should luke-jr be on Default Trust?

[should luke-jr be on DT?]

This is fairly obviously a throwaway account for somewhat obvious reasons

If anyone is curious, here is a little about me: I am not a party to this dispute, I may or may not be on level 2 Default Trust, many people have me on their trust list, I have dark green trust and I do not wish to have a negative rating from luke-jr. I also wish to maintain my reputation here on bitcointalk.org

User in question: luke-jr
Trust abuser's profile link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=3318
Level 1 DT users whose trust list the trust abuser is on: theymos and dserrano5
What happened: luke-jr has sent negative trust to both cooldgamer and lenny_ with a comment of:

Code:

Lies about me.

Both of the above had sent luke-jr a negative rating being critical of what they think were him censoring bitcoin by enabling, by default settings that prevent certain transactions from confirming, notably ones from a certain gambling on-chain "website"

Regardless of if luke-jr is right or wrong in trying to censor the Bitcoin network, he is clearly trying to censor his critics with his negative trust ratings and his position on the DefaultTrust network.

As a result of the above, I believe that luke-jr should be removed from the DefaultTrust network

Regards
"should luke-jr be on DT?"

P.S. Please no comments about "quickseller" or "Vod", this is not the place for such complaints. There are plenty of other threads to complain about either of them

P.P.S. I locked the other thread and created this one in order to create a poll. The other thread can be moved to the trashcan.

[1714915544]

1714915544

[1714915544]

1714915544

[1714915544]

1714915544

[Quickseller]

I think this is a pretty clear example of someone sending a negative rating for personal ratings, which is a generally unaccepted practice in the community

[Xian01]

Dude is cancerous to Bitcoin IMO.

[Muhammed Zakir]

His feedbacks which I think is not appropriate except BPB's can be justifiable thought neutral is good IMHO.


kakobrekla - Slandering me
BiPolarBob - "Too good to be true", or at least teaches people to be scammer victims (see link)
cooldgamer - Lies about me.
lenny_ - Lies about me.


FWIW I removed him from my trust list many weeks ago. IMHO he should be removed from default trust list.

[Luke-Jr]

Both of the above had sent luke-jr a negative rating being critical of what they think were him censoring bitcoin by enabling, by default settings that prevent certain transactions from confirming, notably ones from a certain gambling on-chain "website"

Which is a lie, just as I said in my feedback.

Regardless of if luke-jr is right or wrong in trying to censor the Bitcoin network,

You also lie now, since I am not trying to censor the Bitcoin network.
Clearly you are biased since you are yourself pushing this lie.

he is clearly trying to censor his critics with his negative trust ratings and his position on the DefaultTrust network.

I have the right to distrust whomever I like for whatever reasons I like.
Furthermore, I gave a clear and honest reason why I distrust these people.

As a result of the above, I believe that luke-jr should be removed from the DefaultTrust network

In other words, you don't think theymos and dserrano5 have a right to trust whomever they like either, and want them to obey your lie-based demand not to trust me...

[XinXan]

Both of the above had sent luke-jr a negative rating being critical of what they think were him censoring bitcoin by enabling, by default settings that prevent certain transactions from confirming, notably ones from a certain gambling on-chain "website"

Which is a lie, just as I said in my feedback.

Regardless of if luke-jr is right or wrong in trying to censor the Bitcoin network,

You also lie now, since I am not trying to censor the Bitcoin network.
Clearly you are biased since you are yourself pushing this lie.

he is clearly trying to censor his critics with his negative trust ratings and his position on the DefaultTrust network.

I have the right to distrust whomever I like for whatever reasons I like.
Furthermore, I gave a clear and honest reason why I distrust these people.

As a result of the above, I believe that luke-jr should be removed from the DefaultTrust network

In other words, you don't think theymos and dserrano5 have a right to trust whomever they like either, and want them to obey your lie-based demand not to trust me...

Have you read the instructions on the trust page, it says if you believe this person is a scammer or a potential scammer, you gave him negative trust because he is supposedly a lier... Dserrano5 already proved how trusted he is lately so.

[should luke-jr be on DT?]

Both of the above had sent luke-jr a negative rating being critical of what they think were him censoring bitcoin by enabling, by default settings that prevent certain transactions from confirming, notably ones from a certain gambling on-chain "website"

Which is a lie, just as I said in my feedback.

Regardless of if luke-jr is right or wrong in trying to censor the Bitcoin network,

You also lie now, since I am not trying to censor the Bitcoin network.
Clearly you are biased since you are yourself pushing this lie.

I honestly do not have a strong opinion either way in this. However we can look at this in two ways in the context of your sent trust.

1) Lets say that hypothetically speaking, that you were trying to censor the Bitcoin network. Your sent negative trust ratings would clearly be an effort to cover up this fact that you were trying to censor the network. This would clearly be wrong.

2) Lets say that hypothetically speaking, you were in fact not trying to censor the Bitcoin network. Your sent negative trust ratings would clearly be an effort to censor your critics. This is the situation that you claim to be true. Don't you think it might be a better idea to post facts to your defense, rather then try to shut your critics up with what can only be interpreted as intimidation?

I honestly do not know a lot about the allegation that you were trying to censor the Bitcoin network, and for a long time, despite this allegation, I had a good level of respect for you and your work for Bitcoin and for Eligius. I honestly thought that it could have been true, however it was likely an ideological decision if it was true. However my discovery of these negative ratings caused me to loose a lot of respect for you. Regardless of how frivolous the claims against you are, you should never attempt to shut up your critics with intimidation. If there is no merit to the claims against you then the facts will prove your side of the story to be true.

he is clearly trying to censor his critics with his negative trust ratings and his position on the DefaultTrust network.

I have the right to distrust whomever I like for whatever reasons I like.
Furthermore, I gave a clear and honest reason why I distrust these people.

You are correct to say that you have the right to give negative trust to whoever you wish, however if you want your trust ratings to be relied upon throughout the rest of the community, then your ratings, especially your negative ratings, should conform to the generally accepted practices of the community as a whole. If your trust ratings do not conform to the generally accepted community standards, then you will not remain to be reputable from a trust feedback standpoint. No, there are no written rules about what the community standards are, however I don't think the trust ratings in question conform with the community standards.

As a result of the above, I believe that luke-jr should be removed from the DefaultTrust network

In other words, you don't think theymos and dserrano5 have a right to trust whomever they like either, and want them to obey your lie-based demand not to trust me...

They both have the right to have whomever they wish to be on their trust list. However with that being said if they have people on their trust list who give ratings that do not conform with the generally accepted community standards, then they will not remain reputable and their trust list (and ratings) should not be relied upon by default.

As I mentioned previously, I am not saying that you did or did not try to censor the Bitcoin network. I am merely saying that you are trying to censor the people who are making the claim that you did. If this claim is in fact not true, then you should provide facts to back this up.

[Xian01]

Both of the above had sent luke-jr a negative rating being critical of what they think were him censoring bitcoin by enabling, by default settings that prevent certain transactions from confirming, notably ones from a certain gambling on-chain "website"

Which is a lie, just as I said in my feedback.

Regardless of if luke-jr is right or wrong in trying to censor the Bitcoin network,

You also lie now, since I am not trying to censor the Bitcoin network.
Clearly you are biased since you are yourself pushing this lie.

I'll just leave this here.

https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=524512

+static struct BlacklistEntry BlacklistedPrefixes[] = {
+    {0x946cb2e0, 0x946cb2e0, "Mastercoin"},
+    {0x06f1b600, 0x06f1b6ff, "SatoshiDice"},
+    {0x74db3700, 0x74db59ff, "BetCoin Dice"},
+    {0xc4c5d791, 0xc4c5d791, "CHBS"},  // 1JwSSubhmg6iPtRjtyqhUYYH7bZg3Lfy1T
+    {0x434e5452, 0x434e5452, "Counterparty"},
+    {0x069532d8, 0x069532da, "SatoshiBones"},
+    {0xda5dde84, 0xda5dde94, "Lucky Bit"},
+};

[XinXan]

What i find a little bit funny in this kind of threads, like in the other thread about the staff guy who was promoting a scam is that badbear or hilariousandco never seem to talk here even tho they are really active on meta and post in almost every thread here but these ones. Coincidence?

[hilariousandco]

What i find a little bit funny in this kind of threads, like in the other thread about the staff guy who was promoting a scam is that badbear or hilariousandco never seem to talk here even tho they are really active on meta and post in almost every thread here but these ones. Coincidence?

What the hell are you actually talking about or trying to insinuate?

[Xialla]

because trust system is just sick from the ground, similar threads like this one never ends..I hope, that this will be somehow solved on new forum, if we will had it sometimes..

[erikalui]

If a person is a liar, it makes them a scammer? That's just a rating left for personal issues and without any reference link as well. BipolarBob has proved to be a genuine user and has helped in donating money as well and how does he become a scammer just because he offers "too good to be true" deals. It's clearly abusing the trust system.

[hilariousandco]

If a person is a liar, it makes them a scammer? That's just a rating left for personal issues and without any reference link as well. BipolarBob has proved to be a genuine user and has helped in donating money as well and how does he become a scammer just because he offers "too good to be true" deals. It's clearly abusing the trust system.

I think you could argue initially the feedback was arguably justified and I was always thinking I wouldn't be surprised if he did at some point scam, but I think after a certain while the feedback should have been removed or changed to neutral as doubts were removed.

[erikalui]

If a person is a liar, it makes them a scammer? That's just a rating left for personal issues and without any reference link as well. BipolarBob has proved to be a genuine user and has helped in donating money as well and how does he become a scammer just because he offers "too good to be true" deals. It's clearly abusing the trust system.

I think you could argue initially the feedback was arguably justified and I was always thinking I wouldn't be surprised if he did at some point scam, but I think after a certain while the feedback should have been removed or changed to neutral as doubts were removed.

I have seen many people had left feedback for Bipolar and thought he was a scammer. It was when he proved that he is genuine and trustworthy, those ratings were removed and hence luke-jr also should have removed it as there seems no reason to call him a scammer. Since Bipolar dint want to dispute, he ignored it.

[Luke-Jr]

I still have no reason not to distrust BPB or any of the others.
It's not my job to babysit their daily life just because I don't trust them.

[XinXan]

If a person is a liar, it makes them a scammer? That's just a rating left for personal issues and without any reference link as well. BipolarBob has proved to be a genuine user and has helped in donating money as well and how does he become a scammer just because he offers "too good to be true" deals. It's clearly abusing the trust system.

I think you could argue initially the feedback was arguably justified and I was always thinking I wouldn't be surprised if he did at some point scam, but I think after a certain while the feedback should have been removed or changed to neutral as doubts were removed.

So in other words he is still going to be on dt? I mean wasnt quickseller removed because he supposedly abused the system? Isnt this guy doing the exact same thing with almost 50% of his ratings?

[EcuaMobi]

If a person is a liar, it makes them a scammer? That's just a rating left for personal issues and without any reference link as well. BipolarBob has proved to be a genuine user and has helped in donating money as well and how does he become a scammer just because he offers "too good to be true" deals. It's clearly abusing the trust system.

I think you could argue initially the feedback was arguably justified and I was always thinking I wouldn't be surprised if he did at some point scam, but I think after a certain while the feedback should have been removed or changed to neutral as doubts were removed.

So in other words he is still going to be on dt? I mean wasnt quickseller removed because he supposedly abused the system? Isnt this guy doing the exact same thing with almost 50% of his ratings?

Quickseller was removed from default trust because BadBear (and later Tomatocage) decided to remove him from their personal trust list, not because admins (although BadBear is an Admin he removed him as a personal decision, not as Admin) or someone else removed him, that's not how the system works. Luke-jr will be removed if theymos and dserrano5 decide to do so.

[XinXan]

If a person is a liar, it makes them a scammer? That's just a rating left for personal issues and without any reference link as well. BipolarBob has proved to be a genuine user and has helped in donating money as well and how does he become a scammer just because he offers "too good to be true" deals. It's clearly abusing the trust system.

I think you could argue initially the feedback was arguably justified and I was always thinking I wouldn't be surprised if he did at some point scam, but I think after a certain while the feedback should have been removed or changed to neutral as doubts were removed.

So in other words he is still going to be on dt? I mean wasnt quickseller removed because he supposedly abused the system? Isnt this guy doing the exact same thing with almost 50% of his ratings?

Quickseller was removed from default trust because BadBear (and later Tomatocage) decided to remove him from their personal trust list, not because admins (although BadBear is an Admin he removed him as a personal decision, not as Admin) or someone else removed him, that's not how the system works. Luke-jr will be removed if theymos and dserrano5 decide to do so.

So we are powerless pretty much, i mean look at the poll its obvious that the majority of people agree to have him removed but in the end it wont matter because he wont be removed, he can do whatever he wants with his ratings and nothing will happen. Shouldnt we have some power? Why should we trust people like him if he never really did any trades or hold btc ?

[Muhammed Zakir]

I still have no reason not to distrust BPB or any of the others.
It's not my job to babysit their daily life just because I don't trust them.

You should take care of your own ratings. You can change that feedback to neutral or remove it now. I even send you a PM to tell you about that many weeks ago but you didn't reply. I recommend you to take an action now. "Better late than never."

I don't think feedback on cooldgamer is also good as the thing cooldgamer claimed actually happened(didn't it?).

[Luke-Jr]

You should take care of your own ratings. You can change that feedback to neutral or remove it now. I even send you a PM to tell you about that many weeks ago but you didn't reply. I recommend you to take an action now. "Better late than never."

I have no action to take. I still do not trust him.

I don't think feedback on cooldgamer is also good as the thing cooldgamer claimed actually happened(didn't it?).

Not the censorship part.