"The Pharmacist" need some madical assistance

[raiblock]

This man abusing the trust system of this forum. Considers himself to be the thread police and left me a negative feedback without any issue.
Forum modarator must do something for this kined of sick people

username: The Pharmacist
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=487418

why this mother fucker now ignore this man from red trust?username: grim007
Omegasun  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1550020.0
you son of a bitch has no rights to misuse your Sr. activity power by giving unnecessary red trust,it could be a natural rating if needed bcoz no one is a scammer until anyone submit a valid proof.got it you bitch motherfucker The Pharmacist?

[markj113]

His feedback is accurate though.

What parts of his feedback do you disagree with?

[raiblock]

His feedback is accurate though.

What parts of his feedback do you disagree with?

first of all he's pulling up a dead topic about selling a member account. if buy sell account is prohibited here in bitcointalk, then why only seller got negative trust? those who showing interest to buy accounts why there are no feedback done to them? some people are trying to be very smart as they're not so. and I think there is no issue ever open against me in this forum, since I have no problem with other member. then who the hell is he to put me a red trust? is he a son of barak Obama?or he is a Vladimir putin?? just abusing their power as a sr. member. and this people have no job to do, even their wife ran away as they can't do anything unless spamming

[The Sceptical Chymist]

His feedback is accurate though.

What parts of his feedback do you disagree with?

first of all he's pulling up a dead topic about selling a member account. if buy sell account is prohibited here in bitcointalk, then why only seller got negative trust? those who showing interest to buy accounts why there are no feedback done to them? some people are trying to be very smart as they're not so. and I think there is no issue ever open against me in this forum, since I have no problem with other member. then who the hell is he to put me a red trust? is he a son of barak Obama?or he is a Vladimir putin?? just abusing their power as a sr. member. and this people have no job to do, even their wife ran away as they can't do anything unless spamming

The first part of this I hear all day at work.  You didn't reprimand X, so why are you reprimanding me?  Tough shit.  Did I miss a buyer?   Maybe.  The rest of your post is just a word salad jumble of nonsense.  I don't trust people who deal in bct accounts.  It's that simple,  and that's how the trust system here works for better or worse.
 

[raiblock]

His feedback is accurate though.

What parts of his feedback do you disagree with?

first of all he's pulling up a dead topic about selling a member account. if buy sell account is prohibited here in bitcointalk, then why only seller got negative trust? those who showing interest to buy accounts why there are no feedback done to them? some people are trying to be very smart as they're not so. and I think there is no issue ever open against me in this forum, since I have no problem with other member. then who the hell is he to put me a red trust? is he a son of barak Obama?or he is a Vladimir putin?? just abusing their power as a sr. member. and this people have no job to do, even their wife ran away as they can't do anything unless spamming

The first part of this I hear all day at work.  You didn't reprimand X, so why are you reprimanding me?  Tough shit.  Did I miss a buyer?   Maybe.  The rest of your post is just a word salad jumble of nonsense.  I don't trust people who deal in bct accounts.  It's that simple,  and that's how the trust system here works for better or worse.
 

and congratz, you just get paid for leaving a shit in this thread. you're not a staff member. if bitcointalk community doesn't allow this kind of trading,then why every day there is a new thread about selling account or auction. why not they suspend all of those account? people are free to trade anything if bitcointalk have no objection or nothing happen like scammy. i know if somebody break the official rules, there is some one who can take care of it. everybody has multiple account here and want to make money,accept it or not,its true.

[KenR]

and congratz, you just get paid for leaving a shit in this thread. you're not a staff member. if bitcointalk community doesn't allow this kind of trading,then why every day there is a new thread about selling account or auction. why not they suspend all of those account? people are free to trade anything if bitcointalk have no objection or nothing happen like scammy. i know if somebody break the official rules, there is some one who can take care of it. everybody has multiple account here and want to make money,accept it or not,its true.

Trust is not moderated either.Anyone is free to leave any feedback with relevant references.If the person happens to be on the DT and is being judged by the community as abusing the trust powers,they may be kicked out of their root members.In
your case,the feedback is very accurate ,what you're doing is wrong.Nobody cares about it doesn't mean you can defend yourself while doing shady shit.He thinks account sales are bad which obviously are and he gave you negative trust for that ,nothings wrong with it.

Pharmacist : Keep it up,pal.

[tommorisonwebdesign]

I am also on the Pharmacists side. Many accounts have been ranked up with spammy signature campaign postings and what gives accounts value is the fact that more senior accounts pay more than junior accounts. A sr. Member account may have spammed this forum and decides to sell their account once they're kicked off the campaign. You being a Jr. member, in addition to that last word salad post shows you want to spam this forum with signature campaign ads. 

[Mr.Beegood]

Selling accounts is shady and should be banned in my opinion. The nature of bitcoin makes it easy enough to get scammed, being able to buy a good reputation certainly doesn't help.
The Pharmacist is a straight shooter.

[Quickseller]

It looks like he is trying to get some "madical assistance", via soliciting the shipping of illegal drugs to him in the US. (the post in question has been reported and may be deleted).

His feedback is accurate though.

False. The feedback that he leaves does not point any anyone actually stealing from others, nor attempting to (and/or planning on) stealing from others, which is what negative trust is designed for.

[markj113]

It looks like he is trying to get some "madical assistance", via soliciting the shipping of illegal drugs to him in the US. (the post in question has been reported and may be deleted).

His feedback is accurate though.

False. The feedback that he leaves does not point any anyone actually stealing from others, nor attempting to (and/or planning on) stealing from others, which is what negative trust is designed for.

Not suprising that you defend alt accounts and the selling of accounts Quickseller considering your recent history, especially around fake Escrow arrangments.

It doesn't take a genius to recognise the fact that sold accounts are often used to scam others therefore the seller is just as guilty as the buyer.

The feedback that he leaves does not point any anyone actually stealing from others, nor attempting to (and/or planning on) stealing from others, which is what negative trust is designed for.

So by your definition I presume you feel that all those people that left you neutral/negative feedback are wrong as you did not plan to steal from others?

[suchmoon]

Congrats The Pharmacist, you got a fanclub creating off topic threads (OP - where's the scam accusation here?) and you got QS busting your ass.

I'm starting to think you might be doing something right here

[Quickseller]

It looks like he is trying to get some "madical assistance", via soliciting the shipping of illegal drugs to him in the US. (the post in question has been reported and may be deleted).

His feedback is accurate though.

False. The feedback that he leaves does not point any anyone actually stealing from others, nor attempting to (and/or planning on) stealing from others, which is what negative trust is designed for.

irrelevant ad-hominem attack

It doesn't take a genius to recognise the fact that sold accounts are often used to scam others therefore the seller is just as guilty as the buyer.

I would disagree on this point. From my experience, the majority of sold accounts are used in a way that does not result in anyone getting scammed. Additionally, I believe that there are a small number of serial scammers who buy accounts to scam, and that if they were unable to buy accounts that they would be able to scam with either their own farmed accounts or their own newbie(new) accounts.

There are also a number of purchased accounts that have built up fairly decent amounts of trust due to trading honestly over fairly long(ish) periods of time.

The feedback that he leaves does not point any anyone actually stealing from others, nor attempting to (and/or planning on) stealing from others, which is what negative trust is designed for.

So by your definition I presume you feel that all those people that left you neutral/negative feedback are wrong as you did not plan to steal from others?

If no money was attempted to be stolen (nor that someone attempted to facilitate the theft of money), and you cannot reasonably say that certain actions would later lead to an attempt in the future (successful or not) attempt to steal money then you cannot reasonably say that someone is a scammer.

If you were to extend beyond the above criteria of when to leave negative trust, then you will quickly reach the point of leaving negative trust because you do not like their opinion and/or you do not like them personally and/or you do not like their business practices (of which do not result in the loss of any money).

For example, if a reputable person were to extend beyond the above criteria, could say that since you are selling this Art on eBay, which also owns PayPal, which is used by many scammers, you are helping a platform that is used by many scammers, and are therefore helping scammers, and deserve negative trust.

Another example would be that someone claims to be "from" a certain zip code, but actually lives far away from that zip code, however they work within a few miles from that zip code, and the closest post office to their work is in the zip code they claim to be "from", and that a reputable person were to leave negative trust because they are "lying".

A neutral rating is much more complex because it is only used for "comments" and does not affect the trust score of the person leaving it.

[markj113]

The feedback that he leaves does not point any anyone actually stealing from others, nor attempting to (and/or planning on) stealing from others, which is what negative trust is designed for.

So by your definition I presume you feel that all those people that left you neutral/negative feedback are wrong as you did not plan to steal from others?

If no money was attempted to be stolen (nor that someone attempted to facilitate the theft of money), and you cannot reasonably say that certain actions would later lead to an attempt in the future (successful or not) attempt to steal money then you cannot reasonably say that someone is a scammer.

If you were to extend beyond the above criteria of when to leave negative trust, then you will quickly reach the point of leaving negative trust because you do not like their opinion and/or you do not like them personally and/or you do not like their business practices (of which do not result in the loss of any money).

For example, if a reputable person were to extend beyond the above criteria, could say that since you are selling this Art on eBay, which also owns PayPal, which is used by many scammers, you are helping a platform that is used by many scammers, and are therefore helping scammers, and deserve negative trust.

Another example would be that someone claims to be "from" a certain zip code, but actually lives far away from that zip code, however they work within a few miles from that zip code, and the closest post office to their work is in the zip code they claim to be "from", and that a reputable person were to leave negative trust because they are "lying".

A neutral rating is much more complex because it is only used for "comments" and does not affect the trust score of the person leaving it.

But in short what you did was dishonest and you misled the person you were dealing with in to believing a 3rd party was acting as Escrow.  

Dishonest behavior = a justified negative feedback.

[Vod]

This man abusing the trust system of this forum. Considers himself to be the thread police and left me a negative feedback without any issue.
Forum modarator must do something for this kined of sick people

username: The Pharmacist
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=487418

What are you crying about?  You left him twice the negative feedback he left you.

Stop being a hypocrite.   

[The Sceptical Chymist]

It looks like he is trying to get some "madical assistance", via soliciting the shipping of illegal drugs to him in the US. (the post in question has been reported and may be deleted).

His feedback is accurate though.

False. The feedback that he leaves does not point any anyone actually stealing from others, nor attempting to (and/or planning on) stealing from others, which is what negative trust is designed for.

Eh, the question above is asking what I'd like to buy from Canada, and yes I have an interest in those OTC muscle relaxers but I can do without and my post was only half serious.  Leave it to QS to report that post, who should be the last person on this forum talking about trust, honesty, or anything related to those things.

Edit:  Good to see you around, Vod.

[minerbit hill]

I don't know why a druggists wants to judge others...lol


but anyways he looked like a jobless Crook , so i ignored his feedback. I suggest u do the same OP. Some of them here are as small as 14. I feel sympathy for them before i even think to retaliate with a negative feedback.

[xdtyo]

It looks like he is trying to get some "madical assistance", via soliciting the shipping of illegal drugs to him in the US. (the post in question has been reported and may be deleted).

His feedback is accurate though.

False. The feedback that he leaves does not point any anyone actually stealing from others, nor attempting to (and/or planning on) stealing from others, which is what negative trust is designed for.

Eh, the question above is asking what I'd like to buy from Canada, and yes I have an interest in those OTC muscle relaxers but I can do without and my post was only half serious.  Leave it to QS to report that post, who should be the last person on this forum talking about trust, honesty, or anything related to those things.

Edit:  Good to see you around, Vod.

so you not trust whoever sell btctalk account right? then why you not leave this user negative trust too? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=515387

his thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1516192

show us if you didn't abuse trust system

[The Sceptical Chymist]

It looks like he is trying to get some "madical assistance", via soliciting the shipping of illegal drugs to him in the US. (the post in question has been reported and may be deleted).

His feedback is accurate though.

False. The feedback that he leaves does not point any anyone actually stealing from others, nor attempting to (and/or planning on) stealing from others, which is what negative trust is designed for.

Eh, the question above is asking what I'd like to buy from Canada, and yes I have an interest in those OTC muscle relaxers but I can do without and my post was only half serious.  Leave it to QS to report that post, who should be the last person on this forum talking about trust, honesty, or anything related to those things.

Edit:  Good to see you around, Vod.

so you not trust whoever sell btctalk account right? then why you not leave this user negative trust too? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=515387

his thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1516192

show us if you didn't abuse trust system

And who are you, exactly?   This was your very first post from what's obviously an alt account.  I don't answer to you, fuckstain.

[xdtyo]

It looks like he is trying to get some "madical assistance", via soliciting the shipping of illegal drugs to him in the US. (the post in question has been reported and may be deleted).

His feedback is accurate though.

False. The feedback that he leaves does not point any anyone actually stealing from others, nor attempting to (and/or planning on) stealing from others, which is what negative trust is designed for.

Eh, the question above is asking what I'd like to buy from Canada, and yes I have an interest in those OTC muscle relaxers but I can do without and my post was only half serious.  Leave it to QS to report that post, who should be the last person on this forum talking about trust, honesty, or anything related to those things.

Edit:  Good to see you around, Vod.

so you not trust whoever sell btctalk account right? then why you not leave this user negative trust too? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=515387

his thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1516192

show us if you didn't abuse trust system

And who are you, exactly?   This was your very first post from what's obviously an alt account.  I don't answer to you, fuckstain.

Does it matter who I am? so why why are you afraid give him your red trust? so you just abuser?

[Lutpin]

Does it matter who I am? so why why are you afraid give him your red trust? so you just abuser?

You should first check the trust page of that guy before writing some passive aggressive post that makes you sound like a total joke