Someone from DefaultTrust just killed my pot. Sr. Member account for no reason!

[cexi]

Normally people from DT will be reasonable if they gave you a false-rating. Try to talk it out with that member and see what they're willing to do; if you truly think it's unwarranted then you can make a thread in Meta to complain!

Wrong. Now stop talking, chump.

[unholycactus]

This is normal for the forum. I have been through it too.

you don't break a single rule and some dicklicker still leaves you bad trust.

#typical

The trust system was never about rule breaking.
@OP I don't think trading history is required to be on DT. cryptodevil has pretty shallow feedback and it shouldn't really bother you.

[Blazr]

you don't break a single rule and some dicklicker still leaves you bad trust.

Yes thats totally true in many cases people do get negative trust even though they haven't broken any rules.

One example would be scammers, since scamming isn't strictly against the rules.

[cexi]

you don't break a single rule and some dicklicker still leaves you bad trust.

Yes thats totally true in many cases people do get negative trust even though they haven't broken any rules.

One example would be scammers, since scamming isn't strictly against the rules.

you don't have to talk any more

[subSTRATA]

This is normal for the forum. I have been through it too.

you don't break a single rule and some dicklicker still leaves you bad trust.

#typical

the DT members dont tag you for breaking the rules, they tag you if they feel you are a scammer or youre suspicious in general. in your case, you were attempting to buy positive trust from DT members which is pretty darn shady.

[cexi]

This is normal for the forum. I have been through it too.

you don't break a single rule and some dicklicker still leaves you bad trust.

#typical

the DT members dont tag you for breaking the rules, they tag you if they feel you are a scammer or youre suspicious in general. in your case, you were attempting to buy positive trust from DT members which is pretty darn shady.

it's quicker than ass kissing like you do

[subSTRATA]

This is normal for the forum. I have been through it too.

you don't break a single rule and some dicklicker still leaves you bad trust.

#typical

the DT members dont tag you for breaking the rules, they tag you if they feel you are a scammer or youre suspicious in general. in your case, you were attempting to buy positive trust from DT members which is pretty darn shady.

it's quicker than ass kissing like you do

please do feel free to point out where im kissing ass. also, its not quicker if it doesnt work in the first place.

[cexi]

This is normal for the forum. I have been through it too.

you don't break a single rule and some dicklicker still leaves you bad trust.

#typical

the DT members dont tag you for breaking the rules, they tag you if they feel you are a scammer or youre suspicious in general. in your case, you were attempting to buy positive trust from DT members which is pretty darn shady.

it's quicker than ass kissing like you do

please do feel free to point out where im kissing ass. also, its not quicker if it doesnt work in the first place.

about every thread you pretend to show concern

how about this  stop kissing ass and just eat a dick

[shorena]

-snip-
I would like to know who is this someone. I need to talk to him. Because, the person left me -ve did not communicate me anything yet. Its like he can make anyone -ve at his whim.
-snip-

Cryptodevil is on the list of dooglus.

[subSTRATA]

This is normal for the forum. I have been through it too.

you don't break a single rule and some dicklicker still leaves you bad trust.

#typical

the DT members dont tag you for breaking the rules, they tag you if they feel you are a scammer or youre suspicious in general. in your case, you were attempting to buy positive trust from DT members which is pretty darn shady.

it's quicker than ass kissing like you do

please do feel free to point out where im kissing ass. also, its not quicker if it doesnt work in the first place.

about every thread you pretend to show concern

how about this  stop kissing ass and just eat a dick

please do feel free to post any example where i ask dt members for trust. you wont find any because i dont. you seem quite mad that people tagged you negative for being shady, which is what theyre supposed to do.

[cexi]

This is normal for the forum. I have been through it too.

you don't break a single rule and some dicklicker still leaves you bad trust.

#typical

the DT members dont tag you for breaking the rules, they tag you if they feel you are a scammer or youre suspicious in general. in your case, you were attempting to buy positive trust from DT members which is pretty darn shady.

it's quicker than ass kissing like you do

please do feel free to point out where im kissing ass. also, its not quicker if it doesnt work in the first place.

about every thread you pretend to show concern

how about this  stop kissing ass and just eat a dick

please do feel free to post any example where i ask dt members for trust. you wont find any because i dont. you seem quite mad that people tagged you negative for being shady, which is what theyre supposed to do.
https://i.gyazo.com/2b172be3da84ee69705e9e81a6746116.png

oh ya put me in ignore so you don't have to respond to the evidence

nice one slick scammer

[TheGr33k]

Normally people from DT will be reasonable if they gave you a false-rating. Try to talk it out with that member and see what they're willing to do; if you truly think it's unwarranted then you can make a thread in Meta to complain!

Wrong. Now stop talking, chump.

I've seen it happen on multiple occasions and I'm simply offering the easiest solution. I can't say that an attitude like that would assist in getting any -ve reputation removed, but to each his own.
They're not on DT for no reason, and 99.99% of the time they don't -ve for no reason either.

Just trying to help, and normally de-escalating the situation is your best option.

[Vod]

This is normal for the forum. I have been through it too.

you don't break a single rule and some dicklicker still leaves you bad trust.

#typical

You haven't been through it.  You have no unjustified negative trust on your account.

[TheGr33k]

This is normal for the forum. I have been through it too.

you don't break a single rule and some dicklicker still leaves you bad trust.

#typical

You haven't been through it.  You have no unjustified negative trust on your account.

I've noticed that it's a common theme around this forum for users with negative trust to assume that the system is flawed. The DT members are corrupt and they're all apart of a higher bitcoin elite society that revolves around ruining the network for newbies. I just think it's a little absurd that someone can talk and act the way some of these members do and expect no repercussions.

[cryptodevil]

Oh I see, like that is it, QS? Done having your tantrum over being put in your place about your transparent attempts to deflect from the truth that you are a proven and even self-confessed scammer and now are looking to make wild accusations about me, for which you have absolutely no evidence and will never have any evidence because it is, unsurprisingly considering you are involved, a big fat fucking lie.

Here's the thing, the Trust system allows people to rate negatively if you have reason to suspect a person is a scammer.

You scammed people by performing 'escrow' trades with yourself. That is fraud. You even admit to having done it.

Which part of that behaviour qualifies you as being trustworthy? Ergo, the rating I gave you is correct.

As for RussianRaibow, GermanGiant and SpanishSoldier, check the history and you will see that it has already been proven they are connected to the cloudmining.website scam.

Seems that scammers with an axe to grind are starting to get shitty because more and more people are making it harder for them to operate so easily around here.

[Vitamin King]

Oh I see, like that is it, QS? Done having your tantrum over being put in your place about your transparent attempts to deflect from the truth that you are a proven and even self-confessed scammer and now are looking to make wild accusations about me, for which you have absolutely no evidence and will never have any evidence because it is, unsurprisingly considering you are involved, a big fat fucking lie.

Here's the thing, the Trust system allows people to rate negatively if you have reason to suspect a person is a scammer.

You scammed people by performing 'escrow' trades with yourself. That is fraud. You even admit to having done it.

Which part of that behaviour qualifies you as being trustworthy? Ergo, the rating I gave you is correct.

As for RussianRaibow, GermanGiant and SpanishSoldier, check the history and you will see that it has already been proven they are connected to the cloudmining.website scam.

Seems that scammers with an axe to grind are starting to get shitty because more and more people are making it harder for them to operate so easily around here.

You have not given any explanation about why you left the -ve on me. I have already explained my position here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1201224.msg12628417#msg12628417

[mexxer-2]

I'm with cryptodevil on this one, he seems to be paying attention to ponzis and cloudmining sites where other DT members fail/don't like paying attention to them. And the OP's post history seems too much similar to germangiant who is promoting/shilling cloudmining.website at every point.

[Quickseller]

I'm with cryptodevil on this one, he seems to be paying attention to ponzis and cloudmining sites where other DT members fail/don't like paying attention to them. And the OP's post history seems too much similar to germangiant who is promoting/shilling cloudmining.website at every point.

From the looks of it the OP is reporting his experience doing business with a company that someone *thinks* is a scam. I have not seen any evidence that the OP if affiliated with any scam site.

From the looks of it, there is a company that is doing business in a way that someone does not like and as a result, this person gives negative trust to anyone that does business with that company. All while *speculating* that they are "shilling" for such company.

If someone is essentially gambling their money by doing business with a company that has a high chance of being a scam and then reporting their experience then they are no more a scammer then someone who gambles on an actual gambling site, say (a made up site called) gust-bice and reports their experience. I am sure that the owner of gust-bice would much rather this person gamble on their gambling site though....

[TheGr33k]

I'm with cryptodevil on this one, he seems to be paying attention to ponzis and cloudmining sites where other DT members fail/don't like paying attention to them. And the OP's post history seems too much similar to germangiant who is promoting/shilling cloudmining.website at every point.

From the looks of it the OP is reporting his experience doing business with a company that someone *thinks* is a scam. I have not seen any evidence that the OP if affiliated with any scam site.

From the looks of it, there is a company that is doing business in a way that someone does not like and as a result, this person gives negative trust to anyone that does business with that company. All while *speculating* that they are "shilling" for such company.

If someone is essentially gambling their money by doing business with a company that has a high chance of being a scam and then reporting their experience then they are no more a scammer then someone who gambles on an actual gambling site, say (a made up site called) gust-bice and reports their experience. I am sure that the owner of gust-bice would much rather this person gamble on their gambling site though....

It's really unfortunate if someone is given -ve based off of being gullible enough to fall for a scam or for being trustworthy enough to believe in a new company. I don't think you blame participants for being involved with a "potential" scam if they are simple trying to reap the rewards offered to the "users(victims)". Although I think we're getting off topic, and should re-adjust ourselves because it's unfortunate that QS gets harassed in literally every thread he's mentioned in. There's already dozens of threads with dozens of pages dedicated to complaining about QS and the reciprocal as well.

[Quickseller]

Where the difference here is that I don't speculate when I give trust (except for the *rare* neutral rating that says that something is being looked into and that caution should be exercised). In the case of the OP I think it is pretty clear that speculation is being used (exclusively) in the decision to leave the rating.

This seems to be a common theme among users who are in dooglus's trust list (more specifically those who are in dooglus's trust list but not in anyone else's on level 1's trust list) as well as dooglus's ratings.