right and winning the argument at all costs, ie, can't admit when he's wrong).

You are completely correct that trust system is unmoderated and QS can use it how he likes (see here for my ideas how how to have less drama over this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1031791.0).  Nevertheless those on default trust don't stay on there for long if/when they start using their status as a way to take out personal grudges, begin flamewars, etc.

In that spirit, I'm relocking this thread and awaiting the return of badbear or the removal of QS's smear, or both.