Poll Should Mexxer-2 Lutpin Be Removed From The Default Trust ?

[MisterMiyagi]

Have a read through this Topic https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1376014.0

Cast your honest Opinions.Maybe we can appeal and bring some intelligence back in this forum again.Every opinion matters for the well being of this forum.

[1714142198]

1714142198

[Bill Gates]

What is the difference between Option 1 & Option 4? By the way, a lot of polls have been made before regarding DT. A lot of reputed members have spoken against DT. But, it seems theymos simply does not care. I personally believe, it is his legal shield against anything wrong that may happen on this forum. He'll have a stand that he created a DT with trusted members and if people get scammed by those who are not trusted by him, he can not be made responsible for it. And till date the legal shield is working as intended.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I'll be honest about my vote here.  I said keep Mexxer-2, drop Lutpin.  I think Mexxer-2 is sincere and does help the community, even if he hasn't done a lot of actual deals that put money at risk.  I say drop Lutpin because I've seen him be way too aggressive with some of his feedback since he got on DT.

I still think that trust should be acquired by actually doing deals.  Anyone can come on this forum and start scam-busting and spam-busting.  All that shit is low hanging fruit and you can spot scammers and spammers from a galaxy away.  And someone might do exactly that to gain access to DT in order to scam.  And yes, someone might also escalate bitcoin deals for the same reason, but I think it's easier (and much less risky) to do the former.

If it were my decision--which it definitely is not--I'd wait on both of them for a while. 

[TwitchySeal]

Every opinion matters for the well being of this forum.

Should the value of every persons opinion be multiplied by the number of alts they have?

If so, this poll is a great idea.

[mexxer-2]

I'll be honest about my vote here.  I said keep Mexxer-2, drop Lutpin.  I think Mexxer-2 is sincere and does help the community, even if he hasn't done a lot of actual deals that put money at risk.  I say drop Lutpin because I've seen him be way too aggressive with some of his feedback since he got on DT.

Heh its actually the other way around, not the drop from DT part ofc 

[whywefight]

With all the -ve's for scammers a poll seems a very very very good a idea. Totally smart move...

[nydiacaskey01]

I'll say to OP why not use your main account instead of hiding behind that Newbie account and create this kind of thread. Are you one of those negged by mexxer or luptin?

[shorena]

I'll say to OP why not use your main account instead of hiding behind that Newbie account and create this kind of thread. Are you one of those negged by mexxer or luptin?

Read the other thread, they fear DT retaliation. Besides dont attack someone for using their right to protect their privacy, it makes you look like an arsehole. If you disagree with OP attack their points, their person is of less importance.

[whywefight]

I'll say to OP why not use your main account instead of hiding behind that Newbie account and create this kind of thread. Are you one of those negged by mexxer or luptin?

Read the other thread, they fear DT retaliation. Besides dont attack someone for using their right to protect their privacy, it makes you look like an arsehole. If you disagree with OP attack their points, their person is of less importance.

Thats one of the best comments i have read around here BUT op claims to be on DT and a very important member of the community and controbutor for the development of bitcoin. It would be nice to know who we deal with.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I'll say to OP why not use your main account instead of hiding behind that Newbie account and create this kind of thread. Are you one of those negged by mexxer or luptin?

Read the other thread, they fear DT retaliation. Besides dont attack someone for using their right to protect their privacy, it makes you look like an arsehole. If you disagree with OP attack their points, their person is of less importance.

I don't think it makes him look like an asshole at all, and I agree with him to an extent.  I'd also like to know who's talking, but if the argument is sound it's not all that important to the discussion. 

As far as fearing retaliatory feedback from someone on DT, that would be unfair and might be a damn good reason to reevaluate the feedback-giver's position on the DT list.  It is, after all, just an opinion that's being expressed here.

[shorena]

I'll say to OP why not use your main account instead of hiding behind that Newbie account and create this kind of thread. Are you one of those negged by mexxer or luptin?

Read the other thread, they fear DT retaliation. Besides dont attack someone for using their right to protect their privacy, it makes you look like an arsehole. If you disagree with OP attack their points, their person is of less importance.

I don't think it makes him look like an asshole at all, and I agree with him to an extent.

Well, I do. Attacking someone that is already too afraid too speak out openly makes you look like an arsehole in my book.

 I'd also like to know who's talking, but if the argument is sound it's not all that important to the discussion.  

As far as fearing retaliatory feedback from someone on DT, that would be unfair and might be a damn good reason to reevaluate the feedback-giver's position on the DT list.  It is, after all, just an opinion that's being expressed here.

Just because the fear is not justified does not mean its not real. What would be gained by knowing who is behind the OP? It would add nothing to the discussion, but personal points that are distracting from the topic anyway. I might have missed where they claim to be on DT, I only read they are a quiet Legendary. It does not matter though, their either have valid points to convince or not.

[target]

They are doing great job though. They contributed to the community in fact I can see they prevent potential scammers to scam someone.
If they gave you a red trust, then i guess there must be a reason and you should look the situation meticulously to see why they gave you such comment.

[doctorsnaggles]

Well, I do. Attacking someone that is already too afraid too speak out openly makes you look like an arseholein my book.

Just because the fear is not justified does not mean its not real. What would be gained by knowing who is behind the OP? It would add nothing to the discussion, but personal points that are distracting from the topic anyway. I might have missed where they claim to be on DT, I only read they are a quiet Legendary. It does not matter though, their either have valid points to convince or not.

You are basically trolling with this. "Too afraid too speak" and claiming to be some "important member" - so creating another FAKE ACCOUNT makes him look like a clown scammer in progress.

He should get already neg rep just by creating this thread.

I really dont get it - where did you pick up this logic? So next time in court, send a double of you when you are "too afraid to speak" or even better, when you are getting arrested, send a double cause you are "too afraid" - its all about the "message", right?

How many scams you managed to prevent with your matlock logic?

Its shit like this why this board is overran by scammers, kids and people who are a danger to themselves.

[shorena]

Well, I do. Attacking someone that is already too afraid too speak out openly makes you look like an arseholein my book.

Just because the fear is not justified does not mean its not real. What would be gained by knowing who is behind the OP? It would add nothing to the discussion, but personal points that are distracting from the topic anyway. I might have missed where they claim to be on DT, I only read they are a quiet Legendary. It does not matter though, their either have valid points to convince or not.

You are basically trolling with this. "Too afraid too speak" and claiming to be some "important member" - so creating another FAKE ACCOUNT makes him look like a clown scammer in progress.

I cant follow you, how Im trolling. Its seems however the person behind OP is more important than the topic. Which certanily was not my intention. I could question what exactly you consider fake in an alt account, but I dont think its worth anyones time.

He should get already neg rep just by creating this thread.

Why? Because they questioned someone with power?

I really dont get it - where did you pick up this logic? So next time in court, send a double of you when you are "too afraid to speak" or even better, when you are getting arrested, send a double cause you are "too afraid" - its all about the "message", right?

If you want to use a court as metaphor you probably have heard of witness protection. There is litterally a programm for people that are "too afraid to speak" otherwise. I dont see how this is a court though, its a discussion and community pressure on unpopular opinion is not unheard off.

How many scams you managed to prevent with your matlock logic?

Its shit like this why this board is overran by scammers, kids and people who are a danger to themselves.

...

[doctorsnaggles]

I cant follow you, how Im trolling. Its seems however the person behind OP is more important than the topic. Which certanily was not my intention. I could question what exactly you consider fake in an alt account, but I dont think its worth anyones time.

So why asking rhetorical questions when you claim not to be trolling? And that also answers your question about trolling. The whole issue is about preventing scams and you are trolling by some made-up law-defense circus, else what you managed now with this, apart from giving more hope to scammers?

Why? Because they questioned someone with power?

No, because for exactly what I have said before. For taking the time to create a FAKE ACCOUNT in order to open up this thread. I hope he also scams someone with it later when its not needed anymore - or better yet, sell it straight and hopefully it will get picked up by a scammer. Perhaps everyone should start creating 100 more new accounts daily. Youre not getting the point.

If you want to use a court as metaphor you probably have heard of witness protection. There is litterally a programm for people that are "too afraid to speak" otherwise. I dont see how this is a court though, its a discussion and community pressure on unpopular opinion is not unheard off.

Thats a joke, right? Perhaps you watched too many reruns of Sopranos. Now because its a "discussion" your fantasy law idea is in place? I said it once and I say again, you will get more and more scams because your idea to prevent scams is to give neg rep AFTER a scam.

Btw. You should ask a lawyer about your idea for a good laugh - im not kidding.

Its about preventing scams and your contribution is trolling (in my book, as you would say) - Make a poll among scammers about that.

[shorena]

I cant follow you, how Im trolling. Its seems however the person behind OP is more important than the topic. Which certanily was not my intention. I could question what exactly you consider fake in an alt account, but I dont think its worth anyones time.

So why asking rhetorical questions when you claim not to be trolling? And that also answers your question about trolling. The whole issue is about preventing scams and you are trolling by some made-up law-defense circus, else what you managed now with this, apart from giving more hope to scammers?

I defend OPs right to privacy, that does not mean I agree with their arguments. If you had read the other thread you would know that.

Why? Because they questioned someone with power?

No, because for exactly what I have said before. For taking the time to create a FAKE ACCOUNT in order to open up this thread. I hope he also scams someone with it later when its not needed anymore - or better yet, sell it straight and hopefully it will get picked up by a scammer. Perhaps everyone should start creating 100 more new accounts daily. Youre not getting the point.

If you want to use a court as metaphor you probably have heard of witness protection. There is litterally a programm for people that are "too afraid to speak" otherwise. I dont see how this is a court though, its a discussion and community pressure on unpopular opinion is not unheard off.

Thats a joke, right? Perhaps you watched too many reruns of Sopranos. Now because its a "discussion" your fantasy law idea is in place? I said it once and I say again, you will get more and more scams because your idea to prevent scams is to give neg rep AFTER a scam.

Btw. You should ask a lawyer about your idea for a good laugh - im not kidding.

Its about preventing scams and your contribution is trolling (in my book, as you would say) - Make a poll among scammers about that.

This is so ridiciouls Im just gonna ignore you. I will give you a hint -> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=181801

You might even get more hints by actually reading the thread with the discussion.

[doctorsnaggles]

I defend OPs right to privacy, that does not mean I agree with their arguments. If you had read the other thread you would know that.

I dont care about "the other" thread and I dont care looking it up, because what I said is for this thread and for what has been said. Your so called "right to privacy" is where again exactly written down? Post it along with the "right to create fake accounts in order to claim stuff", I think it should within the same "lawbook"

You call that privacy? So when I create a fake account now and open up a scam accusation poll against you claiming im legendary, hero, batman, staff member - you will defend my "right to privacy" (try law class one day) ?

Absurd logic.

This is so ridiciouls Im just gonna ignore you. I will give you a hint -> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=181801

You might even get more hints by actually reading the thread with the discussion.

What thats? Your trust summary? And what? Its supposed to make me feel any better? I guess you dont follow any sort of scams. You still dont get the point.

Following your logic, perhaps this guy here on your feedback actually is a misunderstanding, hes a great guy and perhaps he is also a hero/superman/legend member just using his "right to privacy"



You should ignore this thread and do something youre good at, because right now it aint "law" or "preventing scams" (which this board is overrun with)

[notaek]

Nah! mesmer and Lutpin are doing a great job ATM, by keeping the forum clean from scammers.

According to your other thread, I would say a DT member doesn't always need to be trusted according to their trading volume(s). Both of them are trusted by Blazed since they are doing their part keeping the scammers out of reach.

You can think of how OldScammerTag was introduced after removal of scammer tags, that were manually put up by admin. You can think of mesmer and Lutpin as playing the role of OldScammerTag actively, according to your POV.

[SFR10]

Both of them are doing great works and have been contributing to the community by either identifying the scammers prior/after their attempts but that's not the only thing their doing since many get to miss some of their contributions as well. Regardless of the whole drama that has been made ever since, them being included in the DT, surely some other cases (criticizing them) will follow up as well and this was expected. Usually people hate justice and when they see their move is somehow restricted, they tend to act upon.

[Heutenamos]

but that's not the only thing their doing

Yes, like giving you an extra spot in the campaign when it is already full ? Do you seriously think people don't watch ?

We don't need to abide by 17 year old's judgments.