cryptodevil has left negative trust on a bought account

[SpanishSoldier]

I have logged into this account after a long time and found that it is marked with negative trust, when I was not online. Since this account is in my possession, it has not been involved into any activity. The last post that was made by this account was on July 21, 2015, whereas the trust was left on August 3, 2015. I bought it in between and have nothing to do with cryptodevil's judgement about the activity of the previous owner. Therefore, my request was to remove the negative trust, so that I can normally use this account on this forum. But, after communicating with cryptodevil to & fro multiple times, this is what the end result is...

I don't care what your reasons are for buying an account, the end result is still about deception.

So, I would like to know from the forum administrators, who, I believe, have chosen a list of trusted members to leave feedback, why allowing account trading on Bitcointalk, if your trusted member thinks account buying is an act of deception?

[Bill Gates]

Contact dooglus. He is the reason scores of irresponsible people have been added to DefaultTrust.

[suchmoon]

So, I would like to know from the forum administrators, who, I believe, have chosen a list of trusted members to leave feedback, why allowing account trading on Bitcointalk, if your trusted member thinks account buying is an act of deception?

Nothing to do with "administrators". Scamming is also "allowed" on Bitcointalk (i.e. mods don't ban scammers) but it doesn't mean their behavior is trustworthy. This is between you and cryptodevil. Also it's impossible to prove that the account really changed hands and you should have considered the risk of prior activity when you purchased it. There was ample warning on the trust page.

[minifrij]

So, I would like to know from the forum administrators, who, I believe, have chosen a list of trusted members to leave feedback

Cryptodevil wasn't chosen by any of the administrators to be on the Default Trust list, instead chosen by dooglus.

why allowing account trading on Bitcointalk, if your trusted member thinks account buying is an act of deception?

Account trading cannot be stopped. If it were banned on this forum then it would be simply continue off-forum. Also, the trust system and moderation are two things. It is not up to staff to moderate scams, it is what the trust system is used for. If someone sees it as untrustworthy, then that someone may leave you trust to correspond with that.

As said above, this is not a forum matter. This is between cryptodevil and yourself.

[Bill Gates]

So, I would like to know from the forum administrators, who, I believe, have chosen a list of trusted members to leave feedback, why allowing account trading on Bitcointalk, if your trusted member thinks account buying is an act of deception?

Nothing to do with "administrators". Scamming is also "allowed" on Bitcointalk (i.e. mods don't ban scammers) but it doesn't mean their behavior is trustworthy. This is between you and cryptodevil. Also it's impossible to prove that the account really changed hands and you should have considered the risk of prior activity when you purchased it. There was ample warning on the trust page.

Nopes. This is not between SpanishSoldier & cryptodevil. It could be, if cryptodevil was not on DT level 2. But, DT level 1 members are hand picked by "administrators" as loyalty reward. There is no algorithm behind it. And DT level 2 members are hand picked by DT level 1 members. Hence, if a DT level 2 member is defying a forum rule, "administrators" can take step to remove the DT level 1 guy, who has chosen the problematic DT level 2 member.

[minifrij]

But, DT level 1 members are hand picked by "administrators" as loyalty reward.

I wouldn't say a loyalty reward. You wouldn't get put on DT1 simply for being here for a long time, else every member from 2010-2011 would be on there.

Hence, if a DT level 2 member is defying a forum rule, "administrators" can take step to remove the DT level 1 guy, who has chosen the problematic DT level 2 member.

Cryptodevil has broken no rules here. Combine that with the fact that trust isn't moderated in any way past blatant abuse, and your post is essentially all incorrect.

[suchmoon]

Nopes. This is not between SpanishSoldier & cryptodevil. It could be, if cryptodevil was not on DT level 2. But, DT level 1 members are hand picked by "administrators" as loyalty reward. There is no algorithm behind it. And DT level 2 members are hand picked by DT level 1 members. Hence, if a DT level 2 member is defying a forum rule, "administrators" can take step to remove the DT level 1 guy, who has chosen the problematic DT level 2 member.

What is the forum rule that cryptodevil is "defying"?

[Bill Gates]

But, DT level 1 members are hand picked by "administrators" as loyalty reward.

I wouldn't say a loyalty reward. You wouldn't get put on DT1 simply for being here for a long time, else every member from 2010-2011 would be on there.

Seems your IQ level is too low to understand the meaning of loyalty reward. Better stop barking for petty signature payment.

[Bill Gates]

Nopes. This is not between SpanishSoldier & cryptodevil. It could be, if cryptodevil was not on DT level 2. But, DT level 1 members are hand picked by "administrators" as loyalty reward. There is no algorithm behind it. And DT level 2 members are hand picked by DT level 1 members. Hence, if a DT level 2 member is defying a forum rule, "administrators" can take step to remove the DT level 1 guy, who has chosen the problematic DT level 2 member.

What is the forum rule that cryptodevil is "defying"?

Leaving (actually not removing in this case) negative trust on someone, because he believes buying an account is an act of deception. If that is what he believes, why not he negative trusting everyone involved into account trading in Digital Goods & Auction, including the forum escrows?

[Lutpin]

Leaving (actually not removing in this case) negative trust on someone, because he believes buying an account is an act of deception. If that is what he believes, why not he negative trusting everyone involved into account trading in Digital Goods & Auction, including the forum escrows?

Did you even read the feedback? It seems you didn't.
It's more about the 'former' owner of the account, rather than about the act of buying the account (which anyway could not be 100% proven).


On a side note, some reputable escrows like OgN don't even offer to escrow for account trades.

[Bill Gates]

Leaving (actually not removing in this case) negative trust on someone, because he believes buying an account is an act of deception. If that is what he believes, why not he negative trusting everyone involved into account trading in Digital Goods & Auction, including the forum escrows?

Did you even read the feedback? It seems you didn't.

Did u read the OP? It seems you didn't.

[suchmoon]

Nopes. This is not between SpanishSoldier & cryptodevil. It could be, if cryptodevil was not on DT level 2. But, DT level 1 members are hand picked by "administrators" as loyalty reward. There is no algorithm behind it. And DT level 2 members are hand picked by DT level 1 members. Hence, if a DT level 2 member is defying a forum rule, "administrators" can take step to remove the DT level 1 guy, who has chosen the problematic DT level 2 member.

What is the forum rule that cryptodevil is "defying"?

Leaving (actually not removing in this case) negative trust on someone, because he believes buying an account is an act of deception. If that is what he believes, why not he negative trusting everyone involved into account trading in Digital Goods & Auction, including the forum escrows?

Can you quote the applicable rule from here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0
 

[Lutpin]

Did u read the OP? It seems you didn't.

Buying an account doesn't free you from any responsibilty over the actions of the previous owner.
Cryptodevil is backing up feedbacks from jimmothy, which had been there since half a year before.

@OP: You bought a shit account and now you're facing the concequences.

[minifrij]

Seems your IQ level is too low to understand the meaning of loyalty reward.

Then please, educate me on what a loyalty reward is. Also, can you stop with the obnoxious bold red text for no reason? Thanks.

Better stop barking for petty signature payment.

The last call of defense for someone too mentally deficient to respond to the rest of my post. Child.

Leaving (actually not removing in this case) negative trust on someone, because he believes buying an account is an act of deception. If that is what he believes, why not he negative trusting everyone involved into account trading in Digital Goods & Auction, including the forum escrows?

So he never broke a rule, just did something that you don't agree with/don't understand.

[Bill Gates]

Nopes. This is not between SpanishSoldier & cryptodevil. It could be, if cryptodevil was not on DT level 2. But, DT level 1 members are hand picked by "administrators" as loyalty reward. There is no algorithm behind it. And DT level 2 members are hand picked by DT level 1 members. Hence, if a DT level 2 member is defying a forum rule, "administrators" can take step to remove the DT level 1 guy, who has chosen the problematic DT level 2 member.

What is the forum rule that cryptodevil is "defying"?

Leaving (actually not removing in this case) negative trust on someone, because he believes buying an account is an act of deception. If that is what he believes, why not he negative trusting everyone involved into account trading in Digital Goods & Auction, including the forum escrows?

Can you quote the applicable rule from here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0
 

18. Having multiple accounts and account sales are allowed, but account sales are discouraged.

[Lutpin]

you quote the applicable rule from here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0

18. Having multiple accounts and account sales are allowed, but account sales are discouraged.

The forum doesn't prevent account sales, however, as everyone can leave feedback as they see just, it also does not prevent users leaving negative feedback over account trades/to bought accounts.
Hence, Cryptodevil does not 'break' that rule.

[suchmoon]

Nopes. This is not between SpanishSoldier & cryptodevil. It could be, if cryptodevil was not on DT level 2. But, DT level 1 members are hand picked by "administrators" as loyalty reward. There is no algorithm behind it. And DT level 2 members are hand picked by DT level 1 members. Hence, if a DT level 2 member is defying a forum rule, "administrators" can take step to remove the DT level 1 guy, who has chosen the problematic DT level 2 member.

What is the forum rule that cryptodevil is "defying"?

Leaving (actually not removing in this case) negative trust on someone, because he believes buying an account is an act of deception. If that is what he believes, why not he negative trusting everyone involved into account trading in Digital Goods & Auction, including the forum escrows?

Can you quote the applicable rule from here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0
 

18. Having multiple accounts and account sales are allowed, but account sales are discouraged.

How exactly is cryptodevil "defying" this rule? It doesn't say anything about an obligation to remove trust ratings after an account sale or anything else that would apply here. The "discouraged" part is the lesson to learn here.

[Bill Gates]

you quote the applicable rule from here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0

18. Having multiple accounts and account sales are allowed, but account sales are discouraged.

The forum doesn't prevent account sales, however, as everyone can leave feedback as they see just, it also does not prevent users leaving negative feedback over account trades/to bought accounts.
Hence, Cryptodevil does not 'break' that rule.

If your version is to be believed, then why not he negative trusting everyone involved into account trading in Digital Goods & Auction, including the forum escrows? Why not apply the same rule to all and see how dooglus+cryptodevil turn red within days? Why rules are selective applied to those, who does not have any loyal connection to DT?

To understand my last statement, each and everyone arguing with me in this thread is somehow blessed by DT. I have no problem if SpanishSoldier remains marked with DT. But, the point is, if this continues, only DT will trust DT and the rest will find something else.

[Bill Gates]

Nopes. This is not between SpanishSoldier & cryptodevil. It could be, if cryptodevil was not on DT level 2. But, DT level 1 members are hand picked by "administrators" as loyalty reward. There is no algorithm behind it. And DT level 2 members are hand picked by DT level 1 members. Hence, if a DT level 2 member is defying a forum rule, "administrators" can take step to remove the DT level 1 guy, who has chosen the problematic DT level 2 member.

What is the forum rule that cryptodevil is "defying"?

Leaving (actually not removing in this case) negative trust on someone, because he believes buying an account is an act of deception. If that is what he believes, why not he negative trusting everyone involved into account trading in Digital Goods & Auction, including the forum escrows?

Can you quote the applicable rule from here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0
 

18. Having multiple accounts and account sales are allowed, but account sales are discouraged.

How exactly is cryptodevil "defying" this rule? It doesn't say anything about an obligation to remove trust ratings after an account sale or anything else that would apply here. Except maybe the "discouraged" part, which is the lesson to learn here.

Please read the OP. The account was sold before the rating was placed. Though, this claim of OP is not provable, it is clear that the account not active for at least a week when the trust was placed by cryptodevil.

[Lutpin]

If your version is to be believed, then why not he negative trusting everyone involved into account trading in Digital Goods & Auction, including the forum escrows?

I said cryptodevil is allowed to, I didn't say a) I will or b) I think it should be done.

Why not apply the same rule to all and see how dooglus+cryptodevil turn red within days? Why rules are selective applied to those, who does not have any loyal connection to DT?

I don't see any reason to leave negative feedback to either, if you do, leave it.

To understand my last statement, each and everyone arguing with me in this thread is somehow blessed by DT. I have no problem if SpanishSoldier remains marked with DT. But, the point is, if this continues, only DT will trust DT and the rest will find something else.

You're free to adjust your trust list as you want to, DT is only the newbie help.
Do it, there is no need to trust the default trust, using a custom trust list with people you trust works just as fine (or even better).

On a side note, I don't think the term 'blessed' should go with DT.